Discussion:
The new service pattern on the Circle and H&C lines
(too old to reply)
Fig
2007-01-02 20:19:07 UTC
Permalink
In another thread, Dave Arquanti commented that "The new service pattern
on the Circle and H&C lines will make using Paddington much easier"
Could anyone expand on this please? A brief google has returned nothing.
--
Fig
C
2007-01-02 21:20:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Fig
In another thread, Dave Arquanti commented that "The new service pattern
on the Circle and H&C lines will make using Paddington much easier"
Could anyone expand on this please? A brief google has returned nothing.
--
Fig
Yeah what does Dave mean?
brixtonite
2007-01-02 22:38:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by C
Post by Fig
In another thread, Dave Arquanti commented that "The new service pattern
on the Circle and H&C lines will make using Paddington much easier"
Could anyone expand on this please? A brief google has returned nothing.
--
Fig
Yeah what does Dave mean?
There is a plan to replace to rearrange the subsurface lines so that:
- the Metropolitan is extended to Barking instead of the Hammersmith
and City
- the Hammersmith and City and Circle are replace by a new line running
from Hammersmith, via Paddington, Kings Cross, Tower Hill, Victoria and
Paddington to Edgware Road, where it would terminate/reverse.
Tom Anderson
2007-01-02 22:44:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by C
Post by Fig
In another thread, Dave Arquanti commented that "The new service pattern
on the Circle and H&C lines will make using Paddington much easier"
Could anyone expand on this please? A brief google has returned nothing.
Yeah what does Dave mean?
Before questioning The Dave, check your scripture:

http://www.alwaystouchout.com/project/39

Which sayeth:

"2011 - New service pattern

"The peak hour service is currently 28tph on most of the subsurface
network in Zone 1 and is due to be increased to 30tph, to be achieved by
restructuring the service - in particular the Circle line.

"Metropolitan trains would run through from Liverpool Street to Barking,
and the Hammersmith & City service would run partially to Aldgate, and
partially all the way around the Circle terminating at Edgware Road - i.e.
Hammersmith - Edgware Road - Aldgate - Victoria - Edgware Road and
reverse.

"This is meant to give a period of recovery time which the Circle line
currently lacks. Detailed information is available at Tubeprune's site and
District Dave's site.

"Works will be undertaken on the Hammersmith & City line station at
Paddington to relieve overcrowding."

Note that because of the new shape of the H&C (which, AIUI, entirely
replaces the current Circle service), at Paddington, no trains on the
Circle/District platform will go beyond Edgware Road, so should that way
lie your destination, your only option is to go to the H&C platform, which
is easier than the choice you face at present.

tom
--
Hit to death in the future head
asdf
2007-01-03 01:02:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Anderson
Note that because of the new shape of the H&C (which, AIUI, entirely
replaces the current Circle service), at Paddington, no trains on the
Circle/District platform will go beyond Edgware Road, so should that way
lie your destination, your only option is to go to the H&C platform, which
is easier than the choice you face at present.
Also, the frequency of trains from the H&C platforms to Liverpool
Street will be increased (doubled?). If that didn't happen (i.e. the
only change was that trains from the Circle platforms terminated at
Edgware Road) then it wouldn't be much of an improvement - although,
as you say, the choice would be easier. ;-)

Having said that, I'd hazard a guess that the Hammersmith-Aldgate
service won't run off-peak (otherwise why send the Met to Barking?),
which would mean this increase would only be at peak times.
Tom Anderson
2007-01-03 18:17:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Anderson
Note that because of the new shape of the H&C (which, AIUI, entirely
replaces the current Circle service), at Paddington, no trains on the
Circle/District platform will go beyond Edgware Road, so should that
way lie your destination, your only option is to go to the H&C
platform, which is easier than the choice you face at present.
Also, the frequency of trains from the H&C platforms to Liverpool Street
will be increased (doubled?). If that didn't happen (i.e. the only
change was that trains from the Circle platforms terminated at Edgware
Road) then it wouldn't be much of an improvement
Well, quite!
- although, as you say, the choice would be easier. ;-)
Yes - take the flipping Bakerloo.

Random PS - why didn't the Bakerloo get called the Regent Line, since it
runs via Regent's Park and Regent Street? That would be a much better
name. 'Bakerloo' makes me cringe every time i hear it.
Having said that, I'd hazard a guess that the Hammersmith-Aldgate
service won't run off-peak (otherwise why send the Met to Barking?),
Hang on, what? What do you mean by the 'Hammersmith-Aldgate service'? Why
won't it run off-peak? How is this related to the Met?

tom
--
If the truth can be told so as to be understood, it will be believed.
Clive D. W. Feather
2007-01-03 22:59:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Anderson
Random PS - why didn't the Bakerloo get called the Regent Line, since
it runs via Regent's Park and Regent Street?
Because it was the Baker Street and Waterloo Railway.

And it's brown on the maps because the Baker Street and Waterloo bus
company had a brown livery.
Post by Tom Anderson
'Bakerloo' makes me cringe every time i hear it.
It made Der Manejment cringe for years before they decided to live with
it.
--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home: <***@davros.org>
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: <http://www.davros.org>
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work: <***@demon.net>
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: <***@davros.org>
Tom Anderson
2007-01-04 00:50:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
Post by Tom Anderson
Random PS - why didn't the Bakerloo get called the Regent Line, since it
runs via Regent's Park and Regent Street?
Because it was the Baker Street and Waterloo Railway.
And it's brown on the maps because the Baker Street and Waterloo bus company
had a brown livery.
As Harry Hill put it, got to have a system.
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
Post by Tom Anderson
'Bakerloo' makes me cringe every time i hear it.
It made Der Manejment cringe for years before they decided to live with it.
I look forward to making a similar whine about Crossrail.

tom
--
Ensure a star-man is never constructed!
Mark Brader
2007-01-06 11:52:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
Post by Tom Anderson
'Bakerloo' makes me cringe every time i hear it.
It made Der Manejment cringe for years before they decided to
live with it.
Well, no. At least, "Rails Through the Clay" (2nd edition) says otherwise:

# The clumsy statutory titles of the three lines were, [of] course,
# too much for the man in the street. A writer in the Evening News
# (G.H.F. Nichols, or 'Quex') coined the tag Bakerloo for the Baker
# Street & Waterloo, a name used by the paper from 7th March 1906¹
# and quickly accepted by the company, which adopted it officially
# from July. This move staggered the prim anti-American editor of
# The Railway Magazine: 'for a railway itself to adopt its gutter
# title, is not what we expect from a railway company. English
# railway officers have more dignity than to act in this [manner].'
# Mr Nokes was spared further nicknames: the other two lines simply
# became known as the Piccadilly² Tube and the Hampstead³ Tube,
# titles which were officially promulgated and stuck well enough.
# A competition was held by the Evening News to find a short title
# for the Piccadilly tube, but none of the rather awkward suggestions
# proved acceptable to the company.

[] indicates places where I have corrected typos in the passage.

¹ 3 days before the line opened. The Piccadilly's opening followed in
December of the same year, so the competition was presumably held in
the intervening months; the Hampstead opened in June of 1907.

