Decision on rail link due before Christmas
 

From eWatford Observer 10th November 2011
.....................
Decision on rail link due before Christmas

http://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/new...ore_Christmas/


The final decision on a rail project which will “change the face of
Watford and Croxley Green” is just four weeks away.

The Croxley Rail Link will connect the Metropolitan line in Croxley
Green to Watford Juction, bringing with it a regeneration scheme for
the west-end of the town.

Architectural plans given to the Watford Observer show how a colossal
rail bridge will run from Baldwins Lane in Croxley Green, past the
Harvester restaurant and over the dual carriageway.

The railway will run along Watford Road, the Grand Union canal, and
through west Watford, where two new stations will be built in Ascot
and Vicarage Roads.

Both MP for Watford Richard Harrington and mayor Dorothy Thornhill
have lobbied heavily for the £119.82 million project to go ahead.

Mr Harrington said: “I've been told it's now down to the last knocking
and we'll hear within four weeks.

“This is a major urban regeneration scheme for the poorest parts of
Watford and step towards the health campus, but it will also be for
the general benefit of Watford and I am behind it 100 percent.”

Roger Gagan, chief executive of Watford and West Herts Chamber of
Commerce, said he had his fingers crossed for the project to get the
green light.

He said: “It's important to the town that people can come into Watford
from the met line from prosperous areas like Moor Park and Harrow and
do some some shopping, without having to bring their car.

“It will help commuters by easing traffic, and means London is linked
to Watford so business people can get in and out much easier.

“It will also be good for attracting new businesses, and this will
make our excellent communication links much better.”

A three dimensional video shows the scale of new route, which is hoped
to be finished by 2016, as it winds its way from Croxley Green, along
the railway bridge and into Watford.

Barry Grant, from the Croxley Green Residents' Association, said:
“There are a lot of unanswered questions but you can't halt progress,
this has been going on for years now.

“From my perspective how it will be funded has not been adequately
explained, it is expected that a large proportion will come from the
private sector.

“Successive ideas have come and gone and the costs have spiralled, if
it's going to be built the residents of Croxley Green want to make
sure we get the best out of it.

“The face of Watford and Croxley Green will be changed by this railway
going through largely undeveloped land. I am concerned about the metal
construction which will mean more noise.

“It'll be a change for better or worse, it will certainly be striking,
and you want it to look as good as money will allow.”

Mr Grant also raised concerns about the Sea Scouts and school
buildings below the proposed site.

He added: “I'd be interested to know what is in mind for relocating
those, it will not be pleasant working under a railway flyover.”

Consulting company Mouchel will publish six new fact sheets, available
for download on November 14.

These will address feedback from consultation, a response to key
issues, an environmental assessment, funding update, the next steps
and a construction plan.

However, an email address intended to let residents register their
views is currently not working, with messages returned as
undeliverable.

Drop in sessions will be held in Explore Church, Fuller Way, Croxley
Green, on November 16, in Watford Museum on November 17, Laurence
Haines School on November 22 and Watford Grammar School on November
24.

See a fly through view of the proposed viaduct by clicking the link
below.

Related links

Watch the 3D video here

.................................................
.................................................
John Burke
WRUG

Decision on rail link due before Christmas
 

On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 09:26:20 -0800 (PST), burkey
wrote:

From eWatford Observer 10th November 2011
....................
Decision on rail link due before Christmas

http://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/new...ore_Christmas/


The final decision on a rail project which will “change the face of
Watford and Croxley Green� is just four weeks away.

The Croxley Rail Link will connect the Metropolitan line in Croxley
Green to Watford Juction, bringing with it a regeneration scheme for
the west-end of the town.

Architectural plans given to the Watford Observer show how a colossal
rail bridge will run from Baldwins Lane in Croxley Green, past the
Harvester restaurant and over the dual carriageway.

The railway will run along Watford Road, the Grand Union canal, and
through west Watford, where two new stations will be built in Ascot
and Vicarage Roads.

