|
Post by elo10538 on Sept 27, 2011 22:47:03 GMT
In the latest edition of the bi-weekly Rail Magazine, Chris Green writes in an article, that his first job when taking over running Network South East, was to close Marylebone and divert the service to Baker Street. With Chiltern now running it's own Inter-City service we could have had Baker Street to Moor Street or even Snow Hill, in Birmingham.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2011 23:47:49 GMT
Had the mentality of that age continued you'd be lucky to be left with Baker Street to Wembley Park. Marylebone was proposed to be bulldozed and the trackbed converted to a bus way. As for Birmingham, the home of the urban motorway, Snow Hill had to come back from the dead and Moor Street almost.
The same era that produced single leaf D stock and '83 stock.
How times change, Neasden Junction has just been relaid to allow 75mph running, previously 40mph.
|
|
|
Post by redsetter on Sept 28, 2011 2:08:19 GMT
chiltern now have the new mainline 100mph banbury service that could be termed inter city.from reading a previous thread it was mentioned that those services from the midlands would have terminated at paddington,it was also mentioned that the aylesbury service would finish at baker street but it was thought that the station could not cope with the demand.
|
|
|
Post by Harsig on Sept 28, 2011 8:50:25 GMT
In the latest edition of the bi-weekly Rail Magazine, Chris Green writes in an article, that his first job when taking over running Network South East, was to close Marylebone and divert the service to Baker Street. With Chiltern now running it's own Inter-City service we could have had Baker Street to Moor Street or even Snow Hill, in Birmingham. I suspect that it is a bit fanciful to suggest that, had Marylebone closed there would today have been a service from Baker Street to Birmingham. I've always been under the impression that the Marylebone closure proposal would have seen High Wycombe line trains diverted to Paddington, with only the Aylebury via Amersham route being diverted to Baker Street, or more likely just the passengers diverted, by forcing them to change to the Met at some point en-route. The line between Northolt Junction and Neasden South Junction and its stations would have been closed completely. Thus any resurgence of Birmingham trains via High Wycombe would originate from Paddington, which is of course the station they traditionally ran from.
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Sept 28, 2011 8:56:06 GMT
beck is quite correct.
Only a very few weeks ago, I wrote some articles about this on another thread, > it was to do with this, Beeching's relationship with Marples, the closure of the Great Central etc., but l'm afraid I don't have the time to find those threads now.
There was NEVER any possibility of main line services to Baker St. The idea as beck says was to turn the Amersham route into a "high speed bus (only) way", with the Ruislip, Denham and beyond services all being diverted to Paddington. This would have meant re-vivifying the Ruislip-Paddington section a bit, but the ultimate goal was to complete the closure of the G.C. all the way to Marylebone and "redevelop" the site for the profit of property developers. The whole thing smacks of corruption and l would recommend a read of my previous threads if you can find them.
Sorry, but must go now.
|
|
slugabed
Zu lang am schnuller.
Posts: 1,480
|
Post by slugabed on Sept 28, 2011 9:07:33 GMT
It's a long time ago,but I recall the plan being to convert the GC tracks from the North Circular at Neasden on to a bus terminal near Marylebone Rd as the two-lane express busway. Aylesbury via Amersham services given back to the Met and Banbury (then the "end of the line" for Marylebone trains)/Aylesbury via High Wycombe all to originate from Paddington. It was thought that the stations between Northolt-jct and Neasden S-jct (which only had a peak-hour service anyway) could easily be closed as there were alternative transport links available. Glad it never happened! It was the tail-end of a grander "rail-into-road" conversion lunacy of the 80s,which also proposed a motorway into Waterloo along the viaduct.This got short shrift,but the Marylebone busway hung around as a plan for a bit longer. Given the effective retention of Marylebone as a bus terminal,it's hard to see the advantage of the plan over the railway,apart from relieving Finchley Rd of its Coach traffic....but practicality wasn't really the issue,and the plan must be seen in the context of the irrational hatred of railways endemic in the Thatcher government. Thatcher,it is said,proudly stated that she never rode a BR train during her whole time as Prime Minister. Mind you,she also said that any man still riding a bus after the age of 26 could count himself a failure in life....but that's another story...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2011 18:55:44 GMT
There were some maniac ideas - some suggested by the less than dynamic and "personable" Lance Ibbotson - one time GM at Waterloo to convert other lines to roads such as the present WLL to Clapham.
