Crossrail NOT making connections
 

In message , at 17:02:21 on Wed, 3
Dec 2008, Andrew Heenan remarked:
And where is the obvious place "past Shenfield"? Colchester is the nearest
that makes sense.

Not my area, and I wouldn't presume to guess.

It is my area, and I do presume to guess.

But I am sure of one thing:
"Not Shenfield"

Bluff. Called.

[There's nowhere "slightly" further out than Shenfield that has the
capacity to turn the requisite number of trains]
--
Roland Perry

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

On Dec 3, 10:15*am, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 3 Dec 2008, 1506 wrote:
On Dec 3, 9:27*am, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 09:21:05 -0800 (PST), 1506

On the positive side this means that the branch will remain something
of a preserved example of early urban transit. *Between Westbourne
park and Goldhawk Road, the route is in essence an "Elevated". *There
are not too many examples of "Els" left anywhere in the world. *Only
Chicago has signifficant sections remaining.

Not to mention New York.

I didn't think there were too many left in NYC. *I can only recall one
short section in Manhattan. *Do the other Boroughs have many Els left?

Outside Manhattan, the subway is substantially, perhaps even mostly,
elevated. It includes sections running on top of roads, and the marvellous
and entirely aerial Broadway Junction:

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=40.6...an/2368185126/

The Street View mode on the google map is a pretty good way to take a look
round the structure.

Thank you for the GREAT links. I will enjoy them at my leisure.

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

On Dec 3, 10:11*am, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 09:46:20 -0800 (PST), 1506





wrote:
On Dec 3, 9:27*am, Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 09:21:05 -0800 (PST), 1506

wrote:
On Dec 3, 2:39*am, "David A Stocks" wrote:
"1506" wrote in message

...

Yes! *In this instance the cost of conversion of the Hammersmith
branch would be a very small part of the overall cost of Crossrail.

The 'cost' needs to include the disruption to current users of services on
the branch while the conversion is being done. This could be substantial.

IIRC, earlier in the thread I conceded that converting the Hammersmith
Branch to a Crossrail extension is perhaps not a good idea.

On the positive side this means that the branch will remain something
of a preserved example of early urban transit. *Between Westbourne
park and Goldhawk Road, the route is in essence an "Elevated". *There
are not too many examples of "Els" left anywhere in the world. *Only
Chicago has signifficant sections remaining.

Not to mention New York.

I didn't think there were too many left in NYC. *I can only recall one
short section in Manhattan. *Do the other Boroughs have many Els left?

Yes. The outer ends of most of the longer subways. The last one I used
was in the Bronx. *But you just have to drive off the freeways to see
how many there are. New York has major problems with electrolytic
corrosion on these that the London Underground's 4-rail system avoids.

And of course the extension to JFK is elevated.

If you want another modern example, how about BART? Outside the city
centres it is elevated apart from sections in the central median of
freeways.

Thank you. Yes, you are correct, there are more Els around than one
would think. I have utilized Bart. I guess Los Angeles' Green Line
would also qualify.

Adrian

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

On Dec 3, 10:02*am, Mr Thant
wrote:
On 3 Dec, 17:46, 1506 wrote:

I didn't think there were too many left in NYC. *I can only recall one
short section in Manhattan. *Do the other Boroughs have many Els left?

Brooklyn is chockablock with them, and I think most of the Subway
network in Queen's is elevated.

(also, I'd question whether you can build a true El with brick
viaducts, given the lack of space underneath them)

U

Point taken, although I wonder what options were available in the
1860s?

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 18:15:53 +0000, Tom Anderson
wrote:

Outside Manhattan, the subway is substantially, perhaps even mostly,
elevated. It includes sections running on top of roads, and the marvellous
and entirely aerial Broadway Junction:

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=40.677957%2C-73.902283
http://www.hopetunnel.org/subway/nyct/010219/117.jpg
http://flickr.com/photos/hielkeoud/2613825920/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/coverwi...on/3014806927/
http://flickr.com/photos/jpchan/2368185126/

The Street View mode on the google map is a pretty good way to take a look
round the structure.

