Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

From eWatford Observer 29/03/08


Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings



Plans to finally build the Croxley Rail Link have again hit the skids
after the Department for Transport dismissed the latest bid as "non-
compliant" with its funding criteria.

The development, which would link the Metropolitan Line to Watford
Junction, has received backing from Hertfordshire County Council,
Watford MP Claire Ward and the East of England Regional Assembly, as
well as Watford Borough Council.

However, the government has rejected the business case because it has
still not received financial backing from Transport for London (TfL).


TfL said in 2005 that it would commit up to £18 million to the
project. However, because TfL will not guarantee how much cash it will
provide for the £95 million project the Government will not commit any
money to it either.

The Department for Transport has, however, agreed to meet with the
county council to discuss the project.

The bid was backed by a letter signed by Mayor Dorothy Thornhill, Ms
Ward and Robert Gordon, leader of the county council.

And Mayor Thornhill says if the three can continue to show the same
level of cross party solidarity the case can still be won.

She said: "Somebody actually wants to talk to us about this and I'm
sure that if we show the same level of solidarity we can prove the
rail link is important.

"The Croxley Rail Link is not just the icing on the cake for the
people of West Watford, it is the cherry on the icing of the cake."


5:21pm Saturday 29th March 2008

.................................................. ..

.................................................. ..

John Burke

WRUG

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

On Apr 2, 10:48 am, wrote:
"The Croxley Rail Link is not just the icing on the cake for the
people of West Watford, it is the cherry on the icing of the cake."

Unless they're travelling to harrow or some other nearby suburb , why
would someone get the met from watford junction and be taken on a tour
of north west london when they could get a direct train to euston
instead?

B2003

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

On Apr 2, 2:48*am, wrote:
From eWatford Observer 29/03/08

*Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings

Plans to finally build the Croxley Rail Link have again hit the skids
after the Department for Transport dismissed the latest bid as "non-
compliant" with its funding criteria.

Unbelievable, all this mishigas over two miles of critically useful
railway. The failure to have build this line to date points to
terminal stupidity.

Adrain

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

Adrian wrote:

Unbelievable, all this mishigas over two miles of critically useful
railway. The failure to have build this line to date points to
terminal stupidity.

What's "critically useful" about it?

Neil

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

The Croxley Link line will be a fantastic success when built because
Watford's people will be able to get to Rickmansworth and the Chiltern Line
(Amersham / Aylesbury etc.) by quick tube thus avoiding the horrendous the
road traffic along this busy corridor. You have to do a rush hour bus trip
from Watford to Rickmansworth to really understand how choked this area is
with traffic. Also and at last Chiltern line passengers can hook up with the
WCML.

Bring it on!

"Boltar" wrote in message
...
On Apr 2, 10:48 am, wrote:
"The Croxley Rail Link is not just the icing on the cake for the
people of West Watford, it is the cherry on the icing of the cake."

Unless they're travelling to harrow or some other nearby suburb , why
would someone get the met from watford junction and be taken on a tour
of north west london when they could get a direct train to euston
instead?

B2003

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

Boltar (Boltar ) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying:

"The Croxley Rail Link is not just the icing on the cake for the people
of West Watford, it is the cherry on the icing of the cake."

Unless they're travelling to harrow or some other nearby suburb , why
would someone get the met from watford junction and be taken on a tour
of north west london when they could get a direct train to euston
instead?

Tube fares, instead of mainline...?

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

On Apr 2, 9:25*am, Neil Williams wrote:
Adrian wrote:
Unbelievable, all this mishigas over two miles of critically useful
railway. *The failure to have build this line to date points to
terminal stupidity.

What's "critically useful" about it?

Neil

It will allow a large chunk of "Metroland" access to mainline services
without going by way of London Euston.

Adrian

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

On Apr 2, 9:30*am, "Mitch" wrote:
The Croxley Link line will be a fantastic success when built because
Watford's people will be able to get to Rickmansworth and the Chiltern Line
(Amersham / Aylesbury etc.) by quick tube thus avoiding the horrendous the
road traffic along this busy corridor. You have to do a rush hour bus trip
from Watford to Rickmansworth to really understand how choked this area is
with traffic. Also and at last Chiltern line passengers can hook up with the
WCML.

