London Banter - View Single Post - Network Rail "incorrectly designed" the Gospel Oak

[email protected] · February 10th 17, 04:13 PM posted to uk.transport.london

In article , d () wrote:

On Fri, 10 Feb 2017 07:16:06 -0600
wrote:
In article , d () wrote:
You said north london, not the north london line. Since you're such a
pedant you should get these things right.

Actually, all the third rail had been removed before the East London was
extended northwards to Highbury & Islington.

And? There is 3rd rail in north london, and not just there - all the
way to watford too.

From Euston because of the interworking with the Bakerloo Line but on no
other routes around there now. And the route almost entirely parallels a
25KV electrified route between Euston and Watford Junction.

I'm prefectly well aware of the that. Your point is what exactly? That
because 3rd rail was removed it can't be put back because of some
moronic DoT regulation? No, lets just inconvenience thousands for
months and spend 130m quid instead, far better.

Go and learn some power electricity and stop talking out of your rear
orifice. It was removed because 3rd rail just couldn't meet the needs of
modern electric trains and couldn't meet freight needs at all.

Sorry, which modern electric trains exactly - the 378s which run on
the NLL *and* the 3rd rail ELL all the way down to crystal palace? Do
they run faster
or with better acceleration on the NLL then?

3rd rail is fine for frequent suburban and metro services but increasingly
hopeless for long distance passenger and freight services. The huge benefit
derived from power electronics is that dual system trains are so much
cheaper and more versatile so there is no reason to keep third rail where
25KV would allow bore versatile traffic, hence the electric spine
re-powering project. It may have been ahead of its time but it will come so
freights too heavy for diesel haulage can run in and out of Southampton.

--
Colin Rosenstiel