http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/downloads/pdf/T2025.pdf

Comments?

Bob wrote:
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/downloads/pdf/T2025.pdf

Comments?

The plan to divert the Chingford line via Stratford is an odd one. It
presumably is about using the platforms free up by Crossrail, and will
provide better connectivity - the only destination of significance lost
is Hackney, and that should be easily doable by either bus from
Walthamstow (or a reinstated Lea Bridge station) or Overground from
Stratford...

....but won't it take significantly longer? Also, what happens to
Clapton?

Jonn

"Bob" wrote in message
oups.com...
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/downloads/pdf/T2025.pdf

Comments?

Some of the pictures are awful,

that Trafalgar square!!!!!

tim

Bob wrote:
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/downloads/pdf/T2025.pdf

Comments?

First I've seen about segregation of the Northern line.

They reckon they can get 30 tph on both branches by sorting out the
restriction around Camden.

What's needed for this?

I would have thought they'd need to interlace the trains and get 60 tph
through Camden, which they could do by shutting Camden. Or is there a
depot somewhere?

TfL actually claim it just needs Capacity Improvements at Camden. What?
New platforms?

Otherwise, sounds so sensible why hasn't it been done before?

wrote:
Bob wrote:
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/downloads/pdf/T2025.pdf

Comments?

First I've seen about segregation of the Northern line.

They reckon they can get 30 tph on both branches by sorting out the
restriction around Camden.

What's needed for this?

I would have thought they'd need to interlace the trains and get 60 tph
through Camden, which they could do by shutting Camden. Or is there a
depot somewhere?

TfL actually claim it just needs Capacity Improvements at Camden. What?
New platforms?

Otherwise, sounds so sensible why hasn't it been done before?

Ah - discussed here
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk....8e4de22d7ae572

It seems Canning Town has 4 platforms but is already horrendously busy.

wrote:
Bob wrote:
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/downloads/pdf/T2025.pdf

Comments?

First I've seen about segregation of the Northern line.

They reckon they can get 30 tph on both branches by sorting out the
restriction around Camden.

What's needed for this?

I'm not sure quite what restriction they are referring to here - perhaps
something signalling-related.

I would have thought they'd need to interlace the trains and get 60 tph
through Camden, which they could do by shutting Camden. Or is there a
depot somewhere?

Physically speaking, the junction at Camden can already handle
segregation of Northern line branches without any new tunnelling - there
is no need to interlace trains, as there are no flat junctions. Trains
between one pair of branches (e.g. Edgware to Bank) can pass through the
junction simultaneously with trains between the other pair of branches.

It does not matter which northern branch is paired with which southern
branch, as long as they are segregated (however, there may be some
signalling constraints I'm unfamiliar with that make one combination
more preferable). The current service pattern fails at Camden when a
train from either southern branch destined for a particular northern
branch reaches the junction at the same time as a train from the other
southern branch, destined for the same northern branch - one of the
trains must wait and blocks trains behind it (destined for the other
branch).

TfL actually claim it just needs Capacity Improvements at Camden. What?
New platforms?

Interchange passageways. If the Northern line were segregated,
interchange at Camden would significantly increase, and the station is
too cramped to handle it. Wider platforms might also be necessary.

There was a discussion on this not that long ago here.

Otherwise, sounds so sensible why hasn't it been done before?

I think mainly because of the interchange problem at Camden. Northern
line passengers would also be upset at the loss of direct services to
their preferred branch - although this is something which passengers
south of Kennington have now become used to.

An interesting possibility partly related to Northern line segregation
is that of an extension of the Charing Cross branch from Kennington to
the south-east, towards Camberwell - it's a very long term prospect
which sits with its alternative, a southern extension of the Bakerloo.

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

Dave Arquati wrote:
An interesting possibility partly related to Northern line segregation
is that of an extension of the Charing Cross branch from Kennington to
the south-east, towards Camberwell - it's a very long term prospect
which sits with its alternative, a southern extension of the Bakerloo.

--

Extending the Bakerloo to Camberwell should be a priority - how would
the cost compare to, say, the DLR Woolwich extension? IME Elephant -
Camberwell is the most congested and slowest bus route after Oxford
Street. That's based on sitting in traffic for *hours* on the Walworth
Road, which is too narrow for bus lanes in parts - so trams wouldn't
help.

In article , Dave Arquati
writes
The current service pattern fails at Camden when a train from either
southern branch destined for a particular northern branch reaches the
junction at the same time as a train from the other southern branch,
destined for the same northern branch - one of the trains must wait and
blocks trains behind it (destined for the other branch).

Not quite: I *think* that the junctions on the Charing Cross branch are
far enough south that a train can stand between the divergence and the
convergence with the Bank branch. Thus if you have one for Edgware on
each route, you let the Bank one in and hold the CX one; a following
CX-Barnet train can then run. Similarly in the southbound direction.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

Clive D. W. Feather wrote:
In article , Dave Arquati
writes
The current service pattern fails at Camden when a train from either
southern branch destined for a particular northern branch reaches the
junction at the same time as a train from the other southern branch,
destined for the same northern branch - one of the trains must wait
and blocks trains behind it (destined for the other branch).

Not quite: I *think* that the junctions on the Charing Cross branch
are far enough south that a train can stand between the divergence
and the convergence with the Bank branch. Thus if you have one for
Edgware on each route, you let the Bank one in and hold the CX one; a
following CX-Barnet train can then run. Similarly in the southbound
direction.

The diagrams at http://www.geocities.com/athens/acro...9/ltcamden.jpg
and http://www.geocities.com/athens/acro...camdenjunc.gif don't
prove you're right, but they do prove you haven't got it the wrong way
around!

"Clive D. W. Feather" wrote in message
...
In article , Dave Arquati
writes
The current service pattern fails at Camden when a train from either
southern branch destined for a particular northern branch reaches the
junction at the same time as a train from the other southern branch,
destined for the same northern branch - one of the trains must wait and
blocks trains behind it (destined for the other branch).

Not quite: I *think* that the junctions on the Charing Cross branch are
far enough south that a train can stand between the divergence and the
convergence with the Bank branch. Thus if you have one for Edgware on each
route, you let the Bank one in and hold the CX one; a following CX-Barnet
train can then run. Similarly in the southbound direction.

The signal diagrams at
http://www.trainweb.org/tubeprune/Ca...wn-lct5-10.gif appear to
confirm this is possible.

Peter Smyth