Croxley Link
 

You could have made all the same ridership arguements about reopening the North London Line to Stratford and look how busy it is now!

Considering what traffic in Watford is like whenever I visit I would expect abstraction from both bus and car traffic as well as new journey opportunities. The link caters for travel to Watford from a large slice of north west London and travel to the Harrow and Wembley areas from Watford and interchange at Watford Junction for journeys that would otherwise require travel to central London.

I never understand why some people are convinced that public transport is only used to commute to Central London.

Croxley Link
 

On Mon, 6 Oct 2014 10:20:24 -0700 (PDT)
Piatkow wrote:
You could have made all the same ridership arguements about reopening the N=
orth London Line to Stratford and look how busy it is now!

Hardly - they're complete opposites. The NLL links up the spokes on a wheel and
provides a quicker alternative to going into london and out again , whereas
the croxley link provides a much longer route to watford than the alternatives.
As for lots of pax between amersham/chesham and watford - yeah, right.

--
Spud

Croxley Link
 

In message of Mon, 6 Oct
2014 19:25:11 in uk.transport.london, Paul Corfield
writes
On Mon, 6 Oct 2014 10:20:24 -0700 (PDT), Piatkow
wrote:

You could have made all the same ridership arguements about reopening
the North London Line to Stratford and look how busy it is now!

Considering what traffic in Watford is like whenever I visit I would
expect abstraction from both bus and car traffic as well as new
journey opportunities.
The link caters for travel to Watford from a large slice of north west
London and travel to the Harrow and Wembley areas from Watford and
interchange at Watford Junction for journeys that would otherwise
require travel to central London.

I never understand why some people are convinced that public transport
is only used to commute to Central London.

And yet if you look at patronage on the DC line into Watford Junction
it's not exactly overburdened with passengers north of Harrow nor does
it carry a lot of local traffic. Hopefully the new extension of the
Met will encourage some transfer from cars but it really depends on
whether people find the stations in Watford to be convenient to use. A
second factor will be how convenient transfers from Amersham line
trains will be at Moor Park.

I actually think Amersham, or even Aylesbury, to Watford Junction via
the north curve is the service that would do well and would take
traffic off the roads. Whether that will be deemed feasible or
desirable is a separate issue.

I think the same. The first thing is to have Chiltern stop at Moor Park
to allow improved interchange between the Watford service and the
Amersham/Aylesbury service.

On 10 March 2014 11:24:57, I got this from Chiltern Customer Services:
"It is not within our Franchise Agreement to stop at this particular
station and at present, there are not any plans to do so".
I failed to find contact details for the franchisor.

I am expecting a reply to a similar question to http://www.croxleyraill
ink.com/contact-us/general-project-queries.htm by 9/10/14.
Sadly, it is one of those sites which does not send enquiry copies.
TfL has another and I generally avoid it.
I should have emailed ; 0800 6125240 is the
chasing number.

With the revised service to Watford, I think it will be daft for
Chiltern not to stop at Moor Park.
--
Walter Briscoe

Croxley Link
 

On 2014-10-06 18:25:11 +0000, Paul Corfield said:

And yet if you look at patronage on the DC line into Watford Junction
it's not exactly overburdened with passengers north of Harrow nor does
it carry a lot of local traffic.

The DC line would I think be used a lot more if the service pattern was
such that people at the northern end of it didn't get such a uselessly
slow journey. One option might be to run the LO service as semifast
south of Harrow just ahead of a Bakerloo train (maybe Willesden and
Queens Park only?) and stopping north thereof, perhaps - interchange
wouldn't be so bad as it'd always be same-platform. That might even
take some of the overcrowding off the WCML itself.

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

Croxley Link
 

On 2014-10-06 21:12:06 +0000, Walter Briscoe said:

With the revised service to Watford, I think it will be daft for
Chiltern not to stop at Moor Park.

Except for that it is known that, and has been known for years that,
Chiltern have very little interest in their local services and are more
bothered about being a pseudo-InterCity operator to Birmingham. So
they are unlikely to insert any extra stops in anything.

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

Croxley Link
 

On 2014-10-06 19:12:29 +0000, d said:

Hardly - they're complete opposites. The NLL links up the spokes on a wheel and
provides a quicker alternative to going into london and out again , whereas
the croxley link provides a much longer route to watford than the alternatives.

