|
|
Post by stapler on Jul 11, 2022 9:51:50 GMT
Harlow's "statement" is at www.harlow.gov.uk/news/statement-central-line-extensionI agree with shrugged that it's a far-fetched idea and won't ever happen. Crossrail2 must now be reckoned moribund if not dead, but that would have been more possible than the Central Line, especially as its proposed northern terminus was "nowhere in particular". Whilst it is true that Harlow administrations of both colours have traditionally rather considered themselves underdogs, it's simply pejorative to call them a trash area, and I hope that can be withdrawn from the forum. |
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196 
|
Post by Tom on Jul 11, 2022 17:55:49 GMT
Apparently Harlow Council want the central line extended to Harlow which I am against. I would much rather it be extended back to Ongar. If anyone who knows the Harlow area well, they will understand why, it’s literally a trash area, possibly worse than Ilford. |
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Jul 11, 2022 18:41:32 GMT
When people state as fact "What Harlow Council want"........
.........Please provide evidence to back that statement up.
Have Harlow Council offered to pay for it. Yes or No?
If "No", who is supposed to pay for this thing that "Harlow Council want"?
Don't even think of suggesting T f L will/should pay.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,758
|
Post by Chris M on Jul 12, 2022 0:10:50 GMT
Wanting something is not the same as offering to pay for it - not being able to afford a new laptop doesn't stop me wanting one.
In the context of Harrow Council "wanting" this extension, what it means is that the council are of the opinion that it being built would benefit the town. That they can't and/or won't pay for it is a completely separate thing.
The Silvertown Tunnel is (probably) going to be built, funded by TfL, despite most local residents and many other groups not wanting it.
|
|
miff
Posts: 317
Member is Online
|
Post by miff on Jul 12, 2022 6:04:07 GMT
Apparently Harlow Council want the central line extended to Harlow which I am against. I would much rather it be extended back to Ongar. If anyone who knows the Harlow area well, they will understand why, it’s literally a trash area, possibly worse than Ilford. Clearly you don’t know the area well  |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Jul 12, 2022 8:04:36 GMT
Harlow Council don't seem to know what they want.
Extensions of the Underground outside the GLA boundary are unlikely to happen any time soon - especially after the Croxley-Watford Junction debacle. And who is going to use a stopping service on the Central Line when there already exists a much faster main line service to Liverpool Street? Especially given that the central Line is running at capacity already, without extra passengers from Harlow? (those who wish to railhead from Epping already do so, so an extension beyond Epping is unlikely to generate much revenue for TfL).
Extending the zones to Harlow - another idea in the release - might be a runner. This might reducing the number of drivers using the M11 and/or Eppping Statioun car park.
|
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Jul 12, 2022 15:37:49 GMT
NF, the reason Harlow want the Tube is not speed, it's cheapness. They say "Epping is in zone 6; why not us?"
Probably, Harlow would be in a zone 9 or 10...
Of course Harlow council hasn't the money to pay for it - they are a humble district council - not even a transport authority (which is Essex CC)
|
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Jul 12, 2022 16:14:42 GMT
TfL already have 'Ghost Zones for fares purposes' so just as an example Broxbourne is in Gohost Zone 11 as are all Stations to Hertford East. Shenfield is in Ghost Zone 12. TfL have the capacity to go up to Ghost Zone 15. I suspect Reading is in 15. Gatwick is already in Ghost Zone 14.
|
|
|
|
Post by andypurk on Jul 13, 2022 0:59:48 GMT
Wanting something is not the same as offering to pay for it - not being able to afford a new laptop doesn't stop me wanting one. In the context of Harrow Council "wanting" this extension, what it means is that the council are of the opinion that it being built would benefit the town. That they can't and/or won't pay for it is a completely separate thing. The Silvertown Tunnel is (probably) going to be built, funded by TfL, despite most local residents and many other groups not wanting it. I sincerely hope Harrow Council (my local council) isn't concerned about something on the other side of the Prime Meridian and outside of Greater London.  (Yes, I know it is a typo). |
|
|
|
Post by jammers on Jul 31, 2022 12:00:54 GMT
I firmly believe that Ongar never really worked because there was no direct service. There was, at one time, a perfect opportunity to offer a park and ride service alongside a special fare with direct trains that would have probably had enough custom to save the service. Now all the land at Ongar has gone for this purpose.
