Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

Following the timetable change, FCC have ceased running empties from
Farringdon into Moorgate and the branch has been fully decommissioned. As at
today, Thursday, the branch has been completely dewired, final removals
occurring adjacent to the LUL sidings at Farringdon today. The signalling
has also been switched out.

Given the speed at which this work is taking place, I guess that track
recovery will not be long commencing.

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 23:31:58 -0000, "Jack Taylor"
wrote:

Following the timetable change, FCC have ceased running empties from
Farringdon into Moorgate and the branch has been fully decommissioned. As at
today, Thursday, the branch has been completely dewired, final removals
occurring adjacent to the LUL sidings at Farringdon today. The signalling
has also been switched out.

I did wonder where the wires had gone when I travelled up there (by
LUL) yesterday!

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

"Jack Taylor" wrote in message
...
Following the timetable change, FCC have ceased running empties from
Farringdon into Moorgate and the branch has been fully decommissioned. As
at today, Thursday, the branch has been completely dewired, final removals
occurring adjacent to the LUL sidings at Farringdon today. The signalling
has also been switched out.


I believe the points were clipped about 5/6th of December.

Paul S

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 23:31:58 -0000
"Jack Taylor" wrote:
Following the timetable change, FCC have ceased running empties from
Farringdon into Moorgate and the branch has been fully decommissioned. As at
today, Thursday, the branch has been completely dewired, final removals
occurring adjacent to the LUL sidings at Farringdon today. The signalling
has also been switched out.

Given the speed at which this work is taking place, I guess that track
recovery will not be long commencing.

What a ****ing idiotic decision this is. That branch was used by a LOT of
people who are now going to have to crowd onto a packed tube train to do
the last mile of their journey. All so they can lengthen Farringdons platform.
What the hell for? Why couldn't they just do the same as the do in dozens of
other places around the country and just say that to get out at farringdon you
have to be in the first 8 cars of the new 12 car trains?

This is nothing but cost cutting dressed up as some fatuous service
improvement.

B2003

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

wrote in message
On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 23:31:58 -0000
"Jack Taylor" wrote:
Following the timetable change, FCC have ceased running empties from
Farringdon into Moorgate and the branch has been fully
decommissioned. As at today, Thursday, the branch has been
completely dewired, final removals occurring adjacent to the LUL
sidings at Farringdon today. The signalling has also been switched
out.

Given the speed at which this work is taking place, I guess that
track recovery will not be long commencing.

What a ****ing idiotic decision this is. That branch was used by a
LOT of people who are now going to have to crowd onto a packed tube
train to do
the last mile of their journey. All so they can lengthen Farringdons
platform. What the hell for? Why couldn't they just do the same as
the do in dozens of other places around the country and just say that
to get out at farringdon you have to be in the first 8 cars of the
new 12 car trains?

The flat junction at Farringdon would not allow the increase in
frequency on the Thameslink line.

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:45:37 -0000
"Recliner" wrote:
What a ****ing idiotic decision this is. That branch was used by a
LOT of people who are now going to have to crowd onto a packed tube
train to do
the last mile of their journey. All so they can lengthen Farringdons
platform. What the hell for? Why couldn't they just do the same as
the do in dozens of other places around the country and just say that
to get out at farringdon you have to be in the first 8 cars of the
new 12 car trains?

The flat junction at Farringdon would not allow the increase in
frequency on the Thameslink line.

Of course it would. How long does a train take to traverse it - 20 seconds?
That was just another excuse they came up with to justify closing the branch.

B2003

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

On 18 Dec, 11:54, wrote:
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:45:37 -0000

"Recliner" wrote:

The flat junction at Farringdon would not allow the increase in
frequency on the Thameslink line.

Of course it would. How long does a train take to traverse it - 20 seconds?
That was just another excuse they came up with to justify closing the branch.


A train crossing a junction blocks it for much longer than just the
time taken to physically cross it. You're a bit of a prat, aren't you,
Boltar?

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

On Dec 18, 10:17*am, wrote:
On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 23:31:58 -0000

"Jack Taylor" wrote:
Following the timetable change, FCC have ceased running empties from
Farringdon into Moorgate and the branch has been fully decommissioned. As at
today, Thursday, the branch has been completely dewired, final removals
occurring adjacent to the LUL sidings at Farringdon today. The signalling
has also been switched out.

