View Single Post
  #13   Report Post  
Old February 6th 10, 06:21 PM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
D7666 D7666 is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2003
Posts: 529
Default Why did Thameslink by-pass Crystal Palace?

On Feb 6, 7:11*pm, MIG wrote:

Farringdon is effectively a terminus, just that trains continue the
way they are facing after their layover. *


Well I'd say all of SPILL + Farringdon + City + Blackfriars are
terminii, and that from north of Thames trains effectively terminate
at BF, and trains to south of Thames effectively start at SPILL, and
v.v. for NB trains.

Connection of the north and south bits is more an operating
convenience than a through route for passengers - useful that it is.
Indeed, the original Thameslink was based on money released by economy
in operation linking together 2 dead end services, using 48 319s to do
what was previously done with 46 317s and about a dozen 4 EPBs.

If there is a good
operational reason now for every station in the central section to
have a long dwell time (ie to avoid contamination between delays on
opposite ends of the route) then there always will be. *The
performance of 319s is a red herring on a route with minutes of dwell
time and a top speed of about 10 mph.


Yep.

Again this is why I think the existing TL route is and always be a
slow speed metro route thus is better off being a sort of overground
route.

24 TPH yes, attempting to serve most of the south coast and deepest
fenlands no.

--
Nick