Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2008 22:18:54 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2008 22:29:26 GMT
In my opinion it is another move by Boris to stop any public transport improvements. This one will hit the new service badly. The article does say TfL says delivery of the full scheme remains an incremental option for the future should funding become available and then Infrastructure works between Camden Road and Dalston Junction will allow additional trains to run and will provide a connection with the newly extended East London Line. The Olympic Delivery Authority has said it will contribute to the cost of the project. So if the ODA are paying, why has it been cancelled?
|
|
|
|
Post by Tubeboy on Sept 15, 2008 22:40:48 GMT
The ODA surely dont have carte blanche though as regards to funding? The traffic disruption on Camden's roads seems to be a big point.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2008 23:06:06 GMT
The traffic disruption on Camden's roads seems to be a big point. In other words, private transport before public transport. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2008 2:25:11 GMT
Well there are a lot of key bus routes down that way, but yes exactly. This is what you get when you vote Tory, even if he looks and sounds funny and the other candidates were equally poor.
|
|
Oracle
In memoriam
RIP 2012
Writing is such sweet sorrow: like heck it is!
Posts: 3,234
|
Post by Oracle on Sept 16, 2008 8:19:46 GMT
strain on its finances which, according to Mayor of London Boris Johnson, are facing a significant cash shortfall Hmmm...money does not just disappear in a short time just like that unless you are an investment bank.  This must all relate to well before the Mayoral election?  I am not au fait but haven't funds had to be allocated to the Metronet, in the words of Rolls-Royce, 'failure to proceed'? Most of members are too young to remember Doctor Beeching and the cuts that he made to our wonderful rail network. Beeching very nearly closed down the NLL, but I gather that vigorous lobbying resulted in its continuation. Good blinking job too!  We are also seeing new track doubling projects to reinstate where in the past singling was made to cut on costs. In South Wales it seems that the new line is exceeding expectations. Double-tracking may have to be introduced to increase capacity but it was allegedly done on the cheap with Assembly etc. funding and will probably cost a fortune to remedy. Hindsight is always perfect but at times it become apparent that saving money by simplification is possibly ill-advised. I have mentioned before that the North Ealing #-over was removed for various reasons. There was widespread discussion at the time amongst those members of LURS including those who actually controleld the lines that this was disinvesting. If it was there today, it could save a lot of hassle, and prove to be very handy for service regulation. I know that this is off-forum but say 40 or so years ago Hounslow Council allegedly were offered the freehold of what became Hounslow House next to the bus garage in London Road, Hounslow. These were brand-new offices. The council said that they would lease it because it would save money. In the end they occupied it for longer than was anticipated, and paid out more in rent than if they had bought it, and of course if they had there would have been an asset on the council's books! Going back on forum, I do wonder whether it is perhaps short-sighted not to 'go that extra mile' and reinstate the infrastructure as despite the consultants' opinions it may prove to be another 'Welwyn Viaduct'. Are 8 trains per hour going to be enough? +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ NOTE TO EDITORS The writer was once commissioned to consult & report on the likely efficacy or not of a new narrow-gauge railway in South-West Wales, and has had experience with reviews of reinstating infrastructure such as bridges, dismantled previously by British Railways to save on upkeep costs. He also works for a former consultant to the government on rail projects. *bows to the Boss 350 miles away* ;D |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2008 10:56:46 GMT
The part which is going to be worrying is going to be the capacity problem. With the new services the extra room was required to fit in the non LOROL services. In my opinion, this is going to have a terrible knock on effect.
I know this is a political comment, but is Boris going to be known as the Mayor who did nothing?
|
|
Oracle
In memoriam
RIP 2012
Writing is such sweet sorrow: like heck it is!
Posts: 3,234
|
Post by Oracle on Sept 16, 2008 11:07:56 GMT
Last week it appeared as though cross-river tram was on (per question time of the Mayor). If the run-down/closure of ticket offices on the LU is cancelled, then that is doing nothing in reverse? Money issues aside, and he may be hamstrung by previous administrations as I suggested, or thought I had, I agree...the roads and rail networks have shown consistently that cutting down on track capacity can be a nightmare in the future: not enough trains requiring mega-money spent on providing that capacity. In my experience, the BAA agreed to build a station box in T4 for the Picc station. Dithering and dallying and arguments over money meant that the BAA went ahead without it. When the link was on again, money having been found, it had to be stuck in the car park, and the line deviated slightly.
|
|
Oracle
In memoriam
RIP 2012
Writing is such sweet sorrow: like heck it is!
