Should the Metropolitan Line become part of the London Overground network?

[ChiefPlanner]

The Met line has steadily slowed down - back in the day there were semi-fast Uxbridge and Watford services , fast Amersham's and even some of these skipped Harrow on the Hill ....

One might question the value of journey time here ........is they a need for exmple of a service which gives "one seat journeys" from say Preston Road to Chesham.......effectively a Metro , not a main line.....

 

[bramling]

The Met could start with a Night tube service for one as one of the biggest service improvements.

Ridiculous that there is no night services serving that part of North West London west of Harrow-on-the-Hill, although Watford passengers have trains out of Euston that run late enough at least

The reason the Met Line doesn’t have a night service is because of the long-running resignalling project. None of the sub-surface lines have it for the same reason.

This doesn’t resolve the issue of who will pay for it and how will it be afforded, issues which will exist whatever brand is used.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Jan 2025 ==

The Met line has steadily slowed down - back in the day there were semi-fast Uxbridge and Watford services , fast Amersham's and even some of these skipped Harrow on the Hill ....

One might question the value of journey time here ........is they a need for exmple of a service which gives "one seat journeys" from say Preston Road to Chesham.......effectively a Metro , not a main line.....

I seem to remember the loss of off-peak fast services was to provide an enhanced frequency between Harrow and Moor Park. No doubt an element of politics at play here, with these stations being within London, whilst Rickmasworth-Amersham isn’t.

Personally I don’t really agree with it, and think there should be a half-hourly fast Amersham service. But it’s never going to politically popular to see lightly loaded 8-car trains passing through the likes of Pinner while they only have an infrequent service. And unfortunately Watford has never been particularly busy so it’s hard to justify running something like 8tph there, especially as Watford isn’t in London either…

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Personally I don’t really agree with it, and think there should be a half-hourly fast Amersham service. But it’s never going to politically popular to see lightly loaded 8-car trains passing through the likes of Pinner while they only have an infrequent service. And unfortunately Watford has never been particularly busy so it’s hard to justify running something like 8tph there, especially as Watford isn’t in London either…

But Pinner can hardly complain about 8 tph can they ! - it was almost worth going to Watford Met to "enjoy" an 8 car A stock , which was sometimes bereft of passengers. The Croxley link cancellation was another example of "politics" which might have given some value passenger wise , at the expense of screams of protest from the well heeled area around the Met station. Linking Harrow and Watford direct to me , seems a strategic move.

Hertfordshire had and has , little spare cash for projects such as this - or even simple rail schemes on their own turf (Bricket Wood loop) -anyway , one could digress - but Watford Met is essentially a reversing point.

 

[bramling]

Personally I don’t really agree with it, and think there should be a half-hourly fast Amersham service. But it’s never going to politically popular to see lightly loaded 8-car trains passing through the likes of Pinner while they only have an infrequent service. And unfortunately Watford has never been particularly busy so it’s hard to justify running something like 8tph there, especially as Watford isn’t in London either…

But Pinner can hardly complain about 8 tph can they ! - it was almost worth going to Watford Met to "enjoy" an 8 car A stock , which was sometimes bereft of passengers. The Croxley link cancellation was another example of "politics" which might have given some value passenger wise , at the expense of screams of protest from the well heeled area around the Met station. Linking Harrow and Watford direct to me , seems a strategic move.

Hertfordshire had and has , little spare cash for projects such as this - or even simple rail schemes on their own turf (Bricket Wood loop) -anyway , one could digress - but Watford Met is essentially a reversing point.

That’s what I mean though, Pinner gets 8tph with the Amersham/Chesham services stopping there, it would only get 4tph with the Watford service alone.

Whether Watford could justify a 6+ tph service is for discussion! But again the question is, who is going to pay for Watford (outside London) to get 6tph in order to allow Amersham and Chesham (also outside London) to skip four stations (in London).

Would for a world bereft of politics and party politicians…

 

[RacsoMoquette]

Just out of curiosity which line is better used and a better way to get to Watford the Lioness Lime to Watford Junction or the Metropolitan Line to Watford?