Both MP for Watford Richard Harrington and mayor Dorothy Thornhill
have lobbied heavily for the £119.82 million project to go ahead.

Mr Harrington said: “I've been told it's now down to the last knocking
and we'll hear within four weeks.

“This is a major urban regeneration scheme for the poorest parts of
Watford and step towards the health campus, but it will also be for
the general benefit of Watford and I am behind it 100 percent.�

Roger Gagan, chief executive of Watford and West Herts Chamber of
Commerce, said he had his fingers crossed for the project to get the
green light.

He said: “It's important to the town that people can come into Watford
from the met line from prosperous areas like Moor Park and Harrow and
do some some shopping, without having to bring their car.

From Harrow ? There are already buses and railway services and the
car-using people from the parts of Harrow which are "prosperous" will
probably continue to drive just as the majority who don't live near
the Met. line will probably mostly continue to use the existing
services. "Fingers crossed" sounds about right if that is what he is
depending on.

“It will help commuters by easing traffic, and means London is linked
to Watford so business people can get in and out much easier.

There are no trains ATM between London and Watford ?

“It will also be good for attracting new businesses, and this will
make our excellent communication links much better.�

A three dimensional video shows the scale of new route, which is hoped
to be finished by 2016, as it winds its way from Croxley Green, along
the railway bridge and into Watford.

Barry Grant, from the Croxley Green Residents' Association, said:
“There are a lot of unanswered questions but you can't halt progress,
this has been going on for years now.

“From my perspective how it will be funded has not been adequately
explained, it is expected that a large proportion will come from the
private sector.

“Successive ideas have come and gone and the costs have spiralled, if
it's going to be built the residents of Croxley Green want to make
sure we get the best out of it.

“The face of Watford and Croxley Green will be changed by this railway
going through largely undeveloped land. I am concerned about the metal
construction which will mean more noise.

“It'll be a change for better or worse, it will certainly be striking,
and you want it to look as good as money will allow.�

Mr Grant also raised concerns about the Sea Scouts and school
buildings below the proposed site.

He added: “I'd be interested to know what is in mind for relocating
those, it will not be pleasant working under a railway flyover.�

Consulting company Mouchel will publish six new fact sheets, available
for download on November 14.

These will address feedback from consultation, a response to key
issues, an environmental assessment, funding update, the next steps
and a construction plan.

However, an email address intended to let residents register their
views is currently not working, with messages returned as
undeliverable.

Drop in sessions will be held in Explore Church, Fuller Way, Croxley
Green, on November 16, in Watford Museum on November 17, Laurence
Haines School on November 22 and Watford Grammar School on November
24.

See a fly through view of the proposed viaduct by clicking the link
below.

Related links

Watch the 3D video here

............................................... .
............................................... .
John Burke
WRUG

Decision on rail link due before Christmas
 

"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 09:26:20 -0800 (PST), burkey
wrote:

The Croxley Rail Link will connect the Metropolitan line in Croxley
Green to Watford Juction, bringing with it a regeneration scheme for
the west-end of the town.



He said: â?oIt's important to the town that people can come into Watford
from the met line from prosperous areas like Moor Park and Harrow and
do some some shopping, without having to bring their car.

From Harrow ? There are already buses and railway services and the
car-using people from the parts of Harrow which are "prosperous" will
probably continue to drive just as the majority who don't live near
the Met. line will probably mostly continue to use the existing
services. "Fingers crossed" sounds about right if that is what he is
depending on.

It would have been useful last Saturday when the wires came down at Wembley,
stopping the job, especially while it took 3 hours to evacuate a Pendolino
to trackside and the DC was stopped as well.

Peter

Decision on rail link due before Christmas
 

On Nov 10, 5:26*pm, burkey wrote:
From eWatford Observer 10th November 2011
....................
Decision on rail link due before Christmas

http://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/new...on_rail_link_d...