That it does, but where it might win out is the "lazy journey" option
for those working in the northern parts of the City easily reachable
from Moorgate, Barbican, Liverpool St and Aldgate. Along similar
lines, were what you say true Bedford commuters would always use the
fast EMT services, yet quite a lot of them use Thameslink because it
provides a single-train journey. Take out the 10 minute walk from a
Euston platform to Euston Square and the on average about 5 minute wait
for a train to the City that you can physically get on (normally the
Met from Amersham/Chesham), the timings might not be so bad. And
you'll be sure of a seat both ways, particularly if boarding at Aldgate
on the return.

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

Croxley Link
 

In message , at 23:51:56 on Mon, 6 Oct
2014, Neil Williams remarked:
Hardly - they're complete opposites. The NLL links up the spokes on a wheel and
provides a quicker alternative to going into london and out again , whereas
the croxley link provides a much longer route to watford than the alternatives.

That it does, but where it might win out is the "lazy journey" option
for those working in the northern parts of the City easily reachable
from Moorgate, Barbican, Liverpool St and Aldgate. Along similar
lines, were what you say true Bedford commuters would always use the
fast EMT services, yet quite a lot of them use Thameslink because it
provides a single-train journey.

There are only two EMT trains from Bedford in the morning that are timed
as useful to commuters, arriving St Pancras at 7:48* and 8:39

The evening peak is inherently more spread out, and there's a better
choice of departures at 17:00, 17:30, 18:00* and 18:30

* via Corby services, so might be a 5-car train only.
--
Roland Perry

Croxley Link
 

On 06/10/2014 19:25, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 6 Oct 2014 10:20:24 -0700 (PDT), Piatkow
wrote:

You could have made all the same ridership arguements about reopening the North London Line to Stratford and look how busy it is now!

Considering what traffic in Watford is like whenever I visit I would expect abstraction from both bus and car traffic as well as new journey opportunities.
The link caters for travel to Watford from a large slice of north west London and travel to the Harrow and Wembley areas from Watford and interchange at Watford Junction for journeys that would otherwise require travel to central London.

I never understand why some people are convinced that public transport is only used to commute to Central London.

And yet if you look at patronage on the DC line into Watford Junction
it's not exactly overburdened with passengers north of Harrow nor does
it carry a lot of local traffic. Hopefully the new extension of the
Met will encourage some transfer from cars but it really depends on
whether people find the stations in Watford to be convenient to use. A
second factor will be how convenient transfers from Amersham line
trains will be at Moor Park.

I actually think Amersham, or even Aylesbury, to Watford Junction via
the north curve is the service that would do well and would take
traffic off the roads. Whether that will be deemed feasible or
desirable is a separate issue.

I am not certain abou that. An Amerham - Watford - St Albans bus
service was tried aboout 2 years ago and only lasted 3 months.


---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com

Croxley Link
 

Neil Williams wrote:
That it does, but where it might win out is the "lazy journey" option
for those working in the northern parts of the City easily reachable
from Moorgate, Barbican, Liverpool St and Aldgate. Along similar
lines, were what you say true Bedford commuters would always use the
fast EMT services, yet quite a lot of them use Thameslink because it
provides a single-train journey. Take out the 10 minute walk from a
Euston platform to Euston Square and the on average about 5 minute wait
for a train to the City that you can physically get on (normally the
Met from Amersham/Chesham), the timings might not be so bad. And
you'll be sure of a seat both ways, particularly if boarding at Aldgate
on the return.

But the line didn't do so well when it was connected at the DC line and ran
to Broad Street. That was a long time ago, but have the reasons why the
first attempted revival failed been understood?

Theo

Croxley Link
 

Theo Markettos wrote:
Neil Williams wrote:
That it does, but where it might win out is the "lazy journey" option
for those working in the northern parts of the City easily reachable
from Moorgate, Barbican, Liverpool St and Aldgate. Along similar
lines, were what you say true Bedford commuters would always use the
fast EMT services, yet quite a lot of them use Thameslink because it
provides a single-train journey. Take out the 10 minute walk from a
Euston platform to Euston Square and the on average about 5 minute wait
for a train to the City that you can physically get on (normally the
Met from Amersham/Chesham), the timings might not be so bad. And
you'll be sure of a seat both ways, particularly if boarding at Aldgate
on the return.

But the line didn't do so well when it was connected at the DC line and ran
to Broad Street. That was a long time ago, but have the reasons why the
first attempted revival failed been understood?

Just speculation, but the London boom has increased employment, London
housing costs are forcing people to live further out, and driving into
Central London work isn't an option for most. The Met line may also be
faster to the City than the old Broad St line was?