London Overground completes the orbital

[313103]

If they could shift more of the freight off onto the Goblin to relieve the NLL and widened the bottleneck west of Camden Road, I'd love to see the DC lines diverted away from Euston and hooked up to the ELL as one continuous DC line.

This will never happen because for one by putting more freight onto the Gospel Oak to Barking you will affect the Gospel Oak to Barking line services which is more or less running at maximum capacity without dispruption to service pattens.

Secondly the bottleneck west of Camden Road can never be resolved west of Camden due to the junction being on a viaduct that then splits in two 1 via Primrose Hill and the other vis Gospel Oak, and then the line's are both two trcked all the way, however you could never put additional track in on the Primrose Hill line due to the width restriction where the railway crosses Chalk Farm Road.

Thirdly third rail rail would not be permitted to be put down as its an area where third rail does not exist, there is no infill.

The change that could be done within costs is to bring back platforms 3 & 4 at Camden Road and four track it all the way to where the line seperates just east of Caledonian Road. It would allow more space and could allow the DC service to be permantley diverted away from Euston. But and there is always a but in these things, this plan was supposed done as part of the original upgrade, however logistics of closing roads to allow bridges to be replaced could not fit in with the demand the roads have in that area, bearing in mind apart from Camden Road itself all the other roads are on one way systems with no viable alternative diversion and this is why it was scrapped in the first place. To have done this would of required Camden Road being closed to remove and replace the existing structure which is right across a busy road junction one of which is a one way road and the diversions would mean that because the other one way steets lead onto the one way road at Camden they are no good. It would mean that Camden Road would have to be closed at its junction with York Way (at this point also one way and about one mile further up) and all traffic diverted all the way down to Kings Cross and with no viable road for a right hand turn along the Euston Road that will take all this extra traffic to head back up to Camden.

 

[tbtc]

LO is a fantastic example of what is possible, and I'm glad that they are starting this new service. Other cities have had to move to light rail to find the funds for urban transport improvements, but London has got something that must make those in Edinburgh, Manchester, Newcastle, West Bromwich etc fairly envious - hopefully the new standards of LO (in terms of investment in trains, simple frequencies, attention paid to station environments etc) will become the standard elsewhere (even if the trains don't all have an orange stripe).

 

[AndyLandy]

Whilst in general I'm in favour of making things AC, I would have made an exception for GOBLIN. Given the rest of LO is electrified in one form or another, it's rather unfortunate that different stock is required for that line. One assumes that laying third rail doesn't involve the same costs that would be required to string up wires along the GOBLIN, such as modifying all the bridges.

 

[Wolfie]

Whilst in general I'm in favour of making things AC, I would have made an exception for GOBLIN. Given the rest of LO is electrified in one form or another, it's rather unfortunate that different stock is required for that line. One assumes that laying third rail doesn't involve the same costs that would be required to string up wires along the GOBLIN, such as modifying all the bridges.

What you say is probably correct, about the PASSENGER service. However, what about freight? The only electric freight locos are AC overhead powered. In general people on here seem (quite rightly in my view) to be against the concept of running diesels over (particularly newly) electrified lines.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

This will never happen because for one by putting more freight onto the Gospel Oak to Barking you will affect the Gospel Oak to Barking line services which is more or less running at maximum capacity without dispruption to service pattens.

Third rail would not be permitted to be put down as its an area where third rail does not exist, there is no infill.

You may be right about the GOBLIN capacity BUT how many passengers use the NLL and how much might that be increased if the freight is shifted off. Greatest benefit for the most?

I believe you accurately quote current policy witrh respect to third rail.

 

[AndyLandy]

What you say is probably correct, about the PASSENGER service. However, what about freight? The only electric freight locos are AC overhead powered. In general people on here seem (quite rightly in my view) to be against the concept of running diesels over (particularly newly) electrified lines.

Perhaps. Although we're currently running diesel passenger and freight services on that line. Third rail would at least make some of those services electric.

Oh, and Class 73. They might be getting on a bit now, but GBRF certainly felt like they needed some fairly recently.

 

[313103]

With regard the Gospel Oak to Barking line, it would seem that a investment policy in line with what has gone on with the rest of the LO network is what is really required. This needs more long term planning rather then short term planning.

Electrification across the whole route is required, the class 172s should be withdrawn and replaced by procurement of class 378s (i think that may be an additional 4 to 6 sets) to supplement the rest of the fleet and without harming the other services. There are a couple of areas that would require a lot of work done. The A1 Holloway Road at Upper Holloway would either require the line and associated platforms being dropped by about 2 feet to fit under the road bridge or the Road Bridge being lifted (highly unlikely), Track work between Upper Holloway and South Tottenham to be done to raise the maximum speed limit to around 45/50 mph then the current 30, A possible redesign of South Tottenham station, the bridge over the lea navigation which is currently restricted to 20mph to be replaced, possible slabbing of and reducing the height of the rail head between Blackhorse Road and Walthamstow Queens Road (slabbing because of the problem with wet patches along this section currently a 20 tsr is in place, and lowering due to so many bridges in this area at the minimum requirements), some bridges were replaced this year so to upgrade the line possible replacement of other bridges maybe required, other then that not a lot needs to be done!.