|
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Jul 31, 2022 12:43:18 GMT
I firmly believe that Ongar never really worked because there was no direct service. There was, at one time, a perfect opportunity to offer a park and ride service alongside a special fare with direct trains that would have probably had enough custom to save the service. Now all the land at Ongar has gone for this purpose. Athrough service would have been difficult to organise without significant capital expenditure. It was of course single track which would have meant the entire Central Line timetable would have to be built round its end to end times (even if most trains terminated at Epping) Alate running train from Ongar would delay the next train waiting at Epping, causing a queue, and consequently delaying trains being on position to return westbound. I also seem to recall that the DC feed was only fromn the Epping end and struggled to power two trains at once, meaning there had to be careful co-ordination in managing departures from each end or when crossing at the passing loop at North Weald. . |
|
|
|
Post by jammers on Aug 1, 2022 14:32:20 GMT
Yes, it would have required capital expenditure for sure especially with the electrics. Even the peak time services were poorly planned, the last departure being 7pm.
|
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Aug 1, 2022 17:00:24 GMT
I firmly believe that Ongar never really worked because there was no direct service. There was, at one time, a perfect opportunity to offer a park and ride service alongside a special fare with direct trains that would have probably had enough custom to save the service. Now all the land at Ongar has gone for this purpose. The people of Ongar might have objected - because it could have meant their town and many local roads becoming gridlocked at busy times by people from Harlow and other areas driving to the Ongar P+R car park. <conjecture alert>The solution could have been for the P+R facility to have been outside of Ongar with new roads plus extension of the railway being built to serve it! </conjecture alert> |
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Aug 1, 2022 17:25:56 GMT
Ongar is too far from London by an all-stations metro service to attract serious support - if the LOIS proposals of 1999 had come to anything, it'd have been a different story....
|
|
|
|
Post by brigham on Aug 2, 2022 7:54:07 GMT
Ongar is too far from London by an all-stations metro service to attract serious support - if the LOIS proposals of 1999 had come to anything, it'd have been a different story.... I've googled this, and it's quite a surprise. I never knew Superman proposed to Lois Lane. Did she accept? |
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Aug 2, 2022 8:16:28 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Aug 2, 2022 9:59:22 GMT
As someone who uses the Epping branch of the Central line frequently, is it worth extending back to Ongar? The area has changed so it could be a thought.. Harlow has a national rail station, as someone said it isn't the best area... Maybe Harlow is something Crossrail 2 could consider? I believe the Central line extended back to Ongar can work financially. It is very different now, to the early 90's when it was closed. The Ongar area has a lot more housing and is busy. The only issue I see is that some parts of the branch line would need to be double tracked. If it was a 20 minute or 15 minute service direct (i.e. Ongar to Ealing Broadway) so none of the coming off at Epping to change onto another train. The only issue I can see is stations such as North Weald, where there may not be as much custom. Was the Ongar line initially built to go further i.e. Chelmsford to link up with the rest of the GER line |
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Aug 2, 2022 10:44:50 GMT
No, but there were several plans for extension, including the Mid-Essex Light railway. The LOIS study (above) 20 years ago envisaged return to NR, a duplicate main line to relieve pressure on the GEML, but would have been impractical, as the widening for quadrupling south of Loughton would have meant multiple demolitions.
The EOR heritage line north of Epping would make any project impossible nowadays
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Aug 2, 2022 15:53:47 GMT
The line between reality, possibility and complete fantasy becomes blurred if you cross it too many times
|
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Aug 2, 2022 17:32:06 GMT
No, but there were several plans for extension, including the Mid-Essex Light railway. The LOIS study (above) 20 years ago envisaged return to NR, a duplicate main line to relieve pressure on the GEML, but would have been impractical, as the widening for quadrupling south of Loughton would have meant multiple demolitions. The EOR heritage line north of Epping would make any project impossible nowadays Triple track might have been enough - the extra track being bi-directional for peak hour expresses! For the Great Eastern Main Line it was once suggested that the route be given a 5th track (quintuple???) for a similar purpose. I am not sure if it was proposed for the whole route to Shenfield, or only as far as Gidea Park or even just Ilford. As it happens there is already a 5 track section in the Forest Gate area. |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Aug 2, 2022 21:10:41 GMT
5 tracking that section would not be needed. After all between Stratford and Shenfield, only a few trains may stop at Romford, other than that, they do not serve any of the other stops on the fast line.
