On 21 May, 17:08, Mizter T wrote:
On May 21, 4:35*pm, MIG wrote:





On 21 May, 16:14, Mizter T wrote:

On May 21, 3:09*pm, Neil Williams
wrote:

On Fri, 21 May 2010 06:11:00 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T

wrote:
You mean it would result in normal levels of crowding, like those
commuters everywhere else deal with?

Just because there is a problem elsewhere doesn't mean it should
spread in aid of someone's pet project that few or no passengers
actually want.

I wasn't trying to propose the diversion of the DC line service - just
pointing out that you've got it sweet!

TBH in the past I did find the idea of diverting the DC line along the
Primrose Hill link to Camden Rd (and the NLL beyond to the east)
attractive - indeed, I still find the idea of there being a service of
some sort between Willesden Jn or Queen's Park and Camden Road most
attractive (with a re-opened station at Primrose Hill too) - but I am
rather more concious of the need/ demand for the DC line into Euston
these days.

However with regards to the passenger demand, Paul C said that there
was apparently a lot of positive feedback from passenger surveys
conducted during the temporary diversion of the DC line away from
Euston and onto the NLL via the Primrose Hill link - this was between
September and mid-November 2008.

The LM commuter services show what can be done with the will and a few
quid. *Don't let's wreck it.

If there ever was to be a diversion of the DC line service, then it
could be mitigated by what Andy suggested - a Watford to Euston
shuttle service. Not sure how do-able it would be to stop it at
Queen's Park, but that would make such a thing x times more useful.

I'm sure we've been assured that it's impossible to stop LM trains at
Queens Park without ending the world (and it would need a new
crossover to serve Kilburn High Road and South Hampstead unless those
were abandoned, and an AC/DC changeover or new wiring).

They wouldn't be abandoned under such a diversion, they would just
serve the combined DC line - NLL service.

Yeah, don't know where that popped into my brain from. Must relate
back to previous discussion about extending the Bakerloo. Ignore.

But the rest as was.

MIG wrote:

I think people would like the service from Camden Road in addition to
the service from Euston, not as a diversion.

Would there be much harm in turning round a couple more Bakerloons at
Queens Park to allow a service via Primrose Hill to Watford? Can't
see any competition for capacity.

I think the theory is that they use the stretch through (the site of)
Primrose Hill station as a recessing point for freight trains.

Can't be sure if the current four tracking east of Camden Rd will make that
any less of a regular occurence...

Paul S

On May 21, 4:35*pm, MIG wrote:
On 21 May, 16:14, Mizter T wrote:





On May 21, 3:09*pm, Neil Williams
wrote:

On Fri, 21 May 2010 06:11:00 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T

wrote:
You mean it would result in normal levels of crowding, like those
commuters everywhere else deal with?

Just because there is a problem elsewhere doesn't mean it should
spread in aid of someone's pet project that few or no passengers
actually want.

I wasn't trying to propose the diversion of the DC line service - just
pointing out that you've got it sweet!

TBH in the past I did find the idea of diverting the DC line along the
Primrose Hill link to Camden Rd (and the NLL beyond to the east)
attractive - indeed, I still find the idea of there being a service of
some sort between Willesden Jn or Queen's Park and Camden Road most
attractive (with a re-opened station at Primrose Hill too) - but I am
rather more concious of the need/ demand for the DC line into Euston
these days.

However with regards to the passenger demand, Paul C said that there
was apparently a lot of positive feedback from passenger surveys
conducted during the temporary diversion of the DC line away from
Euston and onto the NLL via the Primrose Hill link - this was between
September and mid-November 2008.

The LM commuter services show what can be done with the will and a few
quid. *Don't let's wreck it.

If there ever was to be a diversion of the DC line service, then it
could be mitigated by what Andy suggested - a Watford to Euston
shuttle service. Not sure how do-able it would be to stop it at
Queen's Park, but that would make such a thing x times more useful.