Oh i forgot once the trains are electric it will require new platforms at Gospel Oak and the bay platform to be closed, with through platforms put in place and the service to be integrated as put of the wider NLL service pattens.

 

[swt_passenger]

Oh i forgot once the trains are electric it will require new platforms at Gospel Oak and the bay platform to be closed, with through platforms put in place and the service to be integrated as put of the wider NLL service pattens.

Yet another proposal that completely disregards the existing level of freight services west of Gospel Oak. The sort of integration with the NLL you are after is nothing like as easy as you think it is, it is already at capacity for most of the day, which is why the through services to Clapham Jn only run at limited times...

 

[313103]

Yet another proposal that completely disregards the existing level of freight services west of Gospel Oak. The sort of integration with the NLL you are after is nothing like as easy as you think it is, it is already at capacity for most of the day, which is why the through services to Clapham Jn only run at limited times...

Through service to Clapham Junction on the NLL after 19.30 hrs only stopped in September 2012 (i dont think LO wanted negative publicity so brought ahead its timetable change scheduled from December by two months). So it is now back to how it use to be after 19.30 with the Clapham Junction services now relegated to being a shuttle service again.

I know exactly what problems there is in doing such schemes, i didnt say it would be easy either. I know exactly what problems there is on the NLL having been a Guard on the route since 1993. The problem with a few of the freight traffic on the NLL is that it doesnt have to come via London at all. Some start at say Felixstowe or Harwich and often going to destinations in the North West and North East of England and onto Scotland, but are routed via London because routes across East Anglia are not suitable or closed.

Until something is sorted out the Gospel Oak to Barking Line will remain diesel operated until further notice. The bay platform will not acomodate a 4car train of any type as the platform is not long enough with no room at either end for a extension. I think you could just squeeze a 3 car 172 although i am not sure if it will affect the drivers vision for the departing signal.

 

[mr_jrt]

This will never happen because for one by putting more freight onto the Gospel Oak to Barking you will affect the Gospel Oak to Barking line services which is more or less running at maximum capacity without disruption to service pattens.

The line's service pattern isn't written in stone. It's the Goblin line, not the Gospel line

If there's more benefit to adding capacity to the NLL than is lost by taking away from the Goblin, then it's justified.

Secondly the bottleneck west of Camden Road can never be resolved west of Camden due to the junction being on a viaduct that then splits in two 1 via Primrose Hill and the other vis Gospel Oak, and then the line's are both two trcked all the way, however you could never put additional track in on the Primrose Hill line due to the width restriction where the railway crosses Chalk Farm Road.

Nonsense. It's just a viaduct that can be widened. As an example, HS2 are suggesting just that happens for their planned ill-thought-out take over of the southernmost track through Camden Road to link to HS1. Once widened, you could quite easily have Watford to Surrey Quays as a two-tracked DC line, and Willesden Junction to Stratford via Gospel Oak as a two-tracked AC line.

Thirdly third rail rail would not be permitted to be put down as its an area where third rail does not exist, there is no infill.

Connecting the DC lines at South Hampstead to the ELL at H&I sounds very much like reasonable infill to me....

The change that could be done within costs is to bring back platforms 3 & 4 at Camden Road and four track it all the way to where the line seperates just east of Caledonian Road. It would allow more space and could allow the DC service to be permantley diverted away from Euston. But and there is always a but in these things, this plan was supposed done as part of the original upgrade, however logistics of closing roads to allow bridges to be replaced could not fit in with the demand the roads have in that area, bearing in mind apart from Camden Road itself all the other roads are on one way systems with no viable alternative diversion and this is why it was scrapped in the first place. SNIP.

If you say so. I say it didn't happen as the cost was too great for the pot of funding available, and having just a Camden Road to Stratford shuttle wasn't of enough benefit to justify the cost of restoring the bridges. The freight demands on the NLL are so great because of the lack of diversionary routes around London and this means that increasing passenger services comes quite low down the list.

Widening the viaduct to permit 4 lines, restoring the bridges east of Camden Road, restoring 4 tracks and restoring the DC electrification on the southern pair of lines between H&I and Camden Road would be a worthy follow-on project from the current LO schemes, IMHO, but would require the Goblin upgraded to handle the greatly increased freight levels. East-West-Rail may well help with this.