The final decision on a rail project which will “change the face of
Watford and Croxley Green” is just four weeks away.

The Croxley Rail Link will connect the Metropolitan line in Croxley
Green to Watford Juction, bringing with it a regeneration scheme for
the west-end of the town.

Architectural plans given to the Watford Observer show how a colossal
rail bridge will run from Baldwins Lane in Croxley Green, past the
Harvester restaurant and over the dual carriageway.

The railway will run along Watford Road, the Grand Union canal, and
through west Watford, where two new stations will be built in Ascot
and Vicarage Roads.

Both MP for Watford Richard Harrington and mayor Dorothy Thornhill
have lobbied heavily for the £119.82 million project to go ahead.

Mr Harrington said: “I've been told it's now down to the last knocking
and we'll hear within four weeks.

“This is a major urban regeneration scheme for the poorest parts of
Watford and step towards the health campus, but it will also be for
the general benefit of Watford and I am behind it 100 percent.”

Roger Gagan, chief executive of Watford and West Herts Chamber of
Commerce, said he had his fingers crossed for the project to get the
green light.

He said: “It's important to the town that people can come into Watford
from the met line from prosperous areas like Moor Park and Harrow and
do some some shopping, without having to bring their car.

“It will help commuters by easing traffic, and means London is linked
to Watford so business people can get in and out much easier.

“It will also be good for attracting new businesses, and this will
make our excellent communication links much better.”

A three dimensional video shows the scale of new route, which is hoped
to be finished by 2016, as it winds its way from Croxley Green, along
the railway bridge and into Watford.

Barry Grant, from the Croxley Green Residents' Association, said:
“There are a lot of unanswered questions but you can't halt progress,
this has been going on for years now.

“From my perspective how it will be funded has not been adequately
explained, it is expected that a large proportion will come from the
private sector.

“Successive ideas have come and gone and the costs have spiralled, if
it's going to be built the residents of Croxley Green want to make
sure we get the best out of it.

“The face of Watford and Croxley Green will be changed by this railway
going through largely undeveloped land. I am concerned about the metal
construction which will mean more noise.

“It'll be a change for better or worse, it will certainly be striking,
and you want it to look as good as money will allow.”

Mr Grant also raised concerns about the Sea Scouts and school
buildings below the proposed site.

He added: “I'd be interested to know what is in mind for relocating
those, it will not be pleasant working under a railway flyover.”

Consulting company Mouchel will publish six new fact sheets, available
for download on November 14.

These will address feedback from consultation, a response to key
issues, an environmental assessment, funding update, the next steps
and a construction plan.

However, an email address intended to let residents register their
views is currently not working, with messages returned as
undeliverable.

Drop in sessions will be held in Explore Church, Fuller Way, Croxley
Green, on November 16, in Watford Museum on November 17, Laurence
Haines School on November 22 and Watford Grammar School on November
24.

See a fly through view of the proposed viaduct by clicking the link
below.

Related links

Watch the 3D video here

We can only hope. This "no brainer" has run and run to no avail thus
far.

Decision on rail link due before Christmas
 

On Nov 11, 12:11*am, Charles Ellson
wrote:

There are no trains ATM between London and Watford ?

What's more, people will continue to use the existing (LM) trains
because they are faster.

The main benefit of the Croxley Link is connectivity between South
Bucks (on the Met) and the WCML and vice-versa.

Neil

Decision on rail link due before Christmas
 

The main benefit of the Croxley Link is connectivity between South
Bucks (on the Met) and the WCML and vice-versa.


To that end, perhaps Overground services from Euston could reverse and
continue in an Amersham direction.

Decision on rail link due before Christmas
 

On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 08:35:12 -0800 (PST), allantracy
wrote:


The main benefit of the Croxley Link is connectivity between South
Bucks (on the Met) and the WCML and vice-versa.


To that end, perhaps Overground services from Euston could reverse and
continue in an Amersham direction.

