London Banter - View Single Post

[email protected] · November 24th 15, 05:15 PM posted to uk.transport.london

In article , d () wrote:

On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 17:00:09 +0100
Eric wrote:
On 2015-11-24, Basil Jet wrote:
I didn't make myself clear. I meant that I see no reason why the trains
terminating at Liverpool Street have to be as long as the trains going
through to Paddington. Certainly not if they have to lose a platform to
do it. How long are these trains and platforms now? Why would the
introduction of Crossrail bring about an increase in the number of
people using Liverpool Street, because I would expect a decrease.

Because over time the cost of not having a uniform fleet (spare sets,
scheduling problems for the normal timetable, flexibility when something
goes wrong ...) is probably greater than the cost of fiddling with

Thats something LU finally figured out when it ordered the S stock.

the end of one platform (2 faces). That's all its about. There _will_
be fewer passengers (and fewer trains) at Liverpool Street ("surface"),
so there's no reason not to lose one platform that is just long enough
for an 8-car 315.

So one platformn is being removed from LS just after the Overground has
started running into it. I'm sure this will end well. *cough*

The Overground doesn't use that side (the old Electric Lines) of Liverpool
St, platforms 11-18. It uses some of the lowest numbered platforms (1-4?)
though it shares with AGA on them.

--
Colin Rosenstiel