h&c line

I think for three reasons:

a) Before the Circle line was extended it was the only line to run from Edgware Road - Hammersmith, and they didn't want to take away the H+C line when it was extended (as one of the benefits of the 'new' circle was more trains along that section)
b) It's always nice to get from Liverpool Street (excluding Central)/Kings Cross/Euston/Baker St/Paddington to the East without getting off at Tower Hill facing the wrong direction and changing to a District going in the right direction.
c) With less H+C trains there would be more Circle trains, and on the bottom half of the line there would be a million problems slotting these extra trains between the District trains.

Don't forget the 'Circle' is not a specific line, but a service that borrows the H+C and District tracks operationally IIRC (at least operationally)

Maybe they could have circle line trains running from barking via tower hill and then back to barking via Aldagate East as well as the current Hammersmith trains. I know the Circle shares lines with the District and Met Lines but I'm sure this could be worked in.

I just think though that making these changes would make so much more sense.

So are we suggesting removing the name or the service pattern? if it's the latter than I believe their is an underestimate of how many people wish to travel through to East London. You'd have to look at the Central & District and see if they could carry the extra passengers, especially in the peak.

There are operational benefits as well (IMHO) a problem at a location means you can still continue to operate a service, albeit at a reduced frequency.

If we're talking about the name, well you couldn't use CIRCLE as people still find it difficult to fully appreciate that the CIRCLE is no longer such a shape and will need to change at Edgware Road to make it a circle. If we're making suggestions, colour it purple and call it the Metropolitan Line.

Simples ;D

How retro! ;D

Well you have to ask, why does the circle exist as a seperate entity these days? It's been over a year since it was 'extended', and as reluctant as I am to admit it it's doing much better as a result.

But back to my original point, why do we have a seperate circle line, when the moniker of Hammersmith and City would adequately describe what remains? The two lines are 'combined' internally to LU, with the same drivers and manager and so forth... Yes they're two seperate services but the Wimblewares are still District Line trains, in what way is their relationship to the 'main' district line different to the relationship between the H&C Mainline and the Circle remnant?

Ok so you'll have to spend a few £££ re repainting some of the stations to match the inevitable change of line colour. And I guess there's the re reducation of the punters that some H&C trains are really Circles. but perhaps a slight tweak of the name to Hammersmith and Circle would suffice there? Then it's just a quick redraw of the tube map (which seems to happen every few days at the moment) and bobs your uncle, one less line on the underground.

A Hammersmith - Barking via the Circle sounds intriguing, but it puts too many trains across Baker Street Jn. Of course, if you terminated all the Mets at Baker Street then you could be on to something.... Although I guess that just shifts the problems to Aldgate East / Praed Street.

It may not be the most sensible idea, but perhaps its relative benefits do need researching...

Any idea how they obtained those figures? Not questioning it, just intrigued!

Passenger numbers is not necessarily a good indicator of use. A better comparison would be passengers per mile or passengers per hour and this would depend on such factors as time of day/week or even year. A good example is the W&C, in passenger numbers alone it is probably the lowest but add in the other factors and it is probably one of the busiest.

In Oslo the underground routes are numbered 1-6, tram routes 11, 12, 13, 17, 18 and 19. Bus routes start at 20. With this system there is space for more routes of both kinds, and there is no confusion between the systems. Obviously this could be a problem in London where most of the numbers already are in use

Exactly. This is why the Northern line isn't the busiest line as although it gets the most users per annum, we have to take into account that it is a very long and complex line. The Victoria line is the busiest line.

Nice to see the Met' propping up the table!

There was a map on one of the notice boards a while ago showing passenger volume during the peaks and if memory serves the busiest stretch was between Liverpool Street and Holborn on the Central. I’ll see if I can find it when I’m at work today.

a line such as the met is going to be carrying people over a much longer distance than a line such as the circle.

Wasn't there also an era when the highest peak passenger volume was on the Bakerloo between Baker St and Oxford Circus--especially during the pre-Jubilee era?