² Great Northern, Piccadilly & Brompton Railway.

³ Charing Cross, Euston & Hampstead Railway. The name Northern Line
was first used in 1937.
--
Mark Brader "I wasn't the one who misplaced the entire
Toronto Deltivid asteroid belt!"
***@vex.net "Deja Q", ST:TNG, Richard Danus

My text in this article is in the public domain.
Colin Rosenstiel
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Brader
³ Charing Cross, Euston & Hampstead Railway. The name Northern Line
was first used in 1937.
It had been called the Morden-Edgware line by then, indicating how much
it had expanded (also incorporating the City adn South London) since 1907
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Tom Anderson
2007-01-06 22:04:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
Post by Tom Anderson
'Bakerloo' makes me cringe every time i hear it.
It made Der Manejment cringe for years before they decided to
live with it.
But nothing that says there was no cringeing in the ranks in the years
after the decision!

tom
--
made up languages, delusions, skin diseases and unaided human flight
Richard J.
2007-01-06 22:51:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Anderson
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
Post by Tom Anderson
'Bakerloo' makes me cringe every time i hear it.
It made Der Manejment cringe for years before they decided to
live with it.
But nothing that says there was no cringeing in the ranks in the
years after the decision!
Officers' mess surely, not "in the ranks"!
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)
Clive D. W. Feather
2007-01-09 11:09:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Clive D. W. Feather
Post by Tom Anderson
'Bakerloo' makes me cringe every time i hear it.
It made Der Manejment cringe for years before they decided to
live with it.
[...]

You're right. Memory fault on my part; sorry.
--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home: <***@davros.org>
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: <http://www.davros.org>
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work: <***@demon.net>
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: <***@davros.org>
asdf
2007-01-04 01:37:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Anderson
Post by asdf
Having said that, I'd hazard a guess that the Hammersmith-Aldgate
service won't run off-peak (otherwise why send the Met to Barking?),
Hang on, what? What do you mean by the 'Hammersmith-Aldgate service'?
I refer you to your previous post:

"Metropolitan trains would run through from Liverpool Street to
Barking, and the Hammersmith & City service would run partially to
Aldgate..."
Post by Tom Anderson
Why won't it run off-peak? How is this related to the Met?
Perhaps it was a bit of a leap, but I was thinking that if the Teacup
service is 6tph off-peak, there might not be a need for additional
trains from Hammersmith as the frequency on that branch would be high
enough anyway. If the trains from Hammersmith to Barking don't run
off-peak, there would be no through service between the East End and
the northern Circle at those times - hence the Met/H&C Aldgate/Barking
swap.


Thinking about it a bit more, unless I'm missing something, the
suggested service pattern seems to be hopelessly inefficient in terms
of movements across Praed Street Junction.

Let's assume the Wimbleware frequency is 6tph (as at present), the
Teacup runs at 7tph peak / 6tph off-peak (same as the current
Circle/H&C frequency), and suppose for now the Hammersmith-Aldgate
frequency is 0tph. This results in exactly the same number of
movements across Praed St Jn as at present. The frequency of trains
from Edgware Road to each of Hammersmith, Wimbledon, and Gloucester
Road (and beyond) stays the same, but the frequency of trains through
to Baker Street and King's Cross is halved. That would, however, allow
more trains to run through from the Met to the City (perhaps that's
the whole idea?).

Now add in say 6tph Hammersmith-Aldgate. This restores the frequency
on all routes to present levels, except it doubles the frequency on
the Hammersmith branch. This is, of course, good. However, Praed St Jn
is now hopelessly congested.

What am I missing here?
m***@googlemail.com
2007-01-04 02:45:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by asdf
Now add in say 6tph Hammersmith-Aldgate. This restores the frequency
on all routes to present levels, except it doubles the frequency on
the Hammersmith branch. This is, of course, good. However, Praed St Jn
is now hopelessly congested.
What am I missing here?
Two possibilities:
- Hammermsith to Aldgate is a transitional stage before the T-Cup is
introduced
- Hammermsith to Aldgate will be an extension of the T-Cup service (ie
trains will do a lap of the circle before terminating)

U
Tom Anderson
2007-01-04 21:31:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Anderson
Post by Tom Anderson
Post by asdf
Having said that, I'd hazard a guess that the Hammersmith-Aldgate
service won't run off-peak (otherwise why send the Met to Barking?),
Hang on, what? What do you mean by the 'Hammersmith-Aldgate service'?
"Metropolitan trains would run through from Liverpool Street to
Barking, and the Hammersmith & City service would run partially to
Aldgate..."
Okay, somehow i'd missed the 'partially' - i'd been thinking every train
coming from Hammersmith would be a teacupper.
Post by Tom Anderson
Thinking about it a bit more, unless I'm missing something, the
suggested service pattern seems to be hopelessly inefficient in terms of
movements across Praed Street Junction.
ISTR we discussed this here a few years ago, and came to much the same
conclusion.

tom
--
Batman always wins
Boltar
2007-01-03 10:58:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Anderson
"Metropolitan trains would run through from Liverpool Street to Barking,
Amersham to Barking is a heck of a long way. Could this be a contender
for the longest non stop journey on the tube or is Epping to West
Ruislip still further?

B2003
PhilD
2007-01-03 11:14:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Boltar
Post by Tom Anderson
"Metropolitan trains would run through from Liverpool Street to Barking,
Amersham to Barking is a heck of a long way. Could this be a contender
for the longest non stop journey on the tube or is Epping to West
Ruislip still further?
Just done a quick calculation. I make the distances:

54.69km Epping - West Ruislip
56.76km Amersham - Barking

So the Met line would end up longer (and longer still if trains ran
through to Chesham).

PhilD

--
<><
alex_t
2007-01-03 11:42:57 UTC
Permalink
As far as I know, Met from Aldgate runs only to Uxbridge. Amersham and
Chesham trains terminate at Baker Street. What about Uxbridge to
Barking?
sweek
2007-01-03 12:14:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by alex_t
As far as I know, Met from Aldgate runs only to Uxbridge. Amersham and
Chesham trains terminate at Baker Street. What about Uxbridge to
Barking?
Less long in distance, but it will only take you about the 5 minutes
less since Uxbridge-Aldgate runs all-stop.
chunky munky
2007-01-03 15:48:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by alex_t
As far as I know, Met from Aldgate runs only to Uxbridge. Amersham and
Chesham trains terminate at Baker Street. What about Uxbridge to
Barking?
The off peak service pattern is:
Aldgate - Uxbridge (All Stations)
Baker Street - Watford (All Stations)
Baker Street - Amersham (Fast - Wembley Park to Harrow and Harrow to
Moor Park)

In the peak there are all sorts of fast, stopping and semi-fast
services running the whole or part of the line, as well as 2 with flow
peak Chesham - Aldgate Fast services, there are also some other early
morning and late night Chesham 8 car services. Of course the Controller
often amends the stopping patterns if gaps arise in the service or
divert trains to cover other branches gaps.

