On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 17:05:32 -0600
wrote:
I remember reading somewhere many moons ago that the bridge taking the
northern heights line over the main line was knackered and beyond
economic repair and the cost of replacing it was the death knell for
the line. Whether thats the whole story or even true I have no idea.

I rather doubt that as it continued in use till 1970, long after the
passenger service ceased.

Only for very infrequent stock transfer. Thats a bit different to having a
train cross it every 10 minutes.

B2003

On Dec 27, 11:05*pm, wrote:
In article , ()
wrote:

On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 19:04:01 +0000
Paul Corfield wrote:
Finsbury Park to Edgware was not a Beeching closure though - it's not
shown on the London closures map. That was a post war decision by LT
not to proceed with the plans for electrification and passenger
services.

I remember reading somewhere many moons ago that the bridge taking the
northern heights line over the main line was knackered and beyond
economic repair and the cost of replacing it was the death knell for
the line. Whether thats the whole story or even true I have no idea.

I rather doubt that as it continued in use till 1970, long after the
passenger service ceased.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Yes, the bridges being knackered is why the lines were eventually
pulled up, but the actual closure was just pointless bean counting,
given that the line had already been mostly electrified up to Ally
Pally from Drayton Park, and from Highgate to High Barnet.

On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 17:36:19 +0000, Stephen Furley
wrote:







There's not a great deal more in London that has closed, is there? Elmers
End to Selsdon, again competition, and a few line lines in the East End,
around the docks and Beckton gas works, wartime damage, and then declining
industry.



Hammersmith and Chiswick.
Acton Town -South Acton.
Kew Bridge .

And on the extremes of London at the time it hard to imagine that the
District railway stations in the Hounslow area had periods of closure
in the early days due to to lack of patronage.

G Harman

On 28/12/09 19:47, in article ,
" wrote:

On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 17:36:19 +0000, Stephen Furley
wrote:







There's not a great deal more in London that has closed, is there? Elmers
End to Selsdon, again competition, and a few line lines in the East End,
around the docks and Beckton gas works, wartime damage, and then declining
industry.



Hammersmith and Chiswick.
Acton Town -South Acton.
Kew Bridge .

And on the extremes of London at the time it hard to imagine that the
District railway stations in the Hounslow area had periods of closure
in the early days due to to lack of patronage.

Cricklewood to Acton via Dudding Hill Junction would be another one I'd
forgotten, but again long before Beeching's time, like most of the closures
in London.

Uxbridge Belmont Road would be another one, but only a very short length of
line was closed to divert to the new station. More recently, parts of the
DLR, South of Crossharbour, again due to diversion to a new alignment. and
the last part of the original route into platform 4 at Stratford, though
this was only a few tens of metres.

Gas factory Junction - Bow Junction, via Bow Road. I'm not quite sure why
that one closed. Electrified, but regular passenger service withdrawn
before it could be used.

South of Newbury Park to East of Ilford due to takeover of parts of the GER
lines by the Central line. I don't think there were any stations on that
section.

Getting desperate now, King William Street due to pointing in the wrong
direction and being too small, steep and tightly curved.

Canonbury to Finsbury Park. Service diverted to Moorgate rather than Broad
Street.

A few odd curves, like from the North London into Fenchurch Street.

Bishopsgate high Level, replaced by Liverpool Street.

Ok, it's getting silly now, but it makes the point that hardly anything in
London was closed to passengers by recommendation of Beeching. Most
closures were long before his time, and were made for good reasons.

He did recognise the importance of the London Commuter services, but thought
the fares o them needed to rise.

In article , d ()
wrote:

On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 17:05:32 -0600
wrote:
I remember reading somewhere many moons ago that the bridge taking
the northern heights line over the main line was knackered and beyond
economic repair and the cost of replacing it was the death knell for
the line. Whether thats the whole story or even true I have no idea.

I rather doubt that as it continued in use till 1970, long after the
passenger service ceased.

Only for very infrequent stock transfer. Thats a bit different to
having a train cross it every 10 minutes.

The Edgware and High Barnet branches of the LNER never had trains anything
near like every 10 minutes.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message ,
writes

The Edgware and High Barnet branches of the LNER never had trains anything
near like every 10 minutes.

High Barnet did. My 1929 Bradshaw shows six trains an hour leaving High
Barnet in the morning peak (two to Moorgate, two to Kings Cross and two
to Broad Street).

Edgware, being a single-track branch, had only two an hour, though.
--
Paul Terry

On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 16:08:20 -0600
wrote:
In article , d ()
wrote:

On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 17:05:32 -0600
wrote:
I remember reading somewhere many moons ago that the bridge taking
the northern heights line over the main line was knackered and beyond
economic repair and the cost of replacing it was the death knell for
the line. Whether thats the whole story or even true I have no idea.

I rather doubt that as it continued in use till 1970, long after the
passenger service ceased.

Only for very infrequent stock transfer. Thats a bit different to
having a train cross it every 10 minutes.

The Edgware and High Barnet branches of the LNER never had trains anything
near like every 10 minutes.

But if it had become a tube line running from moorgate to east finchley
as was planned then it would have. In fact given it would have been a much
quicker route into the City than going around the houses via camden it
might had had an even more frequent service.

B2003

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 16:08:20 -0600
wrote:
In article , d ()
wrote:

On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 17:05:32 -0600
wrote:
I remember reading somewhere many moons ago that the bridge taking
the northern heights line over the main line was knackered and beyond
economic repair and the cost of replacing it was the death knell for
the line. Whether thats the whole story or even true I have no idea.

I rather doubt that as it continued in use till 1970, long after the
passenger service ceased.

Only for very infrequent stock transfer. Thats a bit different to
having a train cross it every 10 minutes.

The Edgware and High Barnet branches of the LNER never had trains anything
near like every 10 minutes.

But if it had become a tube line running from moorgate to east finchley
as was planned then it would have. In fact given it would have been a much
quicker route into the City than going around the houses via camden it
might had had an even more frequent service.

B2003


I'm strongly inclined to agree. And I suspect that there are those in LU who
rue the day the plan was abandoned. With the Olympics coming up, direct
services would be the order of the day.

Now, back to the bridge - AIUI, the bridge was for Up traffic, and a ramp
catered for Down traffic. Was this correct?

Nonetheless, MU Tube or SSL cars would probably have been lighter than the
tank engines used, and the bridge been usable with speed restrictions for a
while until traffic built up. By then, a bridge strengthening or replacement
project could have got onto the agenda.

DW downunder

On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 19:13:14 +0800
"DW downunder" noname wrote:
I'm strongly inclined to agree. And I suspect that there are those in LU who
rue the day the plan was abandoned. With the Olympics coming up, direct
services would be the order of the day.

Even without the Olympics it would be an extremely useful relief route for
the northern line and a godsend for the residents of the crouch end and upper
hornsey. AFAIK the route is just a cycle path and hasn't been built on so
in theory if the will and money were there it could be rebuilt. Won't happen
of course. Much better to waste a few billion so a bunch of physiological
freaks can run around in circles and toss sticks and balls about for a
fortnight.

B2003

d wrote:

Even without the Olympics it would be an extremely useful relief
route for the northern line and a godsend for the residents of the
crouch end and upper hornsey.

Opposition from the residents of Crouch End and Upper Hornsey is one of the
reasons the ELL wasn't extended up there.

--
We are the Strasbourg. Referendum is futile.