On Dec 23, 12:24*am, (Neil Williams)
wrote:
On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 16:29:01 -0600,
wrote:

I'm appalled and disgusted that the manifold deficiencies in passenger
information and facilities for people changing trains at Edgware Road were
not addressed in the slightest before TfL destroyed the Circle Line.

MX of the first week of it is that the Circle Line's atrocious
punctuality did not appear to have improved much, though it would be
genuinely interesting to see figures.

But 6tph *nowhere near* fulfils the demand that exists on the Circle
Line.

Yes it does: not very many people want to use the Circle-specific
bits.

*Might it not actually be worth considering cutting other lines
short (e.g. terminating more Met trains at Baker St) so that the
Circle frequency can be increased?

No. The core demand for passenger journeys is far greater between
Metroland and the City than between Notting Hill and the City. The
same applies for Essex-City journeys versus Liverpool St-Tower Hill
journeys.

*And could selective door opening
be used to allow a decent train length to run on the Circle?

Yes, this is part of the S-stock upgrade plans: 7-car S-stock trains
the length of current District stock will run all District, H&C and
Circle services.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 02:58:55 -0800 (PST), John B
wrote:

Yes it does: not very many people want to use the Circle-specific
bits.

A very large number of people want to go beyond Aldgate, though -
Tower Hill is a specific example (though perhaps education about how
Aldgate is only ten minutes' walk would help more). So maybe the
"backwards C" of the Circle Line has very high demand, while the
left-hand side doesn't.

Yes, this is part of the S-stock upgrade plans: 7-car S-stock trains
the length of current District stock will run all District, H&C and
Circle services.

Good, as the current 5-car (I think) trains run on the Circle are
completely inadequate.

Does anyone know how quick the acceleration of the S-stock is? I
think a lot more trains could be fitted into the existing track (thus
giving scope for an increase in Circle frequency even without a
decrease in other frequencies) if acceleration/deceleration and
average running speed could be brought up to the level of, say, the
Central Line.

Neil

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

"Neil Williams" wrote in message
...

Good, as the current 5-car (I think) trains run on the Circle are
completely inadequate.

6 car - but of only 16m so seems quite short. A stock is 8 x 16m, D stock
is 6 x 18.3m

Does anyone know how quick the acceleration of the S-stock is? I
think a lot more trains could be fitted into the existing track (thus
giving scope for an increase in Circle frequency even without a
decrease in other frequencies) if acceleration/deceleration and
average running speed could be brought up to the level of, say, the
Central Line.

The end game in 2018 with S stock and new signalling is shown in that LU
document posted a couple of weeks back:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...ce-Changes.pdf

32 tph peak on the north (8 H&C, 8 Circle, 16 Met) and south (24 District, 8
Circle) of the circle. So 8 tph Adgate to Tower Hill, 16 tph Edgware Rd -
Baker St.

Paul S

On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 12:26:05 -0000, "Paul Scott"
wrote:

32 tph peak on the north (8 H&C, 8 Circle, 16 Met) and south (24 District, 8
Circle) of the circle. So 8 tph Adgate to Tower Hill, 16 tph Edgware Rd -
Baker St.

That seems quite an improvement.

Neil

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

On Dec 23, 12:44�pm, (Neil Williams)
wrote:
On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 12:26:05 -0000, "Paul Scott"

wrote:
32 tph peak on the north (8 H&C, 8 Circle, 16 Met) and south (24 District, 8
Circle) of the circle. �So 8 tph Adgate to Tower Hill, 16 tph Edgware Rd -
Baker St.

That seems quite an improvement.

Neil

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

Can anyone explain why, yesterday morning, I had to wait for 25
minutes at Fulham Broadway for an Eastbound train of any description?
And when it came, it was a High Street Ken train. Is this in any way
related to the new Lassoo Line, or an example of the "normal" service
to be expected at 6.15 on a weekday morning?

Marc.

wrote in message
...

Can anyone explain why, yesterday morning, I had to wait for 25
minutes at Fulham Broadway for an Eastbound train of any description?
And when it came, it was a High Street Ken train. Is this in any way
related to the new Lassoo Line, or an example of the "normal" service
to be expected at 6.15 on a weekday morning?

The new Circle apparently does not affect the off peak service on the
Wimbledon Branch (6:6), but the 15 tph peak is now balanced 9:6 in favour of
the service towards Embankment.

I'd suggest at 0615 yesterday if there was a long gap it was more likely
down to bog standard stock availability problems. Did they have weather
issues at start of service at all?