You can't run 3rd-rail stock on the Met.

Decision on rail link due before Christmas
 

On Nov 11, 4:35*pm, allantracy wrote:
The main benefit of the Croxley Link is connectivity between South
Bucks (on the Met) and the WCML and vice-versa.

To that end, perhaps Overground services from Euston could reverse and
continue in an Amersham direction.

....now that's an interesting notion I'd never considered.

My "pet" proposal has always been an orbital route, the easiest bit of
which is Rickmansworth to St Albans (primarily requiring a dive under
at Watford and the Croxley Link), but given the dive under isn't on
the cards for an amount somewhere between never and not likely, the
concept behind splitting off the Met's Watford branch still holds a
conceptual interest.

Given that TPTB seem to want to turn the Met into a normal tube line
line with just two all-stations branches from HotH to Uxbridge/Moor
Park, then slicing off the Rickmansworth-Chesham /Amersham services
and handing them over to a service operating from Watford Junction
seems reasonable (and the LO stock already has the required ability
for operating over the 4 rail electrification), and the LO service
seems to be about the right service level for that area, with the
ability to have additional services running between Watford and
Amersham/Chesham if required. Rickmansworth would need a *lot* of work
to enable it to handle the interchanging passengers though, and
Chiltern would need to beef up their services dramatically to handle
the loads heading into London. Probably would enable them to take over
the fast lines though, leading to potential speed improvements (and
maybe OHLE).

....another great reason to have the Chiltern line to Princes
Riseborough as the 2nd western branch of Crossrail to free capacity
into Marylebone for more Birmingham and Aylesbury via Amersham
services I say :)

Decision on rail link due before Christmas
 

"Jamie Thompson" wrote

...another great reason to have the Chiltern line to Princes
Riseborough as the 2nd western branch of Crossrail to free capacity
into Marylebone for more Birmingham and Aylesbury via Amersham
services I say :)

An early Crossrail proposal involved Crossrauil taking over the Chiltern Met
Line and the Met's Amersham and Chesham services, leaving the Met with
Uxbridge and Watford, and leaving Marylebone with the Chiltern Joint Line.

IMHO there is a case for the Croxley Link to include a half-hourly service
from Watford Junction via Rickmansworth to Chesham or Amersham.

Peter

Decision on rail link due before Christmas
 

On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 20:54:41 +0000, Charles Ellson
wrote:

On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 08:35:12 -0800 (PST), allantracy
wrote:


The main benefit of the Croxley Link is connectivity between South
Bucks (on the Met) and the WCML and vice-versa.


To that end, perhaps Overground services from Euston could reverse and
continue in an Amersham direction.

You can't run 3rd-rail stock on the Met.

Charles:

I defer to your knowledge of the infrastructure, but what would have
to be done, and how much would it cost to make this possible?

Educate me.

Regards
JonH

Decision on rail link due before Christmas
 

"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 08:35:12 -0800 (PST), allantracy

To that end, perhaps Overground services from Euston could reverse and
continue in an Amersham direction.

You can't run 3rd-rail stock on the Met.

Not an insurmountable issue though, as seen on the Bakerloo and District,
and the new S stock has apparently been built to allow use on the raised
third rail supply voltage that NR are about to provide around London...

Paul S

Decision on rail link due before Christmas
 

On Nov 11, 10:34*pm, wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 20:54:41 +0000, Charles Ellson

wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 08:35:12 -0800 (PST), allantracy
wrote:

The main benefit of the Croxley Link is connectivity between South
Bucks (on the Met) and the WCML and vice-versa.

To that end, perhaps Overground services from Euston could reverse and
continue in an Amersham direction.

You can't run 3rd-rail stock on the Met.

Charles:

I defer to your knowledge of the infrastructure, but what would have
to be done, and how much would it cost to make this possible?

Educate me.

