On 2014\11\09 19:24, tim..... wrote:

"D A Stocks" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
On 08.11.14 15:46, Recliner wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:27:51 on Sat,
8 Nov
2014, Clive Page remarked:
remains of all the stuff under Smithfield, City Thameslink with an
absolutely perfect 90s look (you can almost feel the shoulder pads)
including a blanked-off door that should have gone to the Jubilee
line,

Where is that then? And I didn't know that the Jubilee Line went
near enough.

I presume this would have been on the branch which was built as far as
Charing Cross, whose JLE station is used now mainly as a film set.

Actually, the abandoned Jubilee Line Charing Cross station isn't on the
JLE. It's on the old Fleet Line alignment.


Why did they close the station? Would it not have been better to
terminate and turn some trains there, while letting others continue
on to Stratford?

AIUI the cost of having to replace the (by then) life-expired
escalators was a significant factor. If you take out the NR
interchange passengers (who could use Waterloo or London Bridge
instead) what was left, and would it justify retaining the station?

I think you are thinking of a different station

Aldwych closed because the lift was life-expired. I have an inkling that
the escalators at Charing Cross were removed and taken somewhere else,
although I can't think where.

On 2014\11\08 17:28, wrote:

Basil Jet wrote:
Farringdon of course used to have the
dual-electrified Moorgate Branch as a place to hide trains with stuck
pantographs

And anyway the Moorgate City Widened lines were overhead 25KV AC electrified
only.

You're right. I was wrong.

On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 10:43:11 +0000
Basil Jet wrote:
On 2014\11\08 17:28, wrote:

Basil Jet wrote:
Farringdon of course used to have the
dual-electrified Moorgate Branch as a place to hide trains with stuck
pantographs

And anyway the Moorgate City Widened lines were overhead 25KV AC electrified
only.

You're right. I was wrong.

Closing the moorgate branch was a mistake IMO. Not only did it serve a
hell of a lot of commuters but it was a convenient reversing point in case
of any problems south of the river. I'm sure they could have managed with
a shorter platform at farringdon with selective door opening - ie if you want
to get out there southbound you must get be in one of the 1st 8 cars. Its
done elsewhere on the system.

--
Spud

d wrote:

On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 10:43:11 +0000
Basil Jet wrote:
On 2014\11\08 17:28, wrote:

Basil Jet wrote:
Farringdon of course used to have the
dual-electrified Moorgate Branch as a place to hide trains with
stuck pantographs

And anyway the Moorgate City Widened lines were overhead 25KV AC
electrified only.

You're right. I was wrong.

Closing the moorgate branch was a mistake IMO. Not only did it serve
a hell of a lot of commuters but it was a convenient reversing point
in case of any problems south of the river. I'm sure they could have
managed with a shorter platform at farringdon with selective door
opening - ie if you want to get out there southbound you must get be
in one of the 1st 8 cars. Its done elsewhere on the system.

But is it used anywhere as busy as Farringdon? SDO is fine for lightly
used stations, but not suitable for a station where a large percentage
of the train will be alighting (particularly once Crossrail opens).

Peter Smyth

"Peter Smyth" wrote:
d wrote:

On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 10:43:11 +0000
Basil Jet wrote:
On 2014\11\08 17:28, wrote:

Basil Jet wrote:
Farringdon of course used to have the
dual-electrified Moorgate Branch as a place to hide trains with
stuck pantographs

And anyway the Moorgate City Widened lines were overhead 25KV AC
electrified only.

You're right. I was wrong.

Closing the moorgate branch was a mistake IMO. Not only did it serve
a hell of a lot of commuters but it was a convenient reversing point
in case of any problems south of the river. I'm sure they could have
managed with a shorter platform at farringdon with selective door
opening - ie if you want to get out there southbound you must get be
in one of the 1st 8 cars. Its done elsewhere on the system.

But is it used anywhere as busy as Farringdon? SDO is fine for lightly
used stations, but not suitable for a station where a large percentage
of the train will be alighting (particularly once Crossrail opens).

And I dint think you could have the four rear carriages outside the
platform. In any case, having a flat junction in the middle of the busy
central core section would cripple capacity, making the whole project moot.

wrote in message
...


Closing the moorgate branch was a mistake IMO. Not only did it serve a
hell of a lot of commuters but it was a convenient reversing point in case
of any problems south of the river. I'm sure they could have managed with
a shorter platform at farringdon with selective door opening - ie if you
want
to get out there southbound you must get be in one of the 1st 8 cars. Its
done elsewhere on the system.

I think extending the NR side of the station to the south of Cowcross Street
is/was the only way to get an interchange with Crossrail. Having taken that
decision the fate of the Moorgate branch was sealed.

--
DAS

On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 18:49:49 +0000 (UTC)
"Peter Smyth" wrote:
wrote:
Closing the moorgate branch was a mistake IMO. Not only did it serve
a hell of a lot of commuters but it was a convenient reversing point
in case of any problems south of the river. I'm sure they could have
managed with a shorter platform at farringdon with selective door
opening - ie if you want to get out there southbound you must get be
in one of the 1st 8 cars. Its done elsewhere on the system.

But is it used anywhere as busy as Farringdon? SDO is fine for lightly
used stations, but not suitable for a station where a large percentage
of the train will be alighting (particularly once Crossrail opens).

Well there are certainly even more people alightning now they've all got to
schlep over to the circle line to continue their journeys to the City.

--
Spud

On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 20:35:49 +0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
And I dint think you could have the four rear carriages outside the
platform. In any case, having a flat junction in the middle of the busy
central core section would cripple capacity, making the whole project moot.

How long does did it take a train to cross that junction - 30 seconds at most?
With ATO timing would not be an issue.

On a related note , I notice that the tracks were left in situ before
crossrail came along and dug a huge hole just west of barbican so does this
mean the spur will be reused or was it just not economic to bother taking the
track up?

--
Spud

In message , at 09:54:47 on Tue, 11
Nov 2014, d remarked:
But is it used anywhere as busy as Farringdon? SDO is fine for lightly

used stations, but not suitable for a station where a large percentage

of the train will be alighting (particularly once Crossrail opens).



Well there are certainly even more people alightning now they've all got to

schlep over to the circle line to continue their journeys to the City.


Previously having changed at Kings Cross Thameslink I suppose? Although
when I did the odd trip on that route I changed at Farringdon anyway (in
both directions), because of the narrow and congested platforms at KX-T.

--
Roland Perry

wrote:
On Mon, 10 Nov 2014 20:35:49 +0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
And I dint think you could have the four rear carriages outside the
platform. In any case, having a flat junction in the middle of the busy
central core section would cripple capacity, making the whole project moot.

How long does did it take a train to cross that junction - 30 seconds at most?
With ATO timing would not be an issue.

On a related note , I notice that the tracks were left in situ before
crossrail came along and dug a huge hole just west of barbican so does this
mean the spur will be reused or was it just not economic to bother taking the
track up?

The latter, I think. Plenty of disused or singled lines still had the
disused tracks in situ many years later if the land wasn't needed for
something else.