Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2015 18:37:27 GMT
Can someone explain who has paid for the work done at Walthamstow Central, When I first saw what the contracters were doing i.e. the cage I thought it would have been better to have redirected the staircase from the lower level on the Selbourne Road side straight up into the N/R booking hall and then through the new gates onto the platform or out into Selbourne Road instead of the dog-leg right turn onto the Chingford platform as it is now. When the side of the booking hall was removed I thought this would be an ideal opportunity to create this link. Instead two glass panels were put in for no apparent reason. likewise I think a wall could have been removed in the old booking hall (I know it is a listed building) so that passengers could go through the gates straight onto the down staircase instead of going out into the street. Regarding widening of the subway link to the bus station. The original work cost thousands and I believe that it goes under water pipes, (constant water leaks) hence the extra drop and short staircase at one end. Because the gates are at the top of the escalators, at the moment you can walk from the bus station through the subway, come out on the other side and walk down to Queens Road Station without showing a ticket. so I think easier access and exit in the way I described would be the best solution.
|
|
|
Post by pridley on May 30, 2015 18:57:19 GMT
LO, NR Contractors and TfL staff out today getting as much 'stickering' of station names done as possible and putting up a few new timetable and information posters and maps. New timetable booklets available too. This is just to let people know that TfL has arrived! But awful lot to do and expectations need to be carefully managed! I cannot contain myself with excitement. Following missing out on the North London Line boom in Hackney that I could have joined a decade ago when I first moved to London, I decided to buy our first house along the West Anglia line. We are awaiting the first trendy cafe / bakery / craft ale bar in Edmonton. Awaiting artists to move into the warehouses and offices along the Lea Valley after them being priced out of Hackney Wick and now even Tottenham Hale. Nobody is here yet, but then most folk follow rather than lead. However, there is also a buzz on southern parts of the West Anglia Line. Shoreditch nightlife appears to be shifting rapidly into arches between Bethnal Green and Cambridge Heath and a new fringe theater just opened at Stoke Newington, and so areas around these new stations will rapidly tranform. My mind boggles thinking about how London Fields will become once on the tube map. It is already completely at capacity at weekends with crowds of locals. Just imagine what happens when folk pop down from other parts of town. So my mind shifts onto where folk will move onto. I also expect that what happened the last couple of years in Chatsworth Road will start to flow along to gentrify the area around Clapton tube, where we will see a thriving high street develop for years to come. I also expect very soon, certainly once White Hart Lane is built out and STAR services are online, with Meridian Water on the go, to see developers crawling all over Edmonton Green shopping center, maybe building a shiny new shopping center with new flats to rival and outpace Wood Green. Will we also see industrial areas around Southbury start to make way for residential development, in anticipation of the obvious there towards a minimum of four trains per hour? Clearly, once STAR is operational, we will probably see all Hertford East services running via Tottenham Hale, and Southbury Loop services doubled as a result. I also hope for a new station at Catterhatch Lane, which could transform Enfield Broadway into a very up and coming community. Here's hoping that for the first time in my life, I am infront rather than behind the curve. And we still have Crossrail 2 to look forward to. Clearly, it is in the Tory manifesto. Crossrail 2 state that they will submit a powers application between 2018 and 2020, with work starting 2020. No doubt, with the Tories winning, and the majority being slim, they will seek to push that forward towards 2018 with work starting in advance of the next election of May 2020, with the full budget in place so that the next Parliament cannot overturn it. We saw that kind of activity this year, with Safeguarding submitted just prior to Purdah, and clearly STAR services are simply an early start to Crossrail 2, so Crossrail 2 has already commenced. Incidentally, on that topic, I have heard that Network Rail intend to have at least four Stratford trains per hour running all stations to Broxbourne at least alongside Crossrail 2. That adds four trains to the 12 Crossrail 2 trains per hour likely to be on the West Anglia mainline. Suggesting a peak service of at least 16 trains per hour, and that leaves options for retaining the existing two trains per hour to Liverpool Street and more. An astronomical transformation for a line that has just two trains per hour or less for some stations!
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jun 1, 2015 13:39:08 GMT
|
|
|
Post by ashlar on Jun 1, 2015 14:24:11 GMT
Impressive! That train refurb is far better than I'd hoped. Are they going to do this to all trains, given they are scrapping them in 3 years?
I do not miss the salmon pink and broken seats we had to put up with before. How come that TfL able to do this sort of thing while ToCs can't...?