Posts: 3,234
|
Post by Oracle on Sept 16, 2008 11:27:59 GMT
Second thought: is any freight affected? ECS?
|
|
|
|
Post by max on Sept 16, 2008 12:01:37 GMT
A couple of years ago, back in Silverlink days, me and some friends tried out some NLL races: assuming that the NLL genuinely was a strategically important orbital line (as opposed to a local link for areas without satisfactory radial routes), how well did it compare with radial alternatives.
So, we tried journeys such as Highgate to Ilford, and Seven Sisters to Wembley Central, and in most cases the NLL route lost badly. For example, travelling from Seven Sisters to Oxford Circus and then out again by Bakerloo was faster than the NLL option.Taking the Northern Line from Highgate to Bank, then the Central line to Stratford and popping across the platform to get to Ilford defeated the other routes so much that I had time to finish a pint before the others caught up with me. The NLL option did win for a minority of journeys.
One reason for this was the awful NLL line speeds. Another was the 'interchange penalty', each extra interchange is a signifacant penalty on journey time. Lower frequencies than the tube lines also counted against it. Even if frequencies can be improved, the awful line speeds will always count against it.
|
|
|
|
Post by amershamsi on Sept 16, 2008 17:12:10 GMT
The NLL did beat going via Green Park for Finsbury Park-London City Airport (even though the NLL ended at Stratford at that point). Then again, via Green Park is a silly route - it didn't beat via Moorgate and Bank, arriving at the same time - as we all got on a Victoria line train, it meant 3 interchanges on both of the faster routes.
As far as I can tell, the NLL in NE London is a feeder line for Stratford and Highbury, plus for local traffic to Hackney, Stratford and Highbury, and a line for things like Stratford-Camden (that would be a good race - via Bank vs via Hackney - it's really weighted to the NLL, but I'm still not sure it would win). In fact, I just put Stratford-All Saints Greek Orthodox Church (0.22 miles from both Camden stations according to a rough Multimap) into the journey planner and it depends on when you set off - I set off at 1757, and two tube routes are quicker than the Overground, due to the frequency (and bare in mind that my change is at Bank, so I'm going via Tottenham Court Road, the long way). 44 minutes (11 walking) for the tube route, 30 for the Overground (9 walking). If it's somewhere closer to Camden Town as most of the markets and so on are, then it's even more debatable which is quicker.
The Goblin definitely can't function as a serious route for anything but feeding Barking, Gospel Oak and Blackhorse Road stations and providing a local link to Walthamstow and the South Tottenham/Seven Sisters area.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2008 23:05:47 GMT
I know this is a political comment, but is Boris going to be known as the Mayor who did nothing? I've heard him speak before and one of his well-rehearsed lines is about this, how he likes the Mayor in Jaws because when the shark comes 'he does nothing'. |
|
|
|
Post by ducatisti on Sept 17, 2008 8:08:01 GMT
mmm, it has to be said, it connects an awful lot of places that really don't seem to need that much connecting from a passenger point of view
Also, in terms of funding, the above comment about the bank might have more impact that the OP may have guessed. There's 4000 less daily passengers for the Jubilee right about now. Any farebox component of funding could well drop
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2008 8:55:14 GMT
For the record, we were tipped off to this by someone last monday: London Reconnections: North London Line Changes at Camden to be Scaled BackI emailed various people trying to get the word out, but only the Lib Dem LA office actually responded, which was annoying. Nice to see Transport Briefing finally checked their emails! Second thought: is any freight affected? ECS? My reading of the docs suggests not. Its only the NLL that's affected (that suffers to ensure that other services don't). Any talk of "minimising disruption" is justification for a decision already made on financial grounds. After all, if disruption was that much of a big deal why were they planning to carry out the work in the first place? mmm, it has to be said, it connects an awful lot of places that really don't seem to need that much connecting from a passenger point of viewIt may look that way on paper, but the NLL is ridiculously well-used. Sure, if you're in Stratford or Islington you've got options, but if you're in Hackney the NLL is a key route out. The Hackney - Dalston - Camden - Gospel Oak section is busy all through the day, being the most reliable connection between the various communities and high streets. Similarly it doesn't simply empty out at the tube connections during rush hour. Sure, a lot of people get off, but just as many get back on. There are a lot of people who use it to commute to West London without having to enter the dreaded Zone 1. Indeed, for many of them its the only affordable way to do that. Remember - not everyone's goal each day is to get into the City. |
|
|
|
Post by max on Sept 17, 2008 9:13:42 GMT
If the NLL ran 8 coach trains, it might not feel as busy...