Bring it on!

"Boltar" wrote in message

...



On Apr 2, 10:48 am, wrote:
"The Croxley Rail Link is not just the icing on the cake for the
people of West Watford, it is the cherry on the icing of the cake."

Unless they're travelling to harrow or some other nearby suburb , why
would someone get the met from watford junction and be taken on a tour
of north west london when they could get a direct train to euston
instead?

B2003- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Couldn't have said it better.

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

On Wed, 2 Apr 2008, Boltar wrote:

On Apr 2, 10:48 am, wrote:

"The Croxley Rail Link is not just the icing on the cake for the
people of West Watford, it is the cherry on the icing of the cake."

Unless they're travelling to harrow or some other nearby suburb , why
would someone get the met from watford junction and be taken on a tour
of north west london when they could get a direct train to euston
instead?

They won't. Presumably, you'd like to see Croydon Tramlink closed down,
because it doesn't provide a sensible way to get to central London?

Watford is a major town, and a centre of employment, in its own right.
Lots and lots of people commute from surrounding smaller towns and
villages into it, as well as going there to shop, go out, etc. The problem
is that at the moment, they have to do this by road, precisely because the
railways are all London-centric. The Croxley link would turn the Amersham
branch of the Met into a very effective local line serving Watford, and
hopefully get a lot of people out of their cars. Adding a few extra
stations inside Watford doesn't hurt, either.

Although having said all that, a lot of the bumph surrounding the link
does frame it as a way of getting people into London, particularly from
the south of Watford, which seems a bit mad. Even if they run fast Mets
into London, it's going to have a really hard time competing with WCML
expresses. The local trains to Amersham seem to be more of a future
possibility than the driving force.

tom

--
We don't contact anybody or seek anybody's permission for what we do. Even
if it's impersonating postal employees. -- Birdstuff

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

On Apr 2, 10:48 am, wrote:

"The Croxley Rail Link is not just the icing on the cake for the
people of West Watford, it is the cherry on the icing of the cake."

While we're on the subject:

Wouldn't it make sense for the branch to be NR rather than LU? Watford
Junction and Watford High Street are NR stations, and AIUI the
Metropolitan line north of Harrow-on-the-Hill is also owned by NR (the
fasts, at least). If the priority is on local services into Watford, it
would make sense for it to be NR, not LU. Making it NR would also open up
the possibility of longer-distance Chiltern services into Watford (if
there's any demand for that). (And personally, i've long thought that the
Met should give up on the fasts north of HotH altogether, and let Chiltern
use that route exclusively, especially post-S-stock, but what do i know.)

Although now i'm confused about who owns the lines round there. The Met is
two- or four-track from London to HotH, and there's the NR route beside
it; north of HotH, there are two pairs: a slow pair used only by LU
trains, and a fast pair used by LU trains to Amersham, and by NR trains. I
always thought that (a) NR owned the NR-only tracks south of HotH (b) LU
owned the LU-only tracks south of HotH, (c) LU owned the LU-only tracks
north of HotH, and (d) NR owned the shared track north of HotH. But now
i'm reading CULG and Clive says "LU takes over ownership of all 6 tracks
just south of [HotH]", and on his layout diagram, the border is drawn on
the NR lines, and not the Met ones. Oh, but hang on, there's another
border just north of Amersham, at Mantles Wood junction. So do LU really
own the shared fasts from HotH to Mantles Wood? So Chiltern trains run
over NR, then LU, the NR?

Also, what were the railways around Watford like before they got axed and
mothballed and so on? I'm trying to work out how far the Croxley Green
branch went. I've found the Watford and Rickmansworth Railway, which seems
to have been the earliest branch, which comprises today's DC line route
from Watford Junction to Watford High Street, plus the Croxley Green
branch as far as Riverside Park and the power station, but then carried on
on a route which is now either lost or the Ebury Way cycle path along the
south side of Watford, over the Met, and into Rickmansworth. The building
of the New aka DC Lines put in the link from the WCML mainline to the WRR
aka Rickmansworth branch just south of Watford High Street. But where does
the line that goes to Croxley come in? There is mention of a freight
branch off the WRR to the Grand Union - is that it? So why are there
stations on it? Did they come later? At some point, the Met was extended
to Cassiobury Park, with no connections to anything, but with a
Rickmansworth - Watford chord that i don't quite understand. But did the
Croxley Green branch just end where the line runs out on the map, at the
roundabout near Cassio Bridge, where Watford Road crosses the Grand Union?