Curse you Mr Anderson - that Google Street View is just too good. That
looks the most amazing structure and I'm sure there are other amazing
subway junctions to sit and peruse. I fear I may go square eyed while
undertaking more research. Now if only the Americans would stop treating
visitors like potential terrorists I'd be persuaded to go back to NYC to
take a closer look.
--
Paul C

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

On Dec 3, 9:57*am, Mr Thant
wrote:
On 3 Dec, 09:40, "Andrew Heenan" wrote:

Once it's built, people with brains will start to say Shenfield? Abbey Wood?
Other Stations Halfway To A Logical Junction? Get Real!

Cockfosters? Epping? West Ruislip? Amersham? Get Real!

Or: Welwyn Garden City? St Albans? Hertford North? Shenfield? High
Wycombe? West Croydon? etc etc

I'd reckon the number of London inner-suburban services terminating
nowhere in particular outweighs the number terminating at a "logical
junction", to apparently no harm.

Shenfield is a junction* and also a place where people from Harold
Wood etc can change to longer-distance services. To make Maidenhead
in any way equivalent (particularly given that Reading is already
those things plus a major town) there would have to be major changes
if paths that used to go to Reading are taken up by Crossrail, eg

All services from Paddington running non-stop to at least Maidenhead

Some Wales and Bristol services calling at Maidenhead (and maybe
missing out Reading).

Maybe that's what will happen. Or maybe the stations between
Maidenhead and Reading will lose their service.


*Yeah I know Maidenhead sort of is.

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

On Dec 3, 5:53*pm, Graeme Wall wrote:
In message
* * * * * 1506 wrote:

[snip]



IIRC, earlier in the thread I conceded that converting the Hammersmith
Branch to a Crossrail extension is perhaps not a good idea.

On the positive side this means that the branch will remain something
of a preserved example of early urban transit. *Between Westbourne
park and Goldhawk Road, the route is in essence an "Elevated". *There
are not too many examples of "Els" left anywhere in the world. *Only
Chicago has signifficant sections remaining.

You've not looked at south London lately then...

Isn't there a sort of circular elevated route in Paris? It's been a
long time ...

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

In message , Paul Corfield
writes
Curse you Mr Anderson - that Google Street View is just too good. That
looks the most amazing structure and I'm sure there are other amazing
subway junctions to sit and peruse. I fear I may go square eyed while
undertaking more research. Now if only the Americans would stop
treating visitors like potential terrorists I'd be persuaded to go back
NYC to take a closer look.

New York generally is a fascinating place transport wise and I would
highly recommend it; despite having to get through immigration (which,
last time I entered the US, in SFO wasn't too onerous at all).
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

Paul Corfield wrote:
On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 18:15:53 +0000, Tom Anderson
wrote:

Outside Manhattan, the subway is substantially, perhaps even mostly,
elevated. It includes sections running on top of roads, and the
marvellous and entirely aerial Broadway Junction:

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=40.677957%2C-73.902283
http://www.hopetunnel.org/subway/nyct/010219/117.jpg
http://flickr.com/photos/hielkeoud/2613825920/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/coverwi...on/3014806927/
http://flickr.com/photos/jpchan/2368185126/

The Street View mode on the google map is a pretty good way to take
a look round the structure.

Curse you Mr Anderson - that Google Street View is just too good.
That looks the most amazing structure and I'm sure there are other
amazing subway junctions to sit and peruse. I fear I may go square
eyed while undertaking more research. Now if only the Americans would
stop treating visitors like potential terrorists I'd be persuaded to
go back to NYC to take a closer look.

They seem to have a lot of "bridges" which are practically a couple of rails
in the air. The only time I've ever seen the underside of a train in England
was in the subway (i.e. pedestrian underpass) under the Volks Railway.

