On 28 Feb, 13:12, Tom Anderson wrote:
This is one of the reasons that replacing the Euston DC line services with
the Bakerloo is such an utterly worthless idea.

Because Euston is so useful for the City, you mean?

There's not much difference between "board train at Bushey, get off it
at Euston, fight your way onto Northern Line, get to City" and "board
train at Bushey, get off it at Baker Street or Embankment, fight your
way onto Met/District Line, get to City", except that the Met and
District are less crowded than the Northern.

Meanwhile, Canary Wharf types would be far better off ending up in
Baker Street rather than Euston...

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

On Feb 28, 1:55 pm, John B wrote:
On 28 Feb, 13:12, Tom Anderson wrote:

This is one of the reasons that replacing the Euston DC line services with
the Bakerloo is such an utterly worthless idea.

Because Euston is so useful for the City, you mean?

There's not much difference between "board train at Bushey, get off it
at Euston, fight your way onto Northern Line, get to City" and "board
train at Bushey, get off it at Baker Street or Embankment, fight your
way onto Met/District Line, get to City", except that the Met and
District are less crowded than the Northern.

Meanwhile, Canary Wharf types would be far better off ending up in
Baker Street rather than Euston...

I set my top speed ever on the Brompton (in the Euston underpass)
cycling from Baker Street to the City during the Silverlink
strikes :-)

However, getting from Euston to Baker Street in the evening is slow
even on a bicycle. If I had to do it every day I'd experiment with
whether going into the charging zone would be quicker. Certainly it
would be shorter.

Tim.

On 28 Feb, 13:55, John B wrote:
On 28 Feb, 13:12, Tom Anderson wrote:

This is one of the reasons that replacing the Euston DC line services with
the Bakerloo is such an utterly worthless idea.

Because Euston is so useful for the City, you mean?

There's not much difference between "board train at Bushey, get off it
at Euston, fight your way onto Northern Line, get to City" and "board
train at Bushey, get off it at Baker Street or Embankment, fight your
way onto Met/District Line, get to City", except that the Met and
District are less crowded than the Northern.

Meanwhile, Canary Wharf types would be far better off ending up in
Baker Street rather than Euston...


There's a heck of a lot of workplaces near the Euston Road. I can
walk from Euston and always try for a S ... I mean LO train if coming
in from that direction.

Also, with less stops at Watford, going into Euston and out again is
the best option to get from local stations to up north.

On 28 Feb, 13:12, Tom Anderson wrote:
and the Bakerloo only helps you if you're right at the
Oxford Circus end of town (which many people are, of course - but still a
minority, i think).

The Bakerloo serves points that the tubes from Euston don't, and the
the change at Queen's Park should be a lot easier, so I think it'd be
fairly attractive for a decent proportion of commuters. It doesn't
matter that you're not serving everywhere, because trains still
continue to Euston.

U

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

On 28 Feb, 13:12, Tom Anderson wrote:
Neither of them have terribly good onward connections, though. Both give
you the Bakerloo, and WJ gives you the NLL; QP will one day soon give you
some form of NLL as well. I would guess that most people commuting into
Euston take the tube from there into offices in the west end or the City,
or somewhere between. The NLL doesn't help with any of that (through
running to the ELLX may one day get you to Shoreditch High Street, which
is near the City), and the Bakerloo only helps you if you're right at the
Oxford Circus end of town (which many people are, of course - but still a
minority, i think).

Well, the bennefits of interchanging at WJ instead of QP need to be
taken in terms of direct destinations rather than lines.

QP will give you potentially westwards Overground connections to
Willesden Junction, though the Overground will probably terminate at
QP otherwise the Bakerloo would be capacity constrained over the whole
line north of there, due to the need to share track for a tiny two
station stretch. Eastwards gives you Stratford, and potentially the
East London railway route.

Willesden Junction on the other hand will give you all that plus
*direct* Overground services to Clapham, Richmond, and Barking.

On 29 Feb, 13:12, Jamie Thompson wrote:
On 28 Feb, 13:12, Tom Anderson wrote:

Neither of them have terribly good onward connections, though. Both give
you the Bakerloo, and WJ gives you the NLL; QP will one day soon give you
some form of NLL as well. I would guess that most people commuting into
Euston take the tube from there into offices in the west end or the City,
or somewhere between. The NLL doesn't help with any of that (through
running to the ELLX may one day get you to Shoreditch High Street, which
is near the City), and the Bakerloo only helps you if you're right at the
Oxford Circus end of town (which many people are, of course - but still a
minority, i think).

Well, the bennefits of interchanging at WJ instead of QP need to be
taken in terms of direct destinations rather than lines.

QP will give you potentially westwards Overground connections to
Willesden Junction, though the Overground will probably terminate at
QP otherwise the Bakerloo would be capacity constrained over the whole
line north of there, due to the need to share track for a tiny two
station stretch. Eastwards gives you Stratford, and potentially the
East London railway route.

