Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2017 0:50:33 GMT
Quite vague in at which point in 2019, seems to imply December 2019 but surely this cannot be right!?! So after all the works that have caused half a decade of misery for commuters across South & South East London, Kent, Surrey and Sussex, some of the damage is permanent I might add (slower journeys etc) Thameslink have now potentially put off its promise for another two years, its like Thameslink keeps changing its story, ie first Caterham and Tattenham Corner will be getting Thameslink services now they wont because of Windmill Junction being unable to handle extra Thameslink trains, then after segregating all the SE Metro they decide to have an all stations Medway service via Greenwich which will undo all the work that has been done to untangle the lines into London Bridge, so I guess the consultation will have to be looked at again I suppose? www.railtechnologymagazine.com/Rail-News/gtr-announces-thameslink-improvements-but-pushes-back-24-trains-per-hour-promise-?dorewrite=false |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Nov 22, 2017 1:25:18 GMT
I think GTR and Network Rail have faced up to reality and realised that they simply can't deliver the full 24tph on the core from December next year. Neither can they do a "modest bang" of services via London Bridge in Jan 2018. It is clear from comments elsewhere that the delivery of the train management systems at the signalling centres is way behind schedule as the contractor underestimated the network's complexity. Given a crucial piece of technology needed by signallers to get trains through the core in the right sequence won't be ready they've very sensibly backtracked to a position which they feel can work. To be honest I am not exactly shocked that this happened given the repeated commentary from Roger Ford in Modern Railways about these particular bits of software and the pretty parlous way Network Rail has handled the procurement and deployment of the technology. While not wishing any ill of Crossrail we should remember that it faces very considerable hurdles in coping with three signalling systems and very important system interfaces. I am not going to fall off my chair in shock if Crossrail has some similar struggles given there are slight hints that they are "up against" their programme already on some aspects of this vitally important work. The other factor here is that the senior operating official at GTR, Nick Brown, is a former LU MD so he will have experience of signalling and rolling stock upgrades and will know the benefits from TfL's more cautious approach of not overpromising and taking things step by step - as on the Vic Line's secondary upgrade tp 36 tph. As a user of the Vic Line I will happily concede that my fears of a total meltdown of the service during the first upgrade and subsequent operation did not materialise which is damn good given what happened elsewhere. The Vic Line upgrade has been very smooth - not perfect as it can still have its moments with track, signals and rolling stock but not the dreadful weeks of chaos we had with the old stock and signals. If GTR can work through a phased service buildup and actually operate it well then I think a lot of people will be pleased. That is the critical challenge they now face. This link ---> www.mynewsdesk.com/uk/govia-thameslink-railway/pressreleases/wide-range-of-benefits-revealed-for-may-2018-south-east-timetable-2285889 describes the service build up from now through to Dec 2019 showing the services that will be added at each stage. Broadly it is the services to / from the ECML that are added progressively to the core which suggests to me that that is seen as the riskiest element to overall reliability given how many service groupings and freight can cause delays on the ECML. |
|
|
|
Post by phil on Nov 23, 2017 1:37:51 GMT
Quite vague in at which point in 2019, seems to imply December 2019 but surely this cannot be right!?! So after all the works that have caused half a decade of misery for commuters across South & South East London, Kent, Surrey and Sussex, some of the damage is permanent I might add (slower journeys etc) Thameslink have now potentially put off its promise for another two years, its like Thameslink keeps changing its story, ie first Caterham and Tattenham Corner will be getting Thameslink services now they wont because of Windmill Junction being unable to handle extra Thameslink trains, then after segregating all the SE Metro they decide to have an all stations Medway service via Greenwich which will undo all the work that has been done to untangle the lines into London Bridge, so I guess the consultation will have to be looked at again I suppose? www.railtechnologymagazine.com/Rail-News/gtr-announces-thameslink-improvements-but-pushes-back-24-trains-per-hour-promise-?dorewrite=falseFirstly, if you actually read all the supporting info you will find that sending Thameslink via Greenwich actually INCREASES the service on the Greenwich line. This is because without the ability to get rid of empty stock via Blackfriars and back out via Elephant & Castle and thus free up