|
|
Post by tubeprune on Dec 30, 2008 15:40:33 GMT
The 'main line' platforms on the District [Aldgate East to Barking] can certainly accommodate an 8 car Met train, but none of the bay roads can! Given the issues associated with converting the current 6 car platforms & sidings to 7 car [ready for S stock to supercede the C stock], running Mets to Barking is an issue that is easily 'put to bed'. There are also gauging problems with A Stock at Whitechapel and between Bow Road and Bromley. |
|
|
|
Post by astock5000 on Dec 30, 2008 18:23:33 GMT
But wasn't it going to happen after the A stock had been replaced by S stock?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2008 18:41:30 GMT
But wasn't it going to happen after the A stock had been replaced by S stock? This was my impression as well, would be a lot easier if the whole of the sub-surface network was to S Stock gauge,  |
|
|
|
Post by DrOne on Dec 30, 2008 19:05:26 GMT
The Met business unit will not be interested in running to Barking anyway, regardless of the stock. Their priority is their existing customers... Isn't everything run by RfL now? The idea of the Met as a separate railway with it's own customers like SWT or C2C always tickles me |
|
|
|
Post by happybunny on Dec 30, 2008 22:38:44 GMT
Who are RfL  I think most people see the Met as an 'into London' Line, with is London terminus. Just like c2c or whatever. Not a cross London line like most other LUL lines |
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282 
|
Post by Ben on Dec 31, 2008 11:47:45 GMT
Ahh, thanks all! Perhaps something to revisit for the future then, after all of the current changes are implemented.
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Dec 31, 2008 13:32:06 GMT
Any good metro service runs better the more simple the route. The Met to Barking would be very unreliable!
|
|
|
|
Post by ruislip on Dec 31, 2008 17:32:09 GMT
The Met to Barking would be very unreliable! During the peaks, would there have been ex-Amersham and ex-Watford trains making it as far as Barking--in addition to the ex-Uxbridge services? |
|
DWS
every second count's
Posts: 2,487
|
Post by DWS on Dec 31, 2008 18:32:19 GMT
Who are RfL I think most people see the Met as an 'into London' Line, with is London terminus. Just like c2c or whatever. Not a cross London line like most other LUL lines I think it is meant to be TfL (not RfL)  |
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Dec 31, 2008 19:42:19 GMT
But Metman, that was my original point; A service from UXB would be as complex as a service from Richmond. I do take your point though; its the KISS principal for the railways. |
|
|
|
Post by astock5000 on Dec 31, 2008 20:18:27 GMT
I don't see the point of running the Met to Barking anyway. After the Circle is changed to the T-cup, but with the Met running to Aldgate, you would be able to get a 'Circle' to Aldgate, and a Hammersmith & City to Barking, and from the Met, you could get a train to Aldgate, and if you want to go to Barking, you can change to the H&C at Liverpool Street (or anywhere along the Circle). If the Met went to Barking, and the H&C to Aldgate, the Met would still only go to one, and all trains from Hammersmith would go to Aldgate, with none to Barking.
|
|
|
|
Post by DrOne on Dec 31, 2008 21:06:28 GMT
Current problems with the the Met/Circle/H&C at Aldgate junction beg the question why anything other than the District should go east of Aldgate when Crossrail opens? Enough people use the Central to avoid the H&C if they can. It would also make operations a lot simpler.
|
|
|
|
Post by astock5000 on Dec 31, 2008 21:59:47 GMT
Current problems with the the Met/Circle/H&C at Aldgate junction beg the question why anything other than the District should go east of Aldgate when Crossrail opens? Enough people use the Central to avoid the H&C if they can. It would also make operations a lot simpler. But you have the problem of where to terminate the H&C, and would there be enough trains east of Aldgate if they all had to go along the District? |
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Jan 1, 2009 12:31:51 GMT
The original plan for the Met was to run Uxbridge-Barking off peak with Amersham/Watford to Baker Street. In the peaks all current Aldgate reversers would terminate at Barking, which wouldn't have worked!
I like the current set up with the H&C running to Barking. I am unhappy that Whitechapel will loose all reversing facilities with the Crossrail rebuild. Whitechapel should have 3 platforms.
|
|
|
|
Post by ruislip on Jan 1, 2009 17:26:46 GMT
I like the current set up with the H&C running to Barking. I am unhappy that Whitechapel will loose all reversing facilities with the Crossrail rebuild. Whitechapel should have 3 platforms. What does that mean for H&C's that would normally reverse at Whitechapel? Will they reverse at Plaistow now? |
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,346
|
Post by Colin on Jan 1, 2009 17:36:11 GMT
Well they could use Moorgate, Aldgate, Plaistow or Barking - or perhaps even run right through to Upminster once they go over to S stock.......it's possibly too early to speculate at this stage.