Don't forget that the entire Sub-Surface Railway will be very very
different in 10-15 years tim to what it currently is, including the
District running to Uxbridge instead of the Piccadilly
C
2007-01-03 17:50:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by chunky munky
Post by alex_t
As far as I know, Met from Aldgate runs only to Uxbridge. Amersham and
Chesham trains terminate at Baker Street. What about Uxbridge to
Barking?
Aldgate - Uxbridge (All Stations)
Baker Street - Watford (All Stations)
Baker Street - Amersham (Fast - Wembley Park to Harrow and Harrow to
Moor Park)
In the peak there are all sorts of fast, stopping and semi-fast
services running the whole or part of the line, as well as 2 with flow
peak Chesham - Aldgate Fast services, there are also some other early
morning and late night Chesham 8 car services. Of course the Controller
often amends the stopping patterns if gaps arise in the service or
divert trains to cover other branches gaps.
Don't forget that the entire Sub-Surface Railway will be very very
different in 10-15 years tim to what it currently is, including the
District running to Uxbridge instead of the Piccadilly
I didnt realise the District Line was running up until Uxbridge? Does that
mean the Picadilly line is being shortened?
alex_t
2007-01-03 17:54:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by chunky munky
Don't forget that the entire Sub-Surface Railway will be very very
different in 10-15 years tim to what it currently is, including the
District running to Uxbridge instead of the Piccadilly
How did you know about thus? Any website to read about this?
Paul Scott
2007-01-03 17:57:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by chunky munky
Don't forget that the entire Sub-Surface Railway will be very very
different in 10-15 years tim to what it currently is, including the
District running to Uxbridge instead of the Piccadilly
Presumably this will allow the future signalling upgrade on the Piccadilly
to increase train frequency without buying more tube stock - do the SSL
stock replacement contract numbers allow for District services returning to
Uxbridge?

Paul S
Tom Anderson
2007-01-03 18:18:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by chunky munky
Don't forget that the entire Sub-Surface Railway will be very very
different in 10-15 years tim to what it currently is, including the
District running to Uxbridge instead of the Piccadilly
First i've heard of it, other than as fanfic here. What makes you think
this is going to happen?

tom
--
If the truth can be told so as to be understood, it will be believed.
C
2007-01-03 18:41:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Anderson
Post by chunky munky
Don't forget that the entire Sub-Surface Railway will be very very
different in 10-15 years tim to what it currently is, including the
District running to Uxbridge instead of the Piccadilly
First i've heard of it, other than as fanfic here. What makes you think
this is going to happen?
tom
--
If the truth can be told so as to be understood, it will be believed.
Whats to be gained from having District line trains as opposed to Picadilly
line trains running to Uxbridge?
sweek
2007-01-03 19:39:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by C
Post by Tom Anderson
Post by chunky munky
Don't forget that the entire Sub-Surface Railway will be very very
different in 10-15 years tim to what it currently is, including the
District running to Uxbridge instead of the Piccadilly
First i've heard of it, other than as fanfic here. What makes you think
this is going to happen?
tom
--
If the truth can be told so as to be understood, it will be believed.
Whats to be gained from having District line trains as opposed to Picadilly
line trains running to Uxbridge?
A higher frequency on the rest of the Piccadilly I guess, because the
line will be shorter in the end, while there would be enough
sub-surface stock to extend the District back to Uxbridge.
This would be a very unattractive service for everyone from North
Ealing to Uxbridge though, since virtually all of those people will
want to get on the express. It doesn't make much sense to make the
longer line the slowest one here, and the shorter (Ealing Broadway)
line the express.
John Rowland
2007-01-03 19:56:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by sweek
It doesn't make much sense to make the
longer line the slowest one here, and the shorter (Ealing Broadway)
line the express.
Surely Ealing Broadway would remain District too... the point of the plan is
to increase Picc frequency to Heathrow, and sending Picc trains to Ealing
Broadway would defeat the point of ceasing to serve Uxbridge.

Anyway, didn't they rebuild a Sudbury station or two to have platforms level
with the tube stock a few years ago?
sweek
2007-01-03 20:18:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Rowland
Post by sweek
It doesn't make much sense to make the
longer line the slowest one here, and the shorter (Ealing Broadway)
line the express.
Surely Ealing Broadway would remain District too... the point of the plan is
to increase Picc frequency to Heathrow, and sending Picc trains to Ealing
Broadway would defeat the point of ceasing to serve Uxbridge.
Anyway, didn't they rebuild a Sudbury station or two to have platforms level
with the tube stock a few years ago?
You need less trains for an Ealing Broadway picc. branch than an
Uxbridge picc. branch. Those extra trains could go towards the
increased Heathrow frequency.
I don't think complicating the District line even more is ever a good
idea.
Colin McKenzie
2007-01-03 20:52:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by sweek
Post by John Rowland
It doesn't make much sense to make the longer line the slowest one here,
and the shorter (Ealing Broadway) line the express.
Surely Ealing Broadway would remain District too... the point of the plan is
to increase Picc frequency to Heathrow, and sending Picc trains to Ealing
Broadway would defeat the point of ceasing to serve Uxbridge.
Anyway, didn't they rebuild a Sudbury station or two to have platforms level
with the tube stock a few years ago?
Maybe, but District to Ealing Broadway AND Uxbridge is the only
solution that could eliminate all platforms served by trains of both
sizes. Without this change, level wheelchair access cannot be achieved
at Ealing Common or between Rayners Lane and Uxbridge.
Post by sweek
You need less trains for an Ealing Broadway picc. branch than an
Uxbridge picc. branch. Those extra trains could go towards the
increased Heathrow frequency.
I don't think complicating the District line even more is ever a good
idea.
Arguably, when Crossrail is built, Ealing Broadway won't need both
District and Central trains to central London. The capacity might be
better used to create north-south links to Richmond and Uxbridge,
Harrow, or Willesden Junction.

Colin McKenzie
--
No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at
the population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as
walking.
Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.
chunky munky
2007-01-03 22:02:26 UTC
Permalink
There are a number of reasons why the District will end up at Uxbridge
eventually (with the Picc going to Ealing Bdway?).
- The Piccadilly will benefit from the additional rolling stock, when
Terminal 5 opens. There is no new stock for many years yet.
- The platform to train heights will be "level/ step free" between
Rayners Lane and Uxbridge. As set out in the PPP Contract
- The ATO systems for Tube Lines and Metronet will be different, though
thinking about it now must be compatible for the North Ealing to Acton
Town section, unless as some have said the District runs to Ealing
Broadway.