Oh, hang on, all is clear:

http://underground-history.co.uk/croxley.php.

tom

--
We don't contact anybody or seek anybody's permission for what we do. Even
if it's impersonating postal employees. -- Birdstuff

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
h.li
On Apr 2, 10:48 am, wrote:

"The Croxley Rail Link is not just the icing on the cake for the
people of West Watford, it is the cherry on the icing of the cake."

While we're on the subject:

Wouldn't it make sense for the branch to be NR rather than LU? Watford
Junction and Watford High Street are NR stations, and AIUI the
Metropolitan line north of Harrow-on-the-Hill is also owned by NR (the
fasts, at least).

No, all the tracks are LU-owned from HoH to just north of Amersham.
Chiltern runs on LU metals, not vice versa.

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 10:34:40 -0700 (PDT), Adrian
wrote:

It will allow a large chunk of "Metroland" access to mainline services
without going by way of London Euston.

Access to very limited mainline services after the next timetable
change, i.e. one Manchester and one Birmingham an hour, as I recall,
and because it's not the terminus less choice of seats.

I think most would continue to go via Euston, especially given that
all of them[1] have a direct train to Euston Square whereas only some
will have one to Watford.

[1] OK, except Chesham...

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

On 2 Apr, 19:47, Tom Anderson wrote:
Although now i'm confused about who owns the lines round there.

Anything electrified is LUL, anything not is NR. Thus all tracks
between HotH and Amersham are LUL.

Also, what were the railways around Watford like before they got axed and
mothballed and so on?

I made a map of it during a moment of boredom a while ago:
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps/ms?ie=...eb4e8&t=h&z=14

U

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

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 12:43:57 -0700 (PDT), Mr Thant
wrote:

On 2 Apr, 19:47, Tom Anderson wrote:
Although now i'm confused about who owns the lines round there.

Anything electrified is LUL, anything not is NR.

IIRC the boundary at Harrow is beyond the end of electrification on
the Marylebone route. Possibly likewise to the west of Amersham.

Thus all tracks
between HotH and Amersham are LUL.

Yes.
Also, what were the railways around Watford like before they got axed and
mothballed and so on?

I made a map of it during a moment of boredom a while ago:
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps/ms?ie=...eb4e8&t=h&z=14

U

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

On 2 Apr, 19:04, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 2 Apr 2008, Boltar wrote:
On Apr 2, 10:48 am, wrote:

"The Croxley Rail Link is not just the icing on the cake for the
people of West Watford, it is the cherry on the icing of the cake."

Unless they're travelling to harrow or some other nearby suburb , why
would someone get the met from watford junction and be taken on a tour
of north west london when they could get a direct train to euston
instead?

They won't. Presumably, you'd like to see Croydon Tramlink closed down,
because it doesn't provide a sensible way to get to central London?

It does , its a feeder system to a number of mainline stations. But I
take the point.


Watford is a major town, and a centre of employment, in its own right.

True , but a lot of that employment is in industrial estates around
the town (I used to work in one of them back in the mid 90s) which
with the best will in the world arn't exactly easy walking distance
from watford junction.

B2003

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

In article
,
(Mr Thant) wrote:

On 2 Apr, 19:47, Tom Anderson wrote:
Although now i'm confused about who owns the lines round there.

Anything electrified is LUL, anything not is NR. Thus all tracks
between HotH and Amersham are LUL.

Also, what were the railways around Watford like before they got
axed and mothballed and so on?

I made a map of it during a moment of boredom a while ago:

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps/ms?ie=...60141566065590
39825.00044285a70fcf91eb4e8&t=h&z=14

Line 4?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

On 2 Apr, 20:43, Mr Thant
wrote:
On 2 Apr, 19:47, Tom Anderson wrote:

Although now i'm confused about who owns the lines round there.

