In article , (Basil Jet)
wrote:

On 2017\02\24 11:01, David Walters wrote:
On Thu, 23 Feb 2017 20:26:04 +0000 (UTC),
d wrote:
On Wed, 22 Feb 2017 18:51:38 -0600
wrote:
I'm sure that clearance issues were very much on TfL's minds. Rightly
so as things are turning out with the 700s for Thameslink. Both
initial trips north of Hitchin, to Peterborough and Cambridge, came to
grief with lost shoes AIUI due to high ballast shoulders, in the
Cambridge case at Foxton on the return journey.

Why would Thameslink trains be sent up the ECML and cambridge line?
Weren't there enough free slots to test on the MML?

Part of the Thameslink Project includes direct services on the ECML
through Thameslink such as between Cambridge and Brighton and
Peterborough and Horsham.

The (closed) timetable consultation is at
http://www.thameslinkrailway.com/you...e-consultation

I believe the junction is not functional yet, so they will have been
sent via WLL and North London Incline (the Gospel Oak Harringay route
being unelectrified).

Seems a bit premature to me... did they need to know the Foxton
ballast is a bit high so long before the services run? Wouldn't a
diesel-hauled gauging train with polystyrene shoes be better at this
stage?

My understanding is that the Canal Tunnel route between Belle Isle and SPILL
is now open.

--
Colin Rosenstiel