"Paul Scott" wrote in message
...

"Peter Smyth" wrote in message
...

"THC" wrote in message
oups.com...
The March 2006 Modern Railways mentions yet another plan to extend the
DLR, this time from Bank to CX. I'd have treated it with the usual
bucket of salt had it appeared in RAIL, but such a story in MR must
surely be afforded more credibility, no?

I'd be interested to hear what other posters think about this...

Bearing in mind the District/Circle lines already go from Monument to
Embankment, I am not sure what the point would be of a parallel DLR
route.

Peter Smyth

Don't people generally prefer a journey with fewer mode changes - IIRC the
Victoria line didn't actually go anywhere new, as opened.

Paul

True but the extension went to Pimlico. At the time it was the most densely
populated area in GB.

On 25 Feb 2006 04:54:21 -0800, "MIG"
wrote:

The March 2006 Modern Railways mentions yet another plan to extend the
DLR, this time from Bank to CX.

I'd be interested to hear what other posters think about this...

The DLR arrives at Bank facing north. There would have to be some kind
of very wide loop to point it towards Charing Cross.

Also, ISTR that every time an idea like this comes up, someone
mentions that the Bank of England's vaults are in the way of any
extension.

Also, there tend to be fairly easy routes to the Charing Cross area
from places where you can get on the DLR.

I can't see that the extension would improve access to Canary Wharf
much (which is the main DLR destination) - except, perhaps, if there's
a station at City Thameslink.

It would be both more useful and more practical to extend it north, eg
to St Pancras.

At the moment, everyone commuting to Canary Wharf from North London
converges on Bank (to change to the DLR there), which can't, I
imagine, be very sustainable. So a northward DLR extension might be
useful in the medium term.

But Crossrail will solve this in the long term (with TL2k feeding into
it at Farringdon from the KX/StP lines). Though I suppose a good link
from Euston to Canary Wharf would still be useful.

Personally if i was to extend the DLR, I would divert it via
Blackfriars and then onto Waterloo(taking over the Waterloo and City
line branch platform). From Waterloo I would then go via Lambeth Bridge
and Horseferry Road to Victoria. If I went further the Victoria, I
would look at going via Hyde Park Corner, Marble Arch onto Paddington
and then take over the Hammersmith and City line to Hammersmith. Very
ambitious scheme??, yes but it would be a fraction of what crossrail
would cost and patronage would be high (probably too high!)

More seriously some sense exists in going toCharing with maybe stations
at City Thameslink, Aldwych and Charing Cross. It would create
effectively another cross London link and help relieve the Central and
District. The cost would be a fraction of what Crossrail would cost and
would further improve links to the east.

A DLR extension should be considered bearing in mind the considerable
expansion of the system the relatively cheap cost's of expansion and
the benefits it can potentially bring. When Crossrail hits the buffers
which this present scheme will serious consideration should be given to
alternatives.

MartyJ wrote:

Personally if i was to extend the DLR, I would divert it via
Blackfriars and then onto Waterloo(taking over the Waterloo and City
line branch platform). From Waterloo I would then go via Lambeth Bridge
and Horseferry Road to Victoria. If I went further the Victoria, I
would look at going via Hyde Park Corner, Marble Arch onto Paddington
and then take over the Hammersmith and City line to Hammersmith. Very
ambitious scheme??, yes but it would be a fraction of what crossrail
would cost and patronage would be high (probably too high!)

Certainly too high! The DLR is very crowded at Bank as it is - why would
you want to extend it further?

Also, wouldn't it be better just to extend the W&C westwards and not
worry about a costly connection with the DLR?

More seriously some sense exists in going toCharing with maybe stations
at City Thameslink, Aldwych and Charing Cross.

I've previously considered that route for light rail (though rather than
DLR I was thinking of a tunnelled central section for various E-W tram
lines) but eventually I concluded that the loading gauge of the section
already tunnelled is just too small. I think it would be even worse for
DLR trains.

It would create effectively another cross London link and help relieve the
Central and District. The cost would be a fraction of what Crossrail would
cost and would further improve links to the east.

A boat service on the Thames would be far more effective in that
objective, as well as being considerably cheaper.