Point is though, although the Underground map has this nice shiny bit of orange climbing over the top, for all too many orbital journeys, the radial option (into London and out again) is the better option. There seem to be a few certain cases where the NLL is better, but in general it is not, and including it on the map could be argued to be misleading. The current works and new trains don't seem to be improving much on this. If you could get a train every five minutes, and a line speed better than 20mph (or so it feels), then it might offer sound orbital alternatives, but even so the awful interchanges in West London (Willesden to Heathrow anyone?) mean that it misses out on one fo the few important outer-London destinations.
As for vital local connections, there are plenty of places left off the current Underground map, and many of them (e.g. Shenfield Line) have a vastly superior service to the NLL. What's so special about Hackney? Indeed, as a South Londoner born and bred, what's so special about the NLL.
IMHO there is nothing special about the NLL to make it a must-have addition to the Underground map. Trouble is, the current all-London railway maps are way past their sell-by date. The TfL version is useless for planning NR journeys, and the ATOC version is damaged by focussing on TOCs rather than service patterns.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2008 9:53:22 GMT
If the NLL ran 8 coach trains, it might not feel as busy...
But that's a non-argument, because it can't. That's like me saying the Victoria Line wouldn't be packed if they ran twice as many trains an hour.
Point is though, although the Underground map has this nice shiny bit of orange climbing over the top, for all too many orbital journeys, the radial option (into London and out again) is the better option.
For a given definition of "better."
Speedwise maybe it is, costwise not so much. Find me another way to get to Ladbroke Grove from Hackney for a quid and I'll consider it.
Even speedwise its not always the winner - whilst the works are going on I'm doing NR -> Liverpool Street -> LU -> Ladbroke Grove. It takes me longer than sitting on the NLL to Kensal Rise then walking down, and is far less reliable.
That's just my journey as well - talk to the various labourers, cleaners, mums & kids and every other low-paid worker that uses it to get between their home in Hackney and their job in Camden, Hampstead or further out and see what they think of the idea of a radial trip.
If the price to pay for a cheap, relatively reliable and relatively quick journey everyday is the need to actually check the timetable before leaving the house (because services are only every 15 minutes) then its a price many consider worth paying.
Anyway, I'm not arguing that there's anything special about it - what I'm saying is that it's very easy to dismiss it because it looks relatively pointless on paper when it is actually a well used line and one which certain areas rely heavily on. Hell, I used to dismiss it myself until I actually started coming into contact with it on a daily basis.
The other point worth making is that one of the major reasons for the current massive works is to provide some kind of excess capacity. Currently the NLL is already running beyond its maximum capacity, and there is absolutely no margin for error or one-of events that result in a big uptake of usage. That is a situation that simply cannot continue - the Radiohead gig crippled it during rush hour a couple of months back, so what on earth are the Olympics going to do to it?
Basically, I'm the first person to argue that there are plenty of places not on the Underground map (particularly in South London) that need attention. half-arsing the NLL improvements, however, isn't going to help accompish that.
If anything its going to make the situation worse, because all it means is that in five years time TfL are going to still be talking about "much needed" improvements to the NLL and South London Lines, rather than just concentrating on the later.
|
|
Oracle
In memoriam
RIP 2012
Writing is such sweet sorrow: like heck it is!
Posts: 3,234
|
Post by Oracle on Sept 17, 2008 10:16:59 GMT
I seem to recall that there's a Law that basically says that if you provide capacity, it will be filled, and if you provide bigger capacity that will be filled as well. A sort of Cornucopia! There are numerous historical examples in railway history. One that comes to mind is the electrification of the GNR suburban routes. I suppose I should add the Weymouth electrification with its effect on commuting, and Southampton-Fareham which was a godsend to those of us who lived along the line, to get to Southampton and London.
There are numerous examples of roads that have had to be widened, e.g. the M25 near Heathrow twice, the M27 at present from Fareham-Cosham (crawler lanes), and the fiasco that is M271-M3 (one extra lane both sides).