Anything electrified is LUL, anything not is NR. Thus all tracks
between HotH and Amersham are LUL.

Also, what were the railways around Watford like before they got axed and
mothballed and so on?

I made a map of it during a moment of boredom a while ago:http://maps.google.co.uk/maps/ms?ie=...id=10601415660...

Curiously , looking at google earth and some pics online the track for
the croxley line is still in situ, even the conductor rail, except
that most of the bridges have been removed. Which means short of
getting a bunch of pikeys to drive a transit van up the embankment NR
will never be able to recover the track. Why wasn't the track lifted
befor the bridges were demolished? Or is this a new form of
mothballing?

B2003

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

Tom Anderson wrote:

But now i'm reading CULG and Clive says "LU
takes over ownership of all 6 tracks just south of [HotH]", and on
his layout diagram, the border is drawn on the NR lines, and not the
Met ones. Oh, but hang on, there's another border just north of
Amersham, at Mantles Wood junction. So do LU really own the shared
fasts from HotH to Mantles Wood? So Chiltern trains run over NR, then
LU, the NR?

Other than that Mantles Wood is not a junction, just a boundary, that is
correct. Mantles Wood to Harrow South Junction is entirely LUL, with
Chiltern having running rights over the fast lines.

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

On Wed, 2 Apr 2008, Boltar wrote:

On 2 Apr, 19:04, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 2 Apr 2008, Boltar wrote:
On Apr 2, 10:48 am, wrote:

"The Croxley Rail Link is not just the icing on the cake for the
people of West Watford, it is the cherry on the icing of the cake."

Unless they're travelling to harrow or some other nearby suburb , why
would someone get the met from watford junction and be taken on a tour
of north west london when they could get a direct train to euston
instead?

Watford is a major town, and a centre of employment, in its own right.

True , but a lot of that employment is in industrial estates around the
town (I used to work in one of them back in the mid 90s) which with the
best will in the world arn't exactly easy walking distance from watford
junction.

That's true enough. But bear in mind that other stations are being added
to the system: Watford High Street already exists, but will gain the
Croxley service, and that's pretty close to all the stuff on the southeast
corner of town (although i think that's mostly commercial); the estates on
the southwest corner of town aren't that far from the Ascot Way station,
and actually not that far from the existing Croxley LU, which will gain
more trains. For places on the northeast side of town, though, no, the new
train won't be so great. Unless they can work out through running onto the
St Albans Abbey branch!

Interestingly, running right through the middle of the huge industrial
estates on the southwest side of town is the old Watford and Rickmansworth
Railway alignment, now a cycle path. Perhaps one day that could also be
brought back into the fold.

tom

--
We don't contact anybody or seek anybody's permission for what we do. Even
if it's impersonating postal employees. -- Birdstuff

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

On Wed, 2 Apr 2008, Mr Thant wrote:

On 2 Apr, 19:47, Tom Anderson wrote:

Also, what were the railways around Watford like before they got axed and
mothballed and so on?

I made a map of it during a moment of boredom a while ago:
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps/ms?ie=...eb4e8&t=h&z=14

Ooh, very good. But it doesn't show the Watford and Rickmansworth Railway!

And while rowlanding, i noticed yet another branch of that, coming off
the main line to Ricky he

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=51.6...=UTF8&t=h&z=16

And heading north. I saw a mention of a branch that was built to the
Croxley printworks - is this it? Seems a bit mad that this railway built
two separate branches that went to almost the same place. No wonder they
went bust.

tom

--
We don't contact anybody or seek anybody's permission for what we do. Even
if it's impersonating postal employees. -- Birdstuff

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

On 2 Apr, 22:44, Boltar wrote:
Curiously , looking at google earth and some pics online the track for
the croxley line is still in situ, even the conductor rail, except
that most of the bridges have been removed.

It mostly goes under roads - the few underbridges still seem to be
intact, apart from where it's been severed near the far end by the
bypass. The track was all still there when I walked the route in
December, including beyond the sever.

Or is this a new form of mothballing?