Regards
JonH

...indeed, as would I. I'd have though they would be compatible as I
thought all TfL's lines used the same 4 rail system of
electrification, but even if they're not, I'd have thought they would
be compatible by historical virtue that the LO shares tracks with (and
is therefore compatible with) the Bakerloo, which used to have the
branch to Stanmore, so effectively operated over the Met between
Finchley Road and Wembley, though in reality only in and out of
Neasden depot. I know a lot of time has passed, but I wouldn't have
thought things would have diverged too much.

Decision on rail link due before Christmas
 

On Nov 11, 10:34*pm, wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 20:54:41 +0000, Charles Ellson

wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 08:35:12 -0800 (PST), allantracy
wrote:

The main benefit of the Croxley Link is connectivity between South
Bucks (on the Met) and the WCML and vice-versa.

To that end, perhaps Overground services from Euston could reverse and
continue in an Amersham direction.

You can't run 3rd-rail stock on the Met.

Charles:

I defer to your knowledge of the infrastructure, but what would have
to be done, and how much would it cost to make this possible?

Educate me.

Regards
JonH

...indeed, as would I. I'd have though they would be compatible as I
thought all TfL's lines used the same 4 rail system of
electrification, but even if they're not, I'd have thought they would
be compatible by historical virtue that the LO shares tracks with (and
is therefore compatible with) the Bakerloo, which used to have the
branch to Stanmore, so effectively operated over the Met between
Finchley Road and Wembley, though in reality only in and out of
Neasden depot. I know a lot of time has passed, but I wouldn't have
thought things would have diverged too much.

Decision on rail link due before Christmas
 

On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 22:36:54 -0000, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
Not an insurmountable issue though, as seen on the Bakerloo and
District,
and the new S stock has apparently been built to allow use on the
raised
third rail supply voltage that NR are about to provide around
London...

The difference is the infrastructure, not the trains. The Bakerloo
"shared" bit is +660 outer, 0 inner, so works for both. The Tube
proper including the Met is +440 outer, -220 inner, so no good for
third rail EMUs. Or something like that.

Neil

--
Neil Williams, Milton Keynes, UK

Decision on rail link due before Christmas
 

On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 15:24:07 -0800 (PST), Jamie Thompson
wrote:

On Nov 11, 10:34*pm, wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 20:54:41 +0000, Charles Ellson

wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 08:35:12 -0800 (PST), allantracy
wrote:

The main benefit of the Croxley Link is connectivity between South
Bucks (on the Met) and the WCML and vice-versa.

To that end, perhaps Overground services from Euston could reverse and
continue in an Amersham direction.

You can't run 3rd-rail stock on the Met.

Charles:

I defer to your knowledge of the infrastructure, but what would have
to be done, and how much would it cost to make this possible?

Educate me.

Regards
JonH

..indeed, as would I. I'd have though they would be compatible as I
thought all TfL's lines used the same 4 rail system of
electrification,

LO is a National Railway service run on behalf of TfL on mostly
Network Rail infrastructure. Class 378 stock is 750v 3-rail/25kV
equipped.

but even if they're not, I'd have thought they would
be compatible by historical virtue that the LO shares tracks with (and
is therefore compatible with) the Bakerloo,

It works the other way round (in both senses). The DC line has a 4th
rail bonded to the traction return running rail so that 4-rail stock
can run over it. It used to be wired LT-style as 4-rail but was
converted to conventional feed (with the "extra" 3th rail) in the
early 1970s.

which used to have the
branch to Stanmore, so effectively operated over the Met between
Finchley Road and Wembley, though in reality only in and out of
Neasden depot. I know a lot of time has passed, but I wouldn't have
thought things would have diverged too much.

They haven't. LU trains are still the "intruders" on the DC line.

Decision on rail link due before Christmas
 

On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 22:36:54 -0000, "Paul Scott"
wrote:

"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 08:35:12 -0800 (PST), allantracy

To that end, perhaps Overground services from Euston could reverse and
continue in an Amersham direction.

You can't run 3rd-rail stock on the Met.