I'm sure we've been assured that it's impossible to stop LM trains at
Queens Park without ending the world (and it would need a new
crossover to serve Kilburn High Road and South Hampstead unless those
were abandoned, and an AC/DC changeover or new wiring).


If the DC line trains were diverted, then Kilburn High Road and South
Hampstead would be still served by these. Queens Park mainline calls
would be for passengers changing from stations between Kenton and
Queens Park. Passengers from Kilburn High Road and South Hampstead for
Euston could possibly be allowed to double back though Queens Park if
they needed Euston.

I think people would like the service from Camden Road in addition to
the service from Euston, not as a diversion.

Would there be much harm in turning round a couple more Bakerloons at
Queens Park to allow a service via Primrose Hill to Watford? *Can't
see any competition for capacity.

The problem is that many Bakerloo trains run to/from Stonebridge Park
depot during the peak periods (and off-peak as well).

On May 21, 5:08*pm, Mizter T wrote:
On May 21, 4:35*pm, MIG wrote:



On 21 May, 16:14, Mizter T wrote:

On May 21, 3:09*pm, Neil Williams
wrote:

On Fri, 21 May 2010 06:11:00 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T

wrote:
You mean it would result in normal levels of crowding, like those
commuters everywhere else deal with?

Just because there is a problem elsewhere doesn't mean it should
spread in aid of someone's pet project that few or no passengers
actually want.

I wasn't trying to propose the diversion of the DC line service - just
pointing out that you've got it sweet!

TBH in the past I did find the idea of diverting the DC line along the
Primrose Hill link to Camden Rd (and the NLL beyond to the east)
attractive - indeed, I still find the idea of there being a service of
some sort between Willesden Jn or Queen's Park and Camden Road most
attractive (with a re-opened station at Primrose Hill too) - but I am
rather more concious of the need/ demand for the DC line into Euston
these days.

However with regards to the passenger demand, Paul C said that there
was apparently a lot of positive feedback from passenger surveys
conducted during the temporary diversion of the DC line away from
Euston and onto the NLL via the Primrose Hill link - this was between
September and mid-November 2008.

The LM commuter services show what can be done with the will and a few
quid. *Don't let's wreck it.

If there ever was to be a diversion of the DC line service, then it
could be mitigated by what Andy suggested - a Watford to Euston
shuttle service. Not sure how do-able it would be to stop it at
Queen's Park, but that would make such a thing x times more useful.

I'm sure we've been assured that it's impossible to stop LM trains at
Queens Park without ending the world (and it would need a new
crossover to serve Kilburn High Road and South Hampstead unless those
were abandoned, and an AC/DC changeover or new wiring).

They wouldn't be abandoned under such a diversion, they would just
serve the combined DC line - NLL service.

As you say, we've been told fairly authoritatively that stopping LM
services at Queen's Park is a no no - the explanation is simply that
it'd mess up the timetabling, what with all the fast trains that
currently use the slow lines (IYSWIM!).



I think people would like the service from Camden Road in addition to
the service from Euston, not as a diversion.

Agreed. The positive feedback I mentioned upthread during that 2008
diversion was presumably from those who found it handy - I assume that
those who found it a PITA also said so! (The bods I know up Queen's
Park way don't use the train for commuting.)



Would there be much harm in turning round a couple more Bakerloons at
Queens Park to allow a service via Primrose Hill to Watford? *Can't
see any competition for capacity.

Dunno how do-able this is, but from a passenger's POV the cross-
platform interchange at Queen's Park that this might necessitate
couldn't really be any easier.

My view on this is that the DC lines should be linked up with the ELL,
with the NLL running segregated over the northern pair (the viaduct
west of Camden Road would need a short bit of widening). Primrose Hill
can them be reopened and linked to Chalk Farm, offering access to
Euston for ELL passengers via the Northern Line. Frequently stopping
slow line trains will almost certainly require loops, my preference
being for this to happen at Willesden Junction where more space and
better connections are available, though widening the formation at
Queens Park could perhaps offer a single reversible through line by
moving the southbound slow line platform northwards.