The SSR will be different in that it will have new trains, new
signalling systems with 12 control/signalling locations being replaced
by one Command & Control centre, step free access to the trains,
changes to the lines.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6213384.stm
Post by Colin McKenzie
Post by sweek
Post by John Rowland
It doesn't make much sense to make the longer line the slowest one here,
and the shorter (Ealing Broadway) line the express.
Surely Ealing Broadway would remain District too... the point of the plan is
to increase Picc frequency to Heathrow, and sending Picc trains to Ealing
Broadway would defeat the point of ceasing to serve Uxbridge.
Anyway, didn't they rebuild a Sudbury station or two to have platforms level
with the tube stock a few years ago?
Maybe, but District to Ealing Broadway AND Uxbridge is the only
solution that could eliminate all platforms served by trains of both
sizes. Without this change, level wheelchair access cannot be achieved
at Ealing Common or between Rayners Lane and Uxbridge.
Post by sweek
You need less trains for an Ealing Broadway picc. branch than an
Uxbridge picc. branch. Those extra trains could go towards the
increased Heathrow frequency.
I don't think complicating the District line even more is ever a good
idea.
Arguably, when Crossrail is built, Ealing Broadway won't need both
District and Central trains to central London. The capacity might be
better used to create north-south links to Richmond and Uxbridge,
Harrow, or Willesden Junction.
Colin McKenzie
--
No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at
the population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as
walking.
Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.
asdf
2007-01-04 02:55:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by chunky munky
There are a number of reasons why the District will end up at Uxbridge
eventually (with the Picc going to Ealing Bdway?).
- The Piccadilly will benefit from the additional rolling stock, when
Terminal 5 opens. There is no new stock for many years yet.
Some 1967 stock will become available soon. Some is going to the
Bakerloo (for the Watford Junction extension), but I'm sure there'd be
enough left for the Picc.

There's also the 1983 stock still around that was supposed to be
refurbished for use on the Picc.
Post by chunky munky
- The platform to train heights will be "level/ step free" between
Rayners Lane and Uxbridge. As set out in the PPP Contract
Curtail the Picc to Rayners Lane, with new platforms where the goods
yard is now?
Steve Fitzgerald
2007-01-06 02:03:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by asdf
Post by chunky munky
There are a number of reasons why the District will end up at Uxbridge
eventually (with the Picc going to Ealing Bdway?).
- The Piccadilly will benefit from the additional rolling stock, when
Terminal 5 opens. There is no new stock for many years yet.
So, just how many extra trains do you consider that T5 will need?

2 at the most, I would say!
Post by asdf
Some 1967 stock will become available soon. Some is going to the
Bakerloo (for the Watford Junction extension), but I'm sure there'd be
enough left for the Picc.
There's also the 1983 stock still around that was supposed to be
refurbished for use on the Picc.
Most of it has disappeared now (the Uxbridge and Cockfosters stuff went
a couple of months ago and the South Harrow is imminent)
Post by asdf
Post by chunky munky
- The platform to train heights will be "level/ step free" between
Rayners Lane and Uxbridge. As set out in the PPP Contract
Curtail the Picc to Rayners Lane, with new platforms where the goods
yard is now?
Always thought that would be a good idea with the RLN refurbishment,
then just peak stuff to RUI/UXB to maintain the headway on the branch at
peak times.
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)
Boltar
2007-01-08 09:29:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by asdf
Some 1967 stock will become available soon. Some is going to the
Bakerloo (for the Watford Junction extension), but I'm sure there'd be
enough left for the Picc.
I doubt having some knackered 67 stock on the picc would go down too
well with the average picc commuter. Besidesd , wouldn't they need a
lot of work to be compatable such as putting back tripcocks , new train
radios etc?
Post by asdf
There's also the 1983 stock still around that was supposed to be
refurbished for use on the Picc.
That all went for scrap long ago didn't it? Are are them some still
hanging around the system?

B2003
asdf
2007-01-04 02:47:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Colin McKenzie
Post by sweek
Post by John Rowland
It doesn't make much sense to make the longer line the slowest one here,
and the shorter (Ealing Broadway) line the express.
Surely Ealing Broadway would remain District too... the point of the plan is
to increase Picc frequency to Heathrow, and sending Picc trains to Ealing
Broadway would defeat the point of ceasing to serve Uxbridge.
Anyway, didn't they rebuild a Sudbury station or two to have platforms level
with the tube stock a few years ago?
Maybe, but District to Ealing Broadway AND Uxbridge is the only
solution that could eliminate all platforms served by trains of both
sizes. Without this change, level wheelchair access cannot be achieved
at Ealing Common or between Rayners Lane and Uxbridge.
The southern Circle couldn't handle a fifth western destination - the
frequency on each is bad enough with 4. Perhaps Ealing Broadway could
be served instead by an Ealing Broadway - High Street Kensington
service. Or the District service could even become a bit like the Met,
with a proportion of trains from all branches terminating at HSK (cf
Baker Street) instead of running onto the Circle.

Here's an alternative idea, though it's a bit off the wall. By this
time, the District will run under ATO. The driver won't actually drive
the train (under normal circumstances), but will just press "go" and
the train will drive itself to the next station. This would mean that,
just like on the DLR, the driver wouldn't need to be sitting at the
front end of the train - he could reside in an area with door controls
(like the guard's areas on pre-DOO Tube stock), or roam the train
(like on the DLR).

Build a west-to-north curve so that trains can run through from Ealing
Broadway to North Ealing. District trains to Uxbridge would run
Central London - Ealing Common - Ealing Broadway (reverse) - North
Ealing - Uxbridge. A reversal en route wouldn't be a problem as
there'd be no need for the driver to change ends.

Result: Ealing Broadway and Uxbridge branches both served; new local
service to Ealing Broadway from the north; faster journey for London
commuters (by changing to Crossrail at Ealing Broadway).
Post by Colin McKenzie
Post by sweek
You need less trains for an Ealing Broadway picc. branch than an
Uxbridge picc. branch. Those extra trains could go towards the
increased Heathrow frequency.
I don't think complicating the District line even more is ever a good
idea.
Arguably, when Crossrail is built, Ealing Broadway won't need both
District and Central trains to central London.
Not everyone who takes the District goes to central London, though.
Post by Colin McKenzie
The capacity might be
better used to create north-south links to Richmond and Uxbridge,
Harrow, or Willesden Junction.
How do you mean? A Harrow-Ealing-Richmond orbital line would be very
handy for a lot of people, but...
Steve Fitzgerald
2007-01-06 02:05:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by asdf
Build a west-to-north curve so that trains can run through from Ealing
Broadway to North Ealing. District trains to Uxbridge would run Central
London - Ealing Common - Ealing Broadway (reverse) - North Ealing -
Uxbridge. A reversal en route wouldn't be a problem as there'd be no
need for the driver to change ends.
I imagine BT might have something to say about that - they have a depot
right where the line would go.
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)
Steve Fitzgerald
2007-01-06 01:57:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by chunky munky
Don't forget that the entire Sub-Surface Railway will be very very
different in 10-15 years tim to what it currently is, including the
District running to Uxbridge instead of the Piccadilly
This is a rumour that surfaces from time to time (usually when one of
those Green railways types takes a wrong stick at Hanger Lane) which has
no factual substance.

