On 28 Sep 2005 09:04:20 -0700, wrote:

Some classic "LUspeak" though - "heritage features to be retained - EH?

Perhaps something to do with the tunnel construction?

And what about "replacement of old Network Rail engineering features"!
A bit of airbushing of history going on there...

The trains are so little used in comparison to other lines they hardly
need livery change

This especially seems pointless.

why not do something about the window etching endemic on the other
lines run by Metronet?

Quite!

What is that over-capacity on the Northern Line they are talking
about?!

Maybe wisely they did not mention the other way of getting from
Waterloo to Bank - th 521 bus which usually has 3 parallel queues at
Waterloo in the morning that snake their way right the way down into
the pit through which one has to walk en route from the mainline
station or, for the 3rd (rearmost) queue, which snakes right the way
into whatever the road is called where the Southbound 521s terminate. I
would estimate that well over 600 people are in those queues at any one
time in the morning peaks.

ANY reduction in capacity elsewhere, such as the entire closure of the
W&C will only exacerbate an already dire situation.

Marc.

wrote:
What is that over-capacity on the Northern Line they are talking
about?!

They said there was a *shortage* of capacity on the Northern line Bank
branch, hence why they are suggesting Bakerloo/Northern (CX) to
Embankment and then District/Circle.

Maybe wisely they did not mention the other way of getting from
Waterloo to Bank - th 521 bus which usually has 3 parallel queues at
Waterloo in the morning that snake their way right the way down into
the pit through which one has to walk en route from the mainline
station or, for the 3rd (rearmost) queue, which snakes right the way
into whatever the road is called where the Southbound 521s terminate. I
would estimate that well over 600 people are in those queues at any one
time in the morning peaks.

So it seems a good idea not to mention it... the routes they suggest (26
and 76) are probably quicker anyway.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

asdf wrote:
(snip)
And what about "replacement of old Network Rail engineering features"!
A bit of airbushing of history going on there...

And it's somewhat confusing to even bring Network Rail into the
picture, as LU took over the line directly from British Rail in 1994.
Network Rail has thus never had custody of the line.

Looking at CULG, it's intriguing to note that within LU, the W&C line
has been under Central Line management, then Bakerloo line management,
and then East London Line management. When the East London Line ceases
to be an LU operation then the W&C will need yet another new management
home. I wonder what the reason is for all these changes.

On 29 Sep 2005 01:35:18 -0700, "Mizter T" wrote:

And what about "replacement of old Network Rail engineering features"!
A bit of airbushing of history going on there...

And it's somewhat confusing to even bring Network Rail into the
picture, as LU took over the line directly from British Rail in 1994.
Network Rail has thus never had custody of the line.

That was rather my point...

Still, at least if they set their targets low, we won't be
disappointed. Replacing every piece of former Network Rail
infrastructure on the line shouldn't be too hard...

Mizter T wrote:

asdf wrote:
(snip)
And what about "replacement of old Network Rail engineering features"!
A bit of airbushing of history going on there...

And it's somewhat confusing to even bring Network Rail into the
picture, as LU took over the line directly from British Rail in 1994.
Network Rail has thus never had custody of the line.

.... and there were never any Romans in York, Chester or London ...
--
A picture recently added to my gallery collection:
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p13624510.html
(PKP Ok1-359 - smoking and steaming away at Wolsztyn, Poland, in 1999)