Neil Williams wrote:

Dunno, but there is no excuse for 2-car DMUs to be being used on this
kind of service.

Look at Merseyrail for how it should be done (and without any new
MUs)

Eh?

On the electric lines, new MUs were introduced as the loop line was
being developed. They certainly aren't *still* new, but they were new
for the current routes.

As for the diesel services, by common consent the Merseyrail version of
the 142 (a stubby 2-car train) is the least favourite train in .uk.

It's hard to see what point you are making, and how Merseyrail
demonstrates it.

--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p10589963.html
(47 583 at Stratford Depot, 11 Jul 1981)

On 24 Sep, 10:16, Chris Tolley wrote:

Neil Williams wrote:
Dunno, but there is no excuse for 2-car DMUs to be being used on this
kind of service.

Look at Merseyrail for how it should be done (and without any new
MUs)

Eh?

On the electric lines, new MUs were introduced as the loop line was
being developed. They certainly aren't *still* new, but they were new
for the current routes.


And by all accounts they're less than ideal for the city centre loop
as well.

Mizter T wrote:

On 24 Sep, 10:16, Chris Tolley wrote:

Neil Williams wrote:
Dunno, but there is no excuse for 2-car DMUs to be being used on this
kind of service.

Look at Merseyrail for how it should be done (and without any new
MUs)

Eh?

On the electric lines, new MUs were introduced as the loop line was
being developed. They certainly aren't *still* new, but they were new
for the current routes.


And by all accounts they're less than ideal for the city centre loop
as well.

AIUI, the curvature on the track gives rise to increased wear on the
wheels. If so, that's more a track problem than a train problem.

I suppose there are compounding features as well, given that the
Merseyrail loop line is an intensive service. F'rinstance, at
Farringdon, there's a fairly tight curve on Thameslink, but a particular
train will pass over it much less frequently.

--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p15036436.html
(33 110 at Basingstoke, Mar 1991)

On 24 Sep, 11:02, Chris Tolley wrote:

Mizter T wrote:

On 24 Sep, 10:16, Chris *Tolley wrote:

(snip)

On the electric lines, new MUs were introduced as the loop line was
being developed. They certainly aren't *still* new, but they were new
for the current routes.

And by all accounts they're less than ideal for the city centre loop
as well.

AIUI, the curvature on the track gives rise to increased wear on the
wheels. If so, that's more a track problem than a train problem.


Or a train not being suitable for the track (or more properly tight
alignment) problem. Depends upon where you approach it from really -
so I could have said the city centre loop is less than ideal for the
Merseyrail MUs!


I suppose there are compounding features as well, given that the
Merseyrail loop line is an intensive service. F'rinstance, at
Farringdon, there's a fairly tight curve on Thameslink, but a particular
train will pass over it much less frequently.


I presume its the line to Moorgate you speak of? In which case usage
will become zero come March next year when it gets disconnected as
part of the Thameslink 3000 works.

Mizter T wrote:

On 24 Sep, 11:02, Chris Tolley wrote:
I suppose there are compounding features as well, given that the
Merseyrail loop line is an intensive service. F'rinstance, at
Farringdon, there's a fairly tight curve on Thameslink, but a particular
train will pass over it much less frequently.


I presume its the line to Moorgate you speak of? In which case usage
will become zero come March next year when it gets disconnected as
part of the Thameslink 3000 works.

No, I was thinking of inner curve northbound from City Thameslink; the
line to Moorgate strikes me as being straighter. But one other
mitigating factor is that he trains are going over that more slowly
(because all trains stop at Farringdon) than they do around the
Liverpool loop.

--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9632970.html
(43 133 at Reading, 17 Jan 1980)

On 24 Sep, 11:25, Chris Tolley wrote:

Mizter T wrote:

On 24 Sep, 11:02, Chris *Tolley wrote:
I suppose there are compounding features as well, given that the
Merseyrail loop line is an intensive service. F'rinstance, at
Farringdon, there's a fairly tight curve on Thameslink, but a particular
train will pass over it much less frequently.

I presume its the line to Moorgate you speak of? In which case usage
will become zero come March next year when it gets disconnected as
part of the Thameslink 3000 works.

No, I was thinking of inner curve northbound from City Thameslink; the
line to Moorgate strikes me as being straighter. But one other
mitigating factor is that he trains are going over that more slowly
(because all trains stop at Farringdon) than they do around the
Liverpool loop.


OK, I hadn't clocked that as a particularly tight curve, I'll look out
(or more likely listen out) for that next time I'm on a train up that
way. Of course once all the works are complete then the 'new'
Thameslink service is going to involve a very frequent train service
through this central section, with trains travelling faster courtesy
of ATO.

You're right about the line from Farringdon to Moorgate of course, not
least because it basically shadows the not very tightly curved
alignment of the Circle/Met line here. The first photo on this page
shows the line in question:
http://www.abandonedstations.org.uk/...t_station.html

On Sep 24, 11:13 am, Mizter T wrote:
I presume its the line to Moorgate you speak of? In which case usage
will become zero come March next year when it gets disconnected as
part of the Thameslink 3000 works.

And a few hundred people from each thameslink train walk over the
small bridge try and squash onto a circle line train to finish their
journey. Farringdon will be utter chaos every morning and evening.

B2003

On 24 Sep, 12:33, Boltar wrote:
And a few hundred people from each thameslink train walk over the
small bridge try and squash onto a circle line train to finish their
journey. Farringdon will be utter chaos every morning and evening.

Which is why they're putting in a much bigger bridge.

U

Mr Thant wrote:
On 24 Sep, 12:33, Boltar wrote:
And a few hundred people from each thameslink train walk over the
small bridge try and squash onto a circle line train to finish their
journey. Farringdon will be utter chaos every morning and evening.

Which is why they're putting in a much bigger bridge.

If memory serves, the 1990s plan for Crossrail featured Farringdon and
Liverpool Street being "double ended", affording interchange with
Barbican and Moorgate, respectively.

Cheers,

Barry