On Fri, 21 May 2010 10:21:53 -0700 (PDT), Andy
wrote:

If the DC line trains were diverted, then Kilburn High Road and South
Hampstead would be still served by these. Queens Park mainline calls
would be for passengers changing from stations between Kenton and
Queens Park. Passengers from Kilburn High Road and South Hampstead for
Euston could possibly be allowed to double back though Queens Park if
they needed Euston.


Why don't you go to those stations in the morning rush hour and tell
people your ideas? But be careful, you might get pushed off the
platform, in front of a train going the other way, of course.

No sane person would want to divert trains from the DC lines into
Euston (where they serve many thousands of people) on to a route where
only a handful of people would want to go. There is absolutely no
sense whatsoever in doing this.

You seem to forget that the purpose of running trains is to take
people on a journey towards where they want to go. If you want trains
to go where *you* think they should go, in total disregard of the
customers' wishes, you really should stop thinking about the real
railway and its real passengers and amuse yourself with something
slightly different, with which you can play to your heart's content.

http://tinyurl.com/3xeua78

On May 21, 12:01*pm, Jamie Thompson wrote:
On May 21, 5:08*pm, Mizter T wrote:





On May 21, 4:35*pm, MIG wrote:

On 21 May, 16:14, Mizter T wrote:

On May 21, 3:09*pm, Neil Williams
wrote:

On Fri, 21 May 2010 06:11:00 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T

wrote:
You mean it would result in normal levels of crowding, like those
commuters everywhere else deal with?

Just because there is a problem elsewhere doesn't mean it should
spread in aid of someone's pet project that few or no passengers
actually want.

I wasn't trying to propose the diversion of the DC line service - just
pointing out that you've got it sweet!

TBH in the past I did find the idea of diverting the DC line along the
Primrose Hill link to Camden Rd (and the NLL beyond to the east)
attractive - indeed, I still find the idea of there being a service of
some sort between Willesden Jn or Queen's Park and Camden Road most
attractive (with a re-opened station at Primrose Hill too) - but I am
rather more concious of the need/ demand for the DC line into Euston
these days.

However with regards to the passenger demand, Paul C said that there
was apparently a lot of positive feedback from passenger surveys
conducted during the temporary diversion of the DC line away from
Euston and onto the NLL via the Primrose Hill link - this was between
September and mid-November 2008.

The LM commuter services show what can be done with the will and a few
quid. *Don't let's wreck it.

If there ever was to be a diversion of the DC line service, then it
could be mitigated by what Andy suggested - a Watford to Euston
shuttle service. Not sure how do-able it would be to stop it at
Queen's Park, but that would make such a thing x times more useful.

I'm sure we've been assured that it's impossible to stop LM trains at
Queens Park without ending the world (and it would need a new
crossover to serve Kilburn High Road and South Hampstead unless those
were abandoned, and an AC/DC changeover or new wiring).

They wouldn't be abandoned under such a diversion, they would just
serve the combined DC line - NLL service.

As you say, we've been told fairly authoritatively that stopping LM
services at Queen's Park is a no no - the explanation is simply that
it'd mess up the timetabling, what with all the fast trains that
currently use the slow lines (IYSWIM!).

I think people would like the service from Camden Road in addition to
the service from Euston, not as a diversion.

Agreed. The positive feedback I mentioned upthread during that 2008
diversion was presumably from those who found it handy - I assume that
those who found it a PITA also said so! (The bods I know up Queen's
Park way don't use the train for commuting.)

Would there be much harm in turning round a couple more Bakerloons at
Queens Park to allow a service via Primrose Hill to Watford? *Can't
see any competition for capacity.

Dunno how do-able this is, but from a passenger's POV the cross-
platform interchange at Queen's Park that this might necessitate
couldn't really be any easier.

