Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2008 17:45:23 GMT
Right as well all know that there are ideas to alter the SSL in various way but Ive had a few ideas for myself. Now can anyone say if they are workable or not?
* Cut the Met to terminate at Baker Street or at least Farringdon making use of the soon to be disused platforms there to create a space to terminate trains out of the way of the circle tracks
* Scrap the Circle completely and replace it with
Wimbledon Line Wimbledon as is no to Earl's Court then loops around the circle
Hammersmith Line Basically the T-cup tho possibly to Farringdon rather than Edgware road
Barking Line Barking to Aldgate East then around the Circle
Thoughts?
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Mar 2, 2008 19:37:27 GMT
Mac, are you suggesting the Met should terminate at Farringdon or use the ex-Midland line to Moorgate/Barbican?
Met passengers won't like the change at Baker Street-Watford/Amersham passengers don't like it now! I think there are too many loop lines here. One would have to go (probably the Barking line).
The problem with Farringdon is that there is no space. The FCC trains will still be using plats 3-4 so there is nowhere to terminate and keep out of the way. To run an even service, only Edgware Road can be used to terminate T cup trains, otherwise the trains will overlap beyond Edgware Road.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2008 19:40:26 GMT
The idea would be that when the platforms for Thmeslink are abandoned in december this year that LU takes em over for use as terimating platforms. Only T-Cup/Hammersmith trains would terimate at Edgware Road as they can't loop back onto there line.
|
|
|
Post by cetacean on Mar 2, 2008 20:00:20 GMT
But there are no platforms being abandoned at Farringdon - maybe you mean Moorgate? But LUL already has barely used terminating platforms there, so I'd just use those.
|
|
|
Post by c5 on Mar 2, 2008 20:07:42 GMT
But there are no platforms being abandoned at Farringdon - maybe you mean Moorgate? But LUL already has barely used terminating platforms there, so I'd just use those. Moorgate is used a great deal! It's the get out of jail free card for the Met, a place to turn late running Circles and H&Cs and also if there is trouble on the District. I think it would be "simpler" to connect up to the current NR Moorgate TL branch when Farringdon sidings are no longer able to be used. You might just be able to cut across from the east end of the station onto the current NR lines. The Thameslink Route Upgrade will see the platforms at Farringdon extended south to 12 cars long - over the current junction.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2008 20:10:40 GMT
Yes sorry mean Moorgate not Farringdon!
Even cheaper then if there are terimating platforms!
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Mar 2, 2008 21:35:53 GMT
The section from just east of Farringdon to Moorgate will become out of use. By skewing the westbound running line into the NR tunnel, Barbican centre platforms could be used as a terminus, and with a little alteration at Moorgate, Barbican could be used to terminate traines form both directions.
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Mar 2, 2008 22:12:39 GMT
It would be great if platform 6 at Moorgate could become the Westbound platform and then plats 2-5 could become bay roads. Unfortunately, the work involved at Moorgate would be great, too great! I expect, something will happen to the Farringdon-Moorgate section, but what?
My guess: platforms 5&6 get fenced off and used as sidings to replace Faringdon/Edgware Road.
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Mar 2, 2008 22:36:49 GMT
Agreed: Moorgate would require too much work to alter.
I really think Barbican is the key; it would be an opportunity missed otherwise!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2008 22:43:34 GMT
Wouldn't it be better to terminate trains at Moorgate tho for the Northern Line interchange rather than at Barbican? Even if it does mean abit more work?
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Mar 2, 2008 22:55:00 GMT
Barbican would be a useless place to terminate trains I think. If a double junction could be made east of Farringdon (replacing the current sidings) then good access could be made to the bay roads at Moorgate, rather than poor crossovers next to Moorgate that take a while to clear.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2008 23:21:52 GMT
The ex-Thameslink platforms might become DLR ones. I really want to keep the Circle line as is. I can't think of anything I really want to change, just get rid of the flat junctions, rename the Wimbleware line and run a faster, more frequent service using ATO and upgraded signals.
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Mar 2, 2008 23:31:17 GMT
I can't see Moorgate getting DLR lines because of the cost. I want to keep the Circle Line, but I'd leave the Wimbleware line as the District line!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2008 0:35:26 GMT
DLR is actively looking at extending from Bank. Charing Cross or Kings Cross are the two main opitions at the moment tho.
