Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2009 15:33:42 GMT
Running through services SLL/ELL, as is already under construction, is much more useful. Extending tube lines into the suburbs will help - Take an example of an extension of the Victoria Line towards Croydon - many of the people using the extended tube line will have previously changed from the Southern to the tube at Victoria, so the extension will reduce congestion at Victoria, without having such a large increase in passengers on the Tube as you might suppose. I understand your point here, but the Victoria simply can't cope with any increase in passenger numbers until the Chelney is built. I think it functions well as a 'real' inner-city metro system. The Bakerloo and Northern Line Bank branch have much more capacity to spare and could also receive a higher increase in frequency. Both also terminate closer to the city centre than the Victoria, so it makes sense to extend those. The only 'problem' for the Northern is the proposed extension south-westwards to Battersea, which would be the wrong direction for Croydon. |
|
|
|
Post by amershamsi on Feb 9, 2009 16:14:07 GMT
Extending "congested" tube lines into the suburbs will help - Take an example of an extension of the Victoria Line towards Croydon - many of the people using the extended tube line will have previously changed from the Southern to the tube at Victoria, so the extension will reduce congestion at Victoria, without having such a large increase in passengers on the Tube as you might suppose. Rather than the Victoria, the Charing X branch makes more sense, as it definitely has the capacity. I think a Kennington - Camberwell - Denmark Hill - Herne Hill - Streatham Hill route would be best (with the Victoria extended to Herne Hill), though Kennington - Camberwell - Brixton - Streatham Hill would be a bit shorter.I don't see how it would reduce pressure on Charing Cross unless it took over a SErn route or two. All the other termini are jammed, so you can't remove trains from Charing Cross (unless you remove them from NR) and Borough Market Junction will be sorted way before the Bakerloo could be extended - even if they had the plans, money and will to do it. |
|
|
|
Post by max on Feb 9, 2009 17:12:55 GMT
The Victoria Line goes all the way out t the edge of Zone 3, so at the very least the equivalent in South London would be Streatham. With its sparser stations compared with the other lines (e.g. Stockwell to TCR, six intermediate stops Northern, Stockwell to Oxford Circus, four intermediate stops Victoria) the Victoria Line is actually a better candidate for long-distance extension once capacity issues were resolved. If only it had been buit to surface line standards.
Actually, if you compare journey times on the TfL website, even for a journey such as Walthamstow Central to Bank in the morning rush hour, there is not a lot in it whether you go by Victoria Line, or into Liverpool Street. Its those slow NR trains again.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2009 19:04:00 GMT
The Victoria line is incredibly fast at just 35 minutes for 21 km and 17 stations, so 36 km/h including stops. It's one of the many reasons it's so popular. Any capacity increase it gets will quickly be met again, I'm sure. For example, I take the Northern line to work even though the Victoria would make my commute slightly faster; but I choose to avoid it because it's so crowded. If the Viccy got more capacity I would switch to it.
So I still think the idea of extending the Bakerloo is the most feasible one here. If the Northern does go to Battersea, going from there to Clapham Junction would be relatively easy; from there it could possibly still go to Croydon.
|
|
|
|
Post by DrOne on Feb 9, 2009 20:06:04 GMT
Railways in South London have always been pretty miserable, with complicated everywhere-to-everywhere-else timetables that put off the general public, and really slow journeys. Compare Wimbledon to Blackfriars by District Line and by Thameslink, useless. Give me D Stock over a Class 455 any time. I think it's pretty easy to navigate the southeastern and SWT suburban lines as most run through London Bridge and Waterloo respectively. It's the bit of south London in between that's more tricky. Wimbledon-Blackfriars is five minutes longer on the District than by Thameslink. Granted the D stock refurbs are a lot nicer than some of the 319s and Southern 455s. Wimbledon-Bank, however is easily won by SWT (on both frequency and speed) and their 455s are just as nice as D stock. |
|
|
|
Post by max on Feb 10, 2009 7:31:31 GMT
Not according to the timetables and the TfL website:
Thameslink: Wimbledon 07:58, Blackfriars 08:38 [40 minutes]
District: Wimbledon 08:01, Blackfriars 08:36 [35 minutes]
Wimbledon to Bank by SWT? No thanks:
SWT/W&C: Wimbledon 08:02, Bank: 08:35 [33 minutes]
Northern: South Wimbledon 08:01, Bank 08:32 [31 minutes]
And I get to queue at the barriers at Waterloo and squeeze onto the W&C
This is one of my other points about railways in London, not only are line speeds rubbish, but the terminal penalty is often so great that you are better off on a slow Underground train if you don't need to change. If travelling from the extremities, the chance of getting a seat is better.