Not an insurmountable issue though, as seen on the Bakerloo and District,
and the new S stock has apparently been built to allow use on the raised
third rail supply voltage that NR are about to provide around London...

Compatibility is not inevitably a reversable function. The shared
sections all involve some re-arrangement of the power supply and/or
signalling systems. You can e.g. send LU and NR electric stock into
Richmond but neither can take the wrong direction at Gunnersbury as
one requires power between the 3rd and 4th rails and the other
requires the power supply between the 3rd rail and one running rail.
Normal LU signalling is not intended to have traction currents flowing
in the running rails.

Decision on rail link due before Christmas
 

"Neil Williams" wrote

The difference is the infrastructure, not the trains. The Bakerloo
"shared" bit is +660 outer, 0 inner, so works for both. The Tube proper
including the Met is +440 outer, -220 inner, so no good for third rail
EMUs. Or something like that.

When the Croxley Link is built the section through Watford High Street will
have to have an operative 4th rail reinstated (for the Met trains) but at 0V
(bonded to the running rails for the LO trains. Should there be any
intention to run LO trains on to the existing Met (e.g. a Watford Junction
to Chesham or Amersham service) the Met infrastructure would have to be
altered in the same way as Queens Park to Harrow & W, Putney Bridge to
Wimbledon, and Gunnersbury - Richmond. It would be easier to use LU trains.

IMHO there is a case for the Croxley Link also to be used by trains from
Chesham or Amersham. But I doubt that there's a business case for procuring
new trains for this, and the likely traffic won't justify 8-car trains.
Perhaps a few of the D78 trains could be arranged as 4-car sets and modified
as necessary for future Met signalling. Certainly a better place to use them
than Harrogate.

Peter

Decision on rail link due before Christmas
 

On Nov 12, 11:12*am, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"Neil Williams" wrote

The difference is the infrastructure, not the trains. *The Bakerloo
"shared" bit is +660 outer, 0 inner, so works for both. *The Tube proper
including the Met is +440 outer, -220 inner, so no good for third rail
EMUs. *Or something like that.

When the Croxley Link is built the section through Watford High Street will
have to have an operative 4th rail reinstated (for the Met trains) but at 0V
(bonded to the running rails for the LO trains. Should there be any
intention to run LO trains on to the existing Met (e.g. a Watford Junction
to Chesham or Amersham service) the Met infrastructure would have to be
altered in the same way as Queens Park to Harrow & W, Putney Bridge to
Wimbledon, and Gunnersbury - Richmond. It would be easier to use LU trains.

IMHO there is a case for the Croxley Link also to be used by trains from
Chesham or Amersham. But I doubt that there's a business case for procuring
new trains for this, and the likely traffic won't justify 8-car trains.
Perhaps a few of the D78 trains could be arranged as 4-car sets and modified
as necessary for future Met signalling. Certainly a better place to use them
than Harrogate.

Peter

The maintenance issue would no doubt rear it's had again though on
operating non-standard stock. Perhaps keeping them away from the other
children at a rebuilt Wiggenhall Road might suffice...but I think
you'd far more likely end up with too few S7/S8s on an infrequent
service than a correct number of D78s on a frequent one (It's the same
problem as the St. Albans line - infrequent services push passengers
away, but longer services aren't justified by the current loadings.
Make them frequent enough and you'll get the custom I believe). TfL
does seem to prefer to operate for it's own operational convenience
more than passengers most of the time...

Decision on rail link due before Christmas
 

On Nov 12, 1:02*pm, Jamie Thompson wrote:

On Nov 12, 11:12*am, "Peter Masson" wrote:

IMHO there is a case for the Croxley Link also to be used by trains from
Chesham or Amersham. But I doubt that there's a business case for procuring
new trains for this, and the likely traffic won't justify 8-car trains.
Perhaps a few of the D78 trains could be arranged as 4-car sets and modified
as necessary for future Met signalling. Certainly a better place to use them
than Harrogate.