My view on this is that the DC lines should be linked up with the ELL,
with the NLL running segregated over the northern pair (the viaduct
west of Camden Road would need a short bit of widening). Primrose Hill
can them be reopened and linked to Chalk Farm, offering access to
Euston for ELL passengers via the Northern Line. Frequently stopping
slow line trains will almost certainly require loops, my preference
being for this to happen at Willesden Junction where more space and
better connections are available, though widening the formation at
Queens Park could perhaps offer a single reversible through line by
moving the southbound slow line platform northwards.

Broadly speaking I agree with this. However, Northern Line trains are
likely to be pretty packed through Chalk Farm. I think the addition
of platforms on AC slow lines at Queens Park as well thus giving two
interchanges for Euston is needed. The short section west of Camden
Road would need to be widened to allow complete segregation of NLL and
ELL-DC lines.

On May 21, 1:40*pm, wrote:
In article
,
* *E27002 wrote:





My view on this is that the DC lines should be linked up with the ELL,
with the NLL running segregated over the northern pair (the viaduct
west of Camden Road would need a short bit of widening). Primrose Hill
can them be reopened and linked to Chalk Farm, offering access to
Euston for ELL passengers via the Northern Line. Frequently stopping
slow line trains will almost certainly require loops, my preference
being for this to happen at Willesden Junction where more space and
better connections are available, though widening the formation at
Queens Park could perhaps offer a single reversible through line by
moving the southbound slow line platform northwards.
Broadly speaking I agree with this. *However, Northern Line trains are
likely to be pretty packed through Chalk Farm. *I think the addition
of platforms on AC slow lines at Queens Park as well thus giving two
interchanges for Euston is needed. *The short section west of Camden
Road would need to be widened to allow complete segregation of NLL and
ELL-DC lines.

There are platforms on the AC slow lines at Queens Park but they are very
narrow, especially in the down direction. It doesn't matter on the up
because people will want to get away from the slow line platform as quickly
as possible, but getting people to change there means that there will be
waiting passengers on the platform - and this could lead to difficulty.

How easy would it be to widen said AC slow line platforms?

Thanks

On May 21, 8:34*pm, Bruce wrote:
On Fri, 21 May 2010 10:21:53 -0700 (PDT), Andy
wrote:

If the DC line trains were diverted, then Kilburn High Road and South
Hampstead would be still served by these. Queens Park mainline calls
would be for passengers changing from stations between Kenton and
Queens Park. Passengers from Kilburn High Road and South Hampstead for
Euston could possibly be allowed to double back though Queens Park if
they needed Euston.

Why don't you go to those stations in the morning rush hour and tell
people your ideas? *But be careful, you might get pushed off the
platform, in front of a train going the other way, of course.


Experience shows me that these are not the busiest of stations on the
DC lines. Am I allowed to ask if the people would also like to go in
the Camden direction as well or instead of Euston?

No sane person would want to divert trains from the DC lines into
Euston (where they serve many thousands of people) on to a route where
only a handful of people would want to go. *There is absolutely no
sense whatsoever in doing this.


TfL have considered it and if HS2 ever comes to Euston, it will be
necessary for a fair amount of time during the rebuilds, if not after.

You seem to forget that the purpose of running trains is to take
people on a journey towards where they want to go. *If you want trains
to go where *you* think they should go, in total disregard of the
customers' wishes, you really should stop thinking about the real
railway and its real passengers and amuse yourself with something
slightly different, with which you can play to your heart's content.

Just to be clear I'm not suggesting that the DC Lines are diverted,
that was someone else.

However, on many routes, the stations closest to London have been
shut, in favour of people further out. Just look at all missing
stations on most of the lines north of the Thames. Indeed, there used
to be platforms on the mainline at Primrose Hill.

For central London both South Hampstead and Kilburn High Road are
close to the Bakerloo line.

