On 20 Aug, 20:21, (Neil Williams)
wrote:
On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 01:14:22 -0700 (PDT), Andy
wrote:

The more overcrowded services seem to be those that are
first stop Watford and then most stops to Milton Keynes.

From what I can see, the *most* overcrowded are the Tring locals,
followed by the Bletchley semi-locals, followed by the
Leighton/MKC/Northampton fasts, followed by the (Harrow), Watford then
most stops to Northampton runs as the least busy.

But remember that the LM timetable won't now change substantially in
the near future after the 2009 changes, and it needs to take into
account massive growth in the Milton Keynes/Bletchley to/from Euston
run. *Thus, piling on the local passengers makes about as much sense
as crowding out Euston to Glasgow services between Euston and MKC,
which VT are very keen on avoiding.

LO do have a point in that the Bakerloo might actually take up the
slack (and given that most people aren't actually going *to* Euston it
probably will), with people changing from that as appropriate. *But
does the Bakerloo have capacity?

Tons of room, at least as far south as Willesden, in both peaks. the
overcrowded ones are the overground ones -- which always seem to
arrive a couple of minutes before a much longer bakerloo. Surely it
would make more sense to run a bakerloo ahead of a LO, and then stop
them both at Queens park to allow cross platform. (Extending LO to 6
car trains, maintaining 3tph, in the peak would help too, but I guess
there's stock problems

On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, Andy wrote:

On Aug 20, 8:21*pm, (Neil Williams)
wrote:

LO do have a point in that the Bakerloo might actually take up the
slack (and given that most people aren't actually going *to* Euston it
probably will), with people changing from that as appropriate. But
does the Bakerloo have capacity?

There are actually quite a few employers around Euston (e.g. UCLH,
UCL, University of London),

Inland Revenue HQ, Network Rail HQ, Wellcome Trust HQ, a lot of big shops
and offices on Tottenham Court Road and in Fitzrovia ...

This is the point i always make in relation to the Watfoloo plan - the
Euston area is a fairly major traffic generator in its own right, like
Waterloo. Re-routing trains which go there to go somewhere else is going
to inconvenience rather a lot of people. Yes, there will be many others
who are better served by a route that goes into the west end, but it's far
from clear that they're in a majority.

tom

--
Infantry err, infantry die. Artillery err, infantry die. -- IDF proverb

On Aug 20, 9:30*pm, (Neil Williams)
wrote:
On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 13:26:04 -0700 (PDT), Andy
wrote:

True, but London Midland do have the possibility of lengthening all
their remaining peak trains to 12 coaches.

No, they don't, as they are constrained by the middle platforms at
Euston not being 12 cars long, and by Bletchley's platforms 4 and 5
being only 8 cars long. *(Hopefully once Bletchley depot is dispensed
with completely those two can be extended across what is currently the
junction).


In the short term, Bletchley could be dealt with using selective door
opening (as already used in their class 444 and 450 cousins), whilst
any trains using the single 8 car platform at Euston (the other being
LO) would have to be moved to another, but platform utilisation is not
high at Euston. Compare the number of peak departures at Euston to,
for example, King's Cross with only 11 platforms three of which are
limited to 8 cars. The idea being that, on the WCML, there is only a
small amount of infrastructure left which would cause a problem for 12
car trains. I'm not saying that all train will immediately be
lengthened to 12 cars come December, just that services which need
lengthening could be with little problem.

This is a luxury that few
of the other London commuter operators have without Network Rail
spending money on the infrastructure. I would certainly expect a few
peak trains will get longer as the new class 350s come on line, as the
class 321s are not fully diagrammed, even with units on loan
elsewhere.

They are a 1-1 replacement for the 321s, and currently the reliability
figures are vastly better for 321 than Desiro.


Personally, I'd like to see upto date reliablility figures for the LM
321s and the 350s, I think that availability for the 321s has dropped
like a stone since LM took over. The short formed trains only seem to
be those made up of 321s.