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 20:33:58 +0000, Steve Fitzgerald ]
wrote:

In message , Paul Corfield
writes
Curse you Mr Anderson - that Google Street View is just too good. That
looks the most amazing structure and I'm sure there are other amazing
subway junctions to sit and peruse. I fear I may go square eyed while
undertaking more research. Now if only the Americans would stop
treating visitors like potential terrorists I'd be persuaded to go back
NYC to take a closer look.

New York generally is a fascinating place transport wise and I would
highly recommend it; despite having to get through immigration (which,
last time I entered the US, in SFO wasn't too onerous at all).

Not just New York City. I live near Poughkeepsie, half way to the
state capital Albany on the old New York Central main line. It's one
of the world's scenic railway routes at water level along the Hudson
Valley.

We have push-pull electro diesels to Grand Central which is an
incredible station. And similar electro diesels pulling Amtrak to Penn
Station which is a disaster in the basement of Madison Square Garden
in one direction, and Buffalo, Chicago or Canada in the other.

They only recently stopped using the FL9, the electro-diesel version
of the famous streamlined F-units recently, and they still come out of
hiding on special ooccasions.

On the other route from Penn to Boston or Washington we have fast
regular electrics including the Acela.

These are all pretty impressive even to somebody who thinks most
American diesels all look the same.

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 09:40:48 on Wed, 3
Dec 2008, Andrew Heenan remarked:
Crossrail WILL reach Reading, offering myriad onward opportunities
(look at
a rail map - where else should it go?); Crossrail WILL reach Ebbsfleet
(it
would be crazy not to, until HS1 is extended to Heathrow!); Crossrail
will
not stop at Shenfield, looking slightly confused, perhaps a little
embarassed.

But don't expect such obvious common sense until just after it opens -
the
'current package' is all about getting the bloody thing built without
too
many people whining "We Can't Afford it - Cancel It".

Once it's built, people with brains will start to say Shenfield? Abbey
Wood?
Other Stations Halfway To A Logical Junction? Get Real!

And where is the obvious place "past Shenfield"? Colchester is the
nearest that makes sense.

Southend Victoria? It is as close to Central London as Reading is.

Peter Smyth

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 20:56:27 -0000, "John Rowland"
wrote:

Paul Corfield wrote:
On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 18:15:53 +0000, Tom Anderson
wrote:

Outside Manhattan, the subway is substantially, perhaps even mostly,
elevated. It includes sections running on top of roads, and the
marvellous and entirely aerial Broadway Junction:

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=40.677957%2C-73.902283
http://www.hopetunnel.org/subway/nyct/010219/117.jpg
http://flickr.com/photos/hielkeoud/2613825920/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/coverwi...on/3014806927/
http://flickr.com/photos/jpchan/2368185126/

The Street View mode on the google map is a pretty good way to take
a look round the structure.

Curse you Mr Anderson - that Google Street View is just too good.
That looks the most amazing structure and I'm sure there are other
amazing subway junctions to sit and peruse. I fear I may go square
eyed while undertaking more research. Now if only the Americans would
stop treating visitors like potential terrorists I'd be persuaded to
go back to NYC to take a closer look.

They seem to have a lot of "bridges" which are practically a couple of rails
in the air. The only time I've ever seen the underside of a train in England
was in the subway (i.e. pedestrian underpass) under the Volks Railway.

Have you seen the Bridge near the end of Dirty Harry, on the road up
to San Quentin? That carries very heavy Rail.

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

On 3 Dec, 20:22, MIG wrote:
Shenfield is a junction* and also a place where people from Harold
Wood etc can change to longer-distance services. *

Reading will have four local trains an hour arriving from the east
(two semi-fast ex-Paddington, two starting at Slough), so from a
passenger's point of view, those kinds of journeys are well covered.
The only thing missing is being able to change at Reading onto a
direct train to east of Paddington. Given the time differential and
the fact most services at Reading are going to Paddington anyway, I
don't think that's a huge loss.

