Thread: Tunbridge Wells
View Single Post
  #59   Report Post  
Old August 8th 14, 03:08 PM posted to uk.transport.london
Roland Perry Roland Perry is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Aug 2003
Posts: 10,125
Default Tunbridge Wells

In message , at 09:58:48
on Fri, 8 Aug 2014, remarked:
Chelmsford station is on a viaduct and has just two platforms and a
turnback siding. It just doesn't have the capacity to reverse many
trains, and there was a good enough main line service for those
heading for London. To get to intermediate stations it was always
"change at Shenfield", which has five platforms.

Back in the 70's, which was before Chelmsford's expansion to become a
dormitory town, many of the trains terminated at Gidea Park, which
was regarded as about as far out as commuters would normally live.

But Chelmsford is more like Bishop's Stortford, the West Anglia limit of
the 1960s electrification. The fact that Chelmsford would require
infrastructure investment wasn't a block then.


There's no obvious way to increase the size of the station, and the
demand wasn't there from the passengers anyway - most were travelling
on fast trains to London (the Frinton and Clacton electrics
especially) and wouldn't have used a stopping service instead.


Was Bishop's Stortford so different?


Not being on the main line it had fewer fast trains to London. And of
course with significantly fewer of any kind of train, it's be easier to
terminate there. As for the commuting angle, I don't know where the edge
of commuter-belt was in those days, Cheshunt perhaps? I remember how
Letchworth only "took off" as a commuter belt in the late 70's after it
was electrified.
--
Roland Perry