With the M25 it has been said that no-one foresaw the use by 'locals' to do short trips. I suppose the same must apply to the NLL? Whilst it is clearly available to go from Richmond-Stratford, how many passengers do? Conversely how many go on the northern section just a few stops? Having experienced the misery of the Cross-Country, formerly Virgin, services from/to Birmingham from Southampton I can attest to the fact that if you provide capacity, then it gets filled especially with relatively short-distance passengers, because they can. However when an 8-car loco-hauled is full & standing, it is sheer folly if not crass in my opinion to substitute an 8-car DMU, with reduced seating, and even more so just a four-car. I can tell you that even 8 years' commuting on the Picc to the West End was not sufficient experience to give me for enduring the conditions that would cause an outcry if it was cattle or sheep being transported by rail, not humans! Credit therefore to SWT who have at least attempted to enable more punters to be cra,mmed into a 450 (the HD version).
|
|
|
|
Post by max on Sept 17, 2008 10:21:13 GMT
No, my point is that too many people out there confuse crowding with usage. A packed three coach train does not make for a high priority transport investment, a packed eight coach train is a more important investment to relieve.
If you are prepared to walk, why not just get the Central Line all the way to Holland Park?
What is it about the NLL that attracts all this victim worship? Other underfunded but more important railways in London are used by various labourers, cleaners, mums & kids too. My mother used to live in South London but work in South East London, and so every day she had to go all the way into London Bridge and then out again. At least North London has some sort of orbital line.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2008 10:27:25 GMT
Oracle, I suspect you're not wrong on the "filling of available capacity" thing!
One of the problems currently with the NLL, however, is that its been oversubscribed for ages and only continues to get worse as Hackney starts to fill up with trendy people who can no longer afford to live in Hoxton.
I forget the exact figures, but usage has jumped up something stupid (like 25%) already since it became part of the Overground. They've already ripped out 3-seat sections in most of the carriages on the line in an effort to ease overcrowding, but that's about the limit of what they can do until the new trains and line works are completed!
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,763
|
Post by Chris M on Sept 17, 2008 10:34:10 GMT
If you are prepared to walk, why not just get the Central Line all the way to Holland Park? Have you tried to get on the Central Line in the peak? I don't do it often, but its full and standing by the time you get to Stratford. Commuters at Bethnal Green don't stand a chance of physically getting on a lot of trains. What is it about the NLL that attracts all this victim worship? Other underfunded but more important railways in London are used by various labourers, cleaners, mums & kids too. My mother used to live in South London but work in South East London, and so every day she had to go all the way into London Bridge and then out again. At least North London has some sort of orbital line.[/quote] Erm, I don't understand your point? Just because south London needs investment, it doesn't mean that north London doesn't. Your mum could (obviously) afford to do that, otherwise she wouldn't have got a job in SE London. Someone from Hackney can get a low-paid job in NW London because they can afford to get there - if they had no option but to pay zone 1 prices they wouldn't have been able to and so wouldn't have got that job. The reason why TfL are investing in the NLL and not south London is because they are the operator on the NLL and so can fund the operator's portion of the works. Currently the same investment for south London is the responsibility of Southern, South Eastern and SWT. |
|
Oracle
In memoriam
RIP 2012
Writing is such sweet sorrow: like heck it is!
Posts: 3,234
|
Post by Oracle on Sept 17, 2008 10:38:30 GMT
I have said previously that the NLL has its inherent support from the 'masses'. If there had not been vociferous objections to its closure then 'Beeching' (man and report) would have caused its closure. The GOBLIN survives and thrives because of its support. My HQ is in Cumbria...look at the past trials & tribulations of the Settle & Carlisle! It too has a 'Friends' supporting group. From Kirkby Stephen through to Appleby, where my HQ is based, there is a good usage of the DMUs that have been cascaded to the line. When you get to Appleby though, which by road is 35 miles from Carlisle, THE centre of everything major (hospitals, work, authorities, etc), the train is vital to get people to and from where they have to go! I gather that the 7.45 or whatever it is these days is full to bursting at time from Appleby. I am sure that if the TOC added extra cars the result would be even more usage.
I would be interested to hear how the NLL's 'sister line' the Watford-Euston DCs compare, as obviously you have NR and LU dualling for part of the way? Does that get crammed to the gunwhales at times?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2008 10:55:30 GMT
If you are prepared to walk, why not just get the Central Line all the way to Holland Park?
Have you ever tried to use the Central Line past Stratford in rush hour?
I do occasionally have to try from Liverpool Street when the H&C is completely shanked, but its a mission and a half. Notting Hill Gate is also an option. Neither are any quicker.
No, my point is that too many people out there confuse crowding with usage. A packed three coach train does not make for a high priority transport investment, a packed eight coach train is a more important investment to relieve.
