Apologies for the long post, replying to two posts responding to each of my earlier points.
Can I recommend taking mr_jrt with a pinch of salt - s/he is well known for making unrealistic and ill thought out proposals in a few places where you might find them unhelpful, and rising to it isn't going to help.
There's no need for that attitude, thank you. The thread title is about the MKC-Croydon service, so comments in how I think that flow could be improved are quite on-topic. "Unrealistic and ill thought out" is purely subjective as well, so please, there's no need for the tone of your post.
Steady on!
He and I often don't agree (especially on Crossrail up the Chiltern!) but I don't think he's trolling as you unfairly imply - just passionate and with his own ideas. We all have our own biases and all of our ideas can seem farfetched to some.
Thank you. As always, this is a discussion forum - for discussion. If everyone was part of some horrible groupthink it's be fairly pointless. You lot, by all means critique the ideas, but do so constructively please. When someone proposes something it's their job to convince others and other's job to convince them otherwise.
Please continue defending him. I didn't accuse him of trolling however, just giving me a massive headache when I'm reading any forum or comments thread he's posted on.
Time for a dubious statements box maybe.
Reading dissenting opinions gives you a massive headache? - Perhaps you need to stay away from the internet...there's a lot of different opinions on there
You're going to find a way to fit that into Victoria? They run in addition to the normal frequency anyway.
I wasn't aware of that...something new to ponder. That said, soon the SLL services will be gone, freeing up Battersea-terminal capacity, and if I had my way and the outer SLL went to Willesden instead of Victoria, then you'd also have additional free capacity Clapham-terminal. Not sure what good it'd do give there's no additional lines south of there...but useful slack paths aside, it'll probably be useful perhaps if NR ever build that tunnel from Purley they keep bringing up
You're proposing 8tph Sydenham<>Clapham Junction?
Something along those lines, yes. There are currently 6tph you can catch (dpt. x:07 x:17 x:26 x:37 x:47 x:56), which funnel you into 4 services (arr. x:31 x:44 x1:01 x1:15) by changing at Crystal Palace. I'm well aware timetabling is a complex topic, but the line Crystal Palace<>West Norwood Junction is only used additionally by services to Beckenham Junction and Sutton, so some rejigging to those could make more paths available, or the signalling could be improved as that doesn't seem to have a particularly high frequency (6tph all stations? - and I'm not aware of any non-stoppers running that way). It's even easier through Streatham Hill...but the bottleneck becomes Balham Junction-Clapham Junction. There are several major obstacles to widening the alignment here for an additional pair to solve that, but nothing insurmountable, given the will.
I advise checking that with a tape measure
Ditto,
looks fine to me. The lines were slightly straightened out once the platforms were removed. They can just as easy be skewed back, and if everything on the slow lines would be stopping, then the curvature for those (within reason) is largely irrelevant. You also have lots of low-density industrial buildings all around. There are very few minor issues here, and no major ones. Feel free to go into more detail.
Yes, of course, that follows. :roll:
I know.
Thank God you're not proposing sending more down it, eh? Ah, sorry, my mistake.
Your grasp of maths is failing you. 4tph LO + 2tph Southern = 6tph, which are the current service levels. If you're going to be aggressive, at least make an effort to get your facts straight.[/quote]
While I'm in the area, I just thought I'd check that the unlikely thing under discussion was the slow lines connected to the Abbey Line, and not the DC lines (as we've had in the past), yes?
I've always meant the slow lines in this discussion. I'd
like a diveunder from the DC lines to the Abbey line, but that's something else entirely.
Ah, yes, you're good at counting train paths. Would you mind showing us your working on this one please?
Euston's throat is extremely well designed, I've never been held waiting for a platform in all my years, and there are regularly 3-4 empty long platforms (usually including 18, 17 & 16).
It's actually one of the major things that would need to be considered. Whilst a solution could almost certainly be found, don't just try and brush it off.
It's a funding issue, not a engineering one. Hence why it's easy enough compared to the other factors to not worry about.
I could have sworn you said the WLL was full a second ago. Ah well.
You'll note, I wasn't proposing that, just saying it should have tube-style frequencies, like the north and east London lines. There is a difference, an aspiration isn't a proposal. Crucial to achieving that is either moving freight off the WLL, or laying more tracks. I happen to thing given it's importance that the WLL should have a policy of being opportunistically four tracked where possible so LO's frequency can be increased. But anyway.
This overcrowding of course being unique to Euston services, and not common to virtually every single route into the capital at one time or another, including Southern's WLL services?
I'm not saying they're not overcrowded? Just if you want to try to resolve overcrowding you have to maximise the capacity where possible. A chain is as strong as it's weakest link, and likewise, a train service has the capacity of it's shortest platform and the pathing restrictions across at least two VERY busy mainlines. Decouple them and you greatly simplify pathing and can then increase paths on three different lines.
If you introduce another change at Willesden, then what will happen is that all but a brave few will opt to go via London and the tube instead as it will almost certainly be more convenient, particularly when they still haven't built your platforms at Willesden.
