When the "S" stock is introduced...

They don't get an "equal" share now. The Amersham off-peak service has 8 trains - try fitting that many down the Chesham branch.

Seriously though, the Met will be given their "share" of stock - however many trains that has been decided - and the service will be run using them - and leaving a few spare trains in depot for use when trains become defective.

All services, with the exception of the Chesham shuttle, are run as one line unit. Off-peak trains are generally dedicated to each of the services, and run up and down just on their "own" routes. During the peaks, and especially following the evening peak, trains drift from their usual services, and form services to the opposite destinations.

So for example, while train 434 may be an off-peak Uxbridge-Aldgate service, during the peak it may form a Baker Street-Watford or Aldgate-Amersham service. After the evening peak it may stable in depot early evening, or continue to run on any of the branches.

Amersham does have 8 trains on the service at 4tph! 410, 411, 412, 413, 414, 415, ,416, 417/

Watford has 440-447, 450-452

Uxbridge has 420-427, 430-435 and Chesham has 407.

Why do you say that?

AIUI, the plan is to run Chesham trains straight through to Baker Street - though admittedly at the expense of Amersham services.

Will that be to the current Watford station, or along the ex-LMS rails to Watford Junction?

As I was writing above, part of me thought I should make it clear I meant "our" Watford Junctions (between Moor Park, Ricky and Croxley) as opposed to "their" Watford Junction.

you mean off peak - diverting two peak trains would mean that you leave Amersham with no Met trains (and only 1tph) and also have a crash somewhere on the Chesham branch, as 15 minutes allows for no dwell time at Chesham (if you stepped back at Chesham, or brought back a two platform station, then you could run 3tph easy enough, though 4 is perhaps a bit too far, as it takes 7 or 8 minutes to do the Chalfont-Chesham route).

Chalfont-Amersham is busy at peak times (and a lot of people between the two stations drive to Chalfont to make us of the higher frequency of trains - by moving the Amersham trains to Chesham that would move all those with cars wanting to go shopping in London, or whatever to Chalfont) and also around 4, when there's lots of homeward commuting from the two Challoners schools - the girls school in Chalfont, with a lot of people who go there and live in Amersham, and more so the boys school in Amersham, with a lot of people who go there and live in Chalfont, Chorleywood, Rickmansworth, Moor Park, Pinner, Harrow, etc. There must be about 200 station entries in that short time.

When S stock allows 8tph or whatever to the Met main, then Amersham might as well get 6 of them, though having 2 of them going to Watford would be a better use of them, than London IMO.

where was that? 1tph was only mentioned wrt to the Chiltern peak service from Amersham IIRC, the changed (no mention of commuters - their pattern won't change: they already drive to Chalfont due to lack of Amersham trains in the peaks) habits would just be a repeat of what already happens in the peak, when only 2 met trains go from Amersham, in the off-peak.other than around 4pm... and then only because those people who would go from Amersham but have cars will drive to Chalfont (many do anyway to save a bit of money).no one's said Amersham to Chesham - I've said Amersham to Chalfont. It already happens at peak times when through-Chesham trains cut Amersham service and basically cutting the off-peak service to the peak service will just make it happen off-peak as well.

"Another theory is to run a Watford-Chesham service. Quite a nice idea really, taking full advantage of the north curve at Watford Junctions, and giving a useful but self-contained service between the two termini."

Don't know where this theory has come from !?!

1.) Consider terminal capacity at Watford
2.) Consider conflictions at Watford N Junc vs the 6 t.p.h service from Ricky (and north of) to London
3.) In order to maintain an off peak 2 t.p.h to Chesham, this service would require 3 train sets and crews all day, effectively another ten / dozen or so train ops = £500/600k p/a for very little customer benefit and 3 train sets that may not exist or could be far better utilised elsewhere!

I'm sorry to disappoint you, but it is one of a number of suggestions and is (apparently) undergoing serious consideration.

Careful timetabling can easily ensure no conflicts - if we can timetable a service across Aldgate junctions, Watford Junctions are more or less a doddle.

If such a service came into being, maybe the planning that has been looked into for the other option (every other Amersham to Chesham) could be used - in that Amersham may lose that "extra" service on either plan.

In this case, the reduction in Amershams gives you the extra drivers and trains needed.

Of course, I can only go on what I have heard discussed. Being merely a controller (and hopefully future controller) of such services, I would not for one minute think I would be in the consultation process.

they are very much on track

I thought that both pre-production S stock trains would go back to Derby. Both pre-production 09TS will.

And therein lies one of the problems with Aldgate (and I should know as I spent long enough studying it in relation to the software changes there.)

All trains are given the same amount of time, and yet 3 different types of rolling stock pass through the area, with different abilities to match the timetable - particularly with A-stock. This will become a thing of the past once S-stock is with us on all 3 lines.

In just the same way, as you say, Watford Junctions sees differing rolling stock and speed limits - and also to begin with, a much less frequent service than at Aldgate.

As for Watford turn-round time, why must all the recovery be lumped in there with huge reversing times? Yes it suits average late-running, and means you generally recover very quickly after average peaks, but as with now, if you're running right-time, Watford is a big no no for reversing anything else. So maybe a balance could be achieved to move some of this recovery to locations such as Harrow.

But in any case, as you say, the option is not being considered, so here endeth the conversation. I will move it back to the "No" list - on the ever-changing "Sheet of Rumours, Theories and Contra-theories With Regard to S-stock and the SSL Upgrades."

If any solid information is forthcoming (apart from denials that things are happening) it would be useful, as controllers are a regular contact point for those outside seeking such information - particularly when staff visit the control rooms (as Train Operators do regularly now).