Given the speed at which this work is taking place, I guess that track
recovery will not be long commencing.

What a ****ing idiotic decision this is. That branch was used by a LOT of
people who are now going to have to crowd onto a packed tube train to do
the last mile of their journey. All so they can lengthen Farringdons platform.
What the hell for? Why couldn't they just do the same as the do in dozens of
other places around the country and just say that to get out at farringdon you
have to be in the first 8 cars of the new 12 car trains?

This is nothing but cost cutting dressed up as some fatuous service
improvement.

B2003

Nonsense, you can't build what's meant to be a shiney new system with
very tight dwell times and then announce 'sorry, the doors won't open
on these four carriages'. If it's being touted as a twelve-car system
that's what it has to be.
Tim

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 05:45:36 -0800 (PST)
contrex wrote:
On 18 Dec, 11:54, wrote:
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:45:37 -0000

"Recliner" wrote:

The flat junction at Farringdon would not allow the increase in
frequency on the Thameslink line.

Of course it would. How long does a train take to traverse it - 20 seconds?
That was just another excuse they came up with to justify closing the branch.


A train crossing a junction blocks it for much longer than just the
time taken to physically cross it. You're a bit of a prat, aren't you,
Boltar?

Oh , nicely argued. A train from moorgate would take up a slot from a
train going north from city thameslink just like it does at the moment.
Since most people on Thameslink use it to get to and from the City rather
than traversing the capital this is not and has never been an issue until
they decided to make it one.

B2003

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 06:02:46 -0800 (PST)
TimB wrote:
This is nothing but cost cutting dressed up as some fatuous service
improvement.

B2003

Nonsense, you can't build what's meant to be a shiney new system with
very tight dwell times and then announce 'sorry, the doors won't open
on these four carriages'.

Exactly that is done in plenty of other places. Theres no reason not to
do it at farringdon.

If it's being touted as a twelve-car system
that's what it has to be.

BS.

B2003

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

"Jack Taylor" wrote in message
...
Following the timetable change, FCC have ceased running empties from
Farringdon into Moorgate and the branch has been fully decommissioned. As
at today, Thursday, the branch has been completely dewired, final removals
occurring adjacent to the LUL sidings at Farringdon today. The signalling
has also been switched out.

Given the speed at which this work is taking place, I guess that track
recovery will not be long commencing.


I would imagine the section would be of some use to LU - as it was in days
of yore.

DW downunder

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

In message , at 14:13:21 on Fri, 18 Dec 2009,
d remarked:
A train crossing a junction blocks it for much longer than just the
time taken to physically cross it. You're a bit of a prat, aren't you,
Boltar?

Oh , nicely argued. A train from moorgate would take up a slot from a
train going north from city thameslink just like it does at the moment.

But it would also take a slot for a southbound train. Flat junctions do
that.
--
Roland Perry

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

"DW downunder" noname wrote in message
u
"Jack Taylor" wrote in message
...
Following the timetable change, FCC have ceased running empties from
Farringdon into Moorgate and the branch has been fully
decommissioned. As at today, Thursday, the branch has been
completely dewired, final removals occurring adjacent to the LUL
sidings at Farringdon today. The signalling has also been switched
out. Given the speed at which this work is taking place, I guess that
track recovery will not be long commencing.


I would imagine the section would be of some use to LU - as it was in
days of yore.

Cue the usual speculation of outlandish schemes for express routes, DLR
extensions, etc...

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 14:27:30 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 14:13:21 on Fri, 18 Dec 2009,
remarked:
A train crossing a junction blocks it for much longer than just the
time taken to physically cross it. You're a bit of a prat, aren't you,
Boltar?

Oh , nicely argued. A train from moorgate would take up a slot from a
train going north from city thameslink just like it does at the moment.

But it would also take a slot for a southbound train. Flat junctions do
that.

Funnily enough they also allow a train to go to moorgate instead of
southbound. Or did you think there was a train factory at moorgate churning
out one every 30 mins to go north?

When I used to commute on that line 3 years ago the number of people going to
moorgate far exceeded the numbers going south via city thameslink but
obviously that means little to the planners who just want a shiny new
timetable and to save some maintenance costs and stuff the real needs of the
passengers.