 

[35B]

Not so fussed about the colour of the signs, but I would like to see the line beyond of Rickmansworth running heavily upgraded with longer NR trains running at 90+ mph, ideally with OHLE.

The uplift in capacity would then relieve adjacent routes (i.e. the WCML), and enable more commuter housing through the Chilterns along the line. My preference for achieving that is cutting the Met back to Uxbridge and Watford and giving NR exclusive use of the fast lines north of HotH and beyond, but the southern end is a bit of an open question.

Even if you could expand capacity at Marylebone, it's not exactly in a convenient location, so sending passengers there is unlikely to be helpful...but you're not going to be able to expand the Met to Thameslink-levels of capacity, at least not without smashing adjacent pairs of the stations around the Circle into each other, anyway, so I'm not sure what the answer is, there.

There's plenty of fanciful crayon options, though. Most of these have been done to death in the past, but off the top of my head we have:

• Marylebone low-level, Marble Arch, Hyde Park Corner, Victoria low-level, and beyond.
• As above, but instead dive down east of Willesden Green, then tunnel under the Edgware Road to hit Edgware Road instead of Marylebone.
• Finchley Road, Euston low-level (could also take WCML suburban services?), Holborn (or TCR?), Waterloo low-level, and beyond.
• Finchley Road to the Fenchurch St. lines.
• ...and so on.

So in other words, the issue is not the Met being part of LU as far as Amersham, but the ancient and underpowered DMUs in use for the other half of the surviving route as far as Aylesbury. That suggests that the answer lies with the national network investing in the Aylesbury service, which might (probably won't, but might) trigger changes on the Met.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 Jan 2025 ==

Just out of curiosity which line is better used and a better way to get to Watford the Lioness Lime to Watford Junction or the Metropolitan Line to Watford?

My colleague who has a choice of both of those, and also the London Midland service to Euston, has a pecking order. Mainline, Met, and "is there another service". She lives equidistant from Watford Junction and Watford Met.

 

[bramling]

Just out of curiosity which line is better used and a better way to get to Watford the Lioness Lime to Watford Junction or the Metropolitan Line to Watford?

Anecdotally, neither. I’d say most people use LNwR for London journeys. Both the Met and LO are more oriented around local journeys, though Watford Met does get some patronage from serving a specific local catchment area.

I can’t imagine many people using the DC line service to get from Watford to London, though possibly a few do from Watford High Street.

 

[edwin_m]

and the reopening of Grandborough Road and Winslow Road stations, and of course the Brill Branch, terminus of a 30 min frequency service from Watford.

You forgot Verney Junction!

 

[stuu]

Just out of curiosity which line is better used and a better way to get to Watford the Lioness Lime to Watford Junction or the Metropolitan Line to Watford?

Surely it depends where you are starting?

 

[stevieinselby]

Just out of curiosity which line is better used and a better way to get to Watford the Lioness Lime to Watford Junction or the Metropolitan Line to Watford?

Obviously it depends where you're starting from and where in Watford you are going to, as the two stations are over a mile apart, but if you're coming from or via central London the likely answer is "neither". LNWR run a more frequent service from Euston to Watford Junction than LO or LU and the trains do the journey in less than half the time – typically about 20 minutes, compared to 50 minutes in the Lioness Line, and 45 minutes on the Met Line (to Watford from Euston Square).

 

[LCRTrainfan979]

Obviously it depends where you're starting from and where in Watford you are going to, as the two stations are over a mile apart, but if you're coming from or via central London the likely answer is "neither". LNWR run a more frequent service from Euston to Watford Junction than LO or LU and the trains do the journey in less than half the time – typically about 20 minutes, compared to 50 minutes in the Lioness Line, and 45 minutes on the Met Line (to Watford from Euston Square).

Absolutely right, and although its not run by TfL, you can easily use it exactly like a TfL service, with the same ticketing, and even a better frequency as its a common trunk on their network.

