"Nick Leverton" wrote in message
...
In article ,

That seems odd to me, as I thought one reason for this truncation of
services was to allow the SLL junction at Battersea Park to be abolished
so that the Brighton line platforms could be extended ?

Is it really a 'cause and effect' reason? I think the only (published) bona
fide excuse for removal of the service is the capacity reduction caused by
alterations at London Bridge, once having made that decision, the platform
extension option then became available.

Paul S

tim..... wrote


"Jarle H Knudsen" wrote

under the 2005 Act.

Is the act online?

all acts from about 2000 are.

but you have to know its correct name :-(

All now (finally) with translations from law-french for the earliest
ones.

http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/

And you can search.

Try all acts containing "crossbow" for example.


--
Mike D

In article 01cdccca$03d89c80$LocalHost@default, (Michael R
N Dolbear) wrote:

tim..... wrote

"Jarle H Knudsen" wrote

under the 2005 Act.

Is the act online?

all acts from about 2000 are.

but you have to know its correct name :-(

All now (finally) with translations from law-french for the earliest ones.

http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/

And you can search.

Try all acts containing "crossbow" for example.

What would they tell us about the South London Line then?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

wrote

(Michael R Dolbear) wrote:

tim..... wrote

Is the act online?

all acts from about 2000 are.

but you have to know its correct name :-(

All now (finally) with translations from law-french for the
earliest ones.

http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/

And you can search.

Try all acts containing "crossbow" for example.

What would they tell us about the South London Line then?

I'll leave the fascinating but subtle difference
between a 'line closure' and 'withdrawal of railway passenger
services'
to someone else, my post was to point out that a search was possible
even when the correct name of the act wasn't known.

A correction, I should have said that all /public general/ acts of
parliament were now online.

--
Mike D

In uk.transport.london message 01cdccff$41190d20$78cf403e@default, Wed,
28 Nov 2012 00:28:39, Michael R N Dolbear posted:

A correction, I should have said that all /public general/ acts of
parliament were now online.

But they are not all correct (as of a few days ago).

In one case, it is both certain and obvious that either a faulty
amendment was legislated into an Annex to a perfectly good original Act,
or that the minions who provided Webmaster with material had been at best
incompetent at cut'n'paste (either with paper and glue, or in the modern
manner).

--
(c) John Stockton, nr London, UK. E-mail, see Home Page. Turnpike v6.05.
Website http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ - w. FAQish topics, links, acronyms
PAS EXE etc. : http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/programs/ - see in 00index.htm
Dates - miscdate.htm estrdate.htm js-dates.htm pas-time.htm critdate.htm etc.

In one case, it is both certain and obvious that either a faulty
amendment was legislated into an Annex to a perfectly good original
Act, or that the minions who provided Webmaster with material had
been at best incompetent at cut'n'paste (either with paper and glue,
or in the modern manner).

The process is not automatic so it should not be surprising if there are
occasional errors, especially in the "keeled text". IMLE those
responsible welcome reports of such errors to


PS
Acts usually have "Schedules" rather than Annexes. Was this an ancient
one?
--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid

In article ,
Paul Scott wrote:
"Nick Leverton" wrote in message
...
In article ,

That seems odd to me, as I thought one reason for this truncation of
services was to allow the SLL junction at Battersea Park to be abolished
so that the Brighton line platforms could be extended ?

Is it really a 'cause and effect' reason? I think the only (published) bona
fide excuse for removal of the service is the capacity reduction caused by
alterations at London Bridge, once having made that decision, the platform
extension option then became available.

I believe you are right in that it was an opportunity taken rather
than a motivating factor. However the changes at the London Bridge /
New Cross end of the route would surely not have precluded keeping a
service from the South London lines into Victoria ? I did read the
document assessing the options at the time it was mentioned here, but
don't remember the details.

Anyway, whilst we are on the topic of this service, the following has
been quoted on the "gensheet" rare track mailing list, forwarded with
acknowledgements (some of it apparently further quoted from Branch Line
News to whom it is probably copyright).

Note the implication that the Battersea Park junction link will not
completely close immediately despite the cessation of services.

"Battersea Park Platforms 1&2 'Branch Platforms' - Battersea Park Jnc.:
(BLN 1161.557) Closes Passengers from 9th December 2012, on cessation
of London Bridge - South London Line - Victoria passenger service and
extension of the East London Line service to Clapham Jct. It has been
suggested this link will eventually close completely to allow extension
of Platform 3 across the junction. Wandsworth Road (Factory Jct 'A')
to Battersea Park Station is expected to receive a token service of one
train each way SSuX from 10th December 2012."

"The last Victoria to London Bridge SLL train on Saturday December 8th
will be V 2311 - LB 2336. This means that it will be possible to
travel on the final through services between Victoria, Battersea Park
and Wandsworth Road stations and back: V 2311 - WR 2317 / 2329 - V 2337
(i.e. before the introduction of the 'Parliamentary' trains)."

One train each way per day will cover the Battersea Park - Wandsworth
Road section:

0618 Battersea Park - Highbury & Islington
2217 Highbury & Islington to Battersea Park

and one other each way will cover Wandsworth Road - Victoria via
Stewart's Lane:

0530 London Victoria - Bromley South
1818 Sevenoaks to London Victoria

Nick
--
"The Internet, a sort of ersatz counterfeit of real life"
-- Janet Street-Porter, BBC2, 19th March 1996

wrote in message
...
I and some colleagues had a last ride on the South London Line this
afternoon, from Victoria to London Bridge.

One question arising is which bits of line will cease to have services
from
9th December.

It seems to me that only the South London Line from the junction just
North
of Battersea Park to just short of Wandsworth Road, including the South
London platforms at Battersea Park, will lose all services and, though
there
will cease to be direct services between Denmark Hill and London Bridge,
the
journey will still be possible by changing at Peckham Rye or Queen's Road,
Peckham, the latter on the same platform.

Am I correct?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Southern was doing its best to discourage people from using the service on
Friday. The 1411 from Victoria was cancelled because the inward working was
a whole eight minutes late so it turned back at Battersea Park. No attempt
was made to hold it at Battersea for a cross platform connection off the
1413 from Victoria. In fact it was only announced as cancelled at 1412.

The 1541 departure was announced at 1539, front two coaches on platform 11
on top of an eight car 377. While the passengers enjoyed their trek,
platforms 9 and 10 were empty. Inevitably the service departed two minutes
late. Why do they leave it so late before showing platform numbers? Every
train has its booked platform and will normally stick to it unless there is
severe disruption or a failed train in a platform.

John

Reminded by this post that the service would end this Saturday,
I travelled from London Bridge to Victoria just for the fun of it.
(Not something I do very often) The train was a four-car unit
and was quite busy.

The platform was not announced until about five minutes before departure.
I too don't understand why it is not known earlier.

"John C" wrote in message
...
Southern was doing its best to discourage people from using the service on
Friday. The 1411 from Victoria was cancelled because the inward working
was a whole eight minutes late so it turned back at Battersea Park. No
attempt was made to hold it at Battersea for a cross platform connection
off the 1413 from Victoria. In fact it was only announced as cancelled at
1412.

The 1541 departure was announced at 1539, front two coaches on platform 11
on top of an eight car 377. While the passengers enjoyed their trek,
platforms 9 and 10 were empty. Inevitably the service departed two minutes
late. Why do they leave it so late before showing platform numbers? Every
train has its booked platform and will normally stick to it unless there
is severe disruption or a failed train in a platform.

John

I meant Thursday for the above.

John