Maybe that's what will happen. *Or maybe the stations between
Maidenhead and Reading will lose their service.

Station, singular. There's no population to speak of in between.

U

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

In message
MIG wrote:

On Dec 3, 5:53*pm, Graeme Wall wrote:
In message
* * * * * 1506 wrote:

[snip]



IIRC, earlier in the thread I conceded that converting the Hammersmith
Branch to a Crossrail extension is perhaps not a good idea.

On the positive side this means that the branch will remain something
of a preserved example of early urban transit. *Between Westbourne
park and Goldhawk Road, the route is in essence an "Elevated". *There
are not too many examples of "Els" left anywhere in the world. *Only
Chicago has signifficant sections remaining.

You've not looked at south London lately then...

Isn't there a sort of circular elevated route in Paris? It's been a
long time ...

Line 2 has an elevated section which crosses the throat of Gare du Nord.

And, of course, there's the District/Piccadilly line between Ealing and
Hammersmith

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 12:29:15 -0800 (PST), MIG
wrote:

Isn't there a sort of circular elevated route in Paris? It's been a
long time ...

Lines 2 and 6 form a circle although you have to change between lines at
Nation and Charles de Gaulle Etoile in order to do the full circle.

There's also Line 5 that shoots through the roof of Gare d'Austerlitz
and then across the Seine.
--
Paul C

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

"Graeme Wall" wrote

And, of course, there's the District/Piccadilly line between Ealing and
Hammersmith

One that hasn't been mentioned is the DLR between Tower Gateway and
Crossharbour - partly on the 1840 brick viaduct of the Blackwall Railway and
partly on concrete viaducts 150 years newer. In its time it has seen rope,
steam, and electric traction, and part of it is, at least more or less, on
the alignment of a section of the Millwall Railway which was once
horse-worked.

Peter

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

MIG wrote:
The problem to my disordered mind is that Crossrail will have to be
duplicated by local diesel trains all the way to Maidenhead in order
to cover the bit from Maidenhead to Reading (which is a huge hub).

It would probably be more useful, and even out capacity usage, to run
Waterloo to Reading via LHR and Slough, then all stations Maidenhead to
Reading. Then all trains starting at Paddington could be non-stop to Slough.


The reason is presumably to save on some miles of electrification, but
it's not a logical place to terminate the services while making a
sensible use of paths.

Might be more sensible to electrify to at least Oxford, otherwise there
will still need to be an awful lot of diesel trains.

Colin McKenzie

--
No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at the
population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as walking.
Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

Christopher A. Lee wrote:
If you want another modern example, how about BART? Outside the city
centres it is elevated apart from sections in the central median of
freeways.

And Manila has one, on concrete viaduct right through the centre, ISTR.

Colin McKenzie

--
No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at the
population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as walking.
Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

On Tue, 2 Dec 2008, Peter Masson wrote:

"Tom Anderson" wrote

No, Crossrail should stop at Slough, and concentrate on being an
affordable and effective suburban railway, and not a pie-in-the-sky all
things to all people scheme.

Crossrail will go to Maidenhead, Heathrow, Shenfield, and Abbey Wood.
Any strong pressure to change any of these destinations is more likely
to mean that Crossrail doesn't happen at all than that changes will be
made.

Yes. I'm not quite mad enough to argue for changes at this stage - rather,
i point out that the scheme is not optimal. It shouldn't really be going
to the GWML at all - the Waterloo lines would be a much better
destination, but for obscure reasons, they were dropped from consideration
a very long time ago.

Subsequent add-ons are possible - Reading is the obvious one, so that
diesel trains out of Paddington can be eliminated from the Relief Lines,
while the Main Lines can become a totally 125 mph railway.

By which everyone at Reading travels to London. Nobody at Reading is going
to get on a Crossrail stopper to London when they could get a fast train.
The only market is for local commuting into Reading, and that market isn't
big enough to justify the expense.