B2003

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 22:17:38 +0800
"DW downunder" noname wrote:
"Jack Taylor" wrote in message
...
Following the timetable change, FCC have ceased running empties from
Farringdon into Moorgate and the branch has been fully decommissioned. As
at today, Thursday, the branch has been completely dewired, final removals
occurring adjacent to the LUL sidings at Farringdon today. The signalling
has also been switched out.

Given the speed at which this work is taking place, I guess that track
recovery will not be long commencing.


I would imagine the section would be of some use to LU - as it was in days
of yore.

Probably be useful as sidings but obviously as is ever the case in this
country the first priority will be to rip up the tracks and get the 50
quid scrap value for them. Then in 5 years time they can spend a few million
putting them back again when its decided it was useful to keep them after all.

B2003

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

wrote in message ...
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 22:17:38 +0800
"DW downunder" noname wrote:
"Jack Taylor" wrote in message
...
Following the timetable change, FCC have ceased running empties from
Farringdon into Moorgate and the branch has been fully decommissioned.
As
at today, Thursday, the branch has been completely dewired, final
removals
occurring adjacent to the LUL sidings at Farringdon today. The
signalling
has also been switched out.

Given the speed at which this work is taking place, I guess that track
recovery will not be long commencing.


I would imagine the section would be of some use to LU - as it was in days
of yore.

Probably be useful as sidings but obviously as is ever the case in this
country the first priority will be to rip up the tracks and get the 50
quid scrap value for them. Then in 5 years time they can spend a few
million
putting them back again when its decided it was useful to keep them after
all.

B2003


Ah, a man after my own heart - an optimist sigh.

But you're probably right.

DW downunder

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

On Dec 18, 2:59*pm, wrote:
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 22:17:38 +0800

"DW downunder" noname wrote:
"Jack Taylor" wrote in message
...
Following the timetable change, FCC have ceased running empties from
Farringdon into Moorgate and the branch has been fully decommissioned. As
at today, Thursday, the branch has been completely dewired, final removals
occurring adjacent to the LUL sidings at Farringdon today. The signalling
has also been switched out.

Given the speed at which this work is taking place, I guess that track
recovery will not be long commencing.

I would imagine the section would be of some use to LU - as it was in days
of yore.

Probably be useful as sidings but obviously as is ever the case in this
country the first priority will be to rip up the tracks and get the 50
quid scrap value for them. Then in 5 years time they can spend a few million
putting them back again when its decided it was useful to keep them after all.

B2003

But see the thread about the Birmingham Moor Street bay platforms,
where the track was left in situ for a couple of decades and now has
to be replaced as it's jointed track with rotten wooden sleepers.

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

On 18 Dec, 14:52, "Recliner" wrote:

Cue the usual speculation of outlandish schemes for express routes, DLR
extensions, etc...

Speculation aside, having been to New York the 4-track express/local
split works wonders - Manhattan is as a result far, far quicker to get
around than London, though the system has its own faults. It's a pity
London didn't go that way early on.

That said, I'm not sure you'd save a lot skip-stopping Barbican, which
is all you'd really manage. Perhaps a more effective way to speed up
the subsurface lines is for the stock to have acceleration/
deceleration like a Desiro and presumably a higher top speed to make
use of it. Will the S-stock manage that, or is the power supply not
up to it?

That said, if the infrastructure was there, a District Line that did
Earls Court-Victoria-Embankment-Blackfriars-Monument-Tower Gateway
would speed up that somewhat glacially slow service somewhat. The
western part, of course, already has express services in the form of
the Picc. A Central Line that missed out everything except the
interchanges would also be useful, same with the Picc, but I don't see
a lot of scope on other lines.

Neil

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

On 18 Dec, 15:06, Simon Barber wrote:

I wonder whether there was any 'consultation' with passengers using
the branch. *It sounds as if there were a lot of them and that should
have made the decision. *The railway exists to serve its customers,
not jerks in the DfT or TfL.

I'm pleased about the closure because I'll eventually gain from it -
the increased frequency on Thameslink will mean Great Northern trains
are sent through the central section so combined with Crossrail I'll
be able to make a single change to get to work.