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Mar 3, 2008 1:45:24 GMT
Getting rid of flat junctions is of the upmost importance; the problem is though that in central London there isnt that much space to build them that doesnt go for a premium. Unless you have the terminal platforms in the middle of the running lines, then the tracks must cross those of non terminating trains on the flat which limits capacity. Surely?
|
|
|
Post by ruislip on Mar 3, 2008 3:35:05 GMT
Met passengers won't like the change at Baker Street-Watford/Amersham passengers don't like it now! Why can't passengers from Watford/Amersham who need to travel east of Baker Street alight at Finchley Road and wait there for a train from Uxbridge? That would be the easiest thing to do. And outbound passengers on this route could board an Uxbridge train, and alight at Finchley Road to wait for an Amersham or Watford.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2008 7:30:10 GMT
Met passengers won't like the change at Baker Street-Watford/Amersham passengers don't like it now! Why can't passengers from Watford/Amersham who need to travel east of Baker Street alight at Finchley Road and wait there for a train from Uxbridge? That would be the easiest thing to do. And outbound passengers on this route could board an Uxbridge train, and alight at Finchley Road to wait for an Amersham or Watford. Because you'd miss the ability to change to the Hammersmith and City and the Circle line, which run the same route as those Met trains (bar Aldgate for the H&C) and provide an extra 16 trains per hour that you can't change to at Finchley Road.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2008 8:11:52 GMT
Well you could terimate all Met trains at Baker Street and provide cross platform interchange to the circle lines by building across the platform.
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Mar 3, 2008 11:34:50 GMT
Hell no! The flexibility of Baker Street is the ability to project trains into the City. We don't want to be cutting off platforms 2-3 from the city lines. Baker Street isn't the best station capacity wise. It's not poor, but it's not the best either. If all the Met passengers have to more to platform 5, things will get very busy!
Normally, Met trains are timetabled for cross junction working at Baker St East junction although this isn't always possible!
|
|
|
Post by c5 on Mar 3, 2008 16:26:07 GMT
Normally, Met trains are timetabled for cross junction working at Baker St East junction although this isn't always possible! ;D ;D ;D ;D
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Mar 3, 2008 17:39:36 GMT
Well they're supposed to be
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2008 19:47:24 GMT
If all Met trains terminate at Baker Street I can't think of any reason to call it a 'tube line' anymore, ether.
|
|
|
Post by amershamsi on Mar 4, 2008 0:29:47 GMT
The ex-Thameslink platforms might become DLR ones. I really want to keep the Circle line as is. I can't think of anything I really want to change, just get rid of the flat junctions, rename the Wimbleware line and run a faster, more frequent service using ATO and upgraded signals. only if you have very very steep gradients - the DLR is below the Northern at Bank - you have a long climb and the Northern line blocks this (and basements/vaults block sideways motion for a lot of the way between Bank and Moorgate) - there's not enough distance to get from 3 levels below the Met halfway between Bank and Moorgate to level with it at Barbican (also, Crossrail would cause problems for getting under the Thameslink lines a little further on, unless you end it at Farringdon). The only option I can see for using the Thameslink tracks for anything but storage sidings is if the up track is extended 'down' to merge into the circle and the whole thing is used for reversing sidings that don't reduce capacity on the main tracks. Basically it would put the through tracks on the outside of the reversing ones at Moorgate.
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Mar 4, 2008 18:22:02 GMT
If all Met trains terminate at Baker Street I can't think of any reason to call it a 'tube line' anymore, ether. I wouldn't consider the Met a 'tube' line anyway!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2008 18:32:02 GMT
If all Met trains terminate at Baker Street I can't think of any reason to call it a 'tube line' anymore, ether. I wouldn't consider the Met a 'tube' line anyway! Well, what I mean is, it wouldn't be more than a commuter railway instead of a metro line, not actually taking you through but simply to London.
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Mar 5, 2008 1:10:43 GMT
I understand what you are saying! As a child of Metroland, a student of Metroland and a 'product' of Metroland, I've always thought of the Met as a suburban railway. I never understand it when people talk of the Met as a 'tube' railway. The number of 'debates' with my friends over this builds up. Whenever I use the Met, I'm taking the train, not the tube! I'm sure we are all familiar with Sir Edward Watkin's aims for the Met, and his aim for it to be a main line railway. This image lives on. The trains are huge, the seating is dense (for now ) and the commuters thrive on it! Maybe times will change?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2008 7:55:57 GMT
Prefect example of how special the Met is, coming home from Kenton/Northwick Park heading for Stratford. Get a comfortable seat that you can easily sleep in with very little announcements (i.e. DVA not going on and on like some lines) and stay onto Baker Street. get on the Jubilee Line and realise how noise it is. And after the Met feels very cramped! But I still love going on the Tube but the Met is something different.
|
|
|
Post by peterc on Mar 7, 2008 15:44:03 GMT
From an engineering point of view Benedict's idea of a central road at Barbican sounds excellent. The Thameslink platforms could still be accessible for storing rolling stock.
From a business point of view it isn't so great but would put a lot of resilience into the system.
My personal dream ticket is a tunnel from a point between Finchley Road and Baker Street surfacing again in the Widened Lines east of Farringdon with a four road terminus at Moorgate.
|
|