Willesden Junction on the other hand will give you all that plus
*direct* Overground services to Clapham, Richmond, and Barking.

And a nightmarish interchange, presumably.

On 29 Feb, 13:12, Jamie Thompson wrote:
QP will give you potentially westwards Overground connections to
Willesden Junction, though the Overground will probably terminate at
QP otherwise the Bakerloo would be capacity constrained over the whole
line north of there

It's not practical to terminate the Overground service at Queen's Park
either though, due to the long single track sections either side of
the Bakerloo tunnel portal.

Willesden Junction on the other hand will give you all that plus
*direct* Overground services to Clapham, Richmond, and Barking.

Yeah, but to commuters want to go to any of those places? I'd think
any benefit analysis would come down on the side of improving the
journey time for the commuters switching to the Bakerloo to reach the
west end, which means Queen's Park.

U

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

MIG wrote:
On 29 Feb, 13:12, Jamie Thompson wrote:
On 28 Feb, 13:12, Tom Anderson wrote:

Neither of them have terribly good onward connections, though.
Both give you the Bakerloo, and WJ gives you the NLL; QP will one
day soon give you some form of NLL as well. I would guess that
most people commuting into Euston take the tube from there into
offices in the west end or the City, or somewhere between. The
NLL doesn't help with any of that (through running to the ELLX
may one day get you to Shoreditch High Street, which is near the
City), and the Bakerloo only helps you if you're right at the
Oxford Circus end of town (which many people are, of course - but
still a minority, i think).

Well, the bennefits of interchanging at WJ instead of QP need to be
taken in terms of direct destinations rather than lines.

QP will give you potentially westwards Overground connections to
Willesden Junction, though the Overground will probably terminate
at QP otherwise the Bakerloo would be capacity constrained over the
whole line north of there, due to the need to share track for a
tiny two station stretch. Eastwards gives you Stratford, and
potentially the East London railway route.

Willesden Junction on the other hand will give you all that plus
*direct* Overground services to Clapham, Richmond, and Barking.

And a nightmarish interchange, presumably.

Not at all. It's a simple stairs-and-corridor link between the two
island platforms, and there are lifts too (step-free according to the
Tube map).

--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

On Feb 29, 11:42*pm, "Richard J." wrote:
MIG wrote:
On 29 Feb, 13:12, Jamie *Thompson wrote:
On 28 Feb, 13:12, Tom Anderson wrote:

Neither of them have terribly good onward connections, though.
Both give you the Bakerloo, and WJ gives you the NLL; QP will one
day soon give you some form of NLL as well. I would guess that
most people commuting into Euston take the tube from there into
offices in the west end or the City, or somewhere between. The
NLL doesn't help with any of that (through running to the ELLX
may one day get you to Shoreditch High Street, which is near the
City), and the Bakerloo only helps you if you're right at the
Oxford Circus end of town (which many people are, of course - but
still a minority, i think).

Well, the bennefits of interchanging at WJ instead of QP need to be
taken in terms of direct destinations rather than lines.

QP will give you potentially westwards Overground connections to
Willesden Junction, though the Overground will probably terminate
at QP otherwise the Bakerloo would be capacity constrained over the
whole line north of there, due to the need to share track for a
tiny two station stretch. Eastwards gives you Stratford, and
potentially the East London railway route.

Willesden Junction on the other hand will give you all that plus
*direct* Overground services to Clapham, Richmond, and Barking.

And a nightmarish interchange, presumably.

Not at all. *It's a simple stairs-and-corridor link between the two
island platforms, and there are lifts too (step-free according to the
Tube map).

I must have misunderstood. I was interpreting the plan as reinstating
some kind of platforms on the main lines, which I thought were the
other side of a depot from the current stations.

There isn't a connection from the main lines to the existing stations
south of Watford or north of Chalk Farm.

At Queens Park, the lines are all close and parallel, although a
bridge is involved. There are un (barely?) used platforms on the main
lines already.

On 1 Mar, 01:05, MIG wrote:
And a nightmarish interchange, presumably.

Not at all. It's a simple stairs-and-corridor link between the two
island platforms, and there are lifts too (step-free according to the
Tube map).

I must have misunderstood. I was interpreting the plan as reinstating
some kind of platforms on the main lines, which I thought were the
other side of a depot from the current stations.

There isn't a connection from the main lines to the existing stations
south of Watford or north of Chalk Farm.

At Queens Park, the lines are all close and parallel, although a
bridge is involved. There are un (barely?) used platforms on the main
lines already.

Indeed, I am quite curious as to why you believe the interchange would
be so nightmarish. A quick look at some satellite imagery shows it to
be quite matter of course (hopefully, this works!):
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps/ms?ie=...06738&t=h&z=18

The depot is quite some way to the east, and not too great a concern
to this proposal. Admittedly, the platforms already exist at Queens
park, but that shouldn't make too great a obstacle to reinstating the
platforms at Willesden should the benefits justified it.