Tim Roll-Pickering wrote:
AstraVanMan wrote:
which will do a massive job at relieving the burden on Waterloo, and phase
2 of the ELL extension will help, though that's not going to be part of
the tube network by then.

Of course if it were marketted as still being part of the tube, it would
boost usage and property prices. Is there anything really stopping it from
being presented that way?

The North London Line is very busy these days, with a 15 min frequency
during the day and 20 mins in the evening. It's on a tube map, which is
good marketing. The filthy state of the train interiors isn't a good
promotion for the service, but that will I'm sure all change once TfL
takes control next year (TfL will appoint an operator to run the
concession but will I'm certain take a very hands on attitude).

I'd expect that the extended ELL will similarly have an operator
awarded the concession to run it as opposed to be franchised in the
conventional way by the Department for Transport.

More substantially, what level of demand is there for journeys from Clapham
to ELL destinations? I can't see a direct Clapham-Canada Water service
relieving pressure on the Jubilee Line at Waterloo and I'm not sure if
changing at Clapham gets one to Whitechapel faster than from Victoria.

Both good points, I don't know what the relative merits in terms of
journey times will be. But the ELL will have many audiences, and will
provide orbital rather than radial journey opportunities. It's not just
for the benefit of the SWT traveller! It will provide useful local
links, and I think it will be similarly popular to the North London
Line (in terms of loadings as opposed to popularity of the decor).

And - an important point - if it does provide a good alternative to get
to Whitechapel for instance, even say if the journey times are similar,
then some passengers will choose that route as it'll be cheaper (no
travelling through pricey zone 1), which will ease the load on the
District.