Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,197 
|
Post by Tom on Jul 14, 2008 23:22:04 GMT
I always thought they would build a crossover at Wood Lane, but no.. How about Latimer Road or Ladbroke Grove? Ladbroke Grove crossover was decommissioned in the early 1980s. I doubt there will be any new crossovers on that stretch for a while yet. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2008 3:46:10 GMT
How busy is the Hammersmith and City line between Paddington and Hammersmith? Are these extra trains needed now with the new station opening up and the massive shopping centre in Shepherd's Bush? The line is VERY busy at certain times and with the jobs created and all the predicted visitors to the new monolith it will only get busier. It's pretty dead late at night though. Of course we could ask ourselves if, in this time of tightening of purse strings and recession, if what we really need is another shrine to consumerism and the associated battering the credit cards of the weak-willed will take...  White City will probably open until at least midnight, haven't looked at floor plans for a while but will possibly use the cinema as an anchor for the food and drink retail areas so people would be coming out of there when films/bars finish up. You're right, might not be an amazing time to open but we get some new tube infrastructure to look at! I always have to wait longer for an H&C train than on any other line, and service is always busy. Would Edgware Road get a total rebuild if the t-cup happens? Find it a bit confusing as an occasional traveller there let alone if you had to change for a through service on the Circle. |
|
|
|
Post by astock5000 on Jul 15, 2008 15:33:36 GMT
Would Edgware Road get a total rebuild if the t-cup happens? Find it a bit confusing as an occasional traveller there let alone if you had to change for a through service on the Circle. It shouldn't matter that much. At the moment, a H&C (or a Wimbleware, depending what way you're going) comes first, and then you have to change anyway. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2008 14:26:59 GMT
That's not true at all! Trains can be diverted to Moorgate or Hammersmith andback to Edgware Road for their own working or as you say, can be refomed, though on the Circle you can reform up all 7 each side (if the pick ups or spares are available) and don't even have to turn a single train or just by doing as many as you can! And I bet you that on this new service that if a train is running late, it wil just be sent to Hammersmith for its next trip! thank you Mr Banananananananana etc .... They could do a bit more with the schedules too, by giving each Circle driver a one or two train step back on each Circle (which still fits duty parameters) at Edgware Road, it would knock out any percieved advantage for slow running as well as keeping a regular interval on the circle, as a late driver would just step back one instead of two or remain on the same train they arrive with and make it theirs. Issolated late trains can still be turned at Moorgate ...and Inner rails should make a bit more use of Mansion House to reverse. There seems to be a tabboo of reversing a Circle on the District metals for late running !! Longer delays dealt with as now. By running an end to end service you are forced to curtail trains leaving a poorer service at the line ends (in the same way Dagenham East to Upminster gets abandoned at 2200hrs when the service goes up the wall !! gripe gripe  ) And the proposed end to end services don't have much in the way of suitable curtailment points for a 20 / 30 min late train ...so your back to the same reforms, but made more difficult ! |
|
|
|
Post by Alight on Jul 19, 2008 10:50:19 GMT
I have another new idea I came up with last night.
Why not have the Circle/Hammersmith Line go from Hammersmith via H&C route and Tower Hill to Hammersmith (modified/extended District Line platforms)? It would work the same way as passing through Edgware Road twice, although terminating at Hammersmith District platforms is a bit farfetched, I know.
And then Edware Road to Earls Court can be exclusive to Wimbleware albeit with not necessarily a Gloucester Road to HSK Circle express, though customers can change at Earls Court for Wimbleware.
In terms of Aldgate East, why not let the met (with new S stock) run off from Liverpool Street to at least WhiteChapel?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2008 11:43:37 GMT
I have another new idea I came up with last night. Why not have the Circle/Hammersmith Line go from Hammersmith via H&C route and Tower Hill to Hammersmith (modified/extended District Line platforms)? It would work the same way as passing through Edgware Road twice, although terminating at Hammersmith District platforms is a bit farfetched, I know. And then Edware Road to Earls Court can be exclusive to Wimbleware albeit with not necessarily a Gloucester Road to HSK Circle express, though customers can change at Earls Court for Wimbleware. In terms of Aldgate East, why not let the met (with new S stock) run off from Liverpool Street to at least WhiteChapel? That could put too many extra trains through Earl's Ct. It could reduce trains to Barking (depending on what you did with Mets), and would either eliminate trains from Gloucester Rd to High St Ken or complicate operations at High St Ken. Also how would you reverse at Hammersmith? |
|
|
|
Post by Alight on Jul 19, 2008 16:25:52 GMT
I always forget about reversers! I always assume that because trains are double ended, they can drive either direction.