Gravesend is a long shot, but may be needed for (and financed by)
development in the Thames Gateway.

Ditto.

Another destination west of Paddington would be nice, but no-one has
come up with any convincing case.

Hampton Court! The SWML is crying out for Crossrail - a single-seat ride
along it into the City would relieve Waterloo, the W&C, and the southern
Circle. The trouble is that you'd need to bore quite a bit more tunnel in
central London - probably on a route something like the 1938 Northern line
plan:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/twic/1591807010/sizes/o/

Perhaps diving into tunnel at Battersea, and running Victoria, perhaps
Green Park and then Oxford Street. Not at all cheap.

Richmond - Kingston did not attract universal support. Amersham -
Aylesbury would be nice, so that the Met line can concentrate on
Uxbridge and Watford, while the fast lines beyond Harrow-on-the-Hill
would become single use by Crossrail, and electrified at 25 kV OHLE. But
traffic density is insufficient to generate a business case. More trains
can't be pushed down the GWML - there's not teh demand, and capacity is
needed for freight west of Acton Yard. So I think we're stuck with the
Westbourne Park reversing sidings.

Realistically, yes.

tom

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

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

On Wed, 3 Dec 2008, 1506 wrote:

On Dec 3, 10:02*am, Mr Thant
wrote:
On 3 Dec, 17:46, 1506 wrote:

I didn't think there were too many left in NYC. *I can only recall one
short section in Manhattan. *Do the other Boroughs have many Els left?

Brooklyn is chockablock with them, and I think most of the Subway
network in Queen's is elevated.

(also, I'd question whether you can build a true El with brick
viaducts, given the lack of space underneath them)

Point taken, although I wonder what options were available in the 1860s?

Piles of compacted commoners.

tom

--
There's spaceships, snappy dialogue, death cultists, likeable characters,
underwater combat, assassinations of public figures for their own good,
zombies, Batman references, robots, memes, talking cats, and stars used
as flamethrowers. -- Alx, on 'Implied Spaces'

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

In message , Christopher A.
Lee writes

On the other route from Penn to Boston or Washington we have fast
regular electrics including the Acela.

Done that one to Boston a few years ago.

I was quite underwhelmed as we trundled along at little more than 70mph
for miles when suddenly there was a spurt of acceleration and off we
went with a proud announcement that we were now travelling at 150mph,
the maximum speed for Acela!

After about 10-15 mins the brakes went on and we carried on trundling at
70mph to Boston.

I think the Mercans need to realise that 15 miles does not a high speed
railway make.

Fascinating journey nevertheless.
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

In article ,
Graeme Wall wrote:

And, of course, there's the District/Piccadilly line between Ealing and
Hammersmith

Jubilee and Metropolitan between West Hampstead and Kilburn, although
it's not a very long stretch.

Similarly, London Bridge to Canon Street & Blackfriars - ish.

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

On Dec 3, 1:36*pm, Mr Thant
wrote:
On 3 Dec, 20:22, MIG wrote:

Shenfield is a junction* and also a place where people from Harold
Wood etc can change to longer-distance services. *

Reading will have four local trains an hour arriving from the east
(two semi-fast ex-Paddington, two starting at Slough), so from a
passenger's point of view, those kinds of journeys are well covered.
The only thing missing is being able to change at Reading onto a
direct train to east of Paddington. Given the time differential and
the fact most services at Reading are going to Paddington anyway, I
don't think *that's a huge loss.

Maybe that's what will happen. *Or maybe the stations between
Maidenhead and Reading will lose their service.

Station, singular. There's no population to speak of in between.

U

You probably need to count the three stations on the Henley branch
too, although you are still substantially right.

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

In message , at 21:13:13 on Wed, 3
Dec 2008, Peter Smyth remarked:
And where is the obvious place "past Shenfield"? Colchester is the
nearest that makes sense.

Southend Victoria? It is as close to Central London as Reading is.