Also a (sort of) update from Stella Creasy MP today on cage-gate...:
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Jun 1, 2015 14:43:59 GMT
Whoever authorised the Walthamstow cage should have read this forum...
16 trains an hour down the Lea Valley? Nice for those using the level crossings!
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jun 1, 2015 15:23:34 GMT
Impressive! That train refurb is far better than I'd hoped. Are they going to do this to all trains, given they are scrapping them in 3 years? I do not miss the salmon pink and broken seats we had to put up with before. How come that TfL able to do this sort of thing while ToCs can't...? I think they probably will do all the trains as most of it can be done in maintenance time or by taking a train out for 1 or 2 days. The exterior LO vinyling is simple enough as the trains were white under AGA anyway. Looking closely at the seat covers suggests to be they've been done a bit hastily - lots of creases at the corners. Hopefully that'll get resolved without a press deadline bearing down for future swap outs. Whether LO will stop the seat covers coming loose remains to be seen - might be too much to ask for a short term upgrade. Much of the rest is just sticking maps and diagrams up plus a decent clean up which we know LOROL can do. I noticed yesterday that the old in car diagrams showing London / Anglia routes have all been covered over. I think that's a bit of a retrograde step to be honest if it's permanent. It makes sense to show all the relevant routes especially as there are still plenty of AGA trains which overlap with LO services out of Liverpool St. You can't suddenly pretend there isn't a parallel route via T Hale - especially if there are infrastructure problems.
|
|
|
Post by ashlar on Jun 1, 2015 17:26:39 GMT
It seemed a bit more than just a clean and brush-up. Haven't the salmon pink partitions been replaced by glass panels and new orange poles been installed? Also seems to be a new Dot Matrix display from one of the other photos I saw. If it only takes two days to make this sort of difference then it is criminal that WAGN, ONE or AGA (or network South East before them?) never bothered to present their carriages with this pride and care.
Get used to non-TfL lines being removed from maps - it's politics isn't it! I'll forgive it if TfL carry on looking after their lines so well.
|
|
|
Post by bicbasher on Jun 1, 2015 17:41:03 GMT
Local tv news report about the changes.
|
|
|
Post by melikepie on Jun 1, 2015 17:58:24 GMT
|
|
|
Post by ashlar on Jun 1, 2015 18:10:02 GMT
|
|
|
Post by peterc on Jun 1, 2015 18:44:28 GMT
The refurb looked nice but I could have done without that blond guy photo bombing the pics of the train.
|
|
Dom K
Global Moderator
The future is bright
Posts: 1,823
|
Post by Dom K on Jun 1, 2015 20:42:15 GMT
The first LO EMU will pass South Tottenham this Saturday!
Incase you hadn't guessed it's the 0531 Liverpool Street to Enfield Town via South Tottenham junction
|
|
Dom K
Global Moderator
The future is bright
Posts: 1,823
|
Post by Dom K on Jun 1, 2015 21:25:51 GMT
I did notice on one of the photos taken at Enfield Town that White Hart Lane also has the British rail symbol, can't think of its name. AGA services don't call here, but on Spurs match days, some fast trains go there, so maybe that's why it's included
|
|
|
Post by whistlekiller2000 on Jun 2, 2015 8:55:52 GMT
Are they refurbishing all the trains on the Lea Valley lines into LO colours?
|
|
|
Post by ashlar on Jun 2, 2015 9:26:15 GMT
Are they refurbishing all the trains on the Lea Valley lines into LO colours? I think that's the plan...
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Jun 2, 2015 9:51:07 GMT
Are they refurbishing all the trains on the Lea Valley lines into LO colours? I think that's the plan... Except the Lea Valley line itself (through Ponders End) which isn't coming under TfL control. Not the first time it's been left out. It was only electrified in 1969, nine years after the rest of the network as far as Bishops Stortford. (All electric services ran via Seven Sisters, the Lea Valley line only carryng the Cambridge expresses and a limited local service operated by class 125 diesel units)
|
|
|
Post by ashlar on Jun 2, 2015 15:12:28 GMT
I am aware that The Liverpool Street platforms are close to capacity but is there any scope for timetable improvements on these lines at all?
I am thinking, in particular, of the spacing between inbound services arriving at Hackney Downs. Currently the ex-Chingford train arrives just one minute before the slower stopping train from Edmonton Green.