With regard to the 1-1 replacement, several of the 321s currently
aren't even used by LM, for example two with are now with NEEA and one
was on loan to Northern for a while. In 2007, diagrams were 25 for
class 350s and 28 (+1 St. Albans branch and +2 on loan to NEEA) for
321s, although there has been some change (19.04 changed from 350 to
321 for example). Even with the extended services north of Rugby, I'm
sure there will be room for more units on the London end of things. If
the current requirement is 56 units / 67 available, then this gives
availability of 84%. Modern fleets have availabilities in the mid 90%
range (for example in 2007, One had 20 of their class 360 Desiros
diagrammed out of a fleet of 21 = 95% availability). A combined LM
desiro fleet of 67, with similar availability to the Class 360s would
have 63 units available. Taking a conservative view (i.e. not counting
two units already with NEEA as extras), this would give an extra 6-7
units available for peak / extra services. Diagramming would be easier
as all units will be able to couple. Also, remember that the
Birmingham end of LM is down to get extra EMUs, whether these would be
the 323s from Manchester or new units. Some of the 350 diagrams here
may then change to these 'new' units in a few years time.

On Aug 20, 9:33*pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
Andy wrote:
On Aug 20, 8:21 pm, (Neil Williams)
wrote:
But remember that the LM timetable won't now change substantially in
the near future after the 2009 changes, and it needs to take into
account massive growth in the Milton Keynes/Bletchley to/from Euston
run. Thus, piling on the local passengers makes about as much sense
as crowding out Euston to Glasgow services between Euston and MKC,
which VT are very keen on avoiding.

True, but London Midland do have the possibility of lengthening all
their remaining peak trains to 12 coaches. This is a luxury that few
of the other London commuter operators have without Network Rail
spending money on the infrastructure. I would certainly expect a few
peak trains will get longer as the new class 350s come on line, as the
class 321s are not fully diagrammed, even with units on loan
elsewhere.

As I've just pointed out elsewhere, there are two new hourly services north
of Northampton to cover. The 350s replace 321s 1 for 1, there'll be no
increase in overall numbers...


Excepting the units already on loan to NEEA, of course.

On Aug 20, 10:45*pm, Paul Weaver wrote:
On 20 Aug, 09:14, Andy wrote

Peak London Midland services are not severely overcrowded from Euston
to Harrow (maybe with the exception of the 4 car 19.04 departure in
the evening). Sure there are usually a few people standing, but the
doorways and aisles are not packed at all.

I've been left behind at Harrow going northbound when there wasn't
space -- after people had got off and others had got on. That was on a
12 train in the evening peak.


Which 12 car train (assuming that is what you mean) in the evening
peak. To my knowledge, the only 12 car train that is diagrammed to
stop at Harrow is the 08.14 heading south in the morning peak. 17.04,
17.24, 17.40, 18.04, 18.24, 18.34, 18.54 and 19.34 ex Euston are all
normally 8 cars, with the 19.04 only 4 cars.

Only this Monday, the 18.04
departure stopped additionally at Queens Park due to the Bakerloo line
(and DC line) having delays due to a signal failure at Willesden
Junction and it didn't get uncomfortably full after leaving Queens
Park. I very much doubt that anyone would get left behind at Euston.

Wish I'd known that when I was sat at Willesden Jn at 17:45 trying to
get to harrow for 18:16 to get on that very train. grr.

I suppose making Queens park and Harrow pick-up-only Northbound (in
the peaks) would free up enough space on the services.

How would that help, when at least 100 people get on (morning) or off
(evening) each trains at Harrow each day and there is no capacity for
them on the DC lines.

It would mean 100 less people getting on/off at harrow, meaning the
trains aren't as crowded, and dont leave people behind at Euston.
While the trains can just about cope when all is well, when there's
the slightest problem it all goes to pot.


