In message , at 05:29:52
on Mon, 1 Aug 2011, remarked:
And if that's not what it means, will (as Colin suggests) the
"stoppers at everywhere north of Welwyn Garden City" run into KX not
Thameslink?

I was rather assuming that 12-car trains to Foxton were unlikely.

Why Foxton in particular? If the Cambridgshire rural stations are
being extended to 8car, and the Thameslink trains are 12car, it's
simply a necessary side effect.

I sued Foxton as an example rather than spell out Meldreth, Shepreth and
Foxton. In each case 12 into 8 doesn't go, not without SDO anyway.

SDO it is, then.

If the point is to subsume the existing Kings Cross Outer semi-fasts they
should go half to Cambridge and half to Peterborough anyway.

The Peterborough 2tph semi-fasts are going to Three Bridges.

Same problem as for Cambridge then. They are a mix of semi-fasts and slows.

They aren't slow trains, because they skip many stops as they get near
London.

I'm becoming more convinced that "semi-fast" describes all four
services, and you only look upon them as stoppers because you've got
even better "fast" services from Cambridge.

They are all Outer services all of which skip Inner stops. So stopping at
all the Outer stations is slow in my book.

Only because you are spoilt by the Cambridge Cruisers.
--
Roland Perry

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at
05:29:52 on Mon, 1 Aug 2011, remarked:
And if that's not what it means, will (as Colin suggests) the
"stoppers at everywhere north of Welwyn Garden City" run into KX not
Thameslink?

I was rather assuming that 12-car trains to Foxton were unlikely.

Why Foxton in particular? If the Cambridgshire rural stations are
being extended to 8car, and the Thameslink trains are 12car, it's
simply a necessary side effect.

I used Foxton as an example rather than spell out Meldreth, Shepreth and
Foxton. In each case 12 into 8 doesn't go, not without SDO anyway.

SDO it is, then.

Except that I thought the stock will not have SDO?

If the point is to subsume the existing Kings Cross Outer
semi-fasts they
should go half to Cambridge and half to Peterborough anyway.

The Peterborough 2tph semi-fasts are going to Three Bridges.

Same problem as for Cambridge then. They are a mix of semi-fasts and
slows.

They aren't slow trains, because they skip many stops as they get
near London.

I pointed out that there are two services, Inner and Outer. These are slow
Outers.

I'm becoming more convinced that "semi-fast" describes all four
services, and you only look upon them as stoppers because you've got
even better "fast" services from Cambridge.

They are all Outer services all of which skip Inner stops. So stopping at
all the Outer stations is slow in my book.

Only because you are spoilt by the Cambridge Cruisers.

Cruisers went when FCC took over. They are Express services now and they are
quite a bit faster than alternatives.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message , at 07:17:26
on Mon, 1 Aug 2011, remarked:

I pointed out that there are two services, Inner and Outer. These are slow
Outers.

And a "slow outer" could still be regarded as a semi-fast.

I'm becoming more convinced that "semi-fast" describes all four
services, and you only look upon them as stoppers because you've got
even better "fast" services from Cambridge.

They are all Outer services all of which skip Inner stops. So stopping at
all the Outer stations is slow in my book.

Only because you are spoilt by the Cambridge Cruisers.

Cruisers went when FCC took over. They are Express services now and they are
quite a bit faster than alternatives.

Same service, different name. They are indeed a little faster, but their
existence has rather spoilt your perception of what's a semi-fast train.
--
Roland Perry

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at
07:17:26 on Mon, 1 Aug 2011, remarked:

I pointed out that there are two services, Inner and Outer. These are
slow Outers.

And a "slow outer" could still be regarded as a semi-fast.

To you, I suppose.

I'm becoming more convinced that "semi-fast" describes all four
services, and you only look upon them as stoppers because you've got
even better "fast" services from Cambridge.

They are all Outer services all of which skip Inner stops. So stopping
at all the Outer stations is slow in my book.

Only because you are spoilt by the Cambridge Cruisers.

Cruisers went when FCC took over. They are Express services now and they
are quite a bit faster than alternatives.

Same service, different name. They are indeed a little faster, but
their existence has rather spoilt your perception of what's a
semi-fast train.

Uh-oh! They are if anything slower. More trains now call at Royston and/or
Letchworth and end-to-end times are almost never as quick as 45 minutes any
more.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message , at 10:45:03
on Mon, 1 Aug 2011, remarked:
Cruisers went when FCC took over. They are Express services now and they
are quite a bit faster than alternatives.

Same service, different name. They are indeed a little faster, but
their existence has rather spoilt your perception of what's a
semi-fast train.

Uh-oh! They are if anything slower.

I meant faster than the semi-fasts.

More trains now call at Royston and/or Letchworth and end-to-end times
are almost never as quick as 45 minutes any more.

And after all that fuss in what, 2001, about chopping a minute off the
end to end time, by upgrading Cambridge-Royston.
--
Roland Perry

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at
10:45:03 on Mon, 1 Aug 2011, remarked:
Cruisers went when FCC took over. They are Express services now and
they are quite a bit faster than alternatives.