Well, duh. Obviously no platforms at Willesden means this is a non-starter. I think you underestimate the passengers TBH. A lot of them rely on journey planners and ticket clerks to sell them tickets, and given so many have found their way onto the slower cheaper routing via Olympia, I' suspect the vast majority would continue to do so. I know I would. ...and
of course, it's far more convenient to scrum onto the Victoria Line at Euston and Victoria and through the maze of passageways than ~50m across a footbridge at Willesden and the same (which they largely already do!) at Clapham. I'm sorry, no, I disagree.
This is not entirely true.
For the purposes of this discussion though, it probably is.
It is debatable if this is as much of a benefit as you think, although it certainly would be a benefit.
Yay, a concession! Once the area is redeveloped it will become even more significant. Willesden and Old Oak have the potential to put Stratford to shame. It's crucial the infrastructure gets the most made out of it.
I recommend getting your tape measure out again.
I agree, that layout would be very difficult to manage, but it would be possible if things like the turning circle for the buses was elevated and the depot access altered. These are not insurmountable things because they are all railway property.
This is all very spurious. Check it all.
No, you'll have to be more concise than that. Please be more specific.
It is my opinion that we established in the first 50 posts of this thread that it is currently unclear as to what is going to happen on the WLL in the future, so don't be too certain yet.
It's funny, I went fact checking and discovered my information was out of date. You see, that 2nd tph Southern wanted to operate was in the 2008 RUS. And runs now, in the peaks. And terminates at Shepherds Bush.
So it's just the lengthening to 8-cars that is coming up in CP5. Don't get me wrong - Southern want to run to Watford (as MK's bay is only 4-car, so they can't run that far)...but I would imagine there just aren't paths. Because of the difficulty of pathing across 3 busy lines, 2 of which are major mainlines. Which is the point I've been trying to make.
Ah, I see you've been out with the tape measure again.
No, I have eyes. And the ability to judge and compare distances. Do you? You can clearly see that the distance from Willesden Junction High Level's central building to where the WLL platforms would go is compatible to the length of the high-level platforms, which are themselves only marginally longer than the existing interchange from the low-level DC line station.
Where are these metro services going when they hit Clapham, remind me?
See above reply about Crystal Palace<>Clapham
These are staff only i believe and not for passenger use.
They used to be unannounced years back, but the last few times I've been on a service heading to Watford at some ungodly hour they have actually been announced on the PIS.
If passengers really need to use the NLL/Watford DC/WLL - then you may as well just increase calls at Wembley Central, as a few minutes down the DC line is Willesden, lot easier than building additional platforms.
A fair point. It's a good stopgap, certainly, if you can convince LM to stop for that. The slooooow journey to Willesden via LO would destroy it as an interchange though, it'd just be too slow.
Fast line services would rarely, if ever, stop at stations south of Watford so thats even more unlikely. Virgin tend to stop at MKC and LM tend to just suspend everything !! LOROL does usually keep running though which is of course incredibly useful.
Indeed. It'll be the one thing I'll miss when they get evicted from Euston.
2tph Trings and 2tph the 321 Watford shuttles. When you add the half-hourly Southern service (between Clapham and Watford) and LOROL, its fairly frequent. Off-peak its 2tph LM, 1tph Southern and 3tph LOROL. Of course the Southern services dont call at Bushey - maybe that could be inserted as a call.
It's quite annoying that one, actually. My folks actually live in Bushey, and that's their local station, but to catch my Southern I have to go to Watford Junction or Harrow. Ironically, the journey is cheaper from Watford than Harrow...go figure. In the peaks when I commuted from there was certainly demand for at least a couple more 12-car tphs, and everything bar the Southern was already 12 car between 7am and 8am.
You are right, it is 110mph. Not sure existing units will be free'd up though.
The point I was going for was that if those new units are for Northamptons, then the units currently providing it will be freed up.
There is a siding there, yes and it is used a lot because of Westfield. As im not 100% certain where it will terminate i wont say more details on it. I think Watford would be a more suitable place myself (you could also extend it onto the Abbey Line but thats another topic altogether.
As discussed above, yes, 1tph terminates there, although Southern agree with you and would prefer Watford.
1 change is all some people can manage, especially that 20 minutes up the line your going to need to change again. It wouldnt be a small distance to change either, as you would need to cross most of the station to get to the "new" platforms, which would be longer than it currently takes at Clapham. It doesnt really mean more services can run either as 1tph is freed up, but it isnt worth adding an extra LOROL service as the Southern paths run 5 minutes after the current LOROL services. Slight exaggeration on "half the train" emptying at Harrow too, ive never had this (a few get off yes but not half the train, which is usually nearly full up !!)
Fair points - that's the kind of feedback I like. On the subject of Harrow, it was really, really dangerous, so I'm being honest. Our train left Euston at 6:54pm, pulled into Harrow at 7:14-odd and the LO service was due at 7:16. Losing a minute or two was strangely frequent and given it's 3tph on the DC lines there was a mad scramble up those stairs almost every night. LO was usually late mind you...but people weren't to know. Solidified my mind on the importance of cross-platform interchanges and pairing by direction if nothing else!