platforms for fresh arrivals, Cannon Street station simply cannot handle the same number of trains as it did before the Thameslink works service started. As such the limiting factor is NOT the approch tracks (as it was with the old layout that saw Charing Cross and Thameslink having to share platforms and the double track viaduct over borough market) and thus the addition of a Thameslink service via Greenwich is not as problematic as it first appears. Sending Thameslink that way also allows the service to 'The City' to be brings it back up to what it was before the Thameslink works started. Secondly, we are only talking about 2TPH AT MOST that needs to interact with SE services. Even if a tiny proportion of Thameslink services do end up going via Greenwich, that only affects the Cannon Street lines - the Charing Cross, Thameslink and London Bridge terminating flows have all been separated out by that 'half a decade of misery' as you disparagingly put it - plus of course the extra platforms at London Bridge mean an end to 50% of Charing Cross services having to skip London bridge in the morning peaks. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Nov 23, 2017 11:41:05 GMT
Seems the National Audit Office have been investigating the Thameslink project. It looks like part of the reason for the delay to the introduction of some Thameslink services is to allow more work to be done on other parts of the network to improve performance and resilience. I haven't read any of the detail yet. There are different lenghts of report from the NAO about the issues on this link. www.nao.org.uk/report/update-on-the-thameslink-programme/ |
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Nov 23, 2017 16:25:19 GMT
Snoggle....A senior NR Director dealing with capacity and Chris Gibb spoke at a recent conference. Apart from the issues with traffic management you so neatly summarised above, the two speakers highlighted the various constraints of the network. The works to expand the Thameslink core will work wonders for the Thameslink core, but have exposed the constraints elsewhere. This is something LU was well used to; fix the big constraint, identify the next level and fix and so on 'till problem solved. I call this "linear constraint removal". The very nature of the Thameslink service and its knock on effect on other Southern, South Eastern, Midland Main Line and GN services means that the NR problem might be "linear constraint removal, squared, cubed or even to the power 4!
The erudite analyses on "London Reconnections" of the Brighton Main Line has identified many of the constraints - but they haven't even skimmed the surface of any of the others.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2017 17:12:12 GMT
Quite vague in at which point in 2019, seems to imply December 2019 but surely this cannot be right!?! So after all the works that have caused half a decade of misery for commuters across South & South East London, Kent, Surrey and Sussex, some of the damage is permanent I might add (slower journeys etc) Thameslink have now potentially put off its promise for another two years, its like Thameslink keeps changing its story, ie first Caterham and Tattenham Corner will be getting Thameslink services now they wont because of Windmill Junction being unable to handle extra Thameslink trains, then after segregating all the SE Metro they decide to have an all stations Medway service via Greenwich which will undo all the work that has been done to untangle the lines into London Bridge, so I guess the consultation will have to be looked at again I suppose? www.railtechnologymagazine.com/Rail-News/gtr-announces-thameslink-improvements-but-pushes-back-24-trains-per-hour-promise-?dorewrite=falseFirstly, if you actually read all the supporting info you will find that sending Thameslink via Greenwich actually INCREASES the service on the Greenwich line. This is because without the ability to get rid of empty stock via Blackfriars and back out via Elephant & Castle and thus free up platforms for fresh arrivals, Cannon Street station simply cannot handle the same number of trains as it did before the Thameslink works service started. As such the limiting factor is NOT the approch tracks (as it was with the old layout that saw Charing Cross and Thameslink having to share platforms and the double track viaduct over borough market) and thus the addition of a Thameslink service via Greenwich is not as problematic as it first appears. Sending Thameslink that way also allows the service to 'The City' to be brings it back up to what it was before the Thameslink works started. Secondly, we are only talking about 2TPH AT MOST that needs to interact with SE services. Even if a tiny proportion of Thameslink services do end up going via Greenwich, that only affects the Cannon Street lines - the Charing Cross, Thameslink and London Bridge terminating flows have all been separated out by that 'half a decade of misery' as you disparagingly put it - plus of course the extra platforms at London Bridge mean an end to 50% of Charing Cross services having to skip London bridge in the morning peaks. I know that sending 2tph