Strategic Rail Authority notices still up at the stations propose the
line will be closed on 18 June 2001. It also notes that services have
been "suspended" since 24 August 1996 for the construction of the
bypass.

U

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

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

On 2 Apr, 23:30, Tom Anderson wrote:
And heading north. I saw a mention of a branch that was built to the
Croxley printworks - is this it? Seems a bit mad that this railway built
two separate branches that went to almost the same place. No wonder they
went bust.

The London Railway Atlas* says the branch to the north goes to
"Croxley Mill", very near Croxley Green station.

(* You really should buy a copy)

U

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

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 15:49:39 -0700 (PDT), Mr Thant
wrote:

On 2 Apr, 23:30, Tom Anderson wrote:
And heading north. I saw a mention of a branch that was built to the
Croxley printworks - is this it? Seems a bit mad that this railway built
two separate branches that went to almost the same place. No wonder they
went bust.

The London Railway Atlas* says the branch to the north goes to
"Croxley Mill", very near Croxley Green station.

(* You really should buy a copy)

The two branches (Rickmansworth and Croxley Green) were built by
different companies at different times. Rickmansworth was first in the
1860s by a local company and Croxley Green later by the LNWR using
part of the route to Rickmansworth (later re-used again for the DC
line from Watford Junction to Watford High Street and Croxley depot).
If I'm remembering the location of Croxley Mills correctly then it was
effectively just a siding built off an existing railway.

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

On Apr 3, 3:15*am, Charles Ellson wrote:
The two branches (Rickmansworth and Croxley Green) were built by
different companies at different times. Rickmansworth was first in the
1860s by a local company and Croxley Green later by the LNWR using
part of the route to Rickmansworth (later re-used again for the DC
line from Watford Junction to Watford High Street and Croxley depot).
If I'm remembering the location of Croxley Mills correctly then it was
effectively just a siding built off an existing railway.

The history of the various railways between Watford and Ricky is
covered in the excellent "West of Watford" by F.W. Goudie and D.
Stuckey, published by Forge Books in 1990 (ISBN 0 9046 6218 7).
Unfortunately this book is long out of print and is now as rare as
hen's teeth, but is well worth tracking down.

On that note, the copies supposedly available on Amazon are all
actually "Railways of Richmond" from the same publisher and only
appear as WoW thanks to an ISBN transposition error.

THC

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

On Wed, 2 Apr 2008, Colin Rosenstiel wrote:

In article
,
(Mr Thant) wrote:

On 2 Apr, 19:47, Tom Anderson wrote:
Although now i'm confused about who owns the lines round there.

Anything electrified is LUL, anything not is NR. Thus all tracks
between HotH and Amersham are LUL.

Also, what were the railways around Watford like before they got
axed and mothballed and so on?

I made a map of it during a moment of boredom a while ago:
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps/ms?ie=...eb4e8&t=h&z=14

Line 4?

Could it be an escaped reference to the defunct Crossrail branch? Except i
think that would have been Corridor D rather than Line 4.

tom

--
Sorry. Went a bit Atari Teenage Riot there. -- Andrew

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

On Wed, 2 Apr 2008, Mr Thant wrote:

On 2 Apr, 23:30, Tom Anderson wrote:

And heading north. I saw a mention of a branch that was built to the
Croxley printworks - is this it? Seems a bit mad that this railway built
two separate branches that went to almost the same place. No wonder they
went bust.

The London Railway Atlas* says the branch to the north goes to
"Croxley Mill", very near Croxley Green station.

Okay. A bit of digging reveals that this mill was a paper mill, built by a
John Dickinson. Printworks was almost right!

(* You really should buy a copy)

Yes sir. Sorry sir.

tom

--
Sorry. Went a bit Atari Teenage Riot there. -- Andrew

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

On Thu, 3 Apr 2008, Charles Ellson wrote:

On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 15:49:39 -0700 (PDT), Mr Thant
wrote:

On 2 Apr, 23:30, Tom Anderson wrote:
And heading north. I saw a mention of a branch that was built to the
Croxley printworks - is this it? Seems a bit mad that this railway built
two separate branches that went to almost the same place. No wonder they
went bust.

The London Railway Atlas* says the branch to the north goes to
"Croxley Mill", very near Croxley Green station.