[Extrapolate those times south a bit, and you can see why the Wimbledon-Sutton line was a miserable failure. Bus to Morden would always be faster]
I'm not talking about how pretty or comfortable for D stock versus 455, thats just cosmetic and can easily be changed. Class 455 has even less door space than D stock, and has all its motors on one car. Its acceleration and loading time is terrible.
|
|
|
|
Post by cetacean on Feb 10, 2009 10:31:16 GMT
Wimbledon-Blackfriars is normally 32 minutes. It appears it's just that one train (which, I admit, is important, given its timing) that takes longer.
The journey planner is allowing 10 minutes to change at Waterloo, which is ridiculous. I reckon you could reliably do that run in 25 minutes. An calling the W&C a squeeze when you're advocating spending an hour a day* on the bloody Northern Line is a bit much.
(* all in tunnel as well, which I can't even begin to imagine doing every day)
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282 
|
Post by Ben on Feb 10, 2009 16:10:39 GMT
How bout this for the northern:
Do the Battersea route, continue to Clapham Junction, follow the mainline underground to wimbledon (replacing the station at Earlsfield) and take over the sutton loop south. With of course a junction with the...other northern...at Morden south.
|
|
|
|
Post by amershamsi on Feb 10, 2009 22:41:35 GMT
The Victoria Line goes all the way out t the edge of Zone 3, so at the very least the equivalent in South London would be Streatham. With its sparser stations compared with the other lines (e.g. Stockwell to TCR, six intermediate stops Northern, Stockwell to Oxford Circus, four intermediate stops Victoria) the Victoria Line is actually a better candidate for long-distance extension once capacity issues were resolved. If only it had been buit to surface line standards. But Kennington-Waterloo is rather long, and a new line wouldn't have the high frequency of stations that the CSLR has. Even if you have Camberwell and Denmark Hill stops en route on the Northern line, Herne Hill to Central line means getting off at the 7th Victoria Line stop or the 8th Northern line stop - there's not much in it (Embankment and Charing Cross both existing is the problem). To Euston, Goodge Street means that you are +2 stations on the Northern. If you go Kennington-Brixton-Streatham then you could make it +1 station on the Victoria (to the Central, neutral for Euston), or serving Camberwell en-route to give neutral station difference (to the Central, +1 for Euston). |
|
|
|
Post by max on Feb 11, 2009 7:42:27 GMT
You are missing the point. I am not making recommendations for specific journeys.
Comapred with LU, average speeds on Network Rail lines in London, and LO lines are absolutely dreadful. Until something is done about them, all-stations Underground services are surprisingly competitive, especially when terminal time is taken into account.
I could have picked others. For example, much derided Epping to London is actually a very competitive journey timewise compared with, for example, Brentwood to London or Hayes (Kent) to London. Its only a comparatively few places which get proper fast trains to London that offer good times.
For most of the rest of the suburban stations, they are stuck with pretty third-rate services.
Should something be done about this problem?
Can something be done about this problem?
|
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Feb 12, 2009 10:16:08 GMT
Wimbledon-Blackfriars is five minutes longer on the District than by Thameslink. Wimbledon-Bank, however is easily won by SWT (on both frequency and speed) As a frequent user of all three routes, I should point out that you will not get a seat on the SWT route and the W&C in the morning is hellish - you often have to let two or even three trains go before you can even get on the platform. As for Thameslink, you have to allow for the fact that there are only two trains per hour, and that running information at Wimbledon relies on SWT (for whom information even on their own services leaves much to be desired) . Despite being responsible for all eight platforms, they deny any knowledge of the other four operators there. There are no buses from Waterloo to the Blackfriars area - the nearest ones take a circuitous route via the Aldwych to Ludgate Circus. So - if I haven't got a seat by the time I get to Wimbledon, I bale out and take the District. Otherwise, I stay on to Waterloo and take the quickest way to Blackfriars from there - which is to walk. |
|
|
|
Post by dazz285 on Feb 12, 2009 11:22:41 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by DrOne on Feb 12, 2009 12:12:01 GMT
Glad to read that, thanks!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2009 16:53:56 GMT
Hooray! This'll make my monthly trips to Limehouse from Peckham Rye much easier. To say nothing of how helpful it'll be if I get the job I've applied for in Feltham!
|
|
|
|
Post by mikebuzz on Jun 5, 2009 20:02:19 GMT
I was thinking of a connection off the South Bermondsey line to face New Cross. Now looking at Google Maps, diverge off near Bolina Road, back of Millwall... Failing that, there is an old trackbed next to Ilderton Road/Hornshay Street, run that into New Cross Gate near Coldblow Lane... I agree SLL needs more than 4 tph. I would prefer the line diverges west of South Bermondsey under the SE lines (with the old station reopened - Southwark Park?) then on to canary wharf and Canning town, taeks over the JLE to Stratford and the JLE is extended from North Greenwich to Kidbrooke via Westcombe park. |
|