from Thameslink to Greenwich is to maintain 6tph on that line, it was 6tph before the works began, I'm not entirely against Thameslink coming to Greenwich/North Kent, its just the way its been shoe horned in at the last minute, after segregating Greenwich from CX and preventing too many trains crossing over at London Bridge, plus as I've mentioned before the stopping pattern makes no sense, but only time will tell if Thameslink Rainham services will actually work. According to the timetable for the East Grinstead line, it looks like it will be missing out on two stations: Upper Warlingham and Woldingham or is this just a peak time thing only? I may have misread it. The night trains also won't be calling at Purley apparently but the consultation deadline for the night trains hasn't come through yet. |
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Nov 23, 2017 23:05:43 GMT
Snoggle....A senior NR Director dealing with capacity and Chris Gibb spoke at a recent conference. Apart from the issues with traffic management you so neatly summarised above, the two speakers highlighted the various constraints of the network. The works to expand the Thameslink core will work wonders for the Thameslink core, but have exposed the constraints elsewhere. This is something LU was well used to; fix the big constraint, identify the next level and fix and so on 'till problem solved. I call this "linear constraint removal". The very nature of the Thameslink service and its knock on effect on other Southern, South Eastern, Midland Main Line and GN services means that the NR problem might be "linear constraint removal, squared, cubed or even to the power 4! The erudite analyses on "London Reconnections" of the Brighton Main Line has identified many of the constraints - but they haven't even skimmed the surface of any of the others. It's simply not going to work on GN. The mix of stopping patterns will get tangled up with each other as soon as individual trains arrive late going north from the Thameslink core. Between Hitchin and Cambridge there is a double-track section with no opportunity for anything to overtake, and the plan is for this section even off-peak is 6tph, made up of three different stopping patterns - one calling at seven intermediate stations and taking approximately 40 minutes, one calling at three intermediate stations and taking approximately 30 minutes, and one not calling at any stations and taking approximately 22 minutes. Then north of Ely there is the perfect distorting mirror in the form of single-track sections Littleport-Downham and Watlington-Kings Lynn, so any northbound delay then has the potential to transmit back to the southbound direction right through the entire network. Meanwhile the new trains haven't been received well at all. Loads of complaints from passengers used to quality rolling stock, and so far the new trains are only working two trips each way - that's when they turn up as reliability hasn't been good so far for various reasons either. Fast forward a few years and I can see the word Thameslink being nothing better than a swear word in parts of Hertfordshire, Bedfordshire and Cambridgeshire... |
|
|
|
Post by 35b on Nov 24, 2017 0:14:15 GMT
Snoggle....A senior NR Director dealing with capacity and Chris Gibb spoke at a recent conference. Apart from the issues with traffic management you so neatly summarised above, the two speakers highlighted the various constraints of the network. The works to expand the Thameslink core will work wonders for the Thameslink core, but have exposed the constraints elsewhere. This is something LU was well used to; fix the big constraint, identify the next level and fix and so on 'till problem solved. I call this "linear constraint removal". The very nature of the Thameslink service and its knock on effect on other Southern, South Eastern, Midland Main Line and GN services means that the NR problem might be "linear constraint removal, squared, cubed or even to the power 4! The erudite analyses on "London Reconnections" of the Brighton Main Line has identified many of the constraints - but they haven't even skimmed the surface of any of the others. It's simply not going to work on GN. The mix of stopping patterns will get tangled up with each other as soon as individual trains arrive late going north from the Thameslink core. Between Hitchin and Cambridge there is a double-track section with no opportunity for anything to overtake, and the plan is for this section even off-peak is 6tph, made up of three different stopping patterns - one calling at seven intermediate stations and taking approximately 40 minutes, one calling at three intermediate stations and taking approximately 30 minutes, and one not calling at any stations and taking approximately 22 minutes. Then north of Ely there is the perfect distorting mirror in the form of single-track sections Littleport-Downham and Watlington-Kings Lynn, so any northbound delay then has the potential to transmit back to the southbound direction right through the entire network. Meanwhile the new trains haven't been received well at all. Loads of complaints from passengers used to quality rolling