To change trains (eg to travel from Walthamstow to London Fields) you need to run down and up between platforms in a single minute. Possible for the fit and mobile but impossible for many. Just delaying the Edmonton branch trains by 2 minutes would make this a comfortable interchange.
In the opposite direction you have worse problems with a 14 minute wait for interchanging from the stopper line through London Fields to the Chingford Line.
How much scope do TfL have to make inprovements here?
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Jun 2, 2015 16:09:22 GMT
To change trains (eg to travel from Walthamstow to London Fields) you need to run down and up between platforms in a single minute. ? The timetable shows that between Cambridge Heath and the Chingford line it's almost as quick to go via Bethnal Green, although the connection is very tight. I suspect that the number of people travelling between the Chingford branch and those two stations is fairly small - and any change to timings would probably impair connections from CH and LF to the Lea Valley Line, which may be more useful.
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Jun 2, 2015 21:12:32 GMT
These stations are close together. From London Fields most people wanting the Chingford line would walk to Hackney Downs, and from Cambridge Heath, to Bethnal Green. There is just no tradition of travel between these stations, as Chingford trains haven't stopped there habitually for many decades, even though a few have always traversed the slow lines. What Chingford passengers would really like is not a service to the minor stations on the slow line, but the restitution of the pre-?1980 fasts LV-St James St, and an end to the Stansted Express being given precedence at Clapton Junction! Not to mention removal of the gates at Chingford....
|
|
|
Post by ashlar on Jun 2, 2015 21:36:04 GMT
The wait at Clapton is a good point. I hope TfL can exert some leverage. I don't think you'll see more non-stoppers. TfL seem to like simple service patterns (though the Met line is notable exception).
Incidentally there was still one non-stop Liverpool St to Walthamstow train every day (at 2333!) until two weeks ago when it was made into a regular stopper, presumably at TfL's request.
|
|
|
Post by pridley on Jun 2, 2015 22:14:13 GMT
I think the most compelling argument for having Chingford trains stop at London Fields and Cambridge Heath is to double service quantities there. However, with the present timetable, trains from Seven Sisters and Chingford arrive and leave at the exact same time from Hackney Downs, in a pretty tight formation. Chingford trains leave Hackney Downs the same time as Seven Sisters Trains but arrive 2 mins earlier on the fast lines, whereas on the way back, Chingford trains leave 2mins after Seven Sisters trains, arriving Hackney Downs at the same time. At least that is what I have observed recently.
I can imagine that the main reason TFL want to retain this is so that they can maximise service frequencies to Enfield, Cheshunt and Chingford. Having access to both lines effectively lets them double up on services, because for every train running via Seven Sisters, a Chingford can run behind it 2 mins prior, arriving Hackney Downs the exact same time. Thus, theoretically, an additional Chingford service can be provided for every new Seven Sisters service they squeeze in. What that means is, that if they have Chingford trains running on the slow tracks, that eight trains per hour could be a maximum, whereas, if off peak they maintain eight trains per hour via Seven Sisters, they could maybe run six to eight Chingfords on the mainline but could not do that if Chingford trains were on the slow line?
Clearly, the rhetoric is about boosting service frequency, and there will be an announcement on off-peak frequencies. I believe that the announcement will be to maintain on peak services during the off-peak period, because that barely achieves TFL's minimum turn up and go service of four trains per hour on the Enfield branch. They really need to squeeze an extra two trains per hour via Cheshunt to get up to four trains per hour on that branch, and running Chingfords on the slow tracks may stop that from happening with present signalling and Liverpool Street capacity?
Or am I missing something here?
