On Wed, 26 Nov 2014 06:40:34 -0800 (PST)
Mark wrote:
On Tuesday, 25 November 2014 19:06:56 UTC, wrote:
I still think S stock running on the ELL as a tube route terminating at
new cross + gate would have been a better choice despite extra traffic
from further south since interchange would have been fairly easy.

Where would the extra services from further south terminate? No terminating
facility
at New Cross Gate, and no capacity at London Bridge.

They could have had reversers further up the line. Lets be honest - the real
raison d'etre for the ELL now is to get people from highbury to shadwell or
canada water to get to canary wharf so bypassing a huge chunk of central
london. The south bit is mainly irrelevant since trains already went to
london bridge where people could already get the jubilee anyway.

Same applies for terminating from the north at New Cross Gate. Terminating 12
tph
there would be challenging, perhaps not impossible but the knock-on effect of
a problem would be far bigger than with multiple quieter terminuses.

How do other tube lines cope then? Where there's a will...

route. A train load of people changing at New Cross Gate would cause chaos
there, even
after they've finished rebuilding it.

That logic didn't seem to stop the closure of the farringdon to moorgate
branch so its odd TfL seem to think it applies in south london but not north
london.

South london is already oversubscribed with national rail services, it didn't
need another. The ELL with a high frequency fast tube service would have been
a better option for those of us north of the river than the dog slow service
we ended up with.

--
Spud