Ganesh

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 07:14:21 -0800 (PST)
Ganesh Sittampalam wrote:
On 18 Dec, 15:06, Simon Barber wrote:

I wonder whether there was any 'consultation' with passengers using
the branch. =A0It sounds as if there were a lot of them and that should
have made the decision. =A0The railway exists to serve its customers,
not jerks in the DfT or TfL.

I'm pleased about the closure because I'll eventually gain from it -
the increased frequency on Thameslink will mean Great Northern trains
are sent through the central section so combined with Crossrail I'll
be able to make a single change to get to work.

They could still have kept the new frequency even with moorgate. For every
southbound train to moorgate they could just have had a northbound from
Blackfriars reverse at City.

B2003

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 07:14:21 -0800 (PST)
Ganesh Sittampalam wrote:
On 18 Dec, 15:06, Simon Barber wrote:

I wonder whether there was any 'consultation' with passengers using
the branch. =A0It sounds as if there were a lot of them and that should
have made the decision. =A0The railway exists to serve its customers,
not jerks in the DfT or TfL.

I'm pleased about the closure because I'll eventually gain from it -
the increased frequency on Thameslink will mean Great Northern trains
are sent through the central section so combined with Crossrail I'll
be able to make a single change to get to work.

They could still have kept the new frequency even with moorgate. For every
southbound train to moorgate they could just have had a northbound from
Blackfriars reverse at City.

B2003

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

In message , at 14:58:08 on Fri, 18 Dec 2009,
d remarked:

A train crossing a junction blocks it for much longer than just the
time taken to physically cross it. You're a bit of a prat, aren't you,
Boltar?

Oh , nicely argued. A train from moorgate would take up a slot from a
train going north from city thameslink just like it does at the moment.

But it would also take a slot for a southbound train. Flat junctions do
that.

Funnily enough they also allow a train to go to moorgate instead of
southbound. Or did you think there was a train factory at moorgate churning
out one every 30 mins to go north?

It would be a co-incidence if the southbound trains to Moorgate exactly
co-incided (at Farringdon) with the northbound ones from Moorgate. You
can claim it would always be timetabled thus, but such things are
exactly what makes a timetable impossible to deliver in practice.

When I used to commute on that line 3 years ago the number of people going to
moorgate far exceeded the numbers going south via city thameslink

But the new service will be introducing many more useful "through
routes" than the old one ever delivered.

--
Roland Perry

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
"DW downunder" noname wrote in message
u

I would imagine the section would be of some use to LU - as it was in
days of yore.

Cue the usual speculation of outlandish schemes for express routes, DLR
extensions, etc...

How about maxing out straightaway? The terminus for HS2...

Paul S

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

"Simon Barber" wrote in message
...

I wonder whether there was any 'consultation' with passengers using the
branch. It sounds as if there were a lot of them and that should have
made the decision. The railway exists to serve its customers, not jerks
in the DfT or TfL.

There was loads of consultation, the DfT's website is full of it. And when
Thameslink was delayed due to problems with other areas, they did it all
over again IIRC.

Paul S

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

On 18 Dec, 15:34, wrote:
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 07:14:21 -0800 (PST)

Ganesh Sittampalam wrote:
On 18 Dec, 15:06, Simon Barber wrote:

I wonder whether there was any 'consultation' with passengers using
the branch. =A0It sounds as if there were a lot of them and that should
have made the decision. =A0The railway exists to serve its customers,
not jerks in the DfT or TfL.

I'm pleased about the closure because I'll eventually gain from it -
the increased frequency on Thameslink will mean Great Northern trains
are sent through the central section so combined with Crossrail I'll
be able to make a single change to get to work.

They could still have kept the new frequency even with moorgate. For every
southbound train to moorgate they could just have had a northbound from
Blackfriars reverse at City.

That assumes no delays to services ever happen, as any such delay
would create a conflict at the flat junction thus increasing the
delays further. With trains coming from across the entire expanded
Thameslink network some delays are extremely likely.

Ganesh

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

I wonder whether there was any 'consultation' with passengers using
the branch.

They said there was.

They could still have kept the new frequency even with moorgate.

Indeed.

While myself and boltar have dis-agreed on several points in the past,
I agree 100% on this one.