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jun 3, 2015 9:58:15 GMT
I think the most compelling argument for having Chingford trains stop at London Fields and Cambridge Heath is to double service quantities there. However, with the present timetable, trains from Seven Sisters and Chingford arrive and leave at the exact same time from Hackney Downs, in a pretty tight formation. Chingford trains leave Hackney Downs the same time as Seven Sisters Trains but arrive 2 mins earlier on the fast lines, whereas on the way back, Chingford trains leave 2mins after Seven Sisters trains, arriving Hackney Downs at the same time. At least that is what I have observed recently. I can imagine that the main reason TFL want to retain this is so that they can maximise service frequencies to Enfield, Cheshunt and Chingford. Having access to both lines effectively lets them double up on services, because for every train running via Seven Sisters, a Chingford can run behind it 2 mins prior, arriving Hackney Downs the exact same time. Thus, theoretically, an additional Chingford service can be provided for every new Seven Sisters service they squeeze in. What that means is, that if they have Chingford trains running on the slow tracks, that eight trains per hour could be a maximum, whereas, if off peak they maintain eight trains per hour via Seven Sisters, they could maybe run six to eight Chingfords on the mainline but could not do that if Chingford trains were on the slow line? Clearly, the rhetoric is about boosting service frequency, and there will be an announcement on off-peak frequencies. I believe that the announcement will be to maintain on peak services during the off-peak period, because that barely achieves TFL's minimum turn up and go service of four trains per hour on the Enfield branch. They really need to squeeze an extra two trains per hour via Cheshunt to get up to four trains per hour on that branch, and running Chingfords on the slow tracks may stop that from happening with present signalling and Liverpool Street capacity? Or am I missing something here? The bit you are missing are all the Greater Anglia trains that still have to be squeezed into the two track approach to Liverpool St plus the route via Clapton. Services are flighted out of Liverpool St with fast trains running ahead of stoppers. TfL said in the Twitter session that there was not the track capacity to divert Chingford trains via the slow tracks with additional stops. You also need to bear in mind that Chingford Line passengers do not want slower trains and have made that point to TfL via Twitter several times. I expect there has also been more formal representation made against fiddling with the Chingford services. There isn't the demand for 6 or 8 trains an hour to Chingford and you can't run that service in the peaks. The Victoria Line does the bulk movement these days. Look at the Network Rail Working Timetable to see how tightly scheduled the service is on those lines. There is a reason why TfL have made no public commitments to run more peak hour trains - there simply isn't the capacity to do it. It has no ability to shove longer distance trains out of the way because ORR would not allow them to. Furthermore TfL will not want to be seen to be doing this because it gives grist to the arguments of people in Kent that TfL would prioritise London services over those running into neighbouring counties. This is what "did for" TfL's request to take over South Eastern - Tory politicians in Kent went into panic mode over the electoral consequences of worse conditions for "their" commuters. Of course TfL never said they would run more peak trains - they simply said they'd make sure they were all as long as possible by buying more trains to add capacity on each departure. However people in panic mode rarely let the truth get in the way of their arguments. The only thing we know TfL are looking is some extra off peak trains and I suspect they will be to Enfield or Cheshunt and definitely NOT to Chingford because of the consequences on capacity via Clapton and Coppermill Junction. It's the Stansted Express running every 15 minutes which is the killer - everything has to fit round that on a 15 minute cycle. At peak times there are extra services to squash in and as you will know one consequence of this is stops at Bethnal Green are reduced because of the need to get trains round to the fast lines. I know you are very enthused about the prospects of more services but TfL is not in complete control of its destiny here. It hasn't got hundreds of millions of pounds to resignal the tracks into Liverpool St nor can it dictate to Network Rail how to manage Liverpool St. It can't override ORR to grab more train paths and for the moment it hasn't got loads of rolling stock lying around either. TfL has not overpromised because it knows its room for manoeuvre is limited. Let's just wait and see. The priority has to be getting the service to work properly and that seems to be a struggle at the moment - there have been delays, cancellations and short formations plus external events screwing up the service. The latter are harder to control but everything else is in the hands of the operators and they've got to deal with that.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Jun 3, 2015 12:42:27 GMT
I can't see any scope for more trains on any of the WA lines unless at least some Chingford line trains go to Stratford (and/or the Victoria Line is extended to Chingford).
|
|
|
Post by A60stock on Jun 3, 2015 12:45:48 GMT
One thing i have always wondered since takeover is why LO have bothered with taking over any 317s. If anything, i would have thought that the characteristics of these trains would be the opposite of what LO require. They are slower of the mark than the 315s and are more suited to cambridge and stanstead journeys.
Why do tfl need 100mph units which are going to be restricted to chingford services? Under AGA, i understood using them there as they could be rotated around with other longer distance routes, this is now no longer possible.
Im sure there is an explanation as to why LO are using 317s on these routes and i am really interested to know why!
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Jun 3, 2015 13:01:20 GMT
Nobby, I can't see how the Victoria line could ever have the capacity to be extended to Chingford. In the 60s, it was intended for it to surface at Wood St, but with the change in direction of the dead-end sidings, it'd now be fiendishly expensive to do so. Its extension to take over part of the Hainault loop might be more feasible. You are right about Stratford. Restoring the Hall Farm Jc-Lea Bridge Jc spur, as single track, would achieve that, and I simply don't get why doing this would be so expensive as is frequently quoted.