stock, and so far the new trains are only working two trips each way - that's when they turn up as reliability hasn't been good so far for various reasons either. Fast forward a few years and I can see the word Thameslink being nothing better than a swear word in parts of Hertfordshire, Bedfordshire and Cambridgeshire... There is also the interaction with ECML expresses given the constraints of Welwyn viaduct. I’ve lost count of the number of times my train has been checked at Knebworth due to out of course running; something that will become far more critical on up trains when they have to feed into the Core, and where the down trains will be more prone to disruption exiting the Core due to the complexities of the Southern. I await the announcement at Leeds or a Edinburgh that trains are delayed due to disruption 4 hours ago at Gatwick. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Nov 24, 2017 0:44:34 GMT
Snoggle....A senior NR Director dealing with capacity and Chris Gibb spoke at a recent conference. Apart from the issues with traffic management you so neatly summarised above, the two speakers highlighted the various constraints of the network. The works to expand the Thameslink core will work wonders for the Thameslink core, but have exposed the constraints elsewhere. This is something LU was well used to; fix the big constraint, identify the next level and fix and so on 'till problem solved. I call this "linear constraint removal". The very nature of the Thameslink service and its knock on effect on other Southern, South Eastern, Midland Main Line and GN services means that the NR problem might be "linear constraint removal, squared, cubed or even to the power 4! The erudite analyses on "London Reconnections" of the Brighton Main Line has identified many of the constraints - but they haven't even skimmed the surface of any of the others. Having read both the summary and full audit reports from the NAO it's clear plenty has gone wrong and quite a lot has gone right once lessons have been learnt. I was quite shocked at the scale of overspend and design related issues at London Bridge station. A lot of it is down to good old fashioned risks and lack of planning and controls. Something that should have been learnt a very long time ago and should be being repeated. Coming back to your point it's evident from the report that there has been quite a lack of leadership from the DfT in terms of preparing for the move out of construction to service introduction. It looks to me, and I dare say it chimes with what you heard at the conference, that the operational planning and the supporting transition work is way behind where it should be. The late pan industry consulation and joint working has meant time has nearly run out for timetable planning and all of the associated planning, documentation, training and testing of service recovery plans, day to day operation, maintenance, crew training and train crew accommodation. As I've scribbled elsewhere this is all pretty "standard stuff" for LU and I've never been actively involved in train side projects although I did have a sign off role for timetables and contract implications (one of many such departmental sign offs for any service upgrade / new timetable). I am genuinely surprised that TOCs and NR are seemingly struggling or have had problems flagging their concerns. I'd expect professional railwaymen/women and engineers to know what's going on and to speak out. The other issue is the apparent knock on in terms of other infrastructure that Thameslink services will use or interface with being in a parlous state and apparently needing a total of £900m to fix. One wonders how on earth things got to that state. Makes me wonder just how hard the railway is being flogged by ever more intensive services or whether something is seriously amiss in terms of maintenance activity and access to the infrastructure. The NAO will be reporting on the actual GTR franchise in early 2018 and I imagine that will be an "entertaining" read - provided you are not a regular user of GTR services! |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Nov 29, 2017 14:53:18 GMT
Worth noting if anyone is interested that GTR have launched the next round of 2018 (yes 2018!) timetable consultation for the proposed Saturday / Sunday / overnight services for the various routes on the GTR franchise. www.transformingrail.com/ ----> links to the various timetables and routes are available from that home page. |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Nov 29, 2017 21:01:29 GMT
Yes 2018. It's only five weeks away.
SWR are also consulting on their proposed December 2018 timetable. If the consultation is to have any meaning - i.e. they might actually act on the feedback - that is the sort of timescale you need to look at.
|
|
|
|
Post by roboverground on Nov 30, 2017 20:14:15 GMT
The 24 tph isn't all day though and applies to just a few hours in the morning and evening peak Monday to Friday, the 'mix' being 16 tph Thameslink merging with 8 tph from Great Northern ( or 18tph/ TL / 6TPH gn) depending who you believe. By comparison 15 tph already run into the core area M-F .
