On Mar 6, 1:02*am, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Thu, 5 Mar 2009, MIG wrote:
On Mar 5, 9:10*pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
"David Jackman" pleasereplytogroup wrote in message

6.109.145...

which has been reported by the Standard as

"From December, Circle line trains will start in Hammersmith, run
along the current Hammersmith & City line to Edgware Road and then do
a clockwise lap of the Circle line and head back to Hammersmith. They
would then do the journey anti-clockwise."

A very similar mistaken description to the last time the Standard ran
the story a few months back. *IIRC was discussed here at the time...

Identical nonsense in The London Paper I noticed.

Anyway, I really can't see Edgware Road being workable with the number
of crossing movements.

With 12 tph coming from Hammersmith (6 H&C, 6 Lasso), and going the other
way, and 12 tph coming from Notting Hill Gate (6 Lasso, 6 Wimbleware),
you've got 12 vs 12, which means, under ideal conditions, a five-minute
gap between successive Hammersmith-bound trains, through which you have to
fit the NHG-originating trains - every five minutes, all day, and vice
versa!

I think it's currently 7.5 tph H&C, 7.5 tph Circle, and something like 6
tph Wimbleware (?), which pits 13.5 against 7.5. As long as you can hold
the westbound H&Cs at Edgware Road (which you can, due to there being two
roads through it), that gives you 13.5 4-minute slots an hour into which
to fit 7.5 trains. That sounds like it should be easier.

The proximity to the reverse at Edgware Road means that anything which
clobbers a train coming into the bay (from NHG) has the potential to
affect trains doing the reverse, which since they share the line with the
trains going to Hammersmith, means that you could, i think, get some kind
of self-reinforcing cyclone of disaster. The spare slots in the current
scheme effectively mitigate this.

And for the punters, you'd never know which side of the bridge to run to
to get to the Notting Hill direction (bad enough now).

Given that cross-platform change is only 50 : 50 anyway,

According to Quail, there is a trailing crossover to the *east* of the
platforms. If a train's length of outer rail to the east of that was made
reversible, then you could send all reversing trains into platform 2, with
cross-platform change to platform 1 for trains to King's Cross, then carry
on eastward and reverse them via the reversible patch and the crossover
into platform 3, where they could pick up passengers cross-platform from
westbound H&C trains. That would deliver the promised cross-platform
interchange. It would also involve reversing trains on the bit of track
that 12 tph of trains from Hammersmith are trying to use to get to King's
Cross, but there you go. If that bit could be tripled, problem solved!

the only way I could see it working would be with major remodelling (two
new crossovers?) so that terminating trains could use the island
platform 3/4 and trains to/from Hammersmith on the other side. *At least
you'd always know where to stand.

I think you'd need one new scissors crossover, to the west of the
divergence of the lines heading round each side of the islands. Or two
single crossovers and two bits of reversible line, but that would be very
painful.

What you really want is to widen the bit from the junction to the station
to four tracks, so trains can use platforms as you describe without any
crossing at all.

Well, what you *really* want is a flying junction. And four tracks. And
tripling to the east to make a reversing siding:

* * * * * * * * */-------------\
* * *----------/ ###### * * * *\
Ham * * * */-------------+----+--
* * * * * */ * * * * * * / * * * * * *KX
* * *---)/(------------+-+---------
* * * * */ /----\ ###### /
* * *--/ / * * *\------/
NHG * * /
* * *--/

That gives you a completely conflict-free, cross-platform solution. You'd
have to demolish a good chunk of Paddington to do it, but that would then
also give you the chance to construct a large stick, on which the moon
could be mounted (for those who remember Fist of Fun).


I still think that putting the moon on a stick is probably easier than
getting the proposal to work. I give it six weeks of chaos before
they revert to the current pattern.