On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 17:03:47 +0100, Clive D. W. Feather wrote:

The
problem is the Southbound direction because the trains enter the
station from their source and then branch after.

If the branching could happen first that would resolve the problem. The
other option would be to have one wide platform between them, and yes
that would be further South where they are closer together.

The junctions start immediately south of the present platforms, and are
quite long. It's basically not possible without adding brand new tunnels
somewhere (probably from Chalk Farm / South Kentish Town to the opposite
southbound platform).

It'd be interesting to know how much that would cost, particularly in
relation to the £130m earmarked for the surface rebuilding.

Earl Purple wrote:

Dave Arquati wrote:

I'm not sure that's the case. because of the way the junction is laid
out. It's currently essentially cross-platform between the northbound
platforms, which is fine, but putting the southbound platforms next to
each other would cause a considerable headache because of the way the
branches intersect and dive off again. They would need to be in a
completely different location, *much* further south than at present.

The northbound interchange isn't such a problem because at least you
know which platform you are supposed to be on for your destination. The
problem is the Southbound direction because the trains enter the
station from their source and then branch after.


Wait a minute. I'm confused... You're saying the main problem causing
the crowding at Camden Town is that people don't know which southbound
platform to use. But then surely the problem would solve itself if the
line were split in two. The southbound Edgware-Bank line and the
southbound Barnet-Charing Cross line each would use their own
platforms, and never the twain shall meet. There would no longer be
passengers hanging around the escalators, wating to see which platform
their southbound train departs from.

Of course, you might need to excavate a new foot tunnel for addtional,
easier interchange between the two southbound platforms, and one for
the two northbound platforms. But the cost of a couple of new
corridors is going to be less than rebuilding the station with brand
new southbound platforms!

Earl Purple wrote:

Dave Arquati wrote:

I'm not sure that's the case. because of the way the junction is laid
out. It's currently essentially cross-platform between the northbound
platforms, which is fine, but putting the southbound platforms next to
each other would cause a considerable headache because of the way the
branches intersect and dive off again. They would need to be in a
completely different location, *much* further south than at present.

The northbound interchange isn't such a problem because at least you
know which platform you are supposed to be on for your destination. The
problem is the Southbound direction because the trains enter the
station from their source and then branch after.


Wait a minute. I'm confused... You're saying the main problem causing
the crowding at Camden Town is that people don't know which southbound
platform to use. But then surely the problem would solve itself if the
line were split in two. The southbound Edgware-Bank line and the
southbound Barnet-Charing Cross line each would use their own
platforms, and never the twain shall meet. There would no longer be
passengers hanging around the escalators, wating to see which platform
their southbound train departs from.

Of course, you might need to excavate a new foot tunnel for addtional,
easier interchange between the two southbound platforms, and one for
the two northbound platforms. But the cost of a couple of new
corridors is going to be less than rebuilding the station with brand
new southbound platforms!

wrote:

Wait a minute. I'm confused... You're saying the main problem causing
the crowding at Camden Town is that people don't know which southbound
platform to use. But then surely the problem would solve itself if the
line were split in two. The southbound Edgware-Bank line and the
southbound Barnet-Charing Cross line each would use their own
platforms, and never the twain shall meet. There would no longer be
passengers hanging around the escalators, wating to see which platform
their southbound train departs from.

I think that the platforms themselves are simply not big enough. Of
course, a lot of the crowding would also disappear if there were a
steady flow of trains which would be easier with the line split.

Of course, you might need to excavate a new foot tunnel for addtional,
easier interchange between the two southbound platforms, and one for
the two northbound platforms. But the cost of a couple of new
corridors is going to be less than rebuilding the station with brand
new southbound platforms!

I don't know how feasible it would be to build new corridors. The
Southbound-Southbound interchange in the middle involves going up then
down again. There is another set of tunnels towards the South of all
the platforms connecting all of them and is actually a shorter
interchange.

btw, how feasible would it be to put a tunnel between the end of the
Southbound Charing Cross branch at Euston and Euston Square station.
After all, that end is pointing down the Euston Road towards Warren
Street while Euston Square its entry on its West side so the long end
is heading towards Kings Cross. An interchange there would be very very
useful as there is no decent change between Northern Line and Circle /
Hammersmith & City / Metropolitan Line until Moorgate.

Earl Purple wrote:
wrote:

Wait a minute. I'm confused... You're saying the main problem causing
the crowding at Camden Town is that people don't know which southbound
platform to use. But then surely the problem would solve itself if the
line were split in two. The southbound Edgware-Bank line and the
southbound Barnet-Charing Cross line each would use their own
platforms, and never the twain shall meet. There would no longer be
passengers hanging around the escalators, wating to see which platform
their southbound train departs from.

I think that the platforms themselves are simply not big enough. Of
course, a lot of the crowding would also disappear if there were a
steady flow of trains which would be easier with the line split.

