"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 2 Jun 2008 11:58:08 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T
wrote:

And is there anywhere else in Greater London which is similarly
deserving of a brand new railway station on an existing line?

I suppose under that criteria my vote would go for a Brixton station
on the South London Line (which will hopefully play host to ELLX
trains to & from Clapham Jn in years to come) - but that would be an
incredibly difficult and expensive station to build, unlike
Eastfield's quick-and-cheapish new modular station. Is there anywhere
else deserving that's like Eastfields in London - somewhere where the
line is running more or less flat on the ground, not high up on an
embankment or viaduct or low in a cutting or even in a tunnel - i.e.
any *realistic* suggestions?

Oh you've wrecked the criteria! I was going to suggest St Ann's Road /
Seven Sisters Road on the GOBLIN as well as Forest Road, Winchester Road
and Chingford Hatch on the Chingford - Liverpool St line. These extra
stations would hugely increase the catchment areas for these lines even
though I recognise they would slow overall journey times.

If Network Rail were feeling suitably insane they could build an
interchange station at Ferry Lane Estate where the GOBLIN cross the Lea
Valley line via Tottenham Hale. Obviously not every Lea Valley train
could stop as it's reduce line capacity but the locals to Hertford East
could possibly provide a half decent service.

Unfortunately they're all high up or down in dips!


There is an interesting tale in the Alan Williams column in the current
Modern Railways. Apparently the NR plan for the rebuild of Effingham
Junction with one of these modular stations, supposedly using permitted
development rights, failed to gain the local planner's agreement down in
rural Surrey.

So the portakabins have disappeared from the car park, and the project has
been cancelled. Back to the above 'brand new' part of the above discussion,
perhaps if they have a modular metal clad footbridge and some prefab
buildings earmarked waiting in a warehouse somewhere, they're actually far
more likely to gain acceptance in a new build urban setting than a 150 yr
old rural setting?

Paul S

On Mon, 2 Jun 2008 21:29:14 +0100, "Paul Scott"
wrote:

There is an interesting tale in the Alan Williams column in the current
Modern Railways. Apparently the NR plan for the rebuild of Effingham
Junction with one of these modular stations, supposedly using permitted
development rights, failed to gain the local planner's agreement down in
rural Surrey.

So the portakabins have disappeared from the car park, and the project has
been cancelled. Back to the above 'brand new' part of the above discussion,
perhaps if they have a modular metal clad footbridge and some prefab
buildings earmarked waiting in a warehouse somewhere, they're actually far
more likely to gain acceptance in a new build urban setting than a 150 yr
old rural setting?

Well I like the Alan Williams column in MR so it's usually the third
thing I read after the Editorial column and Uncle Roger. I think the
Effingham tale illustrates the lack of competence in NR (the planning
problems), the arrogance (one size fits all and you'll get it
eventually) and the lack of thought (one design solution). I
particularly liked the comment about how can maintenance costs be
reduced when no money has spent on the station in years.

I think the basic idea of modular stations is good if it saves money but
not when it delivers facilities that are not necessary (lifts compared
to ramps for mobility access), increase whole life costs for NR *and*
the operator and which are simply out of scale / sympathy. If TPE can
win awards for sympathetic station refurbishment and repair why on earth
can't NR take a similar cost effective approach at Effingham Junction?
I expect the Eff Junc story to run and run because NR have managed to
rouse a fair proportion of the local populace as well as a well known
critic and other relevant organisations. I'd call it an own goal and I
expect they'll end up having to compromise.

--
Paul C

"Paul Corfield" wrote

I think the basic idea of modular stations is good if it saves money but
not when it delivers facilities that are not necessary (lifts compared
to ramps for mobility access), increase whole life costs for NR *and*
the operator and which are simply out of scale / sympathy.

It's too early to pass judgment on the new design of modular stations, with
Mitcham Eastfields the only example to date. But they will have to be much
better than a previous attempt, the dreaded CLASP design.

Peter

On 2 Jun, 21:27, "Peter Masson" wrote:

It's too early to pass judgment on the new design of modular stations, with
Mitcham Eastfields the only example to date. But they will have to be much
better than a previous attempt, the dreaded CLASP design.
I think you can pass judgment now! Greenhithe is being rebuilt with
the kit of parts - from what I can see it is virtually identical to
Eastfields.

Reminds me of the original DLR station concept, in as much as you
rearrange and join the parts to fit the site, but around 90% of the
construction is the same at any site.

I think the modular station parts are more attractive than CLASP, but
will be just as ubiquitous.

Mitcham Eastfields



I noticed today - and I'm sure it was not like this yesterday - that
FCC PIS three line displays north of the Thames had two lines of text
something like:

[ Mitcham Eastfields station ]
[ .................................. ]
[ Station will open during t ]

And that was it. It was a scrolling and just end in the 't'. So Luton,
Harpenden, West hampstead are held in suspense over when 't' day is.

--
Nick

On Jun 3, 7:28*am, D7666 wrote:
Mitcham Eastfields

I noticed today - and I'm sure it was not like this yesterday - that
FCC PIS three line displays north of the Thames had two lines of text
something like:

[ Mitcham Eastfields station ]
[ .................................. ]
[ Station will open during t ]

And that was it. It was a scrolling and just end in the 't'. So Luton,
Harpenden, West hampstead are held in suspense over when 't' day is.

This would be the dreadful CIS system that isn't properly synchronised
with departures, much like that on the West London Line?
I assume "...............................8" means the train is
supposed to be formed of 8 coaches. The last time I was at Farringdon
I saw this, but a 4 eventually rolled it. No announcement. Cue much
swearing and running along platform.

This isn't just travel. This is First transforming travel.

Let us know if FCC have updated the system today...

On Jun 3, 8:18 am, EE507 wrote:

This would be the dreadful CIS system

Yep ...

.... the rest of your paragraph is superfluous ... its just dreadful
(and not in the crankworthy sense).

I assume "...............................8" means the train is

Indeed.

Let us know if FCC have updated the system today...

ROFLOL.

It took them 3 months to get the two side by side summary screens
above the barrier line to not show the same list of trains ... for
those unfamiliar its two side by side in order to provide enough area
for a the list of trains ... for weeks and weeks we had 2 screens with
identical information of not enough lines to even show the next train
on 5 different platforms (because of the need to display buses from
outside).

On the platforms the rectangular TV-type flat sumarry screens show
different predictions to the individual platform indicators - usually
adrift by 1 minute. Even though a delay may increase or decrease, they
still show 1 minute apart. Mostly.

When I heard First had won the TL franchise I was dreading it based on
reports of certain other group TOCs. But in general they've been OK,
nothing to rave about but little to rant about either. The PIS is the
exception that proves the rule. Crap hardware, crap installation, and
currently crap information.

--
Nick

On 3 Jun, 07:28, D7666 wrote:
And that was it. It was a scrolling and just end in the 't'. So Luton,
Harpenden, West hampstead are held in suspense over when 't' day is.

Probably "today" or Tuesday. They weren't calling yesterday as the
platform cameras weren't working properly. I presume Southern had
guards on duty.

U

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