The fact that some of the platforms down the Rayners Branch have been
recently rebuilt to tube gauge stock suggests that TPTB have no plans to
do this.
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)
Bill Hayles
2007-01-04 15:09:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by PhilD
Post by Boltar
Post by Tom Anderson
"Metropolitan trains would run through from Liverpool Street to Barking,
Amersham to Barking is a heck of a long way. Could this be a contender
for the longest non stop journey on the tube or is Epping to West
Ruislip still further?
54.69km Epping - West Ruislip
56.76km Amersham - Barking
So the Met line would end up longer (and longer still if trains ran
through to Chesham).
What about Cockfosters to Cockfosters via the Heathrow loop?
--
Bill Hayles
***@billnot.com
http://billnot.com
Richard J.
2007-01-04 17:40:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Hayles
Post by PhilD
Post by Boltar
Post by Tom Anderson
"Metropolitan trains would run through from Liverpool Street to Barking,
Amersham to Barking is a heck of a long way. Could this be a
contender for the longest non stop journey on the tube or is
Epping to West Ruislip still further?
54.69km Epping - West Ruislip
56.76km Amersham - Barking
So the Met line would end up longer (and longer still if trains ran
through to Chesham).
What about Cockfosters to Cockfosters via the Heathrow loop?
What about Hammersmith to Barking? There used to be a Circle Line
train, no. 201, that started from Hammersmith (H&C) at about 04:49, went
20 times round the circle and finished up at Barking at 00:58. Total
distance about 440 km (273 miles) in continuous public service with no
reversing.

Can someone with the current WTTs check whether it still runs?
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)
chunky munky
2007-01-04 22:26:55 UTC
Permalink
The last Barking Train (ex Edgware Road) is indeed an Outer Rail
Circle.

Haven't got a Timetable with me at the minute but I think 4 or 5
Circles stable at Barking in the Evening and there are 3 Start-Ups.
These run advertised as Circles until their last arrival at either Glos
Rd or Edg Rd on the Outer Rail or Glos Rd/ Tower Hill on the Inner
Rail.
It is common for the Train to display the correct destination and the
Dot Matrix to have the wrong destination. This is either because the
DMI can' t show the data or the signalling system can't input it (like
Edgware Road to Glos Rd Inner Rail)
Post by Richard J.
Post by Bill Hayles
Post by PhilD
Post by Boltar
Post by Tom Anderson
"Metropolitan trains would run through from Liverpool Street to Barking,
Amersham to Barking is a heck of a long way. Could this be a
contender for the longest non stop journey on the tube or is
Epping to West Ruislip still further?
54.69km Epping - West Ruislip
56.76km Amersham - Barking
So the Met line would end up longer (and longer still if trains ran
through to Chesham).
What about Cockfosters to Cockfosters via the Heathrow loop?
What about Hammersmith to Barking? There used to be a Circle Line
train, no. 201, that started from Hammersmith (H&C) at about 04:49, went
20 times round the circle and finished up at Barking at 00:58. Total
distance about 440 km (273 miles) in continuous public service with no
reversing.
Can someone with the current WTTs check whether it still runs?
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)
thoss
2007-01-03 16:20:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Boltar
Post by Tom Anderson
"Metropolitan trains would run through from Liverpool Street to Barking,
Amersham to Barking is a heck of a long way. Could this be a contender
for the longest non stop journey on the tube
Non stop ???
--
Thoss
Olof Lagerkvist
2007-01-03 16:51:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by thoss
Post by Boltar
Post by Tom Anderson
"Metropolitan trains would run through from Liverpool Street to Barking,
Amersham to Barking is a heck of a long way. Could this be a contender
for the longest non stop journey on the tube
Non stop ???
Hm, I think he meant "longest journey without change on the tube"... ;-)
--
Olof Lagerkvist
ICQ: 724451
Web: http://here.is/olof
Rob
2007-01-03 19:02:56 UTC
Permalink
This should throw up some interesting things

- on the linear map of the Hammersmith and City line
Paddington and Edgware Road appear twice

- Two different ways to go from Paddington to Edgware Road via
Hammersmith and City - from totally seperate platforms

- Idea of going from Embankment to Monument via Westbound Hammersmith &
City - just weird

- You could walk between Royal Oak and Bayswater in ten minutes, or
take tube - over an hour Id guess

- Three lines to choose from between Gloucester Road and Hammersmith,
two stops on Piccadilly, three on the district, or 31 on the
Hammersmith and City

- If they build the tunnel connecting Euston Sq and Euston three ways
to get from Euston to Kings Cross - Eastbound H&C Northbound Victoria
or Southbound Northern

Rob
Post by Tom Anderson
"Metropolitan trains would run through from Liverpool Street to Barking,
and the Hammersmith & City service would run partially to Aldgate, and
partially all the way around the Circle terminating at Edgware Road - i.e.
Hammersmith - Edgware Road - Aldgate - Victoria - Edgware Road and
reverse.
David Lynch
2007-01-03 22:17:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
This should throw up some interesting things
- on the linear map of the Hammersmith and City line
Paddington and Edgware Road appear twice
The platform descriptors at Edgware Road should be interesting.
"Terminates Here," "Edgware Road via Aldgate," "Hammersmith" and
"Hammersmith via Aldgate"
Post by Rob
- Three lines to choose from between Gloucester Road and Hammersmith,
two stops on Piccadilly, three on the district, or 31 on the
Hammersmith and City
Not to mention that all the way from Gloucester Road to Tower Hill,
there are trains to Hammersmith in both directions, and the one
advertised as going there is most likely the slower one.

Similarly, the fastest way to Hammersmith from Bayswater, Notting Hill
Gate, and High Street Kensington is to take a train towards Hammersmith
only as far as Gloucester Road and change to a District/Piccadilly train
in the opposite direction.
John Rowland
2007-01-03 22:35:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Lynch
The platform descriptors at Edgware Road should be interesting.
"Terminates Here," "Edgware Road via Aldgate," "Hammersmith" and
"Hammersmith via Aldgate"
I would imagine the "via Aldgate" trains will continue to be described as
Circle for much of their run.
asdf
2007-01-04 03:02:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Lynch
The platform descriptors at Edgware Road should be interesting.
"Edgware Road via Aldgate,"
"Teacup Line via King's Cross"
Post by David Lynch
"Hammersmith via Aldgate"
Probably just "Aldgate".
Tom Anderson
2007-01-04 00:47:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rob
This should throw up some interesting things
- on the linear map of the Hammersmith and City line
Paddington and Edgware Road appear twice
The 'linear' map might well be like the one currently seen in C stock
trains, with the loop shown as a loop. I think it'd be pretty bloody
confusing otherwise.
Post by Rob
- Two different ways to go from Paddington to Edgware Road via
Hammersmith and City - from totally seperate platforms
- Idea of going from Embankment to Monument via Westbound Hammersmith &
City - just weird
- You could walk between Royal Oak and Bayswater in ten minutes, or
take tube - over an hour Id guess
- Three lines to choose from between Gloucester Road and Hammersmith,
two stops on Piccadilly, three on the district, or 31 on the
Hammersmith and City
- If they build the tunnel connecting Euston Sq and Euston three ways
to get from Euston to Kings Cross - Eastbound H&C Northbound Victoria
or Southbound Northern
The present Circle line arrangement throws up as many odd situations.
Although the Gloucester Road to Hammersmith one is good!