On 21/05/2010 16:35, MIG wrote:
On 21 May, 16:14, Mizter wrote:
On May 21, 3:09 pm, Neil
wrote:

On Fri, 21 May 2010 06:11:00 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T

wrote:
You mean it would result in normal levels of crowding, like those
commuters everywhere else deal with?

Just because there is a problem elsewhere doesn't mean it should
spread in aid of someone's pet project that few or no passengers
actually want.

I wasn't trying to propose the diversion of the DC line service - just
pointing out that you've got it sweet!

TBH in the past I did find the idea of diverting the DC line along the
Primrose Hill link to Camden Rd (and the NLL beyond to the east)
attractive - indeed, I still find the idea of there being a service of
some sort between Willesden Jn or Queen's Park and Camden Road most
attractive (with a re-opened station at Primrose Hill too) - but I am
rather more concious of the need/ demand for the DC line into Euston
these days.

However with regards to the passenger demand, Paul C said that there
was apparently a lot of positive feedback from passenger surveys
conducted during the temporary diversion of the DC line away from
Euston and onto the NLL via the Primrose Hill link - this was between
September and mid-November 2008.



The LM commuter services show what can be done with the will and a few
quid. Don't let's wreck it.

If there ever was to be a diversion of the DC line service, then it
could be mitigated by what Andy suggested - a Watford to Euston
shuttle service. Not sure how do-able it would be to stop it at
Queen's Park, but that would make such a thing x times more useful.

I'm sure we've been assured that it's impossible to stop LM trains at
Queens Park without ending the world (and it would need a new
crossover to serve Kilburn High Road and South Hampstead unless those
were abandoned, and an AC/DC changeover or new wiring).

I think people would like the service from Camden Road in addition to
the service from Euston, not as a diversion.

Would there be much harm in turning round a couple more Bakerloons at
Queens Park to allow a service via Primrose Hill to Watford? Can't
see any competition for capacity.
Are there turning points at Camden Town, however?

On Fri, 21 May 2010 15:07:32 -0700 (PDT), Andy
wrote:

On May 21, 8:34*pm, Bruce wrote:
On Fri, 21 May 2010 10:21:53 -0700 (PDT), Andy
wrote:

If the DC line trains were diverted, then Kilburn High Road and South
Hampstead would be still served by these. Queens Park mainline calls
would be for passengers changing from stations between Kenton and
Queens Park. Passengers from Kilburn High Road and South Hampstead for
Euston could possibly be allowed to double back though Queens Park if
they needed Euston.

Why don't you go to those stations in the morning rush hour and tell
people your ideas? *But be careful, you might get pushed off the
platform, in front of a train going the other way, of course.


Experience shows me that these are not the busiest of stations on the
DC lines. Am I allowed to ask if the people would also like to go in
the Camden direction as well or instead of Euston?

No sane person would want to divert trains from the DC lines into
Euston (where they serve many thousands of people) on to a route where
only a handful of people would want to go. *There is absolutely no
sense whatsoever in doing this.


TfL have considered it and if HS2 ever comes to Euston, it will be
necessary for a fair amount of time during the rebuilds, if not after.

You seem to forget that the purpose of running trains is to take
people on a journey towards where they want to go. *If you want trains
to go where *you* think they should go, in total disregard of the
customers' wishes, you really should stop thinking about the real
railway and its real passengers and amuse yourself with something
slightly different, with which you can play to your heart's content.

Just to be clear I'm not suggesting that the DC Lines are diverted,
that was someone else.

However, on many routes, the stations closest to London have been
shut, in favour of people further out. Just look at all missing
stations on most of the lines north of the Thames. Indeed, there used
to be platforms on the mainline at Primrose Hill.

For central London both South Hampstead and Kilburn High Road are
close to the Bakerloo line.

People using South Hampstead might disagree. Swiss Cottage is a long
enough uphill schlep from there so Kilburn Park certainly isn't
"local".