In view of what they are *now* doing with TL , I'd have argued to have
kept Holborn Viaduct as well as Moorgate. For every peak train that
departs Moorgate northbound, one departs HV southbound and timed to
take up the path through Blackfriars that would have conflicted (*)
with the Moorgate departure had it not been there ... if you see what
I mean ... and vice versa.

The office rebuilding on site of HV could simply have been City
TLHL , maybe even a single platform. At least City would then have got
3 platforms, in turn dwell time ''downstairs'' might be less of a
problem.

You lose no paths, but you provide two city terminii departures at the
same time, one north and one south.

I shall provde another rant about how I think the Farringdon Junction
argument is a cop out in due course .... I need to check on one item
first before I do. It won't alter what I will suggest, just the way in
which it could be carried out.


(*) i.e. northbound Moorgate departures cross southbound Farringdon
departures at Farringdon Junction.


--
Nick

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

On 18 Dec, 14:58, wrote:

Or did you think there was a train factory at moorgate churning
out one every 30 mins to go north?

It would be very handy, as long as it wasn't turning out 317s.

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

On 18 Dec, 15:38, Roland Perry wrote:

It would be a co-incidence if the southbound trains to Moorgate exactly
co-incided (at Farringdon) with the northbound ones from Moorgate. You
can claim it would always be timetabled thus, but such things are
exactly what makes a timetable impossible to deliver in practice.


Game set & match to you, Roland, I think.

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

On Dec 18, 3:38*pm, Roland Perry wrote:

It would be a co-incidence if the southbound trains to Moorgate exactly
co-incided (at Farringdon) with the northbound ones from Moorgate. You
can claim it would always be timetabled thus, but such things are
exactly what makes a timetable impossible to deliver in practice.

Actually they did do that at Farringdon, and this is no more than the
sort of detailed timetabling that has to go into the planning of every
single location where there are conflicts.

Parallel running they call it - how do you think locations like
Borough Market Junction work without it.

Not delivered in practice to the nearest microsecond no, but delivered
it is and it works.

When I used to commute on that line 3 years ago the number of people going to
moorgate far exceeded the numbers going south via city thameslink

But the new service will be introducing many more useful "through
routes" than the old one ever delivered.

Moorgate trains were full enough to justify their existence.

I used them as often as I possibly could to get to and from that area
- and did so ever since I moved to Luton 20+ years ago.

--
Nick

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

There was loads of consultation, the DfT's website is full of it. *And when
Thameslink was delayed due to problems with other areas, they did it all
over again IIRC.


It’s not as if we’ve had a huge outcry since services were
discontinued is it?

I mean, there’s not exactly a shortage of spoilt Southern wingers
waiting to let you know over the slightest little thing.

It always been said, that when surveyed, one of the things tourists
most like about London is its Underground and that one of the things
that Londoners least like about London is its err.. Underground.

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

On Dec 18, 6:04*pm, allanbonnetracy
wrote:

I mean, there’s not exactly a shortage of spoilt Southern wingers
waiting to let you know over the slightest little thing.

Southern, as in todays TOC, or the BR Region, or The Railway, did not
operate to Moorgate.

So their whingers are unlikely to have had cause to whinge.

Do you actually know where Moorgate is ?

--
Nick

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

On 18 Dec, 14:15, wrote:
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 06:02:46 -0800 (PST)

TimB wrote:
This is nothing but cost cutting dressed up as some fatuous service
improvement.

B2003

Nonsense, you can't build what's meant to be a shiney new system with
very tight dwell times and then announce 'sorry, the doors won't open
on these four carriages'.

Exactly that is done in plenty of other places. Theres no reason not to
do it at farringdon.

If it's being touted as a twelve-car system
that's what it has to be.

BS.

B2003

At this point, like a broken record, I remind everyone of the "Kent
Link" platform extensions which have never been, and never will be,
served by a twelve-coach train.

If there are ever twelve-coach trains on Thameslink I'll eat my
breakfast. Some other platforms won't be extended, the stock order
will be reduced and train lengths will remain as they are.

The useful Moorgate connection will be lost, and cross-London services
will continue to run at a walking pace* while disrupting the rest of
the network.

*Can someone explain to me how the performance of the 100 mph 319s
explains the crawling speed and the five-minute scheduled dwell times
which are the real problem with the service?