 

[Class377/5]

Until something is sorted out the Gospel Oak to Barking Line will remain diesel operated until further notice. The bay platform will not acomodate a 4car train of any type as the platform is not long enough with no room at either end for a extension. I think you could just squeeze a 3 car 172 although i am not sure if it will affect the drivers vision for the departing signal.

If a 3 car 172 could fit in there (even if the western cab is off the edge) then its not that difficult to extend. 3 car 172 is 69m long, a 4 car 378 is 80m so we're talking about 11m of difference. That's one set of doors OOU without platform extension. I don't see from google maps where there would be a engineering issue in getting the extra length from the western end but would require some significant but not un do-able works. Especially if you only aim to get all passengers doors on the platform.

 

[VTPreston_Tez]

Will the line actually run as orbital though? The new map on the trains (as already posted) doesn't particularly suggest this.

 

[maniacmartin]

Indeed. To complete an orbit you'd need to change at Clapham Junction and Highbury & Islington

 

[yorkie]

I have split the debate where a former member (who has deactivated his account) made comments about areas of London that this line goes through into a separate thread in the General Discussion forum.

Can I remind people that our rules state "if any content causes you concern, please alert us to it, by reporting (

) it." The report button is at the bottom-left of each post. You can also report off-topic discussion using this method. We do rely on these reports in order to take appropriate action, which has taken place.

Will the line actually run as orbital though? The new map on the trains (as already posted) doesn't particularly suggest this.

The maps and journey planners correctly show the usual service patterns.

The 'orbital' route is served typically by:

• Clapham Jn - Highbury & Islington (via SLL & ELL) and
• Clapham Jn - Stratford (via WLL & NLL) in addition to
• Richmond - Stratford (via NLL)

 

[bicbasher]

IanVisits has posted a full video of the cab view from Dalston Junction to Clapham Junction.

http://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/2012/11/27/east-london-line-drivers-cab-video/

 

[12CSVT]

One interesting quirk of the new London Overground timetable is that every half hour, two trains will depart Clapham Junction 2 minutes apart and arrive at Highbury & Islington 2 minutes apart (the journey time via West London / North London Lines being 4 minutes quicker than via East London Line).

 

[ATW Alex 101]

Will the line actually run as orbital though? The new map on the trains (as already posted) doesn't particularly suggest this.

And even if it was timetabled as orbital it would involve a reversal at Clapham Junction

 

[Deerfold]

Will the line actually run as orbital though? The new map on the trains (as already posted) doesn't particularly suggest this.

I doubt they'd ever consider running a line like this - trying to recover from any delays would be horrendous.

Just look at the effort that went into getting rid of the circle line on the underground (and the much improved service, despite it theorectically going from every 8.5 minutes to every 10).

 

[jopsuk]

Will the line actually run as orbital though? The new map on the trains (as already posted) doesn't particularly suggest this.

As well as it not being a sensible idea in operational terms (circular services quickly stack up delays/train queues, especially on shared lines), the layout at both Clapham and Highbury & Islington splits the service. One minor issue is that H&I/Cannonbury are not designed to allow cross-platform same-direction interchange- but with the service split as it is, rebuilding t line to allow this would have been massively more expensive than it was, requiring a flyover.

 

[greatkingrat]

One interesting quirk of the new London Overground timetable is that every half hour, two trains will depart Clapham Junction 2 minutes apart and arrive at Highbury & Islington 2 minutes apart (the journey time via West London / North London Lines being 4 minutes quicker than via East London Line).

Maybe they should show the ELL trains terminating at Canonbury, like they do with the slow Cambridge trains shown as Foxton!

 

[GodAtum]

From the BBC:

Southwark Rail Users Group, a local residents' group, held a demonstration at Denmark Hill on Saturday to "mourn the loss" of South London Line services into central London.

Jane Smart, from Peckham Rye who commutes to Victoria, said she would have to take a train to Clapham and then a bus.

"My current journey of a quick 15 minute ride on the train will more than double. In fact, 15 minutes could become 40 minutes or more," she said.

Both passenger watchdog London TravelWatch and Labour's transport spokesperson in the London Assembly, Val Shawcross, also criticised the move.

Richard Freeston-Clough, spokesman for London TravelWatch, said despite a more frequent service "some existing users will be worse off".

Ms Shawcross said: "The South London Line is also highly valued by staff and patients at four key London hospitals - Guys, St Thomas, Kings College and the Maudsley, as it provides a direct link between Denmark Hill (where Kings College and Maudsley hospitals are located) and London Bridge ( for Guys)," she added.

Denmark Hill and Peckham Rye are still served by direct trains to Blackfriars and Victoria provided by Southeastern.

TfL said the mayor was in discussions with the government about creating a new off-peak service from 2014 to connect Bromley South to Victoria, stopping at Peckham Rye and Denmark Hill.