A fair point - and one I'm happy to concede that I can be guilty of, but this:
A packed three coach train does not make for a high priority transport investment, a packed eight coach train is a more important investment to relieve.
Does not automatically follow on from it. There are a whole wealth of other factors that must come into play. Determining the relative priority of upgrading a 3-car line versus an 8-car simply by doing a direct passenger numbers comparison would be foolish at best.
Besides - that's not the point here. if we were talking about the merits of undertaking the NLL infrastructure works at all, versus works elsewhere then maybe it would be, but were not.
We're talking about scaling back works already underway in order to save a few quid. Can you honestly, hand on heart, tell me that you believe any money saved here is going to be invested in bettering packed services elsewhere?
What is it about the NLL that attracts all this victim worship? Other underfunded but more important railways in London are used by various labourers, cleaners, mums & kids too. My mother used to live in South London but work in South East London, and so every day she had to go all the way into London Bridge and then out again.
As I clearly indicated, I wasn't trying to make out that its some kind of special heroic train service worthy of a mention on a Noel Edmond's Christmas Day Show - what i was trying to point out was that your definition of "better" is probably quite different from that of a significant number of the lines users.
Do you think that's a fair statement? Or do you disagree?
At least North London has some sort of orbital line.
And South London deserves a reliable service too - in fact, the sooner we get a full Orbital the better. But sometimes realism has to trump idealism - the opportunity and political backing to improve the NLL was there, so it was taken. What's so wrong with that?
|
|
|
|
Post by amershamsi on Sept 17, 2008 12:32:10 GMT
With the M25 it has been said that no-one foresaw the use by 'locals' to do short trips. actually, they designed the M25 in the South and West sections for short hops, as ringway 3 was for long distance route there. What's stupid is that the 1989 Orbit study showed that the Heathrow section needed 3+2 lanes (it heavily advised against having more than 5 lanes on a carriageway) then, with the M40-A3 section needing it within 6 years (plus bits probably needing 3+3 lanes). What have we got? The M40-M4 bit having 4 lanes, as costs stopped it becoming 3+2 in the early 90s (it's as busy as the A30-M3 bit), most of the 4 lane stuff is happening 10 years to late - the M26 to the A405 and the M1 to the M20 were projected to have traffic levels warranting at least 4 lanes by '99 (it's pretty much everything save j3-5 and the bit between the j21a slips and the j21 slips). There's tons of suppressed demand on the M25, and suppressed demand is the "if you increase capacity it will just fill up" factor, however, that demand is not infinite, nor is not providing extra capacity as it would just fill up very sensible.I reckon that the NLL is mostly used for these short hops - feeding interchanges and town centres en-route. It's useless for Cross London journeys and the only benefit of it is that it's cheaper as it doesn't go via zone 1 (though you'd have to watch out as you can be charged that zone 1 anyway with Oyster). As I showed above, it might not get you to places en-route as quickly (though that's frequency being a problem), even when it's only 1/4 of the way round London. I'll wait until the works are over, and I bet there's not much in it for Highbury-West Hampstead (23 minutes is possible for the tube, with a change at Kings Cross, and Finchley Road), with Stratford-West Hampstead losing out. I'll happily accept that for the Hackney area, it's quicker, but that's got quite a bit to do with the WA lines being as slow as the NLL. Chelney will make the NLL traffic plummet.there are big Reading-Southampton, Winchester, Basingstoke and Oxford markets and for most of these, the XC route from Birmingham to Bournemouth provides a large part of the service (1/3 for Basingstoke, ~1/2 the fast service for Oxford and ~1/2 the service for Banbury) and all the service in the case of South Hampshire. Ideally their should be Reading-Southampton shuttle services (or extension of Reading terminators, but I feel fast Reading-Guildford service is something that makes sense - it could go to Portsmouth and connect those to cities to the XC network). |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2008 14:09:26 GMT
At least North London has some sort of orbital line.And South London deserves a reliable service too - in fact, the sooner we get a full Orbital the better. But sometimes realism has to trump idealism - the opportunity and political backing to improve the NLL was there, so it was taken. What's so wrong with that? It might do. That is unless Boris cancels ELL phase 2  |
|
|
|
Post by amershamsi on Sept 17, 2008 14:38:59 GMT