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

On 18 Dec, 17:27, D7666 wrote:
I wonder whether there was any 'consultation' with passengers using
the branch.

They said there was.

They could still have kept the new frequency even with moorgate.

Indeed.

While myself and boltar have dis-agreed on several points in the past,
I agree 100% on this one.

Exactly likewise.

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

In message
Neil Williams wrote:

On 18 Dec, 14:52, "Recliner" wrote:

Cue the usual speculation of outlandish schemes for express routes, DLR
extensions, etc...

Speculation aside, having been to New York the 4-track express/local
split works wonders - Manhattan is as a result far, far quicker to get
around than London, though the system has its own faults. It's a pity
London didn't go that way early on.

That said, I'm not sure you'd save a lot skip-stopping Barbican, which
is all you'd really manage. Perhaps a more effective way to speed up
the subsurface lines is for the stock to have acceleration/
deceleration like a Desiro and presumably a higher top speed to make
use of it. Will the S-stock manage that, or is the power supply not
up to it?

That said, if the infrastructure was there, a District Line that did
Earls Court-Victoria-Embankment-Blackfriars-Monument-Tower Gateway
would speed up that somewhat glacially slow service somewhat. The
western part, of course, already has express services in the form of
the Picc. A Central Line that missed out everything except the
interchanges would also be useful, same with the Picc, but I don't see
a lot of scope on other lines.


Google deep level tubes, it nearly came to pass if it hadn't been disrupted
by an Austrian painter of limited abilty but limitless ambition.

--
Graeme Wall

This address not read, substitute trains for rail
Transport Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail
Photo galleries at http://graeme-wall.fotopic.net/

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

On 18 Dec, 17:27, D7666 wrote:

The office rebuilding on site of *HV could simply have been City
TLHL , maybe even a single platform. At least City would then have got
3 platforms, in turn dwell time ''downstairs'' might be less of a
problem.

Though it would have been inconvenient to have to run up and down
stairs/escalators if you missed one train to go for the next.

Neil

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

On 18 Dec, 18:04, allanbonnetracy wrote:

It’s not as if we’ve had a huge outcry since services were
discontinued is it?

And the Met Line services aren't overcrowded as a result. I guess
most of them are seeing it as a pleasant walk - it isn't *that* far
from Farringdon to Moorgate.

Neil

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

"Graeme" wrote in message

A Central Line that missed out everything except the
interchanges would also be useful,

Isn't that Crossrail?

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

On 18 Dec, 18:18, Graeme wrote:

Google deep level tubes, it nearly came to pass if it hadn't been disrupted
by an Austrian painter of limited abilty but limitless ambition.

Perhaps, though one major convenience of the New York system is an
almost zero change time, as the trains run in a single 4-track "cut
and cover" tunnel so the change is always cross-platform. Thus there
is almost always a gain to be had on a journey of any length by
connecting into a fast train. If you had to mess around walking
through tunnels, the gain would be less significant, and people might
be unlikely to want to do it twice[1] in a given journey.

But then again, that's the advantage of a planned city with wide
boulevards, which London isn't - there are nice wide roads to dig up,
whack in some tracks then cover over.

The same probably already applies to the Picc/District situation
towards Heathrow.

[1] Most won't need to, though. People tend to travel *from* the
sticks *to* significant destinations, then back again. This means
they tend to only need one change.

Neil

Moorgate branch decommissioned
 

On Dec 18, 6:36*pm, Neil Williams wrote:
On 18 Dec, 18:04, allanbonnetracy wrote:

It’s not as if we’ve had a huge outcry since services were
discontinued is it?

And the Met Line services aren't overcrowded as a result. *I guess
most of them are seeing it as a pleasant walk - it isn't *that* far
from Farringdon to Moorgate.

Neil

Except the majority of passengers that were using Moorgate are walking
on further e.g. to Bank area, Broadgate, etc.

It may not be far from Moorgate to Broadgate nor far from Farringdon
to Moorgate, but you start adding them together and it becomes a lot
further.

Part of my working week I spend in an office block almost on top
Edgware Road station. I come off the Jubilee at Baker Street. I walk
that.

Edgware Road is not far from Paddington, and I walk that too, if I'm
going that way, and want to say grab some food along Praed St..

But I would not consider walking Baker Street to Paddington unless
there was no option.

--
Nick