Of course, you might need to excavate a new foot tunnel for addtional,
easier interchange between the two southbound platforms, and one for
the two northbound platforms. But the cost of a couple of new
corridors is going to be less than rebuilding the station with brand
new southbound platforms!

I don't know how feasible it would be to build new corridors. The
Southbound-Southbound interchange in the middle involves going up then
down again. There is another set of tunnels towards the South of all
the platforms connecting all of them and is actually a shorter
interchange.

btw, how feasible would it be to put a tunnel between the end of the
Southbound Charing Cross branch at Euston and Euston Square station.
After all, that end is pointing down the Euston Road towards Warren
Street while Euston Square its entry on its West side so the long end
is heading towards Kings Cross. An interchange there would be very very
useful as there is no decent change between Northern Line and Circle /
Hammersmith & City / Metropolitan Line until Moorgate.


It would be quite a long tunnel. The Charing Cross branch may be
parallel with Euston Road, but it certainly isn't under it; it's
roughly under Drummond Street I think.

But much of this discussion about two lines is confusing me. It's been
done before when the crossovers were taken out of action after a
derailment recently, and you had Edgware to Bank and Barnet to Charing
Cross.

Although there are capacity problems that need to be sorted out, I
can't really follow all the discussion about new platforms and tunnels
etc.

Earl Purple wrote:
btw, how feasible would it be to put a tunnel between the end of the
Southbound Charing Cross branch at Euston and Euston Square station.
After all, that end is pointing down the Euston Road towards Warren
Street while Euston Square its entry on its West side so the long end
is heading towards Kings Cross. An interchange there would be very very
useful as there is no decent change between Northern Line and Circle /
Hammersmith & City / Metropolitan Line until Moorgate.

Except the newly-built one at KXSP. However, since there's no
interchange on the Charing X branch, it would still be a good idea to
put one in at Euston Square (although I'd consider linking it to Warren
Street rather than Euston, given the local geography).


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

John B wrote:

Except the newly-built one at KXSP. However, since there's no
interchange on the Charing X branch, it would still be a good idea to
put one in at Euston Square (although I'd consider linking it to Warren
Street rather than Euston, given the local geography).

If the platforms are under Drummond Street then effectively the link
would be under North Gower Street. The link would include an escalator
as the H&C lines etc are higher.

And given that we are talking about splitting the lines, KXSP won't
even be on the same line.

Warren Street may be more of a problem given the Marylebone Underpass
in near proximity. On the other hand, the existence of that might make
it easier. It would mean one extra stop to make the change though
assuming most the of interchanging passengers are coming from the North.

Earl Purple wrote:



I think that the platforms themselves are simply not big enough.

Ah, I see. And, of course I suppose that means there's no easy way to
dig wider tunnels without closing at least one branch at a time while
the work goes on, and end up creating even more chaos! It seems we're
back to square one.

It's all so much easier when you're just idly doodling new lines on a
map.

wrote:
Earl Purple wrote:

I think that the platforms themselves are simply not big enough.

Ah, I see. And, of course I suppose that means there's no easy way to
dig wider tunnels without closing at least one branch at a time while
the work goes on, and end up creating even more chaos! It seems we're
back to square one.

It's all so much easier when you're just idly doodling new lines on a
map.

Not sure if they'd have to close the lines completely or just Camden
Town station. When they moved Angel station they just closed the
station. It used to be in Goswell Road at the junction of City Road /
Pentonville Road. They moved it into Upper Street.

(Of note, a line that follows the A1 would run along the Northern Line
Barnet Branch between Highgate and Archway and would then go to Upper
Holloway, Holloway Road, Highbury & Islington, Angel, Barbican, St
Pauls. There would be 4 stops from Archway to Angel compared to the 6
there now on a route that follows A400-A501. Note that the Charing
Cross branch continues to follow the A400 all the way to Trafalgar
Square and that the Barnet branch mainly follows the A1000 to the North
while the Edgware branch follows the A502 up to Golders Green then
slides off further to the West crossing the A41 at Hendon Central and
nearly but not quite reaching the A5. In the South the Northern Line
follows the A3 and A24, beginning from London Bridge where the A3
begins).

asdf wrote:
On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 17:03:47 +0100, Clive D. W. Feather wrote:

The
problem is the Southbound direction because the trains enter the
station from their source and then branch after.

If the branching could happen first that would resolve the problem. The
other option would be to have one wide platform between them, and yes
that would be further South where they are closer together.
The junctions start immediately south of the present platforms, and are
quite long. It's basically not possible without adding brand new tunnels
somewhere (probably from Chalk Farm / South Kentish Town to the opposite
southbound platform).

It'd be interesting to know how much that would cost, particularly in
relation to the £130m earmarked for the surface rebuilding.

Don't forget that money would also be paying for reconfiguration of
pedestrian tunnels.

New tunnels built around existing systems are extremely expensive
affairs. You'd also have to factor in rebuilding of much of the station
anyway - it's not an either/or choice.

--
Dave Arquati
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London