Chris Johns wrote:
On Wed, 7 Jun 2006, dwb wrote:

Considering that the ELL will go from nowhere to nowhere it seems alot
of money to spend.

It's not just about the present, it's about the future too.

It would be nice if areas outside London could get lines built for the
present, nevermind the future.
--
Chris Johns

Given the overcrowding that has come to light in the last couple of
days on Thameslink and lines out of Kings Cross mayber some of the
money should have gone there.
I bet the people of West Croydon can't wait to get that direct link to
Dalston Junc.

Kevin

Kevin wrote:

Given the overcrowding that has come to light in the last couple of
days on Thameslink and lines out of Kings Cross mayber some of the
money should have gone there.
I bet the people of West Croydon can't wait to get that direct link to
Dalston Junc.


I bet the people of Cricklewood couldn't wait to get that direct link
to Tooting, either. It's a bit of a facetious comparison, I know, since
Thameslink also created new city-centre journeys, but not entirely so.

One with more direct relevance: have you been on the NLL in rush hour
recently? It's as crowded as the GN or Thameslink, despite the fact
that everyone assumed it'd be completely useless when BR created it so
they could close Broad Street and sell up to developers.

It's clear that a (half) decent service creating significant through
journey opportunities creates its own demand - there is no reason to
assume the ELL will be any different from the NLL or the (also rammed)
WLL in this respect.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

John B wrote:

It's clear that a (half) decent service creating significant through
journey opportunities creates its own demand - there is no reason to
assume the ELL will be any different from the NLL or the (also rammed)
WLL in this respect.

It's also good to see the development and use of effective orbital
journey opportunities rather than everything being geared up towards
the city centre. That can't be a bad thing, and other smaller cities
could also do with similar provision (albeit probably using buses).

Neil

In message .com, Neil
Williams writes
John B wrote:

It's clear that a (half) decent service creating significant through
journey opportunities creates its own demand - there is no reason to
assume the ELL will be any different from the NLL or the (also rammed)
WLL in this respect.

It's also good to see the development and use of effective orbital
journey opportunities rather than everything being geared up towards
the city centre. That can't be a bad thing, and other smaller cities
could also do with similar provision (albeit probably using buses).

Indeed as Birmingham's legendary Outer Circle 11 and Inner Circle 8
routes have proved for 75-80 years. There aren't low-frequency
occasional routes a la those in - say - Norwich but high-frequency
high-capacity routes with frequencies in excess of radial routes in may
places and which have over the decades created travel patterns all their
own.

The ELLX looks distinctly odd on paper. It will probably surprise us
all for the better, though.
--
Ian Jelf, MITG
Birmingham, UK

Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk

"Ian Jelf" wrote in message
...
In message .com, Neil
Williams writes
John B wrote:

It's clear that a (half) decent service creating significant through
journey opportunities creates its own demand - there is no reason to
assume the ELL will be any different from the NLL or the (also rammed)
WLL in this respect.

It's also good to see the development and use of effective orbital
journey opportunities rather than everything being geared up towards
the city centre. That can't be a bad thing, and other smaller cities
could also do with similar provision (albeit probably using buses).

The ELLX looks distinctly odd on paper. It will probably surprise us
all for the better, though.

TfL's long terem aim seems to be to create a not-quite-circular service,
Clapham Junction - Clapham Junction via the SLL, ELL, NLL and WLL.

Peter

On Wed, 7 Jun 2006 16:49:52 +0100, Ian Jelf
wrote:

In message .com, Neil
Williams writes
John B wrote:

It's clear that a (half) decent service creating significant through
journey opportunities creates its own demand - there is no reason to
assume the ELL will be any different from the NLL or the (also rammed)
WLL in this respect.

Exactly. If the routes are well run and frequent then people will use
them - even the Barking - Gospel Oak line carries decent loads at times
you would not expect and it doesn't have the most attractive of service
specifications.

