Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2005 22:14:18 GMT
In the Times today, there was a longish article on the various problems surrounding the existing London rail network, including the Underground, as well as Kenny L's efforts to get ahold of all overground 'heavy rail' services in the GLA and bring them in line with the TfL fare structure.
One of the things mentioned was a Bakerloo line extension to relieve capacity problems somewhere on the network. Unfortunately, I didn't save the article so I don't remember where it said the line would go - but I do remember that Herne Hill was mentioned as a pinch point in the Southern Region rail network.
Is the Bakerloo Line proposal to extend to Camberwell alive again, with the new terminus being Herne Hill instead?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2005 22:32:28 GMT
I saw that article and it was a but vague, but I think they were talking about Harrow & Wealdstone - Watford Jct. for the Bakerloo.
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,346
|
Post by Colin on Nov 17, 2005 4:00:08 GMT
Ken want's it put back to Watford as was.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2005 5:58:02 GMT
Would that be to replace Silverlink Metro's Watford Crawler service?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2005 6:01:20 GMT
I read the article and can confirm (good old photographic memory!) that the extension looked to be heading towards Watford Junction, or somewhere in that region anyway. Will there be enough room for both Met and Bakerloo trains at Watford then?
|
|
towerman
My status is now now widower
Posts: 2,970
|
Post by towerman on Nov 17, 2005 20:11:57 GMT
I think there are 4 or 5 platforms on Metro side,Siverlink only use a couple.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2005 23:59:16 GMT
Will there be enough room for both Met and Bakerloo trains at Watford then? Different Watford. The bakerloo will return to Watford Junction, which is totally separate from Watford Met.
|
|
|
Post by Hutch on Nov 18, 2005 7:59:44 GMT
I assume BL was looking to post-Croxley Link.
Seriously though, wasn't the Bakerloo cut back to H&W because it was little used beyond there for journeys south of Queens Park?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2005 8:09:36 GMT
I assume BL was looking to post-Croxley Link. Seriously though, wasn't the Bakerloo cut back to H&W because it was little used beyond there for journeys south of Queens Park? It was - everyone north of Harrow was going to Euston instead. Besides, Watford Junction has five platforms on the DC lines, not four - one of them is trackless. As long as the signalling between Watford Junction and Watford High Street is of sufficient density and the problem of accessibility with differing rolling stock is solved at High Street, there should be no problems sharing between the Junction and the High Street.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2005 14:51:34 GMT
I assume BL was looking to post-Croxley Link. Seriously though, wasn't the Bakerloo cut back to H&W because it was little used beyond there for journeys south of Queens Park? Heh, guess I should've been clearer But Hutch presents the crucial point, the service was originally cut back for the above reason, and unless traffic levels are going to be larger this time there is little point in reinstating the service, especially when you consider that Bakerloo trains, which are generally absent of transverse seating, are therefore not the most comfortable ride on long journeys such as those to Watford Junction when compared to fast trains out of Euston. Guess which train the passenger chooses? I say just stick to Silverlink beyond H&W. If more tph are needed between there and Watford Junction, then a few more Silverlink trains should surely be possible to implement on the line in between Bakerloo and current Silverlink services? Edit: Also, if the Met is indeed to return to Watford Junction, anyone who does want to Tube in to London will likely take this as it's semi-fast when compared to the Bakerloo which will be all-stations.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2005 20:41:45 GMT
depends where you want to go into london to
met would be fine going to northwest/central london, but say you wanted to go to some of th other big mainline stations. Paddington, Marylebone, Charing X, Waterloo and Victoria would be quicker by bakerloo
|
|
|
Post by oliver on Nov 19, 2005 21:53:09 GMT
It would make sense to either run the bakerloo or met to Watford High Street and 'the junction' because Watford Met is actually in the middle of no-where, well not terribly close to the high street anyway. What I am saying here is that if you wanted to go to Watford you wouldn't use the tube (probably).
|
|
|
Post by thc on Nov 20, 2005 20:05:16 GMT
|
|
|
Post by dunois on Nov 21, 2005 20:24:41 GMT
depends where you want to go into london to met would be fine going to northwest/central london, but say you wanted to go to some of th other big mainline stations. Paddington, Marylebone, Charing X, Waterloo and Victoria would be quicker by bakerloo That problem can be potentially solved by create a new station in order to permit interchange between the Bakerloo and the Met line near Northwick Park/South Kenton.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,762
|
Post by Chris M on Nov 22, 2005 0:37:02 GMT
looking at a map of the area, Northwick Park and Kenton stations alraedy look to be pretty close to one another. If the platforms at Keton were extended a little way south, and Northwick Park station moved east a short distance, then it doesn't look (from the map) to be rocket science to build a link from the east end of Northwick Park to the south end of Kenton. Heck you could probably just put up a few signposts and show the stations linked à la Bow Road/Bow Church or Tower Hill/Tower Gateway. I have never visited either station or been to that area of London though, so I don't know if it truly is possible. I also don't know what complications moving platforms may have on signalling setups, etc. Chris ps: after looking at the aerial photos, it looks like it would be easier to build a new station about here on the triangular plot shown on the aerial photo, with platforms to the south and east. As for names, you could name it Lulworth Avenue after the road it would be on, or Northwick Park (with the present station of that name becoming University of Westminster), or Northwick Park East. Preseton West or West Preston are also possible. Northwick Interchange (or Kenton Interchange) would be well suited to its purpose.
|
|
|
Post by lindsay on Nov 28, 2005 0:51:19 GMT
Edit: Also, if the Met is indeed to return to Watford Junction, anyone who does want to Tube in to London will likely take this as it's semi-fast when compared to the Bakerloo which will be all-stations. Watford services on the Met only run semi-fast at peak times, off peak they stop at all stations.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2005 9:12:15 GMT
But after the Croxley Link, the Watford service may very well run a higher proportion of semi-fast services. Considering that pax at Watford Junction could have a choice between surface stock and Tube stock for the journey to London, they would probably choose the surface stock.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2006 1:54:43 GMT
Worth bearing in mind most pax going to Euston on the DC service do it to get the tube.
Also with only 4 trains in each peak on the Bloo to Watford before closure it wasn't attractive.
At present the DC service Watford - Euston is only 3 tph. Bakerloo could run 6 tph H&W - Watford...
|
|