Same service, different name. They are indeed a little faster, but
their existence has rather spoilt your perception of what's a
semi-fast train.

Uh-oh! They are if anything slower.

I meant faster than the semi-fasts.

More trains now call at Royston and/or Letchworth and end-to-end times
are almost never as quick as 45 minutes any more.

And after all that fuss in what, 2001, about chopping a minute off
the end to end time, by upgrading Cambridge-Royston.

The Cambridge-Royston power supply has been upgraded twice since
electrification. At first nothing more than a four car EMU could use it,
then up to 8 cars and now 12 cars. I think the odd loco can now be
accommodated but I could be wrong.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message , at 15:47:21
on Mon, 1 Aug 2011, remarked:
More trains now call at Royston and/or Letchworth and end-to-end times
are almost never as quick as 45 minutes any more.

And after all that fuss in what, 2001, about chopping a minute off
the end to end time, by upgrading Cambridge-Royston.

The Cambridge-Royston power supply has been upgraded twice since
electrification.

It was the track they upgraded, to increase the speed. It was closed for
a week during (iirc) August, when it was expected to have less
passengers.

At first nothing more than a four car EMU could use it,
then up to 8 cars and now 12 cars. I think the odd loco can now be
accommodated but I could be wrong.

Locos can go as far as Chesterton sidings, I think.
--
Roland Perry

I class them as semi-fasts too. If anything, the Cambridge Cruisers
(which I'm adamant were still displayed as such on the departure
boards at Kings Cross until at least December as such) are the curious
anomaly of Cambridge being an intercity-service operated as a suburban
services to London. It's the service equivalent of Peterborough, where
the fast service is provided by the intercity TOC...but as the WAML is
so capacity-limited, they run via the ECML instead.

I do wonder how tempting it is for TPTB to consider upgrading the WAML
(loops, etc) to speed up services (enabling the fasts to go that way
down to Liverpool Street without having to further abandon the rural
stations on the route that already suffer a 1tph service) rather than
forking out to sort out the Welwyn viaduct. The stopping services on
the branch could quite easily be subsumed into an extension of the
Hertford loop services that terminate at Letchworth, with a change at
Stevenage for the Peterborough services that would run fast down the
ECML, which could then be increased in frequency to use the former
Cruiser paths or some such.

In message
, at
18:43:51 on Thu, 4 Aug 2011, Jamie Thompson
remarked:
I class them as semi-fasts too. If anything, the Cambridge Cruisers
(which I'm adamant were still displayed as such on the departure
boards at Kings Cross until at least December as such) are the curious
anomaly of Cambridge being an intercity-service operated as a suburban
services to London. It's the service equivalent of Peterborough, where
the fast service is provided by the intercity TOC...but as the WAML is
so capacity-limited, they run via the ECML instead.

When they start being operated by IEPs (oink flap) then the distinction
between them and the true suburban services will become clearer again.

I do wonder how tempting it is for TPTB to consider upgrading the WAML
(loops, etc) to speed up services (enabling the fasts to go that way
down to Liverpool Street without having to further abandon the rural
stations on the route that already suffer a 1tph service) rather than
forking out to sort out the Welwyn viaduct.

As far as I can see, widening Welwyn (and an additional tunnel) is a
dead duck. The most recent plan got shelved in the collapse of
Railtrack, and the future seems to be to make sure that the line is used
at full speed (and hence capacity) as much as possible, by all trains;
and removing the flat junction at Hitchin.

The stopping services on the branch could quite easily be subsumed into
an extension of the Hertford loop services that terminate at
Letchworth, with a change at Stevenage for the Peterborough services
that would run fast down the ECML,

The current plan is for them to be part of Thameslink.

which could then be increased in frequency to use the former Cruiser
paths or some such.

Just having the extra 2tph from the cruisers would be sufficient,
without making the semi-fasts take the Hertford loop. But none of this
is the current plan.

--
Roland Perry

In article
,
(Jamie Thompson) wrote:

I class them as semi-fasts too. If anything, the Cambridge Cruisers
(which I'm adamant were still displayed as such on the departure
boards at Kings Cross until at least December as such) are the curious
anomaly of Cambridge being an intercity-service operated as a suburban
services to London. It's the service equivalent of Peterborough, where
the fast service is provided by the intercity TOC...but as the WAML is
so capacity-limited, they run via the ECML instead.

I do wonder how tempting it is for TPTB to consider upgrading the WAML
(loops, etc) to speed up services (enabling the fasts to go that way
down to Liverpool Street without having to further abandon the rural
stations on the route that already suffer a 1tph service) rather than
forking out to sort out the Welwyn viaduct. The stopping services on
the branch could quite easily be subsumed into an extension of the
Hertford loop services that terminate at Letchworth, with a change at
Stevenage for the Peterborough services that would run fast down the
ECML, which could then be increased in frequency to use the former
Cruiser paths or some such.

How much of the West Anglia route could ever be passed for 100 MPH running
though? It's not as if the route is significantly shorter.

--
Colin Rosenstiel