Why would a commuter from Southend want to take a Crossrail train rather
than the much more direct line to Fenchurch St?
--
Roland Perry

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

On Dec 4, 4:39*am, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 21:13:13 on Wed, 3
Dec 2008, Peter Smyth remarked:

And where is the obvious place "past Shenfield"? Colchester is the
nearest that makes sense.

Southend Victoria? It is as close to Central London as Reading is.

Why would a commuter from Southend want to take a Crossrail train rather
than the much more direct line to Fenchurch St?

I am not all that convinced that many people want to travel through
London at all, although east - west might be more significant than
north - south.

The operational benefit of Thameslink is not having to turn trains
round, and the benefit to passengers has been increased frequency from
London Bridge to Brighton and St Pancras to Bedford, not the cross-
London link*.

But it wasn't at the expense of existing services, because it improved
them. If it had been restricted to Radlett to Horley to save costs,
it might have had a detrimental effect on Bedford and Brighton.

Crossrail ought to improve services on the corridors it uses, which is
why ending at Maidenhead seems so wrong.


*Mind you, that's because it's quicker to walk than get Thameslink.
East - west will probably be much faster and it's much further.

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:40:48 on Wed, 3
Dec 2008, Andrew Heenan remarked:
Crossrail WILL reach Reading, offering myriad onward opportunities
(look at
a rail map - where else should it go?); Crossrail WILL reach Ebbsfleet
(it
would be crazy not to, until HS1 is extended to Heathrow!); Crossrail
will
not stop at Shenfield, looking slightly confused, perhaps a little
embarassed.

But don't expect such obvious common sense until just after it opens -
the
'current package' is all about getting the bloody thing built without too
many people whining "We Can't Afford it - Cancel It".

Once it's built, people with brains will start to say Shenfield? Abbey
Wood?
Other Stations Halfway To A Logical Junction? Get Real!

And where is the obvious place "past Shenfield"? Colchester is the
nearest that makes sense.

Wha? Chelmsford?

--
Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it
has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management
decisions. -From “Rollerball”

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

Steve Fitzgerald wrote:
In message , Paul Corfield
writes
Curse you Mr Anderson - that Google Street View is just too good.
That looks the most amazing structure and I'm sure there are other
amazing subway junctions to sit and peruse. I fear I may go square
eyed while undertaking more research. Now if only the Americans would
stop treating visitors like potential terrorists I'd be persuaded to
go back NYC to take a closer look.

New York generally is a fascinating place transport wise and I would
highly recommend it; despite having to get through immigration (which,
last time I entered the US, in SFO wasn't too onerous at all).

I didn't find it too bad in Atlanta, but you do need a prebooked
address. In my case I wasn't visiting anyone but had booked the motel
(in Lafayette) on the Web.

--
Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it
has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management
decisions. -From “Rollerball”

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 20:33:58 +0000, Steve Fitzgerald ]
wrote:

In message , Paul Corfield
writes
Curse you Mr Anderson - that Google Street View is just too good. That
looks the most amazing structure and I'm sure there are other amazing
subway junctions to sit and peruse. I fear I may go square eyed while
undertaking more research. Now if only the Americans would stop
treating visitors like potential terrorists I'd be persuaded to go back
NYC to take a closer look.
New York generally is a fascinating place transport wise and I would
highly recommend it; despite having to get through immigration (which,
last time I entered the US, in SFO wasn't too onerous at all).

Not just New York City. I live near Poughkeepsie, half way to the
state capital Albany on the old New York Central main line. It's one
of the world's scenic railway routes at water level along the Hudson
Valley.

Why do NY cop shows always joke about Poughkeepsie?