But LNWR is why there is no need for more trains on the Watford Met branch at this point in time, because its not the principal station in Watford, a title which belongs to Watford Junction, and there is probably extra capacity that LNWR could unlock in the future with longer trains, as I remember being on a 4-car LNWR train through Watford Junction recently, and should demand ever build up, that could pretty easily be extended to 12-cars, as the required infrastructure is already there.

Watford Met is in many ways useful for those who live closeby to the station, as I think the fares would probably work out as cheaper. However, most genuine commuters who need to be in London ASAP would probably just use one of the other stations instead. If it wasn't for Watford Junction ever existing, things would have gone differently, and the line would be so busy they would have to split it and run a dedicated line to Watford. Obviously, that didn't happen, and there's very little that could be done to justify an 8 tph service to Watford at any point in the forseeable future. There's a reason they wanted to close the station back in 2016, and its mainly its actual use compared to the alternatives.

I broadly think if there is ever an increase in services on the Met line, it would need to be to either Uxbridge, Amersham or Chesham, given they are all in many ways the principal service for those who use the stations, and maybe if they could eventually reintroduce some fast off-peak services, more closely matching Chiltern's services, that could prove popular amongst the locals.

 

[edwin_m]

Linking Harrow and Watford direct to me , seems a strategic move.

Extending the Met to the centre of Watford would be only a marginal benefit to Harrow-Watford journeys, since they are easily possible already from a selection of WCML stations that are within a mile of the Met stations.

 

[LCRTrainfan979]

Extending the Met to the centre of Watford would be only a marginal benefit to Harrow-Watford journeys, since they are easily possible already from a selection of WCML stations that are within a mile of the Met stations.

Absolutely, and it would still be slower for many other journeys, such as into Central London. The Croxley Rail link though may be worthwhile for other journeys, such as Watofrd to Aylesbury journeys which was talked about as some point, as that would be possible with the Watford North curve, but that might require the closure of Watford Met station.

 

[A S Leib]

Extending the Met to the centre of Watford would be only a marginal benefit to Harrow-Watford journeys, since they are easily possible already from a selection of WCML stations that are within a mile of the Met stations.

It would also benefit Amersham, Chesham and Uxbridge (less so, Pinner and Northwood) to Watford journeys and (especially if either a regular direct service from Rickmansworth to Watford or from Aylesbury to Moor Park was (re)introduced, Aylesbury to Watford), but TfL's tube flow statistics portal says that every Met station west of Harrow-on-the-Hill non-inclusive combined to Watford Met comes to ~930 passengers per day*, some of which the current location would be more useful for.

*For comparison, Watford Junction to Euston's 3746 daily and Watford Met to stations between Baker Street and Aldgate inclusive is ~600 per day.

 

[stuu]

Extending the Met to the centre of Watford would be only a marginal benefit to Harrow-Watford journeys, since they are easily possible already from a selection of WCML stations that are within a mile of the Met stations.

The traffic from the north western suburbs into Watford every morning is atrocious, so there is a lot of demand that could be catered for if the Met went into central Watford. I used to live in Pinner and Watford was the major local centre for work and shopping, no one would ever think to use the Met to get there though

 

[Meerkat]

Always thought that if the Croxley link was built then Chesham should be served by a Chesham to Watford shuttle.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

The traffic from the north western suburbs into Watford every morning is atrocious, so there is a lot of demand that could be catered for if the Met went into central Watford. I used to live in Pinner and Watford was the major local centre for work and shopping, no one would ever think to use the Met to get there though

Any road traffic into Watford is atrocious - and having to get to the hospital even more so !

 

[A S Leib]

Always thought that if the Croxley link was built then Chesham should be served by a Chesham to Watford shuttle.

I think demand to London would outweigh demand to Watford, even a more central station, by enough that I think Chesham should keep Aldgate services. I don't think the 4 tph planned under 4 Lines Modernisation, at least pre-Covid, plus Chiltern is (currently) necessary for Amersham to London though so maybe it could be 2 tph each for Chesham and Amersham to London and Amersham to Watford, or doubling the Chesham branch (I'm not entirely sure how practical that would be) and having 2 tph each to London and Watford Junction.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Under Crossrail 1 (binned of course , in fact anything XR to the Met and Aylesbury !) , Chesham was considered for Watford assuming a Croxley Link which seemed likely at the time) - Chesham was planned for a London service , but 1 TPH only , maybe 2 TPH - but with a passing loop to give some flexibilty. There was a challenge in finding a spot , but one was found in the end. Modelling showed a very modest potential flow Chesham to "Watford" - other studies have agreed on this.