At least North London has some sort of orbital line.And South London deserves a reliable service too - in fact, the sooner we get a full Orbital the better. But sometimes realism has to trump idealism - the opportunity and political backing to improve the NLL was there, so it was taken. What's so wrong with that? It might do. That is unless Boris cancels ELL phase 2 he won't. Anyway, ELLX phase 2 fails to give South London a decent orbital - OK, the Clapham Junction end is orbital, but it's a bodge of radial lines and a link to the ELL. Interchange wise, it's as bad as the western end of the NLL - the London Bridge-Brighton ML, the Chatham ML, the Blackfriars route all fail to interchange with it. There's also the huge problem of the lines radiating out of London Bridge - no part of the ELL meets more than one - it's either change at Surrey Quays, or change at London Bridge (and the Greenwich route isn't served at all by Surrey Quays). The Nunhead-Lewisham route, with Brockley HL would interchange . I'm going to say that the best south London Orbital route would be Clapham Junction-Lewisham (with Brixton, Loughborough Junction and Brockley HL stations) as it meets with all but one line (the Greenwich one). 4tph Victoria (or Shepherds Bush if you feel that it must be orbital)-Lewisham and 4tph Clapham Junction-Highbury would do the trick, though. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2008 15:20:50 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2008 17:59:51 GMT
To be honest, I've always been cynical about all these proposals to turn the NLL/WLL etc into some super-duper metro system. I've always thought "hmmm ... I'll believe it when I see it" and have long felt we'd just end up with the same old service as now but with some new trains.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrjrt on Sept 18, 2008 15:01:01 GMT
It might do. That is unless Boris cancels ELL phase 2 he won't. Anyway, ELLX phase 2 fails to give South London a decent orbital - OK, the Clapham Junction end is orbital, but it's a bodge of radial lines and a link to the ELL. Interchange wise, it's as bad as the western end of the NLL - the London Bridge-Brighton ML, the Chatham ML, the Blackfriars route all fail to interchange with it. There's also the huge problem of the lines radiating out of London Bridge - no part of the ELL meets more than one - it's either change at Surrey Quays, or change at London Bridge (and the Greenwich route isn't served at all by Surrey Quays). The Nunhead-Lewisham route, with Brockley HL would interchange . I'm going to say that the best south London Orbital route would be Clapham Junction-Lewisham (with Brixton, Loughborough Junction and Brockley HL stations) as it meets with all but one line (the Greenwich one). 4tph Victoria (or Shepherds Bush if you feel that it must be orbital)-Lewisham and 4tph Clapham Junction-Highbury would do the trick, though. One idea I had was to build an new super-interchange on a par with Clapham Junction roughly to the east of where Millwall's ground is. You would then be able to have separate platforms on all of the lines as well as the ELL, creating a proper interchange. It'd also hopefully relieve London Bridge. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2008 17:22:17 GMT
Where on earth are they going to be able to cram more trains through Peckham Rye? They better not take my Southeastern service to Blackfriars away!
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282 
|
Post by Ben on Sept 18, 2008 18:21:15 GMT
The proposals for orbirail, renovating the NLL and redoing the services on it go back at least 34 years. Fact of the matter is public transport is the distant relation of modern day transport politics, at least in England. Sure, everyone will talk untill the cows come home about this and that; improving, doubling, quadrupling, enhanced service capacity...all the buzz words. But it never happens, remaining in ambience. I read an article yesterday that said triumphantly 'The Second Railway Age is upon us!'. And as much as I'd love to agree, and wish it were so, it isn't, flatly.
I don't blame Borris, or Ken. Its the people behind them, the 'Sir Humphrys' of this world. The one thing Ken had over Boris personally was that he was outspoken, and didnt give a damn if people didn't like what he said. Borris isn't allowed to do that, because simply he'll make an unintentional gaff if he does, unlike Kens intentional ones...
Frankly, I don't know many people my age who will stay in this country for the rest of their lives, but I'm really digressing here.
Willesden - Heathrow?? Well, the Paddington Greenford locals were at one point supposed to be diverted to Willesden via a new chord twixt NLL and GWML. That would have done it in one change.
Alternatively, reopen the South Acton stub, and dirvert some NLL trains into platform 5 at Acton Town.
|
|
This must all relate to well before the Mayoral election? 
I am not au fait but haven't funds had to be allocated to the Metronet, in the words of Rolls-Royce, 'failure to proceed'? 
We are also seeing new track doubling projects to reinstate where in the past singling was made to cut on costs. In South Wales it seems that the new line is exceeding expectations. Double-tracking may have to be introduced to increase capacity but it was allegedly done on the cheap with Assembly etc. funding and will probably cost a fortune to remedy. 
