On Mar 31, 1:07*pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
How might the LO & ELL changes have panned out then. Would the ELLX project
still have connected into the Kingsland viaduct and run round to Highbury,
after all it's four tracks wide, or just run up to terminate and interchange
at Dalston.

I'm not even sure there would have been an ELLX project in this case.

--
Abi

On Mar 31, 1:55*pm, Abigail Brady wrote:

On Mar 31, 1:07*pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote:

How might the LO & ELL changes have panned out then. Would the ELLX project
still have connected into the Kingsland viaduct and run round to Highbury,
after all it's four tracks wide, or just run up to terminate and interchange
at Dalston.

I'm not even sure there would have been an ELLX project in this case.


My thinking exactly. My reading of the inception of the ELLX scheme
was that that an opportunity was seen to connect an underutilised line
- the ELL - up with the disused trackbed between Broad Street and
Dalston Junction (and beyond), as well as reconnect it with the
mainline at the southern end (i.e. New Cross Gate), along with (re)
connecting it to the South London Line (i.e. phase 2 to Clapham Jn).

Thankfully that opportunity - which could so easily have become
another fantasy project such as those which have been discussed on
here many times before - was grasped and is being realised. I must say
I'm somewhat amazed this actually happened!

In article
,
(Mizter T) wrote:

On Mar 31, 1:55*pm, Abigail Brady wrote:

On Mar 31, 1:07*pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote:

How might the LO & ELL changes have panned out then. Would the ELLX
project still have connected into the Kingsland viaduct and run
round to Highbury, after all it's four tracks wide, or just run
up to terminate and interchange at Dalston.

I'm not even sure there would have been an ELLX project in this case.

My thinking exactly. My reading of the inception of the ELLX scheme
was that that an opportunity was seen to connect an underutilised line
- the ELL - up with the disused trackbed between Broad Street and
Dalston Junction (and beyond), as well as reconnect it with the
mainline at the southern end (i.e. New Cross Gate), along with (re)
connecting it to the South London Line (i.e. phase 2 to Clapham Jn).

Thankfully that opportunity - which could so easily have become
another fantasy project such as those which have been discussed on
here many times before - was grasped and is being realised. I must say
I'm somewhat amazed this actually happened!

I wonder if anyone here remembers the Orbital London Rail promotion
railtour which started from Broad Street some time in the 1970s, I'd guess
late 1974 or early 1975?

It was the only railtour I've ever been on where the train started with
brightly coloured balloons tied to the lamp brackets and door handles! I
have a couple of pictures I must scan some time.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On 31 Mar, 13:55, Abigail Brady wrote:
I'm not even sure there would have been an ELLX project in this case.

The previous extension proposal to Cambridge Heath might have happened
instead.

(which would also allow the route across Bishopsgate Goods Yard to be
used to divert some Liverpool Street trains to Broad Street)

U

On Tue, 31 Mar 2009, Mr Thant wrote:

On 31 Mar, 13:55, Abigail Brady wrote:
I'm not even sure there would have been an ELLX project in this case.

The previous extension proposal to Cambridge Heath might have happened
instead.

(which would also allow the route across Bishopsgate Goods Yard to be
used to divert some Liverpool Street trains to Broad Street)

What was this proposal? All i can find is a bit on the CULG page for
the ELL, where Clive sayeth:

At Spitalfields a branch turned off into extensive sidings underneath the
corresponding GER coal depot (and with a vertical hoist linking them);
there were plans to tunnel to meet the GER line at Cambridge Heath, but
these never came to fruition and the tunnel dead-ended only 350m from the
junction.

But that doesn't make a huge amount of sense to me. I don't see how any
branch going to Spitalfields could have anything to do with Cambridge
Heath.

tom

--
People don't want nice. People want London. -- Al

On Mar 31, 11:21*pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
But that doesn't make a huge amount of sense to me. I don't see how any
branch going to Spitalfields could have anything to do with Cambridge
Heath.

If you look on Google Maps just south of Selby Street (north of
Whitechapel station) there's a bit where the cutting widens to the
east, which was the junction for Spitalfields goods yard. If you
scroll up a bit you can see a chunky curve of disused viaduct that led
the GER depot.

The definition of "Spitalfields" must have been wider in the past,
though Spitalfields City Farm is not far from the goods yard site.

U

On Tue, 31 Mar 2009, Mr Thant wrote:

On Mar 31, 11:21*pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
But that doesn't make a huge amount of sense to me. I don't see how any
branch going to Spitalfields could have anything to do with Cambridge
Heath.

If you look on Google Maps just south of Selby Street (north of
Whitechapel station) there's a bit where the cutting widens to the east,
which was the junction for Spitalfields goods yard. If you scroll up a
bit you can see a chunky curve of disused viaduct that led the GER
depot.

Aha, yes, thanks. I've never looked at this area on an aerial photo
properly before - there's loads of viaduct. Must have been an amazing
sight when the Bishopsgate and Spitalfields goods yards were still going.

The definition of "Spitalfields" must have been wider in the past,

Quite!

though Spitalfields City Farm is not far from the goods yard site.

The so-called wikipedia says that the name Spitalfields comes from the
back end of 'St Mary's Hospital Fields' (St Mary's Hospital being a
12th-century priory):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spitalfields

I assume the front end gave us St Mary's station, and latterly curve.
Anyway, i suppose for a long time Spitalfields would have meant all the
former land of that priory, which was probably quite a lot. These days, i
tend to think of it as just meaning the market.

tom

--
DO NOT WANT!