asdf wrote:
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 00:45 +0100 (BST), Colin Rosenstiel wrote:

Isn't another reason simply the fact that the Aldgate terminating
platforms are between the Circle platforms so involve fewer conflicting
movements that at Moorgate or, when the bay existed there, at Liverpool
St?

That's quite correct. Terminating the Met at Moorgate (or Liverpool
Street) would cause more than twice as many conflicting moves as
running it through to Aldgate.

Then that is a good reason for the status quo. :-) All the same one
cannot help but think that the Circle line needs some simplification.
If Crossrail happens then that could be a good opportunity to review
Circle Line operation.

Adrian

wrote:
asdf wrote:
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 00:45 +0100 (BST), Colin Rosenstiel wrote:

Isn't another reason simply the fact that the Aldgate terminating
platforms are between the Circle platforms so involve fewer conflicting
movements that at Moorgate or, when the bay existed there, at Liverpool
St?
That's quite correct. Terminating the Met at Moorgate (or Liverpool
Street) would cause more than twice as many conflicting moves as
running it through to Aldgate.

Then that is a good reason for the status quo. :-) All the same one
cannot help but think that the Circle line needs some simplification.
If Crossrail happens then that could be a good opportunity to review
Circle Line operation.

AIUI there are already plans to ditch the Circle line in a few years
(after the new S stock is in place, I think) - by diverting the H&C east
of Liverpool Street to Edgware Road via Tower Hill and Victoria (the
"tea cup") and having the Met take over H&C services east of Liverpool
Street.


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

In message .com of
Fri, 9 Jun 2006 10:00:20 in uk.transport.london, "Adrian Auer-Hudson,
MIMIS" writes

[snip]

It puzzles me that LU insists on running Met Line trains thru to
Aldgate. The Junction there must be an operating challenge. Meanwhile
there is ample unused capacity at Moorgate. Surely the walk saved to
City employment centers cannot be so much shorter from Aldgate?


I just tried the trip between Moorgate and Aldgate in
http://journeyplanner.tfl.gov.uk/user/XSLT_TRIP_REQUEST2?language=en
and found it takes 4 minutes by LU and 18 walking.
I regularly make that walk. I would be quite uncomfortable to share some
parts of the footpaths with many extra pedestrians. In fact, people
transfer to Circle trains at Barbican when trains teverse at Moorgate.

Reversing at Moorgate means eastbound trains cross the westbound line to
a single reversing platform.
At Aldgate, there are two reversing platforms between the east and west
bound lines.
Reversing at Moorgate is uncommon. I assume it only happens when there
is unusual congestion around Aldgate.

If Crossrail ever happens, things will be more interesting as Moorgate
and Liverpool Street will be one station - the trains will be long.
--
Walter Briscoe

On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 07:48:30 +0100, Walter Briscoe wrote:

If Crossrail ever happens, things will be more interesting as Moorgate
and Liverpool Street will be one station - the trains will be long.

There's currently a similar sort of situation at Waterloo. Waterloo
(Jubilee) is an interchange station for Waterloo (NR), which is an
interchange station for Waterloo East (NR), which is an interchange
station for Southwark (Jubilee). The London Connections map shows them
all interconnected.

asdf wrote:
On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 07:48:30 +0100, Walter Briscoe wrote:

If Crossrail ever happens, things will be more interesting as Moorgate
and Liverpool Street will be one station - the trains will be long.

There's currently a similar sort of situation at Waterloo. Waterloo
(Jubilee) is an interchange station for Waterloo (NR), which is an
interchange station for Waterloo East (NR), which is an interchange
station for Southwark (Jubilee). The London Connections map shows them
all interconnected.

Charing Cross also has had an interesting history. Embankment Station
was once Charing Cross Underground station. The current CX was Strand
Northern Line and Trafalgar Square Bakerloo. The Embankment Station
Entrance is actually under the mainline platforms.

The CX & Embankment Northern Line stations must be very close to each
other.
Adrian.

Solario wrote:

The CX & Embankment Northern Line stations must be very close to each
other.

Not as close as some (e.g. Covent Garden & Leicester Square). From
recollection the CX Northern line platforms are on the northern side of the
Strand whilst the Embankment ones stretch under the Thams (I think the loop
that formed the northern platform does). But one can still see the light at
end of the tunnel when looking north.

In article ,
(Tim Roll-Pickering) wrote:

Solario wrote:

The CX & Embankment Northern Line stations must be very close to
each other.

Not as close as some (e.g. Covent Garden & Leicester Square). From
recollection the CX Northern line platforms are on the northern side
of the Strand whilst the Embankment ones stretch under the Thams (I
think the loop that formed the northern platform does). But one can
still see the light at end of the tunnel when looking north.

I don;t think the Strand /platforms/ extend under the Thames, just the
former terminating loop which was walled off for the war and in fact the
only sub-Thames tube to be breached by bombing.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 17:07:09 +0100, Tim Roll-Pickering wrote:

The CX & Embankment Northern Line stations must be very close to each
other.

Not as close as some (e.g. Covent Garden & Leicester Square).

IIRC, CX and Embankment (Northern) are actually slightly closer
together, as the crow flies, than Leicester Square and Covent Garden,
but due to the curvature of the track, the distance by rail is
slightly longer.

(Or was it the other way round?)

Tim Roll-Pickering wrote:
Solario wrote:

The CX & Embankment Northern Line stations must be very close to each
other.

Not as close as some (e.g. Covent Garden & Leicester Square). From
recollection the CX Northern line platforms are on the northern side of the
Strand whilst the Embankment ones stretch under the Thams (I think the loop
that formed the northern platform does). But one can still see the light at
end of the tunnel when looking north.

Nah, that's just the headlamp of an oncoming train.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Robin

Charing Cross also has had an interesting history. Embankment Station
was once Charing Cross Underground station. The current CX was Strand
Northern Line and Trafalgar Square Bakerloo...

That's only part of it -- the present names of both Charing Cross and
Embankment were also their original names on one line each.

Here's a table of the relevant openings, closings, and name changes.
For proper alignment view it in a monospaced font, of course. For CX
read Charing Cross, for E read Embankment, for TS read Trafalgar Square,
for S read Strand, for A read Aldwych. Line names have also changed
over the years, but I'll use the modern ones for simplicity's sake.
The separator "|" indicates separate stations.

| late
| now Charing Cross | now Embankment | Aldwych
| --------------------- | ----------------------- | -------
| B'loo Nor'n J'lee | Distr B'loo Nor'n | Pic'y
| --------------------- | ----------------------- | -------
1870 | - | - - | CX - - | -
1906 | TS | - - | CX E - | -
Jun1907 | TS | CX - | CX E - | -
Nov1907 | TS | CX - | CX E - | S
1914 | TS | CX(S) - | CX CX(E) CX(E) | S
1915 | TS | S - | CX CX CX | A
1973 | TS - - | CX CX CX | A
1974 | TS - - | CX E CX E CX E | A
1976 | TS - - | E E E | A
1979 | CX CX CX | E E E | A
1994 | CX CX CX | E E E | -
1999 | CX CX - | E E E | -
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "Any story that needs a critic to explain it,
| needs rewriting." -- Larry Niven

My text in this article is in the public domain.