tom
--
Ensure a star-man is never constructed!
Dave A
2007-01-07 14:08:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Anderson
Post by C
Post by Fig
In another thread, Dave Arquanti commented that "The new service pattern
on the Circle and H&C lines will make using Paddington much easier"
Could anyone expand on this please? A brief google has returned nothing.
Yeah what does Dave mean?
http://www.alwaystouchout.com/project/39
"2011 - New service pattern
"The peak hour service is currently 28tph on most of the subsurface
network in Zone 1 and is due to be increased to 30tph, to be achieved by
restructuring the service - in particular the Circle line.
"Metropolitan trains would run through from Liverpool Street to Barking,
and the Hammersmith & City service would run partially to Aldgate, and
partially all the way around the Circle terminating at Edgware Road -
i.e. Hammersmith - Edgware Road - Aldgate - Victoria - Edgware Road and
reverse.
"This is meant to give a period of recovery time which the Circle line
currently lacks. Detailed information is available at Tubeprune's site
and District Dave's site.
"Works will be undertaken on the Hammersmith & City line station at
Paddington to relieve overcrowding."
Note that because of the new shape of the H&C (which, AIUI, entirely
replaces the current Circle service), at Paddington, no trains on the
Circle/District platform will go beyond Edgware Road, so should that way
lie your destination, your only option is to go to the H&C platform,
which is easier than the choice you face at present.
tom
To add some clarification on service frequencies to this, I believe the
idea is to double the frequency of Hammersmith departures. The current
frequency on each of the H&C, Circle and Wimbleware services is 8tph
(every 7.5 mins). The "teacup" plan would (theoretically) involve 16tph
departing from Hammersmith, resulting in a doubling of service on the
Hammersmith-Paddington section, giving a much improved service to the
White City shopping centre which will push up demand on the line (via
the new station at Wood Lane).

It will also provide big benefits at Paddington, where interchange
passengers from National Rail can head to the Bishop's Bridge (current
H&C) station for 16tph (direct) to the east, an improvement over the
current situation with direct trains split equally between those
platforms and the Praed Street (Circle line) platforms. Additionally,
the extensive development in the Paddington Basin is closer to the
Bishop's Bridge platforms and will benefit from a better service to them.

However, the obvious problem is that 16 circular services do not fit
along either the southern Circle or into the terminating platforms at
Edgware Road - so it seems likely that 8tph will halt at Aldgate and
reverse, with the other 8tph continuing round to Edgware Road via
Victoria and back, just as the current Circle service.

Unfortunately, it means a bit of a raw deal for journeys on the western
part of the Circle, as there will be no frequency increase and a break
in journeys passing through Edgware Road - but hopefully with the prize
of improved reliability.

Other people may know more than I do, so please step in to correct if
necessary!
--
Dave Arquati
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London
chunky munky
2007-01-02 22:35:12 UTC
Permalink
Must be the plan for the Hammersmith & Circle line, which has to wait
for the new S7 stock to arrive, as there isn't enogh C Stocks about.
The current idea is Hammersmith (Met) -> Edgware Road -> Aldgate ->
Gloucester Road -> then either up to Edgware Road or down to Wimbledon.
The Met will then be diverted from Liverpool Street to Barking.

No idea about frequencies or if the service will run past Edgware Road
as a loop?
Post by Fig
In another thread, Dave Arquanti commented that "The new service pattern
on the Circle and H&C lines will make using Paddington much easier"
Could anyone expand on this please? A brief google has returned nothing.
--
Fig
C
2007-01-03 04:47:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by chunky munky
Must be the plan for the Hammersmith & Circle line, which has to wait
for the new S7 stock to arrive, as there isn't enogh C Stocks about.
The current idea is Hammersmith (Met) -> Edgware Road -> Aldgate ->
Gloucester Road -> then either up to Edgware Road or down to Wimbledon.
The Met will then be diverted from Liverpool Street to Barking.
No idea about frequencies or if the service will run past Edgware Road
as a loop?
Post by Fig
In another thread, Dave Arquanti commented that "The new service pattern
on the Circle and H&C lines will make using Paddington much easier"
Could anyone expand on this please? A brief google has returned nothing.
--
Fig
Personally I dont see why the Met line has to run to Barking?
James Farrar
2007-01-03 06:07:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by C
Post by chunky munky
Must be the plan for the Hammersmith & Circle line, which has to wait
for the new S7 stock to arrive, as there isn't enogh C Stocks about.
The current idea is Hammersmith (Met) -> Edgware Road -> Aldgate ->
Gloucester Road -> then either up to Edgware Road or down to Wimbledon.
The Met will then be diverted from Liverpool Street to Barking.
No idea about frequencies or if the service will run past Edgware Road
as a loop?
Post by Fig
In another thread, Dave Arquanti commented that "The new service pattern
on the Circle and H&C lines will make using Paddington much easier"
Could anyone expand on this please? A brief google has returned nothing.
--
Fig
Personally I dont see why the Met line has to run to Barking?
Because otherwise, if you divert the current H&C to Aldgate instead of
Aldgate East, you've got no trains running between Liverpool Street
and Aldgate East!
alex_t
2007-01-03 10:09:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by James Farrar
Because otherwise, if you divert the current H&C to Aldgate instead of
Aldgate East, you've got no trains running between Liverpool Street
and Aldgate East!
I think it would be much better idea to force people change at Tower
Hill (or build passenger walk tunnel between Aldgate and Aldgate East)
- current Aldgate junction is too crowded.

Yes, it's additional change for passengers, but it will result in
better service.
John Rowland
2007-01-03 14:16:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by C
Personally I dont see why the Met line has to run to Barking?
Because at the moment, the Met trains empty out in one direction and fill up
in the other. It's better to have them filling up with new people as the old
ones get out.
C
2007-01-03 16:55:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Rowland
Post by C
Personally I dont see why the Met line has to run to Barking?
Because at the moment, the Met trains empty out in one direction and fill
up in the other. It's better to have them filling up with new people as
the old ones get out.
Dont all lines do that?
Dave A
2007-01-07 13:52:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by C
Post by John Rowland
Post by C
Personally I dont see why the Met line has to run to Barking?
Because at the moment, the Met trains empty out in one direction and fill
up in the other. It's better to have them filling up with new people as
the old ones get out.
Dont all lines do that?
No - witness any line at Oxford Circus, where a mob get off a train to
be replaced by a mob getting on. Imagine if the Central line didn't go
west of Marble Arch - the trains would get emptier and emptier as they
approached Marble Arch from the east, whereas there is currently a
turnover of people which keeps them efficiently used at least as far as
White City.
--
Dave Arquati
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London
asdf
2007-01-04 02:57:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Rowland
Post by C
Personally I dont see why the Met line has to run to Barking?
Because at the moment, the Met trains empty out in one direction and fill up
in the other. It's better to have them filling up with new people as the old
ones get out.
And by swapping the eastern destinations of the Met and H&C, exactly
the same thing happens with the H&C...
John B
2007-01-04 18:13:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by asdf
Post by John Rowland
Post by C
Personally I dont see why the Met line has to run to Barking?
Because at the moment, the Met trains empty out in one direction and fill up
in the other. It's better to have them filling up with new people as the old
ones get out.
And by swapping the eastern destinations of the Met and H&C, exactly
the same thing happens with the H&C...
Except Met trains are far fuller when they reach Baker Street than H&C
trains are when they reach Paddington...
--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org
sweek
2007-01-04 21:16:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by John B
Except Met trains are far fuller when they reach Baker Street than H&C
trains are when they reach Paddington...
--
But generally empty once you go past Baker Street. The Met's usually
not that crowded.
John Rowland
2007-01-09 13:07:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by asdf
Post by John Rowland
Post by C
Personally I dont see why the Met line has to run to Barking?
Because at the moment, the Met trains empty out in one direction and
fill up in the other. It's better to have them filling up with new
people as the old ones get out.
And by swapping the eastern destinations of the Met and H&C, exactly
the same thing happens with the H&C...
But the Met east of Baker Street has 120 carriages per peak hour, whereas
the H&C has something like 48 carriages per peak hour.
asdf
2007-01-09 21:52:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Rowland
Post by asdf
Post by John Rowland
Post by C
Personally I dont see why the Met line has to run to Barking?
Because at the moment, the Met trains empty out in one direction and
fill up in the other. It's better to have them filling up with new
people as the old ones get out.
And by swapping the eastern destinations of the Met and H&C, exactly
the same thing happens with the H&C...
But the Met east of Baker Street has 120 carriages per peak hour, whereas
the H&C has something like 48 carriages per peak hour.
But if 15 Met tph are to head through Aldgate East, some Districts
will have to be cut back to Tower Hill (and/or Mansion House) to make
room, which just shifts the same situation onto those Districts.
Tom Anderson
2007-01-10 15:47:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Rowland
Post by asdf
Post by John Rowland
Post by C
Personally I dont see why the Met line has to run to Barking?
Because at the moment, the Met trains empty out in one direction and
fill up in the other. It's better to have them filling up with new
people as the old ones get out.
And by swapping the eastern destinations of the Met and H&C, exactly
the same thing happens with the H&C...
But the Met east of Baker Street has 120 carriages per peak hour, whereas
the H&C has something like 48 carriages per peak hour.
But if 15 Met tph are to head through Aldgate East, some Districts will
have to be cut back to Tower Hill (and/or Mansion House) to make room,
which just shifts the same situation onto those Districts.
No, because the Mets replace H&Cs.

