On Dec 3, 1:34 pm, Tom Anderson wrote:


Hang on, though - at Baker Street, the junction between the southbound
lines of the Watford and Stanmore branches is *south* of the platforms,
isn't it? That means you really can have trains from each arriving
simultaneously, with one then waiting at the platform for the other to
leave. At St Pancras, the junction of the Great Northern and Midland
branches of Thameslink has to be north of the station box, doesn't it? You


I thought I'd seen the junction from the train - if I was right, the
lines ran off to each side *immediately* north of the station; I
assume within the concrete box that was constructed.

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
h.li...
On Mon, 3 Dec 2007, Roland Perry wrote:

In message , at 15:03:14 on Mon, 3 Dec
2007, R.C. Payne remarked:

Why will the dwell times here be longer than other stations? I'd have
thought somewhere like City Thameslink or London Bridge would have
just as much excuse to have long dwell times, and wherever the
location of the voltage change also has a good reason to offer long
dwell times, what's so special about this station?

It's where two lines meet and merge. So you can only get the maximum
throughput if trains arrive from the two branches interleaved exactly
on time.

Is it? I thought they met and merged north of the station, and shared a
single 2 track approach from the north. If that is the case, then they
will have to interleave exactly regardless of whether the station has 2
or 4 platforms.

The lines from the ECML aren't in place yet,

No, but the tunnels for them (the Canal Tunnels) are - they were built as
part of the CTRL works. AIUI.

but if they merge before the station it would make things worse.

I'm all but certain that there is not a four-track approach to the station
from the north.

I can't find maps or diagrams giving any details, though. Possibly people
who are more au fait with council planning department websites etc might
do.


The merging tunnels to the ECML are visible from passing trains, just north
of the station box. At least the northbound track has been built as a dive
under, rather than a basic flat junction, which will be the situation south
of Blackfriars.

Paul S

IIRC the Canal Tunnels are to the north of the station box with points
being inserted just to the north of the new platforms to provide
connections to the ECML.

As the south end of the station is on a sharp curve then short of
going under the British Library I don't see how you can fit in a four,
12 car platform, station (bays or islands).

Does the CTRL Act cover what was being built?

OC

On 3 Dec, 16:26, Tom Anderson wrote:
I'm all but certain that there is not a four-track approach to the station
from the north.

I can't find maps or diagrams giving any details, though. Possibly people
who are more au fait with council planning department websites etc might
do.

This is the best one I've found online:
http://www.arup.com/_assets/_download/download268.pdf

Not great, but it shows the four tracks enter the station box
separately, and that there probably isn't enough width for conversion
to islands.

U

--
http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/
A blog about transport projects in London

On Mon, 3 Dec 2007, Mr Thant wrote:

On 3 Dec, 16:26, Tom Anderson wrote:

I'm all but certain that there is not a four-track approach to the station
from the north.

I can't find maps or diagrams giving any details, though. Possibly people
who are more au fait with council planning department websites etc might
do.

This is the best one I've found online:
http://www.arup.com/_assets/_download/download268.pdf

Not great, but it shows the four tracks enter the station box
separately, and that there probably isn't enough width for conversion to
islands.

Hmm, no, it looks like there isn't.

There might be room to build a two-storey structure, with a northbound
island on top of a southbound island, and the junction to the south, but i
imagine it would be rather expensive to build!

I have a feeling Quail shows the junction, as it was planned when the map
was printed, and might even give mileage. I'll check later.

tom

--
this place would be a paradise tomorrow if every department had a
supervisor with a sub-machine gun

Andy wrote:
Providing two platforms in each direction at St. Pancras would at
least prevent the hanging around and allow trains from the two
northern branches to wait their 'slot' in a platform and allow
passengers to change to the underground if they wish. It also allows
slightly easier recovery from delays, as fast trains can pass stoppers
in the station, rather than having to wait until they are further out
from the center.

As we already know, there will be no junctions immediately either side
of SPILL for some time. However, from December 2015, this will be the
new layout:


--- Down GN
Plat. /
Down TL ------------ Down TL
SOUTH NORTH
Up TL ------------ Up TL
Plat. \
--- Up GN


If SPILL had been built to accomodate 4 platforms, you would have to
build the track in either of these formations in order to maximise the
benefits 4 platforms would provide over 2 platforms:


---------------- Down GN
/ Plats. \ /
Down TL ------------------- Down TL
SOUTH x x NORTH
Up TL ------------------- Up TL
\ Plats. / \
---------------- Up GN

OR

Plat.
-------------- Down GN
/ \ /
Down TL ----------------- Down TL
SOUTH x Plats. x NORTH
Up TL ----------------- Up TL
\ / \
-------------- Up GN
Plat.


The single crossovers would, as you have pointed out, permit overtaking
moves to take place at SPILL. Assuming the signalling is of the
bi-directional variety, then the (otherwise useless) diamond crossovers
would further enhance the status of SPILL by allowing it to fully
function as a terminus for both TL services (from both directions) and
GN services (from the north). The benefits for TL passengers would be
greater as there would be more scope to limit the reduction in frequency
required to terminate services at SPILL than at SPIHL (particularly if
GN services outside the peak are restricted to KGX as it has more spare
capacity than SPIHL in that respect IMO) - ironically, it seems that
SPIHL will actually become the London terminus for TL services to/from
north of London during some weekends next year while preliminary TL
Prog. works are carried out!

Technically incorrect. FCC will cease operating it and it returns to NR
who
will then allow TfL to operate it.

Last I heard, there are plans to install one of the new advanced fare
machines, but I'm not sure how that's progressing.

What is the very last train from Kings Cross Thameslink?

Best Wishes,
LEWIS

On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 02:28:59 +0000, Charles Ellson
wrote:

If you look over the wall at Kings Cross Thameslink you'll see the
other two platforms. They haven't been used since 1940 when the
station was Kings Cross Met/Circle station but no significant removal
work has been carried out so I wouldn't expect much more than removal
of the platform edging to take place.

I'm curious whether anybody knows if there are plans to change the
surface buildings at Kings Cross Thameslink in the longer term. The
booking hall may be cramped for its current use, but it'll be very
generous for a (presumably) relatively minor entrance to the tube
station, and I would expect the site to be of some interet to
developers

Martin

"Lew 1" wrote in message
...
What is the very last train from Kings Cross Thameslink?

The 2359 from Haywards Heath to Bedford at 0108 on Sunday.

http://www.firstcapitalconnect.co.uk...?iCmsPageId=77

--
Peter

"Lew 1" wrote in message
...
Technically incorrect. FCC will cease operating it and it returns to NR
who
will then allow TfL to operate it.

Last I heard, there are plans to install one of the new advanced fare
machines, but I'm not sure how that's progressing.

What is the very last train from Kings Cross Thameslink?


Journey planner is currently showing 01:30 towards London Bridge which
sounds right.