On the 317s, isn't it simply because they are stabled at Chingford carriage sidings?
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jun 3, 2015 13:17:58 GMT
One thing i have always wondered since takeover is why LO have bothered with taking over any 317s. If anything, i would have thought that the characteristics of these trains would be the opposite of what LO require. They are slower of the mark than the 315s and are more suited to cambridge and stanstead journeys. Why do tfl need 100mph units which are going to be restricted to chingford services? Under AGA, i understood using them there as they could be rotated around with other longer distance routes, this is now no longer possible. Im sure there is an explanation as to why LO are using 317s on these routes and i am really interested to know why! I would guess it's partly because dividing the area into two operating units, with separate diagrams, is less efficient. So more units are likely required to mitigate against this, and perhaps if TFL plan to run extra or longer services. Whilst not ideal, the 317/7s were the only AC EMUs currently spare. I wish TFL would end their empire-building flirtation with mainline services, and concentrate on running their own network.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Jun 3, 2015 14:40:49 GMT
Nobby, I can't see how the Victoria line could ever have the capacity to be extended to Chingford.? I didn't say it would be easy On the 317s, isn't it simply because they are stabled at Chingford carriage sidings? Or even more simply, because there are not enough 315s to cover LO and TfL Rail? TfL have 44 class 315s. That leaves only seventeen left for LO. They are supplemented by fifteen 317s to bring a total fleet of 32. These 317s are subclass 317/7 and half of subclass 317/8. These have had a colourful history - starting out as class 317/1 on the "Bedpan" line, the 48 units were displaced by the Thameslink project to the WCML local lines, only to be replaced in turn by the "Dusty Bin" class 321s to the Liverpool Street - Cambridge route A number of 317/1s were loaned to LTS and Thameslink during WAGN's ownership of them. When WAGN was split, most of the class went to National Express East Anglia (ONE), but GN (now TSGN) retained twelve 317/1s. . Under Nat Ex ownership nine 317/1s were modified for Stansted Express use, and became 317/7. One of these is now a test bed for a technical upgrade, the rest have been transferred to Overground Twelve more 317/1s had a different style of refurb, and were reclassified 317/8. Overground has seven of these The rest of the Anglia fleet of 317/1s (fifteen units) have also been refurbished, and reclassified 317/5. The 24 younger class 317/2 classmates started out on the Kings Cross - Cambridge route, which was the other half of what became the WAGN franchise. The 317/2s were refurbished by WAGN and reclassified 317/6, and went to Anglia with the 317/1s when WAGN was split. Both subclasses were originally numbered in the 3173xx series (as the remaining 317/1s on the GN still are) as the 3xx series was the first vacant one in the LM region's emu number series, and the ER only went up to unit 321 so the 317/2s could start at 317349 EDIT - just realised this means that, in their history, many of these units will have worked out of all but one of the seven London termini equipped for ac (including Moorgate on the "Bedpan" services) - the one exception being Paddington.
|
|
|
Post by pridley on Jun 3, 2015 19:21:49 GMT
Rapidsman, my call is achievable. I state that we will see the existing peak of four trains per hour via Enfield Town being extended off peak, because this matches TFl's minimum turn up and go standard of four trains per hour. South bury loop previously had four trains per hour with an additional two trains per hour Cheshunt to Seven Sisters shuttle.
This is is what I see happening in the medium term, alongside maybe opportunities when the new franchise comes in and as a result of Crossrail definitely releasing capacity for that holy grail of four stopping trains per hour between Cheshunt and Liverpool Street via Southbury.
in the longer run, maybe when STAR services or Crossrail 2 release capacity, I see Chingford rising to six trains per hour.
if tfl get the Hertford East service in 2017, they may be tempted to have the two per hour via Tottenham Hale stopping at Clapton to bring it up to the metro standard of 6 trains per hour.
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Jun 3, 2015 19:57:53 GMT
Is it not possible to run alternate trains to Liverpool Street and Stratford? Especially outside the peaks people may like the direct connection with Westfield, whilst (especially during the peaks) Stratford would be far better for those heading towards Docklands... for a start, these people will be able to avoid Zone 1 and its higher fares!
Simon
|
|
|
Post by peterc on Jun 3, 2015 21:21:38 GMT
I have seen suggestions of running some services via Stratford rather than Hackney Downs once Crossrail took the local traffic off the "Electric Lines" (are they still called that?) west of Stratford.
|
|