"Adrian Hudson" wrote in message
m...
"John Rowland" wrote in message
...

The news is that, to my surprise, it looks like it's
going to go ahead. The LU project team expect...

What good news! There is hope for public transportation yet.

[chevrons corrected...]

Not really. The Croxley Link is being pushed up the agenda because it's a
perfect Blair project - by putting three extra stations on the tube map for
only 40 million quid, its political value per pound rating is excellent,
regardless of any actual usefulness that it might have. I have heard that
Watford Met is the fifth least used station on LU, and I'm not sure that
Ascot Road and Watford West will do an awful lot better.

I wonder what Ascot Road station will be called? Ascot Road is a terrible
name, because people will go there for the Ascot Racecourse. Watford
Holywell was the best I could come up with, or perhaps Whippendell.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

"John Rowland" wrote in message ...
Not really. The Croxley Link is being pushed up the agenda because it's a
perfect Blair project - by putting three extra stations on the tube map for
only 40 million quid, its political value per pound rating is excellent,
regardless of any actual usefulness that it might have. I have heard that
Watford Met is the fifth least used station on LU, and I'm not sure that
Ascot Road and Watford West will do an awful lot better.

Surely if a tube link to watford junction was required once more, then
re-extending the bakerloo line would be the most logical (and cheapest)
since its the most direct route. I can't see many people who want to
go to watford junction wanting to travel halfway around east buckinghamshire
on the met to get there!

B2003

Boltar wrote:

Surely if a tube link to watford junction was required once more, then
re-extending the bakerloo line would be the most logical (and
cheapest) since its the most direct route. I can't see many people
who want to go to watford junction wanting to travel halfway around
east buckinghamshire on the met to get there!


Is the requirement to go to Watford Junction not a desire to provide a
service to Watford High Street which is at the southern end of the shopping
area? It'll be interesting to see how much local traffic is generated on
the Croxley- High St section.


--
Cheers for now,

John from Harrow, Middx

remove spamnocars to reply

"John Shelley" wrote in message ...

Is the requirement to go to Watford Junction not a desire to provide a
service to Watford High Street which is at the southern end of the shopping
area? It'll be interesting to see how much local traffic is generated on
the Croxley- High St section.

This link will do far more than that! All Metroland from Harrow to
Aylesbury will now have a direct connection to the West Coast Main
Line. No more "going to Euston if you want to go to Manchester".

Hey does anyone else remember that LT advertising campaign?

Adrian.

On 2 Oct 2003 01:18:32 -0700, (Boltar) wrote:

"John Rowland" wrote in message ...
Not really. The Croxley Link is being pushed up the agenda because it's a
perfect Blair project - by putting three extra stations on the tube map for
only 40 million quid, its political value per pound rating is excellent,
regardless of any actual usefulness that it might have. I have heard that
Watford Met is the fifth least used station on LU, and I'm not sure that
Ascot Road and Watford West will do an awful lot better.

Surely if a tube link to watford junction was required once more, then
re-extending the bakerloo line would be the most logical (and cheapest)
since its the most direct route. I can't see many people who want to
go to watford junction wanting to travel halfway around east buckinghamshire
on the met to get there!


How many stops to Watford Junction? The Bakerloo Line is
uncomfortable enough between Queens Park and Harrow.

The Met extension to Watford Junction will work better - the trains
can run semi-fast south of Harrow-on-the-Hill.

Rob.

--
rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk

"Robert Woolley" wrote in message
...

The Met extension to Watford Junction will work better -
the trains can run semi-fast south of Harrow-on-the-Hill.

The tracks will allow it, but I don't think the trains will do that.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

The Met extension to Watford Junction will work better -
the trains can run semi-fast south of Harrow-on-the-Hill.

If a crossover at Watford South Junction is installed then trains can run
semi-fast to Harrow-on-the Hill as well.

John Burke

I dont think you really need fast trains along this line. There are already
fast trains to Watford Junction from Euston.

"Erbert23658200" wrote in message
...
The Met extension to Watford Junction will work better -
the trains can run semi-fast south of Harrow-on-the-Hill.

If a crossover at Watford South Junction is installed then trains can run
semi-fast to Harrow-on-the Hill as well.

John Burke