It's also good to see the development and use of effective orbital
journey opportunities rather than everything being geared up towards
the city centre. That can't be a bad thing, and other smaller cities
could also do with similar provision (albeit probably using buses).

Indeed as Birmingham's legendary Outer Circle 11 and Inner Circle 8
routes have proved for 75-80 years. There aren't low-frequency
occasional routes a la those in - say - Norwich but high-frequency
high-capacity routes with frequencies in excess of radial routes in may
places and which have over the decades created travel patterns all their
own.

I entirely agree - the 253 / 254 in London make no apparent sense in
terms of end to end destinations but they carry huge volumes of people.

The ELLX looks distinctly odd on paper. It will probably surprise us
all for the better, though.

The ELLX may look odd on its own. The real issue is the service pattern
to be provided over the whole set of TfL inherited routes. Thankfully
there is already some innovative thinking going on which provides a
range of through journeys not available at present.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
...
snippitty
The ELLX may look odd on its own. The real issue is the service pattern
to be provided over the whole set of TfL inherited routes. Thankfully
there is already some innovative thinking going on which provides a
range of through journeys not available at present.

Somewhat off topic I know, but mention of the TfL inherited routes made me
wonder if anyone knows what the situation with TfL staff passes will be once
the routes pass to TfL control, will these lines become available to staff
passes?
--
Cheers, Steve.
Change from jealous to sad to reply.

Steve Dulieu wrote:

Somewhat off topic I know, but mention of the TfL inherited routes made me
wonder if anyone knows what the situation with TfL staff passes will be once
the routes pass to TfL control, will these lines become available to staff
passes?
--
Cheers, Steve.

I suspect *not*. Had LU been the operator and the extended ELL (and
maybe NLL) incorporated into the Underground proper, then clearly staff
passes would have become valid on all sections.

As things stand I guess "grandfather rights" will allow their use from
Shoreditch to New Cross/New Cross Gate and from Harrow & Wealdstone to
Watford Junction - i.e. as at present.

A precedent was set a few years ago when LU single tickets from
Tottenham Hale to zone 1 were also accepted on WAGN via Liverpool
Street NR. Despite me raising the anomaly, holders of staff passes were
not granted a similar choice in route.

On Thu, 08 Jun 2006 13:46:21 GMT, "Steve Dulieu"
wrote:


"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
.. .
snippitty
The ELLX may look odd on its own. The real issue is the service pattern
to be provided over the whole set of TfL inherited routes. Thankfully
there is already some innovative thinking going on which provides a
range of through journeys not available at present.

Somewhat off topic I know, but mention of the TfL inherited routes made me
wonder if anyone knows what the situation with TfL staff passes will be once
the routes pass to TfL control, will these lines become available to staff
passes?

I doubt very much that that has yet been considered. I would expect the
TUs to add it to the list of items for negotiation but the fact the
routes are effectively a concession or franchise does not bode well.

There have been very few positive changes to the staff pass or priv
ticket validities since rail privatisation. The usual reasons are money
and reciprocation of benefit for National Rail franchise / Network Rail
employees. The relative sizes of the employee groupings in TfL vs
Network Rail and the TOCs always tilts the cost / benefit balance in
favour of NR and the TOCs and away from TfL.

I don't see much reason for TfL to extend staff pass validity to these
services when they do not own the infrastructure, the vehicles or
directly employ the staff. The nearest parallel is DLR and I am not at
all sure how it works there - do the people maintaining the Lewisham
extension have TfL staff pass validity given they are employed by a
private infrastructure company and no direct relationship with DLR Ltd
or even Serco as the DLR operator?

--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

On 7 Jun 2006 07:29:06 -0700, John B wrote:

It's clear that a (half) decent service creating significant through
journey opportunities creates its own demand - there is no reason to
assume the ELL will be any different from the NLL or the (also rammed)
WLL in this respect.

Indeed. I think it was a mistake not to connect the northern end to
anything, though, as that greatly reduces the through journey
opportunities.

(I know it's planned for Phase 2, but that won't be completed until
years later - if it even happens at all.)