Much still to sort out operationally one of the big issues is locomotives are presently not gauge cleared for the new Canal Tunnels so it is impossible to rescue and recover a stalled class 700 should overhead power supply not be available. The rescue and recovery over the other areas is also a mess with class 700 having to be towed unbraked to clear the line however no single locomotive has the brake force to safely control a 400 tonne 12 car on the steep gradients, the preferred rescue loco that can provide enough air (class 67) itself is not gauge cleared height wise and again may not have enough brake force, the gradient being 1 in 30 at Farringdon
|
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Dec 1, 2017 7:48:39 GMT
The rescue and recovery over the other areas is also a mess with class 700 having to be towed unbraked to clear the line however no single locomotive has the brake force to safely control a 400 tonne 12 car on the steep gradients.......... the gradient being 1 in 30 at Farringdon So use two locos. In any case. although the gradient at Farringdon may indeed be 1 in 30, it's not very long - probably less than a 12 car train - so you would only be lifting or braking the cars actually on the slope. (A 12-car train is about 240 metres long - at 1 in 30 that's a vertical distance of 8 metres: how much is the vertical separation in the diveunder at Farringdon? |
|
|
|
Post by 35b on Dec 1, 2017 9:53:27 GMT
How straightforward is gauge clearance though? My understanding is that the vertical clearances are the issue, so minimal margin of error.
|
|
|
|
Post by roboverground on Dec 1, 2017 10:08:20 GMT
Since the' rigid conductor beam' replaced traditional tensioned catenary from St Pancras low level to KX Thameslink vertical clearance is a big issue - what was sold as a like for like replacement is anything but as to using two locos - more than two required to gain brake force possibly and with only class 73 permitted only one is readily available 73 202 usually lurking at Battersea Stewarts Lane
|
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Dec 1, 2017 13:03:22 GMT
although the gradient at Farringdon may indeed be 1 in 30, it's not very long - probably less than a 12 car train - (A 12-car train is about 240 metres long - at 1 in 30 that's a vertical distance of 8 metres: how much is the vertical separation in the diveunder at Farringdon? Lookiug at it on Google Earth, the distance from the platform end to the point where the Thameslink lines dive under the Circle Line looks to be about half the length of the station itself, suggesting that the ramp is only about six cars to eight cars (120m - 160m) long. (At 1 in 30 that's a height gain of four or five metres, which seems about right). So only half to two-thirds of a twelve-car train would be on the gradient at any given time. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 26, 2018 12:29:31 GMT
As the first small step towards that larger network of Thamelink services the very first passenger services ran through the Canal Tunnels this morning. They link the Great Northern route to the Thameslink core and are also the first scheduled / advertised trains to stop at London Bridge platforms 4 and 5. I know other TL services have been calling at London Bridge in recent days but they have not been advertised to the public. Seems the lucky passengers were given Thameslink branded cup cakes for their ride through the new link. |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Feb 26, 2018 13:53:35 GMT
I got a cake too! (On the Brighton-Cambridge service - the third through the Canal Tunnel)
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 26, 2018 17:11:46 GMT
I took the somewhat delayed 1429 from Finsbury Park to New X Gate. The train was running 15 late from Peterborough. The GTR staff bearing cakes and leaflets duly turned up just before the train. All in all a little uneventful once on the move which is what you'd ideally want. Nice smooth run down from FP and into the tunnels with no delays. Obviously a lot of people alighted at St Pancras and not many boarded. As the cakes were being walked through the poor chap handing them out was berated by a passenger whose train had been told to run fast so he missed the train as it zoomed through where he was waiting. Based on his comments this seems to be standard practice. We got through the core OK but were held just outside London Bridge. Looking at realtimetrains it seems we were right behind the 1502 to Brighton. On arrival a decent number of people boarded the train as it clearly replaces a normal Horsham train. Once we left the 700 moved at a very decent pace and went over and through the flyover very smartly. I got off at NXG where 1/3 of the train was hanging off the end of the platform. It was my first ride on a 700. Not impressed with the legroom or footwell intrusion at a window seat. While I didn't find the seat agonising it wasn't exactly comfortable either. The trains themselves are very smooth, quiet and fast where the line speed allows. Oh and the cake was decent - just ate it while composing this.  |
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Feb 27, 2018 0:03:59 GMT
Yes Siemens have built some nice trains, its the seating and general internal layout which is the problem. For instance, did anyone have a table near to them so that they could put the cake down? Tables can come in forms other than drop down (from seat in front), such as window ledge.