tom
--
Children are born true scientists. -- R. Buckminster Fuller
Dave A
2007-01-10 18:49:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Anderson
Post by asdf
Post by John Rowland
Post by asdf
Post by John Rowland
Post by C
Personally I dont see why the Met line has to run to Barking?
Because at the moment, the Met trains empty out in one direction and
fill up in the other. It's better to have them filling up with new
people as the old ones get out.
And by swapping the eastern destinations of the Met and H&C, exactly
the same thing happens with the H&C...
But the Met east of Baker Street has 120 carriages per peak hour, whereas
the H&C has something like 48 carriages per peak hour.
But if 15 Met tph are to head through Aldgate East, some Districts
will have to be cut back to Tower Hill (and/or Mansion House) to make
room, which just shifts the same situation onto those Districts.
No, because the Mets replace H&Cs.
asdf has a point - the current H&C service is only 8tph. If all 15tph
Met go to Barking, then 7tph will have to be removed from the District
service - I imagine that demand for services along the southern Circle
is higher than for the northern Circle.

Perhaps 7tph from the Met will terminate at Aldgate alongside 8tph from
the new H&Circle service.

Trying to get my head around this service pattern is as difficult as the
multitude of proposals for the North London Railway.
--
Dave Arquati
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London
Tom Anderson
2007-01-10 19:26:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Anderson
Post by John Rowland
Post by asdf
Post by John Rowland
Post by C
Personally I dont see why the Met line has to run to Barking?
Because at the moment, the Met trains empty out in one direction and
fill up in the other. It's better to have them filling up with new
people as the old ones get out.
And by swapping the eastern destinations of the Met and H&C, exactly
the same thing happens with the H&C...
But the Met east of Baker Street has 120 carriages per peak hour, whereas
the H&C has something like 48 carriages per peak hour.
But if 15 Met tph are to head through Aldgate East, some Districts will
have to be cut back to Tower Hill (and/or Mansion House) to make room,
which just shifts the same situation onto those Districts.
No, because the Mets replace H&Cs.
asdf has a point - the current H&C service is only 8tph. If all 15tph Met go
to Barking, then 7tph will have to be removed from the District service
Allowing another 7tph of Hammersmith trains to be Teacups rather than
Aldgates - by jove, Holmes, we've cracked it!

Assuming they reverse somewhere like HSK or Edgware Road, rather than
Tower Hill, of course.
- I imagine that demand for services along the southern Circle is higher
than for the northern Circle.
Ah, but between where? If the demand is along the actual circle bit
(Charing Cross to the City, say), then heavily pruning some Districts back
to a western point and replacing them with Teacups would be fine; if the
demand is actually from the western District suburbs to the south side of
the circle, it wouldn't, and the admittedly far more sensible idea of
reversing some Districts at Tower Hill would come into play. The only case
where you need to preserve the full District service beyond Tower Hill is
if there's much more demand for trips from the eastern end of the
District/H&C to the south circle than the north.

Hmm. I think i'm in knip there.

Anyway, yes, there you, all fun and games until someone loses a peak-time
through train.
Perhaps 7tph from the Met will terminate at Aldgate alongside 8tph from
the new H&Circle service.
Well, or that. So now we have both the Met and the H&C having half Aldgate
and half through trains. What fraction of District trains reverse at Tower
Hill rather than running through? ISTR it's actually quite a lot.
Trying to get my head around this service pattern is as difficult as the
multitude of proposals for the North London Railway.
I had a look at the service patterns on the railway south of the river the
other day.

*shudders*

tom
--
Curse me, God, for making you this way!
Richard J.
2007-01-10 21:36:08 UTC
Permalink
What fraction of District trains reverse at Tower Hill rather than
running through? ISTR it's actually quite a lot.
In the daytime off-peak, it's basically the Ealing Broadway trains that
reverse at Tower Hill, while the Richmonds and Wimbledons go to
Upminster. So the answer is about a third, or about a quarter of all
eastbound traffic if you include the Circle. In the peaks, it may well
be different.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)
Colin Rosenstiel
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard J.
What fraction of District trains reverse at Tower Hill rather
than running through? ISTR it's actually quite a lot.
In the daytime off-peak, it's basically the Ealing Broadway trains
that reverse at Tower Hill, while the Richmonds and Wimbledons go
to Upminster. So the answer is about a third, or about a quarter
of all eastbound traffic if you include the Circle. In the peaks,
it may well be different.
Are there no Dagenham terminators any more?
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Richard J.
2007-01-11 02:21:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Colin Rosenstiel
Post by Richard J.
What fraction of District trains reverse at Tower Hill rather
than running through? ISTR it's actually quite a lot.
In the daytime off-peak, it's basically the Ealing Broadway trains
that reverse at Tower Hill, while the Richmonds and Wimbledons go
to Upminster. So the answer is about a third, or about a quarter
of all eastbound traffic if you include the Circle. In the peaks,
it may well be different.
Are there no Dagenham terminators any more?
I've seen then in the evening peak, but not off-peak.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)
Colin Rosenstiel
1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard J.
Post by Colin Rosenstiel
Are there no Dagenham terminators any more?
I've seen then in the evening peak, but not off-peak.
Ah! I had the impression I'd seen them slightly more than that in recent
years. I must have been wrong.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
James Farrar
2007-01-11 02:22:36 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 00:40 +0000 (GMT Standard Time),
Post by Colin Rosenstiel
Dagenham terminators
Digressing, I know, but that sounds quite ominous... :)
Tom Anderson
2007-01-11 14:45:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by James Farrar
On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 00:40 +0000 (GMT Standard Time),
Post by Colin Rosenstiel
Dagenham terminators
Digressing, I know, but that sounds quite ominous... :)
'ASTA LA VISTA, GUV'NOR.