--
Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it
has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management
decisions. -From “Rollerball”

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

Peter Masson wrote:
"Graeme Wall" wrote
And, of course, there's the District/Piccadilly line between Ealing and
Hammersmith

One that hasn't been mentioned is the DLR between Tower Gateway and
Crossharbour - partly on the 1840 brick viaduct of the Blackwall Railway and
partly on concrete viaducts 150 years newer. In its time it has seen rope,
steam, and electric traction, and part of it is, at least more or less, on
the alignment of a section of the Millwall Railway which was once
horse-worked.

Peter


The last section of the Met to Watford is on a bridge over Croxley Moor.

--
Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it
has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management
decisions. -From “Rollerball”

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

In message
, at
00:05:17 on Thu, 4 Dec 2008, MIG remarked:
And where is the obvious place "past Shenfield"? Colchester is the
nearest that makes sense.

Southend Victoria? It is as close to Central London as Reading is.

Why would a commuter from Southend want to take a Crossrail train rather
than the much more direct line to Fenchurch St?

I am not all that convinced that many people want to travel through
London at all, although east - west might be more significant than
north - south.

I agree (although that's somewhat orthogonal to finding the quickest way
from Southend to the City).

Having spent a couple of years with an office at London Bridge, a
through train from Cambridge would have saved messing around at Kings
Cross, and partly because of the availability of the through train I've
hopped between Luton and Gatwick a few times recently. If I was still
living in Mid-Essex a through train would help me quite often, as my
destination is more likely to be somewhere between Bank and Paddington
than near Liverpool St.
--
Roland Perry

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

In message , at 08:12:02 on Thu, 4 Dec
2008, Martin Edwards remarked:
And where is the obvious place "past Shenfield"? Colchester is the
nearest that makes sense.

Wha? Chelmsford?

Doesn't have the required capacity to turn trains. The track beyond
Shenfield is also already quite busy with longer distance trains.
--
Roland Perry

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

In message , at 08:16:49 on Thu, 4 Dec
2008, Martin Edwards remarked:
despite having to get through immigration (which, last time I entered
the US, in SFO wasn't too onerous at all).

I didn't find it too bad in Atlanta, but you do need a prebooked
address. In my case I wasn't visiting anyone but had booked the motel
(in Lafayette) on the Web.

You need an address wherever you enter, and starting real soon you have
to register your details in advance.
--
Roland Perry

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

In message
Tom Anderson wrote:

On Tue, 2 Dec 2008, Peter Masson wrote:

"Tom Anderson" wrote

No, Crossrail should stop at Slough, and concentrate on being an
affordable and effective suburban railway, and not a pie-in-the-sky all
things to all people scheme.

Crossrail will go to Maidenhead, Heathrow, Shenfield, and Abbey Wood.
Any strong pressure to change any of these destinations is more likely
to mean that Crossrail doesn't happen at all than that changes will be
made.

Yes. I'm not quite mad enough to argue for changes at this stage - rather,
i point out that the scheme is not optimal. It shouldn't really be going
to the GWML at all - the Waterloo lines would be a much better
destination, but for obscure reasons, they were dropped from consideration
a very long time ago.

How do you come up with that conclusion?

With the city business centre moving eastward it leaves Paddington even
further from many commuters ultimate destination. Waterloo has good links to
both the City and Docklands (the Drain and the Northern and Jubilee Lines)
already.

Also one of the principal objectives of Crossrail is to relieve the pressure
on the Central line, going to Waterloo won't help that.

Though, given that a significant proportion of Crossrail funding was supposed
to come from the banks, I suspect all these discussions are moot anyway.

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

In message
Tom Anderson wrote:

On Wed, 3 Dec 2008, 1506 wrote:

On Dec 3, 10:02*am, Mr Thant
wrote:
On 3 Dec, 17:46, 1506 wrote:

I didn't think there were too many left in NYC. *I can only recall one
short section in Manhattan. *Do the other Boroughs have many Els left?

Brooklyn is chockablock with them, and I think most of the Subway
network in Queen's is elevated.

(also, I'd question whether you can build a true El with brick
viaducts, given the lack of space underneath them)

Point taken, although I wonder what options were available in the 1860s?