|
|
|
|
Post by phil on Feb 27, 2018 18:18:41 GMT
Yes Siemens have built some nice trains, its the seating and general internal layout which is the problem. For instance, did anyone have a table near to them so that they could put the cake down? Tables can come in forms other than drop down (from seat in front), such as window ledge. Tables are one of the things that Govia wanted to fit but the 'variation order' Siemens would have been able to charge the DfT - who (in case folk have forgotten) actually ordered and specified every single detail of the 700s themselves, would have been excessive. However there are rumours that if Govia were to put in a bid for the standalone Thameslink franchise (when the mega TSGN franchise gets broken up in a couple of years time), enhancements like tables and things like power points so customers can charge their mobile devices would be feature of said bid |
|
|
|
Post by melikepie on Feb 27, 2018 19:30:58 GMT
Has a new Thameslink or Great Northern timetable been introduced to show these new services or were they just one offs until the new services are introduced?
|
|
|
|
Post by 35b on Feb 27, 2018 20:22:58 GMT
Yes Siemens have built some nice trains, its the seating and general internal layout which is the problem. For instance, did anyone have a table near to them so that they could put the cake down? Tables can come in forms other than drop down (from seat in front), such as window ledge. Tables are one of the things that Govia wanted to fit but the 'variation order' Siemens would have been able to charge the DfT - who (in case folk have forgotten) actually ordered and specified every single detail of the 700s themselves, would have been excessive. However there are rumours that if Govia were to put in a bid for the standalone Thameslink franchise (when the mega TSGN franchise gets broken up in a couple of years time), enhancements like tables and things like power points so customers can charge their mobile devices would be feature of said bid My understanding is that variations have been agreed, and tables and WiFi are being installed. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 27, 2018 21:03:21 GMT
Has a new Thameslink or Great Northern timetable been introduced to show these new services or were they just one offs until the new services are introduced? They are just a few small additional through services fitted around the existing timetable. The next substantive timetable change will be in May when a lot of services north and south of the Thames are changed / retimed to fit in around the restructured Thameslink network. The times of the additional trains are accessible from this page. www.thameslinkrailway.com/travel-information/plan-your-journey/thameslink-services-to-new-destinations |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Mar 21, 2018 13:58:23 GMT
Hopefully this is a reasonably appropriate place to put the following Mayor's Q and A relating to Thameslink being on the Tube Map. I have looked at other threads to see if one was better suited but couldn't (quickly) find one.
The Q and A relate to the placement of the Thameslink service on the Tube Map. Interesting to note the distinguishing factors as to what appears on the tube map and what does not.
|
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Mar 21, 2018 14:14:19 GMT
What do they define as a “turn up and go” service?
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,400
|
Post by Chris M on Mar 21, 2018 14:17:10 GMT
Most of the Underground and not all of the overground is a turn-up-and-go service for customers with accessibility needs.
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Mar 21, 2018 14:34:30 GMT
What do they define as a “turn up and go” service? I believe that "turn up and go", in the context of accessibility, means a service where someone who needs to use a wheelchair does not have to phone for assistance to be arranged prior to travelling. In other words, assuming the passenger can get from street to platform via ramps / lifts / level access, there will be a member of staff available to deploy a boarding ramp at origin, interchange and destination stations. TfL offer this on the basis that staff are in place on platforms to provide said assistance. I have to say that I don't see how that could be achieved at Blackhorse Road Overground because there is usually only one LO member of staff at platform level and trains arrive at both platforms simultaneously. If a wheelchair passengers was at each platform then one train would have to be delayed to allow the staff member to move between platforms. I also have no idea how / if it is achieved with the Romford - Upminster line at Emerson Park. tfl.gov.uk/transport-accessibility/help-from-staffIn the more general context "turn up and go" usually refers to a bus, tube or rail service which runs at least every 15 minutes. Clearly a lot of the tube network meets this criteria as does the DLR and parts of the Overground network. There is much more frequency variation on the bus network for a lot of well understood reasons but, of course, every bus is accessible and has been for around a decade (barring the Heritage routemaster service on route 15 - just before anyone corrects me!  ) |
|
)