A DLR extension should be considered bearing in mind the considerable
expansion of the system the relatively cheap cost's of expansion and
the benefits it can potentially bring. When Crossrail hits the buffers
which this present scheme will serious consideration should be given to
alternatives.

But the best alternative is a cheaper form of Crossrail: see my website.

--
Aidan Stanger
http://www.bettercrossrail.co.uk

"asdf" wrote in message
...

Also, ISTR that every time an idea like this comes up, someone
mentions that the Bank of England's vaults are in the way of any
extension.

.... of the Waterloo & City, not of the DLR.

John Rowland wrote:
"asdf" wrote in message
...

Also, ISTR that every time an idea like this comes up, someone
mentions that the Bank of England's vaults are in the way of any
extension.

... of the Waterloo & City, not of the DLR.


When getting from Docklands to Euston etc, I find it very easy to
change to the Northern (I can use stairs OK), but I agree that that bit
of the Northern is overcrowded pretty much every time of every day, so
staying on the DLR northwards might be nicer. Not a major priority.

As for the Waterloo & City, I can't see how it's physically possible to
connect the two, vaults aside. The DLR station is under King William
Street, heading north, at a very deep level (below the Northern, which
is below the Central).

The Waterloo & City, I think, is roughly under Queen Victoria Street,
heading north-east, not far below street level.

On Sat, 25 Feb 2006, asdf wrote:

On 25 Feb 2006 04:54:21 -0800, "MIG"
wrote:

The March 2006 Modern Railways mentions yet another plan to extend the
DLR, this time from Bank to CX.

Also, there tend to be fairly easy routes to the Charing Cross area
from places where you can get on the DLR.

I can't see that the extension would improve access to Canary Wharf much
(which is the main DLR destination) - except, perhaps, if there's a
station at City Thameslink.

And would that axis be better served by a Thameslink station at Southwark,
linking up with the Jubilee?

tom

--
Men? Women? Give me a colossal death robot any day!

In relation to joining up it would have to be new tunnels constructed
for most of the length, though the engineering issues mentioned at
Waterloo probably rule out the option.

On Mon, 26 Feb 2006, Paul Weaver wrote:

And would that axis be better served by a Thameslink station at
Southwark, linking up with the Jubilee?

Would that be possible without a long walk? Even if you ignore the
London Bridge branch it's a long way on the map.

Potentially. It rather depends on where the platforms are at Southwark,
and i'm afraid i have absolutely no idea about that. The worst-case
scenario is that they're to the west of the booking hall on Blackfriars
Road; if, as you say, we ignore the London Bridge branch, and consider a
station on the viaduct over Union Street, then it's 200 metres from the
railway station to the tube station, which could be covered with 40 metres
of escalator (going down 20 metres at 2:1 slope) and 160 metres of
passageway. That's certainly a bit of a schlep - two minutes' walk, plus a
bit to actually get to the platforms - but not entirely beyond the bounds
of sanity.

And, outrageous as imposing three minutes' walk on commuters may be, i
certainly think it makes more sense than building a brand new tunnel
meandering under the city just so they can change at already-crowded
Blackfriars for a ride on those tiny wee tram thingies!

Returning to the DLR option, though - perhaps we're missing the point when
we think about how to get from Bank to points west; a better option might
be to forget the Bank branch, and build a branch from Fenchurch Street,
running under the District line, express tube style - after all, the
presence of that line means we know it's clear of foundations, vaults,
etc. You could then either keep some trains running to Bank, or send the
whole lot along the new line, letting people get off at Monument or Cannon
Street if they want to go to the Bank area.

tom

--
Death to all vowels! The Ministry of Truth says vowels are plus
undoublethink. Vowels are a Eurasian plot! Big Brother, leading us proles
to victory!

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Mon, 26 Feb 2006, Paul Weaver wrote:

And would that axis be better served by a Thameslink station at
Southwark, linking up with the Jubilee?

Would that be possible without a long walk? Even if you ignore the
London Bridge branch it's a long way on the map.

Potentially. It rather depends on where the platforms are at Southwark,
and i'm afraid i have absolutely no idea about that. The worst-case
scenario is that they're to the west of the booking hall on Blackfriars
Road;


Yes, I think that's where they are.