The maintenance issue would no doubt rear it's had again though on
operating non-standard stock. Perhaps keeping them away from the other
children at a rebuilt Wiggenhall Road might suffice...but I think
you'd far more likely end up with too few S7/S8s on an infrequent
service than a correct number of D78s on a frequent one (It's the same
problem as the St. Albans line - infrequent services push passengers
away, but longer services aren't justified by the current loadings.
Make them frequent enough and you'll get the custom I believe). TfL
does seem to prefer to operate for it's own operational convenience
more than passengers most of the time...

What a load of nonsense.

Decision on rail link due before Christmas
 

We were about to embark at Dover, when
(Charles Ellson) came up to me and whispered:

You can e.g. send LU and NR electric stock into
Richmond but neither can take the wrong direction at
Gunnersbury as
one requires power between the 3rd and 4th rails and the other
requires the power supply between the 3rd rail and one running
rail.
Normal LU signalling is not intended to have traction currents
flowing
in the running rails.

There's no reason what LU stock can't be converted to third rail
operations - cf. 1939 stock on the Isle of Wight.

--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
IF you think this http://bit.ly/u5EP3p is evil
please sign this http://bit.ly/sKkzEx

---- If it's below this line, I didn't write it ----

Decision on rail link due before Christmas
 

On Nov 12, 1:37*pm, Mizter T wrote:

On Nov 12, 1:02*pm, Jamie *Thompson wrote:

On Nov 12, 11:12*am, "Peter Masson" wrote:

IMHO there is a case for the Croxley Link also to be used by trains from
Chesham or Amersham. But I doubt that there's a business case for procuring
new trains for this, and the likely traffic won't justify 8-car trains.
Perhaps a few of the D78 trains could be arranged as 4-car sets and modified
as necessary for future Met signalling. Certainly a better place to use them
than Harrogate.

The maintenance issue would no doubt rear it's had again though on
operating non-standard stock. Perhaps keeping them away from the other
children at a rebuilt Wiggenhall Road might suffice...but I think
you'd far more likely end up with too few S7/S8s on an infrequent
service than a correct number of D78s on a frequent one (It's the same
problem as the St. Albans line - infrequent services push passengers
away, but longer services aren't justified by the current loadings.
Make them frequent enough and you'll get the custom I believe). TfL
does seem to prefer to operate for it's own operational convenience
more than passengers most of the time...

What a load of nonsense.

Sorry, that's a bit harsh - I should have said something like
"Really?".

Decision on rail link due before Christmas
 

"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 22:36:54 -0000, "Paul Scott"
wrote:

Not an insurmountable issue though, as seen on the Bakerloo and District,
and the new S stock has apparently been built to allow use on the raised
third rail supply voltage that NR are about to provide around London...

Compatibility is not inevitably a reversable function. The shared
sections all involve some re-arrangement of the power supply and/or
signalling systems. You can e.g. send LU and NR electric stock into
Richmond but neither can take the wrong direction at Gunnersbury as
one requires power between the 3rd and 4th rails and the other
requires the power supply between the 3rd rail and one running rail.
Normal LU signalling is not intended to have traction currents flowing
in the running rails.

So exactly as I said it is not an 'insurmountable issue'.

They build the NEW infrastructure to allow for third rail EMUs as well as LU
stock, and alter a section of the existing infrastructure to match. It is
all being completely resignalled anyway by 2018...

Paul S

Decision on rail link due before Christmas
 

On Nov 12, 2:18*pm, Mizter T wrote:
On Nov 12, 1:37*pm, Mizter T wrote:









On Nov 12, 1:02*pm, Jamie *Thompson wrote:

On Nov 12, 11:12*am, "Peter Masson" wrote:

IMHO there is a case for the Croxley Link also to be used by trains from
Chesham or Amersham. But I doubt that there's a business case for procuring
new trains for this, and the likely traffic won't justify 8-car trains.
Perhaps a few of the D78 trains could be arranged as 4-car sets and modified
as necessary for future Met signalling. Certainly a better place to use them
than Harrogate.