(* You really should buy a copy)

The two branches (Rickmansworth and Croxley Green) were built by
different companies at different times. Rickmansworth was first in the
1860s by a local company and Croxley Green later by the LNWR using
part of the route to Rickmansworth

But after the LNWR had bought the local company, no?

(later re-used again for the DC line from Watford Junction to Watford
High Street and Croxley depot). If I'm remembering the location of
Croxley Mills correctly then it was effectively just a siding built off
an existing railway.

Yes, that's about right.

tom

--
Sorry. Went a bit Atari Teenage Riot there. -- Andrew

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

On 3 Apr, 18:57, Tom Anderson wrote:
Line 4?

Could it be an escaped reference to the defunct Crossrail branch?

Yes, exactly that.

Funnily enough, also the default name Google Maps gave it.

U

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

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

On Thu, 3 Apr 2008 19:04:43 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

On Thu, 3 Apr 2008, Charles Ellson wrote:

On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 15:49:39 -0700 (PDT), Mr Thant
wrote:

On 2 Apr, 23:30, Tom Anderson wrote:
And heading north. I saw a mention of a branch that was built to the
Croxley printworks - is this it? Seems a bit mad that this railway built
two separate branches that went to almost the same place. No wonder they
went bust.

The London Railway Atlas* says the branch to the north goes to
"Croxley Mill", very near Croxley Green station.

(* You really should buy a copy)

The two branches (Rickmansworth and Croxley Green) were built by
different companies at different times. Rickmansworth was first in the
1860s by a local company and Croxley Green later by the LNWR using
part of the route to Rickmansworth

But after the LNWR had bought the local company, no?

Eventually. It was one of several lines (real and theoretical) which
would have eventually provided a by-pass route toward the Great
Western which might or might not have been dropped by the time the
LNWR took over. The line originally had two full-length through
platforms (or a platform? the 1898 OS map suggests one but ISTR a
track diagram showing two) at Watford Junction, the southern end(s) of
which have became DC line platforms.

(later re-used again for the DC line from Watford Junction to Watford
High Street and Croxley depot). If I'm remembering the location of
Croxley Mills correctly then it was effectively just a siding built off
an existing railway.

Yes, that's about right.

tom

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 09:01:21 -0700 (PDT), Boltar wrote:

"The Croxley Rail Link is not just the icing on the cake for the
people of West Watford, it is the cherry on the icing of the cake."

Unless they're travelling to harrow or some other nearby suburb , why
would someone get the met from watford junction and be taken on a tour
of north west london when they could get a direct train to euston
instead?

Watford West hasn't had a direct service to Euston for a very long
time.

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

"asdf" wrote

Watford West hasn't had a direct service to Euston for a very long
time.

There was one through train a day each way between Croxley Green, Watford
West and Broad Street until 1967. In 1962 (I don't know how much longer it
lasted) there was one from Croxley Green to Euston, though not in the
reverse direction. Of course, after 1966 it was much quicker to travel via
Watford Junction and the AC.

Peter

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

In article , Tom
Anderson writes
Although now i'm confused about who owns the lines round there.
[...]
But now i'm reading CULG and Clive says "LU takes over ownership of all
6 tracks just south of [HotH]", and on his layout diagram, the border
is drawn on the NR lines, and not the Met ones. Oh, but hang on,
there's another border just north of Amersham, at Mantles Wood junction.

Clive is correct :-)

So do LU really own the shared fasts from HotH to Mantles Wood? So
Chiltern trains run over NR, then LU, the NR?

Correct.

--
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:

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

In article , Tom
Anderson writes
And while rowlanding, i noticed yet another branch of that, coming off
the main line to Ricky he

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=51.6...=UTF8&t=h&z=16

And heading north. I saw a mention of a branch that was built to the
Croxley printworks - is this it?

That's the paper mill, not the print works. The mill was located roughly
where the end of Byewaters is, just east of the lock on the canal (it
was a regular walk in my youth).

Seems a bit mad that this railway built two separate branches that
went to almost the same place. No wonder they went bust.

This wasn't a passenger branch, it was a normal goods siding off the
Ricky line.

