On Jan 7, 3:12*pm, 1506 wrote:
On Jan 7, 2:49*pm, wrote:



On Fri, 7 Jan 2011 14:22:41 +0000

Mike Bristow wrote:
["Followup-To:" header set to uk.transport.london.]
In article ,
* wrote:
So fill us in on how removing a set of points increases operational
flexibility then.

It doesn't.

But the cost of that operational flexiblity is increased disruption
(points fail more often than plain track) and increased cost (points
need more maintenance then plain track).

If they're clipped out of use most of the time they can't fail short of a
rail breaking.

Moreover, when they are needed, the returns in goodwill and
convenience to passengers is enormous. *If one of the two lines is not
available on Monday morning after a weekend possession the ability to
still move at least some passengers to work is great asset.

But you can still do that on whichever service is still running and
you'll get more trains through the area that way than trying to run
two 'special' services over one track with the problems in pathing
over the pointwork at each end.