There will also be a new centre siding at West Ham, though it is my understanding that it will only be used when the service goes up the wall. That said, I'm led to believe that it is planned to extend the Tower Hill reversers to West Ham (and round in the centre siding) during the Olympics........again though, it's possibly too early to tell at this stage what will happen....
|
|
|
|
Post by DrOne on Jan 1, 2009 19:22:41 GMT
But you have the problem of where to terminate the H&C, and would there be enough trains east of Aldgate if they all had to go along the District? I'm running on the same theme as metman here (not implying he agrees with this particular post) that "any good metro service runs better the more simple the route". astock5000 raises two important points which I'll address on the assumption of a post-crossrail SSL 1. With upgraded signalling all of the Hammersmith trains (12tph IIRC) should be able to continue to Edgware Rd, in addition to the District services. 2. If the capacity on the SSL increases, that leaves around 18tph from the District to go east of Aldgate which with improved reliability will be as good, if not better than current peak service. As a regular user of that part of the line I find the H&C service notoriously difficult to rely on, especially with the standing times at Aldgate junction during the peaks. Cutting it might allow the District and the T-Cup to follow much simpler more reliable patterns. Anyone east of Mile End heading into that part of the city currently changes for the Central line and reconnects at Liv St if necessary. And Crossrail will open up another alternative. |
|
|
|
Post by astock5000 on Jan 1, 2009 19:50:04 GMT
As a regular user of that part of the line I find the H&C service notoriously difficult to rely on, especially with the standing times at Aldgate junction during the peaks. Cutting it might allow the District and the T-Cup to follow much simpler more reliable patterns. Anyone east of Mile End heading into that part of the city currently changes for the Central line and reconnects at Liv St if necessary. And Crossrail will open up another alternative. But not everyone wants to go to the city. If you want to go from somewhere on the Met to east London (to Stratford or Docklands), at the moment you can get an Aldgate Met train and change at Liverpool street to a H&C on the same platform, and if nessacary use the cross platform interchange to the Central at Mile End. Having no service between Liverpool Street and Aldgate East means that you would have to change to the Jubilee at Finchley Road, and then to the Central at Bond Street, which is not a cross platform interchange. (It also means you have a longer journey on a crowded 92TS - but then, the Met would be running S stock by then). |
|
|
|
Post by DrOne on Jan 1, 2009 20:09:27 GMT
As a regular user of that part of the line I find the H&C service notoriously difficult to rely on, especially with the standing times at Aldgate junction during the peaks. Cutting it might allow the District and the T-Cup to follow much simpler more reliable patterns. Anyone east of Mile End heading into that part of the city currently changes for the Central line and reconnects at Liv St if necessary. And Crossrail will open up another alternative. But not everyone wants to go to the city. If you want to go from somewhere on the Met to east London (to Stratford or Docklands), at the moment you can get an Aldgate Met train and change at Liverpool street to a H&C on the same platform, and if nessacary use the cross platform interchange to the Central at Mile End. Having no service between Liverpool Street and Aldgate East means that you would have to change to the Jubilee at Finchley Road, and then to the Central at Bond Street, which is not a cross platform interchange. (It also means you have a longer journey on a crowded 92TS - but then, the Met would be running S stock by then). Remember, this would all be post-Crossrail. Let's use HOTH as our Met station for the fictional journey to Stratford/Docklands. This would be achieved with just one change at Farringdon, Barbican, Moorgate or Liverpool St. I accept the same platform issue but to be frank that is dealt with on 3 fronts: 1. I suspect very few people go from Metland to Docklands via H&C. It's a bit more involved than just staying on the Jubilee. 2. Passengers can change for Crossrail which will provide 12tph to each Stratford/Docklands - which is more frequent than the H&C beyond Whitechapel and reaching Docklands/Stratford with less changes. 3. Met-Docklands is already feasbible with same platform changes and wouldn't be affected by snipping the H&C east of Aldgate. Besides if Stratford/Docklands were such a big issue for Met/Chiltern folk they wouldn't have rejected Crossrail coming into their territory. |
|
|
|
Post by astock5000 on Jan 1, 2009 20:27:30 GMT
I suspect very few people go from Metland to Docklands via H&C. It's a bit more involved than just staying on the Jubilee. I thought that very few people used the Jubilee from the Stanmore - Finchley Road area to Docklands or Stratford, as the Jubilee is 'U' shape so I thought it would take longer. When I've gone from the Met to east London, I've nearly always used the H&C, and not the Jubilee. |
|
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 Jan 1, 2009 21:50:32 GMT
One suite of journeys that hasn't been addressed here is those from the east end of the Central to the north side of the Circle, e.g. Kings Cross and Paddington and vice versa
Currently the easiest journey is to use the cross-platform interchange at Mile End, changing additionally at Aldgate East if necessary. With only the District running east of Tower Hill, your options are the much longer journey via South Kensington or crossing the tracks at Tower Hill and going back the other way, or the less than ideal interchanges at Liverpool Street, Bank, Holborn, TCR, Bond Street or Oxford Circus - all busy stations which make travelling with luggage difficult.