--
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:

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

In article
, Mr
Thant writes
Anything electrified is LUL, anything not is NR. Thus all tracks
between HotH and Amersham are LUL.

Not quite true: the electrification ends well to the LUL side of the two
boundaries.

--
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:

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

In article , Jack Taylor
writes
Other than that Mantles Wood is not a junction, just a boundary, that is
correct.

It's a junction: the term was often used to refer to an end-on junction
between two railway companies' lines.

--
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:

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

On Fri, 4 Apr 2008, Clive D. W. Feather wrote:

In article , Tom Anderson
writes
And while rowlanding, i noticed yet another branch of that, coming off the
main line to Ricky he

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=51.6...=UTF8&t=h&z=16

And heading north. I saw a mention of a branch that was built to the
Croxley printworks - is this it?

That's the paper mill, not the print works. The mill was located roughly
where the end of Byewaters is, just east of the lock on the canal (it was a
regular walk in my youth).

Is this by any chance why there's a Caxton Way in the nearby industrial
estate? I assume it's why there's a Mill Lane running from Croxley Met to
the lock you mention.

Seems a bit mad that this railway built two separate branches that went to
almost the same place. No wonder they went bust.

This wasn't a passenger branch, it was a normal goods siding off the Ricky
line.

Ah, fair enough. I suppose even the 1 km from Croxley Green station (or a
notional goods siding on the Rickmansworth branch) to the mill would have
been too much for big deliveries of rags etc.

tom

--
BUTTS LOL

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

Watford Junction will not even have that according to the draft timetable.
Just one Birmingham train an hour and the stopping train to Crewe via Stoke.
If I still lived in the area, I would be protesting about that.

PS only Uxbridge met line trains go to Euston Square at off peak times. All
others terminate at Baker Street.

"Neil Williams" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 2 Apr 2008 10:34:40 -0700 (PDT), Adrian
wrote:

It will allow a large chunk of "Metroland" access to mainline services
without going by way of London Euston.

Access to very limited mainline services after the next timetable
change, i.e. one Manchester and one Birmingham an hour, as I recall,
and because it's not the terminus less choice of seats.

I think most would continue to go via Euston, especially given that
all of them[1] have a direct train to Euston Square whereas only some
will have one to Watford.

[1] OK, except Chesham...

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

"Jason Fisher" wrote in message
.. .
Watford Junction will not even have that according to the draft timetable.
Just one Birmingham train an hour and the stopping train to Crewe via
Stoke. If I still lived in the area, I would be protesting about that.

That's already better than the previous suggestion, which IIRC was going to
be reduced to about 4 main line trains a day

tim

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

"tim (not at home)" wrote in message
...

"Jason Fisher" wrote in message
.. .
Watford Junction will not even have that according to the draft
timetable. Just one Birmingham train an hour and the stopping train to
Crewe via Stoke. If I still lived in the area, I would be protesting
about that.

That's already better than the previous suggestion, which IIRC was going
to be reduced to about 4 main line trains a day

I've come to this thread late, catching up after a week away.
Co-incidentally, I was on a canal boat and we were discussing the scheme as
we passed under the Met line to Watford and then (a few yards further on)
the other bridge on the line from Watford West. Further delay on this scheme
is absurd. It just needs sorting. But why is it so expensive? The Cotswold
(partial) re-doubling mentioned in another thread seems to be the same cost
for several miles as a few hundred yards of new construction. As to services
on the new line, one could run Amersham to WJ and cut short some of the
Amershams at Rickmansworth. As others have said, it's misleading to think of
the scheme as "just another way of getting from WJ to London". Aylesbury to
St Albans, anyone?

Regards

Jonathan

Croxley Rail Link hits the sidings
 

On 6 Apr, 12:33, "Jonathan Morton"
wrote:
But why is it so expensive?

It requires a tall 500m viaduct which has to cross various obstacles,
rebuilding another mile and a half of track and building two new tube
stations, which go for £10-20m each. £95m is about right compared to
similar schemes, and it could be worse - the ELL extension is costing
£900m (which has about the same amount of new route) and rebuilding 3
miles of North London Line is costing £400m (with no new structures).

U

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