New Met Timetable Commencing 11th Dec 2011

"Pinner resident Anthony Wood, chairman of The Federation of Metropolitan Line Users' Committees and chairman of Harrow Public Transport Users' Committee, said: "We're happy for Met line trains to stop there in an emergency or when the Jubilee line is closed but we are not in favour of a permanent stop at Willesden Green.
"It would mean a worse service for longer distances passengers"
Bit of double standards going on there. Look after no.1 ;D ;D

Anthony Wood, chairman of The Federation of Metropolitan Line Users' Committees and chairman of Harrow Public Transport Users' Committee" - Proving that, - "the longer the title, the less important the job"

Willesden Junction? Who got that wrong?

Not the objective at all. Nobody is forcing anyone to switch services.

Not only will we still be running fast services in the peak, off peak our services don't actually take that much longer, and many more are direct to the city without the need to change at Baker Street. I can tell you now, that Chiltern services won't remain as "fast" as they are at present for much longer. Changes are on their way...

I'm sure I've probably said that several times now. Someone pass me a brick wall upon which to bang my head.

Every Met station with the exception of Watford and Croxley (for now) will now have a regular all-day direct service to Aldgate. We cannot run the old fast services all day and provide increased direct trains to Aldgate, so we've had to strike a compromise.

I don't recall them upgrading their line between Harrow and Amersham.

Their services may not be slowed in the infrastructure / speed limit sense. And I don't really wish to kick off another big debate - even if I may have sown a seed. Speed is one thing, reliability is another. You'll appreciate the fact that I can't go into too much detail at this time.

But doing that now would take it away from the TfL stop everywhere, make it simple, sytle they so seem to be in love with. As I said previously, why not just plain line the Harrow North Junction and be done with it. Then the map creators wouldn't have these problematic fast lines to deal with.

Is there anything in the notion that Mr. Hurd's support for more trains to Pinner has everything to do with getting in with his newly-gained (through boundary changes) constituents in Pinner?

From Chilterns perspective, the main line is their new cash cow and priority. If anything, the Aylesbury service is going to have to fit around the mainline service, and so now the tough call is how to slot this in at the London end at Neasden Jn and then in with the met at HArrow and Watford S Jns. . Without seeing the WTT's I guess this is becoming more of a headache. I wouldnt be surprised if that was a reason behing any deceleration of the Aylesbury via HArrow service.

Simom11 asks "Instead of this being politically driven, shouldn't the timetable requirements be modelled around the demand?", but surely this is heresy, giving pax what they want. If "those who politically drive" and control costs, gave in to this sort of idea, they would have to build a Park Royal interchange, and divert 50% of the W Ruislip Central Lines to Uxbridge via Ickenham, whilst Uxbridge Piccs would only run to Rayners & Ruislip.

Because planners only plan for the afternoon and not for tomorrow, this has become more difficult because these are the very same "planners" who:

1 Built the M25 over the railway (W Drayton to Staines) that once ran round the back of Heathrow rather than create a through route from Staines S.R. station

2 Didn't build the M25 until 20 years too late on the basis that "people wouldn't want to go around London, only into it"

3 Built the southern end of the M1 with just 2 lanes as they didn't see the traffic demand for it

4 Closed the Ongar branch as they refused to see the demand for a Parkway with the M11

5 Didn't extend the Picc to Heathrow until land and building costs became prohibitively expesive, both outside the airport and within it

etc, etc


No, NEVER give in to pax demands, or they'll abolish all the politically available bungs.

I'm not sure the centeral line to uxbridge will be viable.

I agree that usage at West Ruislip is low ( With nearby Ickenham station), and I would assume this station would have to be closed but another problem is can Uxbridge station cope with the additional trains?

They would either have to create a new platform, fairly expensive or turn around more Picadilly trains at Rayners Lane or Ruislip.

Another problem would be signalling.

Being someone who lives in Chorleywood, and takes the train to Northwick Park, or Pinner quite a lot, I welcome this change! Too many times have I been caught out when changing trains at Moor Park, even some times falling down the stairs and hurting my legs!

Castlebar - Demand based services.... oooh, sounds like another perfect entry point for Beeching. Thing is though it works both ways; if TfL hadn't taken over Silverlink, would any other opperator have seen the potential to raise frequence and wait for demand to skyrocket?

Having said that, the saturation point for rail services in general now must be far far ahead of even the most bright-eyed of planners...

Simon11 - West Ruislip wouldn't necessarily have to close, in fact it would almost certainly be kept because of the aditional terminal arrangements it would provide, the fact it would help alieviate performance polution, and more importantly the relationship it has with the depot.
Ignoring overlaying the two signalling systems (possible...), Uxbridge could manage a few more tph, even more if the Pics service was thinned out more at Rayners and Ruislip.

Ben

Don't start me off on Beeching again. Read my previos blogs. Beeching was appointed by the completely corrupt Tory Transport Minister (Marples, -see wiki and my previous etc), and the whole thing is compatible with a 3rd world banana dictatorship.

But you are right again in that pax demand is now increasing. No more could there ever be talk of a Marylebone express coachway and coach park with the Met taking all rail traffic. Politicians have been forced to move on from that potty idea. Again, as somebody else said, there was money to be made, (a vast amount of it), from the office build that would have been above the proposed "new Marylebone coach station".

and you thought the last timetable was bad....

Until you read this one which is even worse..