From the images I've seen, none of Crossrail's interchanges with other lines will be cross-platform, and indeed a couple will be less easy than some of the above (I can't remember where, but one looks like it will involve a longer walk than presently involved in changing at Green Park)
|
|
|
|
Post by DrOne on Jan 2, 2009 18:04:38 GMT
I have to say again: remember, this would all be post-Crossrail.
Our second fictional journey is getting Chris M from Epping/Hainault etc to points on the northern Circle.
As far as I know, until some point west of Stratford, Crossrail will run on the same line as Shenfield metro. There should be cross-platform interchange with the Central line at Stratford as at present. This will give a much more frequent single cross-platform connection to many parts of the northern Circle (Liverpool St, Moorgate, Barbican, Farringdon, Paddington) from the eastern branches of the Central line, AND the Shenfield Metro which is not the case at present. Kings X, Euston, Gt Portland St, Baker St & Edgware Rd will all be possible in the same number of changes as present(fine, 1 less cross-platform), and with Crossrail there will be more frequent connections.
What is the current tph between Mile End-Liv St on the H&C? Whatever it is, Crossrail will probably double this just on the Shenfield branch, and with longer trains. As an addition, yes the Liv St-Whitechapel link will be nice. But I don't believe it can compare with Crossrail on capacity, frequency or reliability. It'll be like doing Kings X-Uxbridge via Piccadilly when the Metropolitan provides a faster, more frequent service.
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Jan 2, 2009 20:05:29 GMT
This is quite true, but how long will Crossrail take to build?
|
|
|
|
Post by DrOne on Jan 3, 2009 13:17:36 GMT
Don't know. Work should start next year though.
The other point to this plan is the Tower Hill-Liverpool St section. If the Hammersmith service is split between T-Cup and Whitechapel, then Liv St-Tower Hill would only get 6tph (less than the current service). If all the Hammersmith trains go round the Circle this would give Liv St - Tower Hill 12tph.
Anyone know what the max potential reversing frequency at Aldgate? 12tph T-Cup leaves space for around 18tph for the Met Baker St-Aldgate.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2009 13:52:59 GMT
One things worries me in this "tea cup" service project: between Paddington and Edgware rd., the (short, I admit) section between the junction with H&C and the western approach of Edgware Road will become an actual bottle neck.
Are there plans to upgrade it to four tracks, allowing trains beginning their Circle not to conflict with those finishing it ?
|
|
|
|
Post by astock5000 on Jan 3, 2009 14:57:49 GMT
One things worries me in this "tea cup" service project: between Paddington and Edgware rd., the (short, I admit) section between the junction with H&C and the western approach of Edgware Road will become an actual bottle neck. Are there plans to upgrade it to four tracks, allowing trains beginning their Circle not to conflict with those finishing it ? There aren't any plans to four track that section, so it probably will be a bottleneck until the signalling upgrade. |
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Jan 3, 2009 15:10:26 GMT
It'll probably be a bottleneck with the signal upgrade! I'm most concerned about this.
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Jan 3, 2009 17:35:36 GMT
For the record, CULG makes the distance between Praed Street Jnct. and Edgware Road station 320m. Would perhaps upon the signalling upgrade making both tracks bi-di help? With a pretty nifty software routine written for the tracks, perhaps...
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Jan 3, 2009 18:25:29 GMT
Maybe, that will need a lot of new point work, and with the proposed frequencies, difficult.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2009 19:55:42 GMT
For the record, CULG makes the distance between Praed Street Jnct. and Edgware Road station 320m. Would perhaps upon the signalling upgrade making both tracks bi-di help? With a pretty nifty software routine written for the tracks, perhaps... This is why the T-cup won't work without killing off the Wimblewares. |
|