tom
--
I'd get more sense out of a crossed line with the Krankies
Dave A
2007-01-11 19:44:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tom Anderson
Post by Dave A
Post by Tom Anderson
Post by asdf
Post by John Rowland
Post by asdf
Post by John Rowland
Post by C
Personally I dont see why the Met line has to run to Barking?
Because at the moment, the Met trains empty out in one direction and
fill up in the other. It's better to have them filling up with new
people as the old ones get out.
And by swapping the eastern destinations of the Met and H&C, exactly
the same thing happens with the H&C...
But the Met east of Baker Street has 120 carriages per peak hour, whereas
the H&C has something like 48 carriages per peak hour.
But if 15 Met tph are to head through Aldgate East, some Districts
will have to be cut back to Tower Hill (and/or Mansion House) to
make room, which just shifts the same situation onto those Districts.
No, because the Mets replace H&Cs.
asdf has a point - the current H&C service is only 8tph. If all 15tph
Met go to Barking, then 7tph will have to be removed from the District
service
Allowing another 7tph of Hammersmith trains to be Teacups rather than
Aldgates - by jove, Holmes, we've cracked it!
Assuming they reverse somewhere like HSK or Edgware Road, rather than
Tower Hill, of course.
Post by Dave A
- I imagine that demand for services along the southern Circle is
higher than for the northern Circle.
Ah, but between where? If the demand is along the actual circle bit
(Charing Cross to the City, say), then heavily pruning some Districts
back to a western point and replacing them with Teacups would be fine;
if the demand is actually from the western District suburbs to the south
side of the circle, it wouldn't, and the admittedly far more sensible
idea of reversing some Districts at Tower Hill would come into play. The
only case where you need to preserve the full District service beyond
Tower Hill is if there's much more demand for trips from the eastern end
of the District/H&C to the south circle than the north.
Hmm. I think i'm in knip there.
Anyway, yes, there you, all fun and games until someone loses a
peak-time through train.
OK, here's some data to chew on - Figure 4C.2 of the Mayor's Transport
Strategy is a particularly useful diagram showing Underground crowding
levels for 2001, with the following figure showing predictions for 2011
- so imagine something between the two. The width of the lines is the
magnitude of demand, and the colour is the crowding level. (You need
good zoom or good eyesight to check that you're looking at the correct
direction of travel.)

2001 shows a higher and crowded passenger flow from Aldgate East to
Tower Hill, and a much lower (but still crowded) flow from Aldgate East
to Liverpool Street.

2011 prediction (albeit this is meant to be without the Transport
Strategy) shows crowding again to Tower Hill and a still low but "very
crowded" service (i.e. crammed) from Aldgate East to Liverpool Street.

Demand from the western branches into Victoria and the City is very high
and very overcrowded, compared to that from the east.

The difference in the magnitude of demand in the east suggests that the
Tower Hill service should be much more frequent than the Liverpool
Street service (perhaps doubly so), which I think is about the shape of
things at the moment.

It's also worth bearing in mind that a reduced-frequency
east-District/southern-Circle service may push people onto the
very-high-frequency Central line at Mile End to get to Bank or St Paul's
(whereas they would have stayed on to Monument, Cannon St or Mansion
House), and the Central line already suffers worse overcrowding than
either the District or the H&C in this area.

To me this suggests that the District frequency to/from the east should
be maintained, as the balance is quite delicate.
Post by Tom Anderson
Post by Dave A
Perhaps 7tph from the Met will terminate at Aldgate alongside 8tph
from the new H&Circle service.
Well, or that. So now we have both the Met and the H&C having half
Aldgate and half through trains. What fraction of District trains
reverse at Tower Hill rather than running through? ISTR it's actually
quite a lot.
As Clive mentions, it's about a third of the District service (Ealing
Broadways).
Post by Tom Anderson
Post by Dave A
Trying to get my head around this service pattern is as difficult as
the multitude of proposals for the North London Railway.
I had a look at the service patterns on the railway south of the river
the other day.
*shudders*
Indeed. However, whilst the downside is that they're complicated, the
upside is that they end up matching demand more closely than simpler
Underground all-or-nothing service patterns.

They do also relieve some stress from the Underground by offering a
choice of termini...
--
Dave Arquati
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London
j***@gmail.com
2007-02-20 00:44:48 UTC
Permalink
An improved service from the north side of the circle down to Barking
would have a great effect on the central, plenty of people (myself
included) could take either into the city, but opt for the central
(which involves changing) on the basis of reliability, frequency and
speed. With a decent frequency and spanking new ACed up S Stock I know
I'd prefer that to standing with my head at a 45 degree angle squashed
up against the doors in 40 degrees on the central.

T-cup seems to make a lot of sence, the paddington stations
improvements would also be well recieved, I do Paddington - Bow Road a
fair bit, and will normally take bakerloo, central and district rather
than gamble on the cooperation of the H&C. Thought the unified aldgate
interchange is interesting (I do this on foot a fair bit, one of the
great irritations of oyster is that it would not let me do this
without paying for the privalage of walking), If that could be done it
would be a very usefull addition for people living/working on the
district.

Matt Wheeler
2007-01-10 19:59:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave A
Post by Tom Anderson
No, because the Mets replace H&Cs.
asdf has a point - the current H&C service is only 8tph. If all
15tph Met go to Barking, then 7tph will have to be removed from the
District service - I imagine that demand for services along the
southern Circle is higher than for the northern Circle.
Surely, though, the situation with the Met will be much as now (unless
i've missed something).... the off-peak timetable only has the
Uxbridge services running through to Aldgate, so presumably those
(every 10 mins ?) would be the ones going to the H&C route to Barking,
whilst the Watford & Amersham services will continue to run only as
far as Baker Street.
Dave A
2007-01-11 19:14:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Matt Wheeler
Post by Dave A
Post by Tom Anderson
No, because the Mets replace H&Cs.
asdf has a point - the current H&C service is only 8tph. If all
15tph Met go to Barking, then 7tph will have to be removed from the
District service - I imagine that demand for services along the
southern Circle is higher than for the northern Circle.
Surely, though, the situation with the Met will be much as now (unless
i've missed something).... the off-peak timetable only has the
Uxbridge services running through to Aldgate, so presumably those
(every 10 mins ?) would be the ones going to the H&C route to Barking,
whilst the Watford & Amersham services will continue to run only as
far as Baker Street.
That may be so, but the off-peak service pattern isn't the problem, it's
the peak one (although H&C and Circle services are pretty invariable
throughout the day).
--
Dave Arquati
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London
Loading...