In those days , there was a "peak" service Chesham to Aldgate (know jokingly as "The Pullman !) , with the shuttle 4 car parked in the Chalfont bay , but crewed in case the London service was compromised. The bay is no longer there I understand.

Crossrail was planned for 4 TPH to Aylesbury then which would have been transformational , but dare I say it , seemed too much service - one of the discounted plans was a Harrow turnback (North Harrow almost) , which was both expensive , and frankly not terribly well used ! - (according to modelling)

I any case - installing 25kV overheads would have been a challenge - not just bridges , but substandard clearances.

 

[A S Leib]

Crossrail was planned for 4 TPH to Aylesbury then which would have been transformational , but dare I say it , seemed too much service

Would 2 tph to Aylesbury and 2 tph to High Wycombe have been possible / feasible?

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Would 2 tph to Aylesbury and 2 tph to High Wycombe have been possible / feasible?

Crossrail had a very clear message to just stay in the Aylesbury corridor , so no work was done on the Chiltern railways corridor - remember that part of the objective was to "improve" the Met Line corridor which was flagged as a concern following the Central London Rail Study , which of course launched the project. (the scheme present to the Select Commitee was 4 Aylesbury . 4 Amersham and 1/2 Chesham).

First plans were 12 each of both legs - subsequently changed to 10 / 14 in favour of the Thames Valley. (and 24 towards Essex and East London)

The Committee did not go into any detail on the "branches" , as it was distinctly unimpressed by the demand on the / for the whole project. As we know.

 

[stuu]

Any road traffic into Watford is atrocious - and having to get to the hospital even more so !

Fair point! I spent a terrible year of my life doing London Colney-Croxley business park. Used to take over an hour on the mornings which was not fun

 

[Russel]

Can someone suggest any possible benefit to anyone of changing the colour of the signs? What problem does this fix?

There isn't any.

If we're going down this route, then the Central and district may as well join the overground too.

 

[Egg Centric]

Obviously it depends where you're starting from and where in Watford you are going to, as the two stations are over a mile apart, but if you're coming from or via central London the likely answer is "neither". LNWR run a more frequent service from Euston to Watford Junction than LO or LU and the trains do the journey in less than half the time – typically about 20 minutes, compared to 50 minutes in the Lioness Line, and 45 minutes on the Met Line (to Watford from Euston Square).

Unless of course you are starting out somewhere on the Met Line. My usual Durham-Watford journey I will take the Met from Kings Cross as I invariably have a pile of luggage. It does mean I have to get it up the stairs at Watford somehow but this is still preferable to wheeling it along Euston Road (or the back way). I also find it the most interesting of the three routes (not saying much admittedly) as well as the most pleasant cabin ambience - it's rare for it to be standing room only.

 

[Mgameing123]

Extending the Met to the centre of Watford would be only a marginal benefit to Harrow-Watford journeys, since they are easily possible already from a selection of WCML stations that are within a mile of the Met stations.

It would also be brilliant for Watford Local Journeys to be able to get to the West Coast Mainline without having to drive to the closest station.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Jan 2025 ==

Also why do Amersham, Chesham and Watford trains stop at Northwick Park & Preston Road? The stations are lightly used so what’s the point of stopping there on the longer Metropolitan Line services?

 

[LCRTrainfan979]

There isn't any.

If we're going down this route, then the Central and district may as well join the overground too.

I agree, and its a different case to the recent renaming of overground line, because that in turn means each of the lines now has a different identity, rather than sharing one big identity, despite the lines being mostly segregated, making a shared identity pretty worthless (which is unlike with the DLR which are more connected, with any 'lines' just being combinations of branches). The Met already has a pretty clear identity, so its just mixing things up for the fun of it if it became an overground line