Piles of compacted commoners.


Like the Chiswick flyover you mean?

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

In message
Sarah Brown wrote:

In article ,
Graeme Wall wrote:

And, of course, there's the District/Piccadilly line between Ealing and
Hammersmith

Jubilee and Metropolitan between West Hampstead and Kilburn, although
it's not a very long stretch.

Probably only the Central Line that doesn't have significant lengths of
elevated railway thinking about it.

Similarly, London Bridge to Canon Street & Blackfriars - ish.


I'd included the latter in my original comment about south London, most of
the ex-SR terminals are fed by an elevated system.

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

In message
MIG wrote:

On Dec 4, 4:39*am, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 21:13:13 on Wed, 3
Dec 2008, Peter Smyth remarked:

And where is the obvious place "past Shenfield"? Colchester is the
nearest that makes sense.

Southend Victoria? It is as close to Central London as Reading is.

Why would a commuter from Southend want to take a Crossrail train rather
than the much more direct line to Fenchurch St?

I am not all that convinced that many people want to travel through
London at all, although east - west might be more significant than
north - south.

Don't know if it still exists in the current economic situation, but there
used to be a lot of traffic between high tech firms in the Thames Valley and
places like Marconi at Chelmsford.

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

"Roland Perry" wrote ...
Andrew Heenan remarked:
Not my area, and I wouldn't presume to guess.
But I am sure of one thing:
"Not Shenfield"

Bluff. Called.
[There's nowhere "slightly" further out than Shenfield that has the
capacity to turn the requisite number of trains]

Sneaky Pedant called:

1. I was not bluffing - I was expressing a view. Sorry about that.
2. When you quoted me, you chose to miss a key point:
"There are, of course, many options east of Liverpool Street, and a lot may
depend on who's in power come 2018."

I repeat, "Not my area, and I wouldn't presume to guess" - instead of trying
to be smart (and merely being smug) why not *use* your local knowledge to
see what other possibilities there are.

Warning: this may require an open mind and tad of imagination - do your
best.

Just imagine *you* are planning an East-West high capacity, high frequency
rail service, and you have a free choice of terminus, and go for it!

[tip: it is theoretically possible for More Than One to be used]

(And please don't tell me there's not one station on the Eastern that is
more appropiate than Shenfield - or I, and many others, will cease to
believe a word you say.)


--
Andrew

"When 'Do no Evil' has been understood, then learn the harder, braver rule,
Do Good." ~ Arthur Guiterman

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

"Peter Smyth" wrote ...
And where is the obvious place "past Shenfield"? Colchester is the
nearest that makes sense.
Southend Victoria? It is as close to Central London as Reading is.

Southend sounds an interesting possibility;

What's the objection to Cochester, assuming that was a serious suggestion?
--
Andrew

"When 'Do no Evil' has been understood, then learn the harder, braver rule,
Do Good." ~ Arthur Guiterman

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

"Colin McKenzie" wrote ...
Might be more sensible to electrify to at least Oxford, otherwise there
will still need to be an awful lot of diesel trains.

There's a fair chance of that, independently of crossrail.

But nice to think of a Cambridge- Oxford service, via Tottenham Court Road
["Alight Here for the University of London"!]
--

Andrew

"She plays the tuba.
It is the only instrument capable
of imitating a distress call."

Crossrail NOT making connections
 

"Roland Perry" wrote ...
Southend Victoria? It is as close to Central London as Reading is.
Why would a commuter from Southend want to take a Crossrail train rather
than the much more direct line to Fenchurch St?

Rather depends on the commuter's ultimate destination, I suppose.

But with Crossrail, they'd have achoice of destinations, wouldn't they?

(Like the lucky Asford commuters, slow to Cannon Street, or wafted to King's
Cross; choice is not always a bad thing.

Nor is change ;o)


--

Andrew

"She plays the tuba.
It is the only instrument capable
of imitating a distress call."