The triple track of the Central line would have seem a good idea, although certain parts I could see it being a problem, but demolition could easily be done.
Mod edit [Antharro]: Quote removed. Please be selective about the part of a post you wish to quote rather than the whole post verbatim, particularly if you are replying to the previous post in the thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Aug 3, 2022 8:40:56 GMT
The line between reality, possibility and complete fantasy becomes blurred if you cross it too many times I think we just crossed it again with "demolition could easily be done" |
|
|
|
Post by xtmw on Aug 3, 2022 12:33:12 GMT
Couldn't a shuttle from Epping - Ongar work? But that would require trains to be withdrawn. An Ongar - Ealing Broadway service sound's good, with the existing Epping trains just being sent up to Ongar
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Aug 3, 2022 13:14:10 GMT
As soon as I see a post with any of the words "just", "simply" and "easily" in front of any 'proposal'
I know that it hasn't been properly thought through.
|
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Aug 3, 2022 13:50:00 GMT
As soon as I see a post with any of the words "just", "simply" and "easily" in front of any 'proposal' I know that it hasn't been properly thought through. ah but ... sometimes people without detailed knowledge of what the work would entail simply do not know enough to even be able to ask the right questions, let alone understand the true complexity of the ask. I've fallen foul of this more than once! Oh and I am talking about the physical attributes of what would be required - not myopic human politics issues caused by 'can't we just have another study' civil servants or 'but thats not we do things here' other officials (I can quote an example, if requested) |
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Aug 3, 2022 14:13:36 GMT
Couldn't a shuttle from Epping - Ongar work? But that would require trains to be withdrawn. An Ongar - Ealing Broadway service sound's good, with the existing Epping trains just being sent up to Ongar Wasn't a shuttle between Epping and Ongar exactly what we had from 1949 to 1994? |
|
|
|
Post by xtmw on Aug 3, 2022 14:54:24 GMT
Yes. But I'd assume if it were to open today, it would require stock to be withdrawn from the current service to accommodate the shuttle service
Mod edit [Antharro]: Quote removed. Please be selective about the part of a post you wish to quote rather than the whole post verbatim, particularly if you are replying to the previous post in the thread.
|
|
towerman
My status is now now widower
Posts: 2,968
|
Post by towerman on Aug 3, 2022 16:47:48 GMT
From 1949 till 1957 the shuttle was steam operated by Eastern Region on behalf of LT.On electrification till the 70s it was operated by a fleet of 3 35TS units(2in service 1 spare).From the 70s till the late 80s it required 2 units of 62 TS.From the late 80s till the early 90s it required 1 62 TS unit.From then until closure it was operated by 60 TS.The shuttle was the reason Hainault had a stock holding of 32 1/2 trains with half a train out stabled at Loughton.
|
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Aug 3, 2022 17:11:27 GMT
ah but ... sometimes people without detailed knowledge of what the work would entail simply do not know enough to even be able to ask the right questions, let alone understand the true complexity of the ask. I've fallen foul of this more than once! Oh and I am talking about the physical attributes of what would be required - not myopic human politics issues caused by 'can't we just have another study' civil servants or 'but thats not we do things here' other officials (I can quote an example, if requested) You say "myopic human politics issues" I say "people not wanting their homes demolished" Mod edit [Antharro]: Quote partially removed. Please be selective about the part of a post you wish to quote rather than the whole post verbatim, particularly if you are replying to the previous post in the thread. It's not always necessary to quote a post AND a post previously quoted within that post. |
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Aug 3, 2022 21:30:19 GMT
LOL, actually I was thinking of things like railway people being dead set against the creation of the through-London Thameslink service but a politician who saw how such a service could be very successful was able to convince them to put aside regional rivalries and to get the service running.
Mod edit [Antharro]: Quote removed. Please be selective about the part of a post you wish to quote rather than the whole post verbatim, particularly if you are replying to the previous post in the thread.
|
|
(Yes, I know it is a typo).