Whilst these ideas were never taken seriously (thank goodness) - other academic planners realised that rail could play a major part , leading to innovations like Thameslink in the mid- late 1980's - now planned for 24 tph !
Padington could have handled the traffic in those days - not now though ! - Met Line traffic increases helped save Marylebone.
|
|
roythebus
Pleased to say the restoration of BEA coach MLL738 is as complete as it can be, now restoring MLL721
Posts: 1,275
|
Post by roythebus on Sept 29, 2011 18:41:33 GMT
Some interesting hypotheses there. One of the things the government of the day quickly discovered was that you simply can't pass 2 road coaches through a double track railway tunnel without a serious risk of collision. As for 2 double deckers, forget it! Hence, going slightly off-topic, we have the great Cambridge mis-guided busway.
As for turning Waterloo into a coach station, think of all the coach driver jobs that would have been created; the chaos that would have happened at Richmond when they all leave the busway and join the Chertsey Road...
Remember, it was Thatcher who closed Acton Works, Chiswick Works et al. It was also one Mr. D. Thatcher who was a principal shareholder in the company that boughtChiswick works. Vested interest?
|
|
|
Post by redsetter on Sept 29, 2011 22:54:03 GMT
Thatcher government. Thatcher,it is said,proudly stated that she never rode a BR train during her whole time as Prime Minister. Mind you,she also said that any man still riding a bus after the age of 26 could count himself a failure in life....but that's another story... disgraceful attitude,this is where all the problems stem from and the attitudes as well that have lead us into societies problems.
|
|
slugabed
Zu lang am schnuller.
Posts: 1,480
|
Post by slugabed on Sept 30, 2011 7:29:14 GMT
Thatcher government. Thatcher,it is said,proudly stated that she never rode a BR train during her whole time as Prime Minister. Mind you,she also said that any man still riding a bus after the age of 26 could count himself a failure in life....but that's another story... disgraceful attitude,this is where all the problems stem from and the attitudes as well that have lead us into societies problems. I agree with you entirely,Redsetter...but as Castlebar has pointed out elsewhere,these attitudes pre-date Thatcher in government circles,although she was most publicly associated with them.
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Sept 30, 2011 8:28:55 GMT
Thank you slugabed
Yes, my articles were on the "Chiltern and Metropolitan Railway" thread around pages 6/7. The anti-railway brigade of the Conservative Party (a.k.a. "The Road Lobby" - and what a powerful lobby it was with political donations) preceded Thatcher by a whole generation. Particularly the Eden & Macmillan governments. It was a on a knife edge that Marylebone survived at all. The corruption was unbelievable (see my article re Marples), and by the 60s, all the central London "bomb sites" had gone so the magnificent structure of Marylebone with it's wonderful location was THE target for new concrete "offices". If my late uncle's memoirs could have been published at the time, the Tory party would imploded, but he was bound by the Official Secrets Act. He only gave me the info verbally, but as he died before the Millenium, l thought it time to share some of what he told me.
Only when all the central London and West End prime sites were gone did serious attention turn to anywhere east of Liverpool Street/Aldgate and Docklands, where more fortunes were made.
|
|
slugabed
Zu lang am schnuller.
Posts: 1,480
|
Post by slugabed on Sept 30, 2011 8:46:23 GMT
It's always good to hear things that you always suspected,confirmed as true from a variety of sources,years later. I grew up in the 70s and 80s wondering about the vandalism of the railways and the contrast between the Modernisation Plan and the commissioning of the Beeching report only a few years later. Sometimes it is quite simply down to a few personalities and their weaknesses....but their decisions can blight a country for generations. During the late fifties,the esablishment embraced roads and thenceforth have regarded railways as a nuisance only to be tolerated at best. This was almost certainly,I realise now,to a great extent due to the enormous Construction lobby at work (Marples/McAlpine/Bovis),pushing at an open door in the Government....and,as the film "How to get ahead in advertising" written by Bruce Robinson points out....the Establishment hate the railways because they are ALREADY THERE and so what's to build? where's the profit? Where are the new jobs to announce? We all know how one-sided and short-sighted this is,but it makes perfect sense to the construction lobby and a Civil Service trained to think along such lines for the last fifty-odd years. It'll take a good few years yet,to expunge such attitudes....