How will they be worse off if there is still a SE service to Victoria? Why does Jane have to go to Clapham when she can get a train to Victoria from Peckham Rye?

 

[greatkingrat]

Although Denmark Hill and Peckham Rye are served by the SE Victoria - Dartford services, Clapham High Street and Wandsworth Road do not have any alternative.

 

[GodAtum]

I still dont get what she is complaining about as she can get the train from Peckham Rye to Victoria?

Jane Smart, from Peckham Rye who commutes to Victoria, said she would have to take a train to Clapham and then a bus.

"My current journey of a quick 15 minute ride on the train will more than double. In fact, 15 minutes could become 40 minutes or more," she said.

And according to NR its a 23 min journey from Wandsworth Road - Victoria.

 

[bicbasher]

Although Denmark Hill and Peckham Rye are served by the SE Victoria - Dartford services, Clapham High Street and Wandsworth Road do not have any alternative.

Clapham High Street does. The Northern line where Jane from the activists group could change there for a brief walk to Clapham North and at Stockwell which is a cross-platform interchange for the Victoria line if she misses the 2tph to Victoria which Southeastern provides from Denmark Hill which could be argued transported the bulk of passengers from DH and Peckham Rye before the SLL closed.

 

[tripleseis]

There are plenty of buses to Victoria from Denmark Hill too. It's hardly cut anyone off.

I expect the same moans from Herne Hill once the Wimbledon Loop trains are forced to terminate at Blackfriars in a few years time.

 

[bicbasher]

There are plenty of buses to Victoria from Denmark Hill too. It's hardly cut anyone off.

I expect the same moans from Herne Hill once the Wimbledon Loop trains are forced to terminate at Blackfriars in a few years time.

I tried that one on the local forum which serves DH and PR which fell on deaf ears, although it appears it's convienced some people after it started yesterday when a passenger had a "stress free journey" from DH to Bond Street changing at Canada Water for Christmas shopping.

Herne Hill was also discussed there earlier in the year where a simple change at Blackfriars fell on deaf ears, despite the increased frequency on the TL core once it starts.

 

[RJ]

There are plenty of buses to Victoria from Denmark Hill too. It's hardly cut anyone off.

Any ideas how long the 185s take during the morning peak? It's quicker to wait 30 minutes for the next train and take that to Victoria!

I take it you don't have much understanding of the local area at all?

 

[GodAtum]

Any ideas how long the 185s take during the morning peak? It's quicker to wait 30 minutes for the next train and take that to Victoria!

I take it you don't have much understanding of the local area at all?

Its 24 mins according to TFL.

 

[RJ]

Its 24 mins according to TFL.

Hopelessly unrealistic in the morning peak. It takes 10 minutes just to get through the traffic at the bottom of Denmark Hill/Camberwell Green. Also factor in the bus driver's leisurely crew changes at Camberwell Green then the rush hour traffic along Camberwell New Road and Vauxhall Bridge Road.

Plus you assume that you will get on the first bus. Many a time in the Denmark Hill area I haven't even been able to get on the first 185 towards London between 0730 and 0830 because they're already packed beyond capacity with school kids, then commuters from the parts of Forest Hill and Dulwich which aren't close to a rail station and even if they are, don't have any practical links to Camberwell or Vauxhall.

What's the point in quoting duff statistics off a website when you have no understanding of the way things actually happen locally?

 

[bicbasher]

Hopelessly unrealistic in the morning peak. It takes 10 minutes just to get through the traffic at the bottom of Denmark Hill/Camberwell Green. Also factor in the bus driver's leisurely crew changes at Camberwell Green then the rush hour traffic along Camberwell New Road and Vauxhall Bridge Road.

Plus you assume that you will get on the first bus. Many a time in the Denmark Hill area I haven't even been able to get on the first 185 towards London between 0730 and 0830 because they're already packed beyond capacity with school kids, then commuters from the parts of Forest Hill and Dulwich which aren't close to a rail station and even if they are, don't have any practical links to Camberwell or Vauxhall.

What does reading statistics of a website mean if you have no appreciation of how things actually happen locally?

if you factor in the other 3 routes which stop outside Denmark Hill station during the morning peak, the 176 and 484 will also be packed, however Route 40 starts from Dulwich Library which would give the most likely opportunity for space on a bus. For those passengers who live close to DH station, Camberwell Green is a short 5-10 minute walk with regular services to Victoria.

Regardless of which mode of transport you use in London, they're always going to be packed. Who hasn't been been able to board the first service on the tube or NR during the morning peak due to delays. The same happens to buses.

 

[tbtc]

What's the point in quoting duff statistics off a website when you have no understanding of the way things actually happen locally?

Maybe you know more about bus timings than the TfL website (?), but I'd still take it as a fair benchmark for public transport information...