Are those Mk1's at Hainault? Or the works? Either way they wouldn't have been on the Met at all if Mk1s, though if Mk2s they would have shared the 4 track with the Met between Finchley Road and Wembley and possibly run to Watford on the Bloo route.
I used it in '89 (electric traction), when there were basically no passengers during the day. Got on at Croxley with my toddler daughter, then off at West Watford. The guard, in the driver's cab, was astonished to see us, but not interested in any fare when I waved some money towards him!
A recent Q and A with the Mayor of London about the Met Line Extension gives a bit more detail on what's happened / what alternatives are being considered. Have to say I am shocked that TfL might lead on a busway type scheme which lies wholly outside of London!
Met Line Extension Question No: 2018/0575 Navin Shah
A number of my Harrow residents and a well-recognised Public Transport Users lobby group are deeply disappointed that you refused the Government's £73 million to help extend the Metropolitan Line. I know that TfL has said that a "detailed review" had been carried and it resulted in the matter being deemed unfit for continuation. I understand that a bus route has been considered but it is not a definite and comparable alternative to the Metropolitan line. Are you able to let me know what is the latest on this? Also, I would strongly urge you to reconsider your position on this and not lose the opportunity to extend the line going through and serving my Borough.
I recognise the transport and housing benefits the Metropolitan Line Extension would bring to the Watford area and beyond. This is why I presented to Government a practical proposal to resolve the scheme's funding gap and cost risk. My offer for Transport for London (TfL) to deliver the scheme, if costs beyond TfL's previously agreed £49m contribution can be met, still stands. While the Government's commitment to cover the existing funding gap is welcome, TfL is still being asked to commit to pay for any further increased costs. Given the history of cost increases on this scheme, TfL cannot sign up for this cost risk without access to a potential income stream to cover any additional costs. I have therefore asked Government to consider how the cost risk could be covered as it would be unfair for Londoners to be asked to bear the brunt of any such increases for a scheme that lies outside its boundaries.
If an income stream to cover any additional costs cannot be made available to TfL, it is difficult to see how the scheme can progress in its current form. A Bus Rapid Transit scheme is one of the alternatives being explored, either from Croxley to Watford Junction or reaching further beyond Watford. Such a scheme would have the potential to be considerably cheaper than an extension to the Metropolitan line and could provide the opportunity to develop and trial the latest technologies. It also has the potential to deliver improved transport connections through integration with the London Underground network and the Oyster fares structure. If this alternative can be taken forward, I will ask TfL to lead on the scheme, working closely with Hertfordshire County Council.
Well, I can understand the refusal to accept further risk, but he's clearly got no idea about Watford, or he'd know that a bus rapid transport scheme as a lower cost option is a complete non-starter due to the LO shared track between Wiggenhall Road and Watford Junction.
Actually, he could know that it is a complete non-starter so he make grand-sounding promises based on conditionals he knows cannot be satisfied, while carefully not stressing the "if" statement:
IF (bus rapid transit option is cheaper) THEN I'll direct TfL to lead on the project.
Very good point. The various options document from donkeys years ago made it very clear that a bus option, even though it came out as second favourite, was clearly well below delivering anything workable.