All,

I've read that South Quay station was "moved" recently (OK, not
actually moved, but replaced, but you know what I mean).

What I haven't ascertained though is which way? Towards Canary Wharf,
or towards Lewisham?

Thanks.

PhilD

--

In message
,
PhilD writes

I've read that South Quay station was "moved" recently (OK, not
actually moved, but replaced, but you know what I mean).

What I haven't ascertained though is which way? Towards Canary Wharf,
or towards Lewisham?

About 125 yards east, towards Canary Wharf. It was done because the
reverse curves on the track prevented the original platforms being
extended for three-car units. It's now on the straight section south of
Admirals Way.

--
Paul Terry

On Dec 4, 9:34*am, Paul Terry wrote:

About 125 yards east, towards Canary Wharf. It was done because the
reverse curves on the track prevented the original platforms being
extended for three-car units. It's now on the straight section south of
Admirals Way.

Brilliant. THanks.

PhilD

--

"Paul Terry" wrote in message
...
In message
, PhilD
writes

I've read that South Quay station was "moved" recently (OK, not
actually moved, but replaced, but you know what I mean).

What I haven't ascertained though is which way? Towards Canary Wharf,
or towards Lewisham?

About 125 yards east, towards Canary Wharf. It was done because the
reverse curves on the track prevented the original platforms being
extended for three-car units. It's now on the straight section south of
Admirals Way.

--
Paul Terry

If it moved east (as it did) then in terms of the OP it moved towards
Lewisham.

MaxB

In message , Batman55
writes

"Paul Terry" wrote in message
...

About 125 yards east, towards Canary Wharf. It was done because the
reverse curves on the track prevented the original platforms being
extended for three-car units. It's now on the straight section south of
Admirals Way.

If it moved east (as it did) then in terms of the OP it moved towards
Lewisham.

Oops, you're correct - east is indeed towards the Lewisham end of the
line.

Here's a photo of the old station, taken from the platform of the new
one:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ianvisi...7622542894127/

--
Paul Terry

On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 09:34:12 +0000, Paul Terry wrote:
I've read that South Quay station was "moved" recently (OK, not
actually moved, but replaced, but you know what I mean).

It was done because the
reverse curves on the track prevented the original platforms being
extended for three-car units.

Why didn't they plan for this when they built it the first time?

--
jhk

In article ,
(Jarle H Knudsen) wrote:

On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 09:34:12 +0000, Paul Terry wrote:
I've read that South Quay station was "moved" recently (OK, not
actually moved, but replaced, but you know what I mean).

It was done because the
reverse curves on the track prevented the original platforms
being extended for three-car units.

Why didn't they plan for this when they built it the first time?

Ho, ho! Look at the history of the DLR!

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 14:05:42 +0100
Jarle H Knudsen wrote:
On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 09:34:12 +0000, Paul Terry wrote:
I've read that South Quay station was "moved" recently (OK, not
actually moved, but replaced, but you know what I mean).

It was done because the
reverse curves on the track prevented the original platforms being
extended for three-car units.

Why didn't they plan for this when they built it the first time?

The DLR was initially built on the cheap so lots of patch and mend has been
done in the meantime. If they'd built it properly to start with then it
would no doubt have cost far less in total by now but I suppose back in 1987
there was no guarantee that docklands would take off as a business centre
so I guess they didn't want to invest huge amounts in a system that might
have turned out to be a train to nowhere.

B2003

wrote in message
On Fri, 4 Dec 2009 14:05:42 +0100
Jarle H Knudsen wrote:


Why didn't they plan for this when they built it the first time?

The DLR was initially built on the cheap so lots of patch and mend
has been done in the meantime. If they'd built it properly to start
with then it would no doubt have cost far less in total by now but I
suppose back in 1987 there was no guarantee that docklands would take
off as a business centre so I guess they didn't want to invest huge
amounts in a system that might have turned out to be a train to
nowhere.

There's no way that it would have been built at all had the original
plan been to build what's now there. It was only because it was so cheap
that the plan went ahead.

But I wouldn't describe what's been done since then as 'patch and
mend' -- it includes a well-engineered deep level station under Bank,
two double river tunnel crossings, four new links to mainline rail
stations (including the as-yet unopened Stratford International), a
pretty spectacular grade-separated junction at West India Quay and an
excellent airport station (the most convenient in the UK?). The many
extension projects have all been very well managed, too. Probably the
only compromised bit is the under-sized box for Cutty Sark station.

Even the trains will soon be longer than the new four-car Class 378
trains on the East and North London lines (and not much shorter than the
current C stock trains), so it's no longer the toy-town railway that it
started as. And which other UK railway is 100% MIP accessible?

Recliner wrote:

And which other UK railway is 100% MIP accessible?

Tyne Wear Metro - but it predates the DLR, and isn't in London, so you
mustn't mention it...

Paul S