Paul S

On Wed, 23 Dec 2009, John B wrote:

On Dec 23, 12:24*am, (Neil Williams)
wrote:
On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 16:29:01 -0600,
wrote:

I'm appalled and disgusted that the manifold deficiencies in passenger
information and facilities for people changing trains at Edgware Road were
not addressed in the slightest before TfL destroyed the Circle Line.

MX of the first week of it is that the Circle Line's atrocious
punctuality did not appear to have improved much, though it would be
genuinely interesting to see figures.

But 6tph *nowhere near* fulfils the demand that exists on the Circle
Line.

Yes it does: not very many people want to use the Circle-specific
bits.

Might it not actually be worth considering cutting other lines short
(e.g. terminating more Met trains at Baker St) so that the Circle
frequency can be increased?

No. The core demand for passenger journeys is far greater between
Metroland and the City than between Notting Hill and the City. The same
applies for Essex-City journeys versus Liverpool St-Tower Hill journeys.

I do wish people would stop referring to East London as Essex. As someone
who is actually from Essex, it is highly distressing.

Apart from that, bang on, of course!

tom

--
X is for ... EXECUTION!

On 23 Dec, 16:54, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 23 Dec 2009, John B wrote:
On Dec 23, 12:24*am, (Neil Williams)
wrote:
On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 16:29:01 -0600,
wrote:

I'm appalled and disgusted that the manifold deficiencies in passenger
information and facilities for people changing trains at Edgware Road were
not addressed in the slightest before TfL destroyed the Circle Line.

MX of the first week of it is that the Circle Line's atrocious
punctuality did not appear to have improved much, though it would be
genuinely interesting to see figures.

But 6tph *nowhere near* fulfils the demand that exists on the Circle
Line.

Yes it does: not very many people want to use the Circle-specific
bits.

Might it not actually be worth considering cutting other lines short
(e.g. terminating more Met trains at Baker St) so that the Circle
frequency can be increased?

No. The core demand for passenger journeys is far greater between
Metroland and the City than between Notting Hill and the City. The same
applies for Essex-City journeys versus Liverpool St-Tower Hill journeys..

I do wish people would stop referring to East London as Essex. As someone
who is actually from Essex, it is highly distressing.

Maybe if they did, they could stop referring to North London as East
London at the same time.

"MIG" wrote in message
...
On 23 Dec, 16:54, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 23 Dec 2009, John B wrote:
On Dec 23, 12:24 am, (Neil Williams)
wrote:
On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 16:29:01 -0600,
wrote:

I'm appalled and disgusted that the manifold deficiencies in passenger
information and facilities for people changing trains at Edgware Road
were
not addressed in the slightest before TfL destroyed the Circle Line.

MX of the first week of it is that the Circle Line's atrocious
punctuality did not appear to have improved much, though it would be
genuinely interesting to see figures.

But 6tph *nowhere near* fulfils the demand that exists on the Circle
Line.

Yes it does: not very many people want to use the Circle-specific
bits.

Might it not actually be worth considering cutting other lines short
(e.g. terminating more Met trains at Baker St) so that the Circle
frequency can be increased?

No. The core demand for passenger journeys is far greater between
Metroland and the City than between Notting Hill and the City. The same
applies for Essex-City journeys versus Liverpool St-Tower Hill journeys.

I do wish people would stop referring to East London as Essex. As someone
who is actually from Essex, it is highly distressing.

Maybe if they did, they could stop referring to North London as East
London at the same time.
===========

It appears the BBC rely on post codes, often something happening in what
everyone else would think of as South London e.g Brixton, but they call
south west because it is SW3 or because adjacent Herne Hill is SE24, it
becomes SE London. They have no actual geographical knowledge.

MaxB

Batman55 wrote:
It appears the BBC rely on post codes, often something happening in
what everyone else would think of as South London e.g Brixton, but
they call south west because it is SW3 or because adjacent Herne Hill
is SE24, it becomes SE London. They have no actual geographical
knowledge.

The occasional description by the local news of something happening in
'Middlesex' is equally baffling, due to that county ceasing to exist 44
years ago. And as it would cover nearly half of their transmission area,
it is not very geographically helpful either.

To give BBC London their due, the recent coverage of the gas (and
electricity) failures in East Barnet has correctly been described as
north London.

However National Grid was totally confused about the location in their
press releases, stating that they were liaising with the emergency
planning department in Bedfordshire, then Hertfordshire before finally
(correctly) settling on the London Borough of Barnet.