The maintenance issue would no doubt rear it's had again though on
operating non-standard stock. Perhaps keeping them away from the other
children at a rebuilt Wiggenhall Road might suffice...but I think
you'd far more likely end up with too few S7/S8s on an infrequent
service than a correct number of D78s on a frequent one (It's the same
problem as the St. Albans line - infrequent services push passengers
away, but longer services aren't justified by the current loadings.
Make them frequent enough and you'll get the custom I believe). TfL
does seem to prefer to operate for it's own operational convenience
more than passengers most of the time...

What a load of nonsense.

Sorry, that's a bit harsh - I should have said something like
"Really?".

Perhaps indeed that last bit of my comment was a bit unjustified...but
I've seen a fair few things lately that don't seem to make much sense.
I do however feel the need to thank you for taking the effort to tone
down your reply...measured response isn't exactly something the
internet in general - let alone usenet, is famous for, so it's worth
highlighting when it does happen :) Thanks.

Decision on rail link due before Christmas
 

On Sat, 12 Nov 2011 17:03:13 -0000, "Paul Scott"
wrote:



"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 22:36:54 -0000, "Paul Scott"
wrote:

Not an insurmountable issue though, as seen on the Bakerloo and District,
and the new S stock has apparently been built to allow use on the raised
third rail supply voltage that NR are about to provide around London...

Compatibility is not inevitably a reversable function. The shared
sections all involve some re-arrangement of the power supply and/or
signalling systems. You can e.g. send LU and NR electric stock into
Richmond but neither can take the wrong direction at Gunnersbury as
one requires power between the 3rd and 4th rails and the other
requires the power supply between the 3rd rail and one running rail.
Normal LU signalling is not intended to have traction currents flowing
in the running rails.

So exactly as I said it is not an 'insurmountable issue'.

Not if you can get a rich uncle to pay for it.

They build the NEW infrastructure to allow for third rail EMUs as well as LU
stock, and alter a section of the existing infrastructure to match.

Watford to Amersham is not an insignificant distance.

It is
all being completely resignalled anyway by 2018...

Decision on rail link due before Christmas
 

On Nov 12, 9:37*pm, Jamie Thompson wrote:
On Nov 12, 2:18*pm, Mizter T wrote:





On Nov 12, 1:37*pm, Mizter T wrote:

On Nov 12, 1:02*pm, Jamie *Thompson wrote:

On Nov 12, 11:12*am, "Peter Masson" wrote:

IMHO there is a case for the Croxley Link also to be used by trains from
Chesham or Amersham. But I doubt that there's a business case for procuring
new trains for this, and the likely traffic won't justify 8-car trains.
Perhaps a few of the D78 trains could be arranged as 4-car sets and modified
as necessary for future Met signalling. Certainly a better place to use them
than Harrogate.

The maintenance issue would no doubt rear it's had again though on
operating non-standard stock. Perhaps keeping them away from the other
children at a rebuilt Wiggenhall Road might suffice...but I think
you'd far more likely end up with too few S7/S8s on an infrequent
service than a correct number of D78s on a frequent one (It's the same
problem as the St. Albans line - infrequent services push passengers
away, but longer services aren't justified by the current loadings.
Make them frequent enough and you'll get the custom I believe). TfL
does seem to prefer to operate for it's own operational convenience
more than passengers most of the time...

What a load of nonsense.

Sorry, that's a bit harsh - I should have said something like
"Really?".

Perhaps indeed that last bit of my comment was a bit unjustified...but
I've seen a fair few things lately that don't seem to make much sense.
I do however feel the need to thank you for taking the effort to tone
down your reply...measured response isn't exactly something the
internet in general - let alone usenet, is famous for, so it's worth
highlighting when it does happen :) Thanks.

Agreed.