But yeah the idea with Hammersmith was to add somehow an extra platform section.
Obviously there would be loads of complications and technical difficulties but it was just an idea of using the 'outer circle' concept.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,773
|
Post by Chris M on Jul 20, 2008 1:02:26 GMT
how feasble would it be to rebuild Edgware Road on two levels so that trains to/from HSK used platforms underneath those used by trains from Hammersmith H&C?
This would remove the need for a junction at Praed Street, might be ablr tol provide an interchange with the Bakerloo Line (I don't know what the underground geography is). If the t-cup were kept then you wouldn't need to join the new tunnels to the existing railway east of the station.
|
|
|
|
Post by programmes1 on Jul 20, 2008 14:30:50 GMT
how feasble would it be to rebuild Edgware Road on two levels so that trains to/from HSK used platforms underneath those used by trains from Hammersmith H&C? This would remove the need for a junction at Praed Street, might be ablr tol provide an interchange with the Bakerloo Line (I don't know what the underground geography is). If the t-cup were kept then you wouldn't need to join the new tunnels to the existing railway east of the station. I rememeber being told that there was a plan for a fifth platform loss of siding(s) and a scissors cross over at the Baker Street end. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2008 16:47:11 GMT
Why cant the Circle line trains run Hammersmith, Kings Cross, Tower Hill, Victoria, Edgware Road, Kings Cross and terimate at Moorgate using the soon to be abandoned platforms there? Flat junction could back fire but least it would provide an end to end place for the Circle to turn around without fouling current services.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alight on Jul 20, 2008 17:37:29 GMT
Would be a tad confusing!
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,773
|
Post by Chris M on Jul 20, 2008 17:51:28 GMT
I've suggested this previously on this forum - even producing this (poor) digram to show what I meant -  The only current journeys that would be inconvenienced would be Bayswater-Aldgate, this is nominally 26-27 minutes direct via Edgware Road, 28-29 minutes changing at Edgware Road and Liverpool Street and 31-32 minutes via Victoria; and Bayswater-Liverpool Street, as Queensway station is only about 1-2 minutes walk away customers would just be advised to use the Central Line. From what I remember it was rejected for two reasons - lack of capacity between Baker Street and Moorgate, and that the flat junction at Moorgate would cripple the service. As has been suggested elsewhere, reconstructing Moorgate so the westbound/inner rail track was moved from the present platform 2 to one of platforms 4-6 (5 & 6 are the current Thameslink platforms) would alleviate this - but where would the money come from? |
|
|
|
Post by DrOne on Jul 20, 2008 20:06:05 GMT
I like that idea but it is a tad clumsy for the passenger. Maybe a neater solution is to use Moorgate for an extended Wimbleware and keep Hammersmith and Circle as proposed Hammersmith - Aldgate - Edgware Rd.
That would give 24tph Baker Street - Moorgate made up of 6tph Uxbridge, 6tph Wimbledon, 12tph Hammersmith. Allows an additional 6tph for the peak Mets if the signaling is upgraded and flat junctions at Baker St and Moorgate can can cope with 30tph.
Another proposal would be to try and change the trackwork around Liverpool Street. The current WB could become a terminating middle track. The disused platform behind the current WB could be reconfigured into a new WB through platform, allowing conflict-free terminating of perhaps the 6tph Wimbledons in the middle road. Would this be more realistic/cheaper/practical than re-configuring Moorgate?
[This problem shows what knock-on benefits Chelney would have if it were to take over the whole of the Wimbledon branch]
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2008 21:28:33 GMT
Flat junction could back fire You've answered your own question there! I think regularly reversing at Moorgate would cause operational problems as it would be adding another flat junction to the system. The current single track layout would also mean that you cannot timetable trains in and out at the same time. If a new terminus was used/old terminus re-used, then as Dr One mentioned, the track layout should be reconfigured so that the centre road would be used for reversing. This would be at considerable expense! |
|
|
|
Post by amershamsi on Jul 20, 2008 23:03:22 GMT
making Barbican a two-way terminus, using the Thameslink tracks and platforms is the easiest way to add another city reversing point for short turns.
|
|
|
|
Post by astock5000 on Jul 21, 2008 14:27:22 GMT
What about Wimbledon - Edgware Road - Kings Cross - Aldgate - Victoria - Edgware Road, and Hammersmith - Barking? You don't have two services terminating at Edgware Road and there would be direct services between Bayswater and Baker Stree.
|
|
|
|
Post by DrOne on Jul 21, 2008 18:36:36 GMT
Amershamsi: Yes, that goes back to an earlier "Wimblecan" suggestion. So how easy and financially viable would it be to link the current EB Thameslink to the WB Circle at both ends of Barbican? This could be tied in with a link to the remaining disused Thameslink tracks and using them as sidings.