So where do these 100 people go? I few of them use London Midland to
avoid the overground London Overground service which they then change
onto at Harrow, but what about the rest? When LM go wrong and LO have
to take over, things get much worse!

*As I said before, the Harrow stoppers are not
overcrowded. The more overcrowded services seem to be those that are
first stop Watford and then most stops to Milton Keynes.

In peak most trains to/from mkc stop at harrow, and are acceptable
north of there. When the masses get on at harrow things become very
uncomfortable, and squeezing on even now at Euston isn't easy.

I've certainly never had problems getting on and will get a seat the
majority of the time if all is running to plan. I do have to goto the
rear half of the train to get this seat, but not right up to the back.
Leaving Euston in the evening, the same applies, if I arrive late and
bundle onto the rear carriage, there will be no room, if I arrive 3-4
mins before departure and walk down the train, there will be free
seats, even in the middle of the train.

On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 17:01:30 -0700 (PDT), Andy
wrote:

Personally, I'd like to see upto date reliablility figures for the LM
321s and the 350s, I think that availability for the 321s has dropped
like a stone since LM took over. The short formed trains only seem to
be those made up of 321s.

I have noticed this, and it seemed to coincide exactly with the moving
of maintenance from Bletchley to Northampton.

Neil

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

On 19 Aug, 21:43, "Peter Lawrence" wrote:

Would anyone like to guess how long West Hampstead to Queen's Park
might take?


Peter

Queens Park to West Hampstead is scheduled to take 15 minutes. It
will be quicker to change at South Hampstead as that is only 5-10
minutes away from West Hampstead. Stay on the train for as long as
you can..!!

A few further notes to explain other comments:

Euston is not served Mon-Sat to allow trains to divert to Stratford,
therefore providing connections from Camden Road to Stratford with
Willesden Junction. Euston can be reached by changing at Highbury &
Islington.

Willesden Junction not served by bus service A, as it will be quicker
for passengers to change at Queens Park or South Hampstead to reach
destinations to Gospel Oak. There is too much traffic in the
Willesden Junction area to make it reliable for a rail replacement
bus.

Service B will not terminate at Blackhorse Road and has been extended
to Walthamstow Central Station via Walthamstow Queens Road.

HTH

Ian

On 21 Aug, 01:20, Andy wrote:
How would that help, when at least 100 people get on (morning) or off
(evening) each trains at Harrow each day and there is no capacity for
them on the DC lines.

It would mean 100 less people getting on/off at harrow, meaning the
trains aren't as crowded, and dont leave people behind at Euston.
While the trains can just about cope when all is well, when there's
the slightest problem it all goes to pot.

So where do these 100 people go? I few of them use London Midland to
avoid the overground London Overground service which they then change
onto at Harrow, but what about the rest? When LM go wrong and LO have
to take over, things get much worse!

Well, I for example, get off and get the bus to Bushey, as I'd need to
get a bus either way, so I might as well have a cheaper ticket. The
price differential between Bushey and H&W is disproportionate IMHO,
given the bus that runs between them.

On 21 Aug, 11:30, Jamie Thompson wrote:
On 21 Aug, 01:20, Andy wrote:


Well, I for example, get off and get the bus to Bushey, as I'd need to
get a bus either way, so I might as well have a cheaper ticket. The
price differential between Bushey and H&W is disproportionate IMHO,
given the bus that runs between them.


Jamie

The London Midland trains are not affected. They will continue to run
in and out of Euston.

Ian

On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 01:53:21 -0700 (PDT), Ian Rivett
wrote:

On 19 Aug, 21:43, "Peter Lawrence" wrote:

Would anyone like to guess how long West Hampstead to Queen's Park
might take?


Peter

Queens Park to West Hampstead is scheduled to take 15 minutes. It
will be quicker to change at South Hampstead as that is only 5-10
minutes away from West Hampstead. Stay on the train for as long as
you can..!!

Thanks fir that Ian. I will probably try the walk.

--
Peter Lawrence