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Sept 30, 2011 9:03:30 GMT
Yes, slugabed
One of the reasons given AT THAT TIME for the closure of Marylebone was that "the building was unsuitable for offices". The building site itself was THE ultimate target of these people. So the track was to become a dedicated bus/coachway and "lovely new offices, suitable for the modern age" above a coach station would have made £Millions for a very few. Is Victoria coach station the model for what so nearly happened??
|
|
pitdiver
No longer gainfully employed
Posts: 439
|
Post by pitdiver on Sept 30, 2011 9:36:25 GMT
I am glad Marylebone didn't become a coach station perhaps part of TfL. They may have based the design on VCS. This as a coach station is an absolute disaster. No way can it cope with the number of passengers that travel by coach from there each day. An accident waiting to happen perhaps.
How on earth will it cope with next years influx of Olympic visitors
Come to think of it how will London cope. I myself will be going to the remotest part of Norfolk for two weeks sailing.
I know this is slightly of thread but is there a discussion going on about Olympic travel and how LUL will cope.
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Sept 30, 2011 10:00:09 GMT
@ pitdiver
Exactly, "Marylebone Coach Station" with it's dedicated express bus/coachway to near the M1 & A/M40 was to take pressure off Victoria C.S., which would then specifically handle coaches from S. & S.W. of the Thames, Sussex and Kent leaving Marylebone to handle much of the rest. It was aimed at taking the traffic from Metroland. I doubt very much if the Met would have survived to Rickmanswoth. Beyond Rickmansworth, - NO chance.
One of the "selling points" was that coaches would not have needed to cross central London in order to access a coach station (Victoria) and they tried to sell it as a way of easing congestion in the West End!!
|
|
pitdiver
No longer gainfully employed
Posts: 439
|
Post by pitdiver on Sept 30, 2011 10:40:59 GMT
I know this is not the place to discuss Victoria Coach Station but as we are talking about transport in London I didn't think a brief mention wouldn't go amiss. Although I worked on LUL for 10 years then another six at the LTM. I have vey limited knowledge of the Bakerloo line including Marylebone. However I have used it once to travel to London from Wembley and found it to be quite a good station.
I think the plan that was mooted a few years ago about having Satellite coach stations around London so there would not be any need to cross London may have worked. This would have no doubt increased the loadings on other transport modes. I think TfL would love to dispose of VCS. Think of how much money they could get for all that prime Belgravia land.
Enough of this. Let the Met go back to Aylesbury
BTW I worked for for National Express for five and half years on the coach side so I have some knowledge of that company
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2011 15:48:31 GMT
It works at Golders Green where coaches call in on their way to/from the north, also at Hammersmith for the south coast. That avoids the passengers having to go into London and back out. For example, we have friends in Bournemouth and it's easier for us to get the NatEx coach at Hammersmith, as we can get there by Piccadilly line from west London.
Trouble is, people expect a decent bus station these days, rather than a layby as at Hammersmith, so space would have to be found for these. Also connections wouldn't be so easy if passengers had to cross London by tube from one terminal to another rather than changing at VCS.
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Oct 9, 2011 16:39:36 GMT
@ dalesman
Actually, it doesn't work at Golders Green, 'cos l fear you are missing the point. At Golders Green, there are LU (only) rail services through London and out to the suburbs, (both N & S). The Marylebone idea was to have NO rail access at all, but for the Bakerloo, as the Chiltern Line would be ripped up, with a dedicated bus/coachway bringing in passengers to central London on the covering tarmac, these passengers currently travel by rail.
Golders Green was a historic coach stop since the ealiest days of motor coaches, Green Line coaches brought people in to Golders Green for the Undergrond connection. Golders Green coach station has not involved the complete closure of a railway. But also, there are other pick up points on all the major coach routes out of London. People rarely use them. This plan was to rip up what remains of the G.C. (now a.k.a. "Chiltern"), completely out of existence. The Met would be overwhelmed. Do you want coachways and dedicated busways instead of rail, with the rail tracks concreted over? That is what so nearly happened at Baker Street
|
|