On Mar 29, 3:06 pm, "THC" wrote:
Kev, I'm sure you're aware that TfL have already committed funding to
this project - £18m if memory serves me - as part of their five-year
investment programme. This project would provide excellent network
benefits and open up the commercial centre of Watford to rail access
from large parts of north-west London and south Bucks. It suffers for
falling between the gaps in public sector responsibility but is backed
locally, regionally and in the Government Office for the region.
Someone at DfT needs to have their arse kicked, I think,
metaphorically speaking of course. I for one hope this project gets
the go-ahead.

Maybe I'm missing something obvious , but if the goal is to get the
tube to watford junction wouldn't it be a damn site cheaper just to re-
extend the Bakerloo line there? Who realistically is going to go all
round the houses via the met line from central london? No doubt there
will be a small amount of local traffic but realistically I doubt it
will amount to much and certainly not enough to justify what will
probably be quite an expensive project (bridges don't come cheap plus
all the track + signalling will probably need renewing since its been
left to rot by NR for 6 years).

B2003

On 29 Mar, 15:30, "Boltar" wrote:
Maybe I'm missing something obvious , but if the goal is to get the
tube to watford junction wouldn't it be a damn site cheaper just to re-
extend the Bakerloo line there? Who realistically is going to go all
round the houses via the met line from central london? No doubt there
will be a small amount of local traffic but realistically I doubt it
will amount to much and certainly not enough to justify what will
probably be quite an expensive project (bridges don't come cheap plus
all the track + signalling will probably need renewing since its been
left to rot by NR for 6 years).

It's for local traffic (one suggestion is Aylesbury to Watford trains)
and to connect developments in west Watford with Watford Junction. The
existing Met Watford branch does a healthy trade, despite its stupid
location.

The main service from Watford to London is Silverlink County (22
minutes to Euston), so no one would get either tube line all the way
anyway.

U

"Boltar" wrote

Maybe I'm missing something obvious , but if the goal is to get the
tube to watford junction wouldn't it be a damn site cheaper just to re-
extend the Bakerloo line there? Who realistically is going to go all
round the houses via the met line from central london?

AIUI the Bakerloo will take over the Watford New Line in a few years time.
The purpose of the Croxley Link iis for connection with the WCML and access
to Watford High Street. The stub to Watford Met is badly sited and could be
abandoned, leaving land with development value which will contribute to the
cost of building the link.

Peter

Yeah, this is a situation where extending both the Bakerloo and Met
lines to Watford Junction is definitely a realistic possibility, and
both will have different purposes and different transport flows.

On 29 Mar 2007 10:48:52 -0700, "sweek"
wrote:

Yeah, this is

What is ?

a situation where extending both the Bakerloo and Met
lines to Watford Junction is definitely a realistic possibility, and
both will have different purposes and different transport flows.

Bakerloo tube stock is generally incompatible with both LU surface
stock and the NR-style stock announced as intended to be used on the
"London Overground" services which will eventually use the DC lines,
so those are two reasons for not re-extending Bakerloo Line services
to Watford Junction.

On 29 Mar, 20:45, Charles Ellson wrote:
Bakerloo tube stock is generally incompatible with both LU surface
stock and the NR-style stock announced as intended to be used on the
"London Overground" services which will eventually use the DC lines,
so those are two reasons for not re-extending Bakerloo Line services
to Watford Junction.

What's your point? If the Bakerloo were extended it would no longer
share any track with National Rail stock, and there are four platforms
(two islands) at Watford Junction for DC Lines and trains via Croxley,
so two could be Met height and two could be tube height.

U

On 29 Mar 2007 13:29:52 -0700, "Mr Thant"
wrote:

On 29 Mar, 20:45, Charles Ellson wrote:
Bakerloo tube stock is generally incompatible with both LU surface
stock and the NR-style stock announced as intended to be used on the
"London Overground" services which will eventually use the DC lines,
so those are two reasons for not re-extending Bakerloo Line services
to Watford Junction.

What's your point? If the Bakerloo were extended it would no longer
share any track with National Rail stock, and there are four platforms
(two islands) at Watford Junction for DC Lines and trains via Croxley,
so two could be Met height and two could be tube height.

The DC line is only one part of what will form "London Overground". If
the information in :-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Overground

is correct then the class 378 NR-style stock is already on the way.
The DC line is part of what was built as a network of lines with
common equipment and working arrangements, it is not a self-contained
line. If anything it would be more sensible to run Met trains down the
DC line from Watford to East/South London as they (apart from their
loading gauge) are much more suitable for the line than tube trains.

Charles Ellson wrote:
The DC line is part of what was built as a network of lines with
common equipment and working arrangements

Whatever gave you that idea? The Silverlink Metro is a mess of
orphaned lines built by countless different companies that have been
munged together to form a very mixed up network. The only line the DC
line was built in conjunction with is in fact the Bakerloo.

As far as rolling stock goes, TfL haven't ordered enough 378s to cover
all lines and provide an improved service, and they'll take several
years to all arrive. I wouldn't be surprised if the DC line never gets
378s, and goes straight to modified Victoria Line stock, which will
become available around the same time.

U