Astock5000: But then you won't have the desired tph uppage on the H&C.
|
|
|
|
Post by astock5000 on Jul 21, 2008 20:43:28 GMT
Astock5000: But then you won't have the desired tph uppage on the H&C. You can't increase the H&C service, and have no problems at Edgware Road without rebuilding the line, and using a lot of money. Why not just put points in at Paddington and run Paddington - Hammersmith shuttles in between the Barking trains. 7-car S stock would give extra capacity without changing the services anyway. |
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,773
|
Post by Chris M on Jul 21, 2008 21:42:26 GMT
The problem with that is that unless you want Paddington mainline station, Paddington Bishop's Road is not a useful place to be in terms of continuing your journey towards central London, and the platform isn't large enough to handle large volumes of passengers.
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Jul 21, 2008 21:45:55 GMT
If we can hang on a few years hopefully Crossrail will solve some of the problems!!
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,773
|
Post by Chris M on Jul 21, 2008 22:39:26 GMT
I think the powers that be at LU are hoping to have some improvement before the office juniors retire!
|
|
|
|
Post by upfast on Oct 14, 2008 17:32:53 GMT
There was a map in this evening's thelondonpaper.
It said that the new service would run via Earl's Court and Hammersmith!
|
|
|
|
Post by cetacean on Oct 14, 2008 17:55:12 GMT
I was puzzling over that - the article was actually correct (though ambiguous) and the map maker had obviously read it and got the wrong end of the stick. The news hook was TfL presenting the scheme to London Travelwatch today, which means it's inching onwards towards the public domain. |
|
|
|
Post by Alight on Oct 14, 2008 18:55:45 GMT
The Hammersmith idea, upfast, was one I raised earlier - it would basically mean the Circle will have a bigger area!
Though, it would be very hard to modify Hammersmith I guess, in order to this, but it is an idea I definately favour over the Tea cup.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2008 1:53:19 GMT
I would have taken Crossrail from Richmond to Paddington via Hammersmith, using the old viaduct from the LSWR service. That would free up space at Edgware Road so the Circle could run as now but with a place to hold or terminate trains. If modified Paddington H&C could be used as a terminus, wouldn't need to change the map if passengers were properly informed. Could also send some more services down the Wimbledon branch. Tfl aren't doing a good job with the PR on the T-Cup, I'm sure they did try to limit the use of the word 'split', it never sounds positive. If the service does happen, changing destination blinds at the right places and putting a 'change at Edgware Road for through services' sticker on the map will leave most of the population oblivious  |
|
|
|
Post by ruislip on Oct 15, 2008 2:42:33 GMT
After reading the London Travelwatch link, I have two questions:
1) How can a "Tea Cup" service connect Earls Court and Hammersmith to the existing Circle layout?
2) When I was reading links about an enhanced Amersham service needing to be extended to the City off-peak to serve main-line termini, does that mean that most of the City off-peak service on the Met will be from the Amersham line instead of the Uxbridge line--as is the case at present?
|
|
|
|
Post by cetacean on Oct 15, 2008 8:18:29 GMT
Earl's Court isn't involved in the actual plans, but there was a bonkers diagram in The London Paper where they'd taken the idea of "extending the Circle Line to Hammermith" and run with it.
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Oct 15, 2008 11:42:29 GMT
As far as I know there are no plans to extend Amersham trains to Aldgate off peak, the Uxbridge service provides a decent service.
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Oct 15, 2008 12:13:50 GMT
Whatever happens, its got to involve Barbican; it seems that practically every second person has suggested it now! From an engineering perspective it doesnt seem too much a problem; granted the crossovers to gain access to the centre platforms might have to be at Farringdon and Moorgate, but it would still boost capacity; and if all four platforms were used then it would do so massively
|
|
|
|
Post by amershamsi on Oct 15, 2008 12:59:23 GMT
As Barbican can be made into a fairly flexible terminal - 2 platforms and 2 directions, with no fouling of other routes, you could run south side services of Barbican-Richmond, Ealing-Tower Hill, Edgware Road-Upminster and Wimbledon-Upminster, north side services of Aldgate-Met (x2), Hammersmith-Barking and Hammersmith-Barbican and the Wimbleware.
This basically splits the T-cup at Barbican and switches Edgware Road and Richmond, allowing for shorter, less flat-junction heavy, services.
|
|
) And the proposed end to end services don't have much in the way of suitable curtailment points for a 20 / 30 min late train ...so your back to the same reforms, but made more difficult !
