wrote:
In article , () wrote:

On 06.12.14 21:01, Recliner wrote:
" wrote:
On 06.12.14 10:37, Robin wrote:
I've given up using the overground from highbury - its just a
totally inadequate service.

As it's my local line I find that a wee bit hyperbolic It is
undeniably overloaded much of the time but I rarely fail to get on and
I'm a FOG.

And did anyone predict the growth in traffic at the time of decisions
on the NLL and ELL? I certainly don't seem to recall anyone
forecasting eg 14 per cent growth in London's population in the
noughties, let alone the nature and location of that growth. And
while it is just my impression, that growth accounts for a sizeable
fraction of passengers at Highbury and Islington.

I wonder why they have not yet introduced five-car operation,
considering the passenger volumes, even though they have not finished
making such adjustments at all stations. Could they not lock out the
doors in the fifth car at stations were five-car operation is not yet
available, requiring passengers to move forward?

My guess is that doing this would kill dwell times, and that it is all
the doors are on the 378s are in one zone.

They have. The first five-car 378 was recently put into service, and
they'll all b extended in due course.

That's on ELL, which they built and rebuilt for five-car operation,
is it it not? What about NLL?

Why the big deal about 5-car trains on the ELL? They had 5-car CP stock
trains over 40 years ago.

But for many years it ran with 4-car trains (and LU cars are much shorter
than the 20m CapitalStar carriages, so a 5-car CP stock train is shorter
than a 4-car 378), so platforms were shortened, and new ones, such as at
Canada Water, weren't built long enough. But I think the biggest problem
for longer LO trains was on the NLL.

On 07.12.14 1:51, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
In article , () wrote:

On 06.12.14 21:01, Recliner wrote:
" wrote:
On 06.12.14 10:37, Robin wrote:
I've given up using the overground from highbury - its just a
totally inadequate service.

As it's my local line I find that a wee bit hyperbolic It is
undeniably overloaded much of the time but I rarely fail to get on and
I'm a FOG.

And did anyone predict the growth in traffic at the time of decisions
on the NLL and ELL? I certainly don't seem to recall anyone
forecasting eg 14 per cent growth in London's population in the
noughties, let alone the nature and location of that growth. And
while it is just my impression, that growth accounts for a sizeable
fraction of passengers at Highbury and Islington.

I wonder why they have not yet introduced five-car operation,
considering the passenger volumes, even though they have not finished
making such adjustments at all stations. Could they not lock out the
doors in the fifth car at stations were five-car operation is not yet
available, requiring passengers to move forward?

My guess is that doing this would kill dwell times, and that it is all
the doors are on the 378s are in one zone.

They have. The first five-car 378 was recently put into service, and
they'll all b extended in due course.

That's on ELL, which they built and rebuilt for five-car operation,
is it it not? What about NLL?

Why the big deal about 5-car trains on the ELL? They had 5-car CP stock
trains over 40 years ago.

But for many years it ran with 4-car trains (and LU cars are much shorter
than the 20m CapitalStar carriages, so a 5-car CP stock train is shorter
than a 4-car 378), so platforms were shortened, and new ones, such as at
Canada Water, weren't built long enough. But I think the biggest problem
for longer LO trains was on the NLL.


The 313s were tripods, were they not?

" wrote:
On 07.12.14 1:51, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
In article , () wrote:

On 06.12.14 21:01, Recliner wrote:
" wrote:
On 06.12.14 10:37, Robin wrote:
I've given up using the overground from highbury - its just a
totally inadequate service.

As it's my local line I find that a wee bit hyperbolic It is
undeniably overloaded much of the time but I rarely fail to get on and
I'm a FOG.

And did anyone predict the growth in traffic at the time of decisions
on the NLL and ELL? I certainly don't seem to recall anyone
forecasting eg 14 per cent growth in London's population in the
noughties, let alone the nature and location of that growth. And
while it is just my impression, that growth accounts for a sizeable
fraction of passengers at Highbury and Islington.

I wonder why they have not yet introduced five-car operation,
considering the passenger volumes, even though they have not finished
making such adjustments at all stations. Could they not lock out the
doors in the fifth car at stations were five-car operation is not yet
available, requiring passengers to move forward?

My guess is that doing this would kill dwell times, and that it is all
the doors are on the 378s are in one zone.

They have. The first five-car 378 was recently put into service, and
they'll all b extended in due course.

That's on ELL, which they built and rebuilt for five-car operation,
is it it not? What about NLL?

Why the big deal about 5-car trains on the ELL? They had 5-car CP stock
trains over 40 years ago.

But for many years it ran with 4-car trains (and LU cars are much shorter
than the 20m CapitalStar carriages, so a 5-car CP stock train is shorter
than a 4-car 378), so platforms were shortened, and new ones, such as at
Canada Water, weren't built long enough. But I think the biggest problem
for longer LO trains was on the NLL.


The 313s were tripods, were they not?

Yes, the 313s were three-car, as were the 378s when first introduced.

On Sat, 6 Dec 2014 19:20:12 +0000
eastender wrote:
On 2014-12-06 17:54:06 +0000, d said:
It's hardly a poor service from Dalston, which is my local station,
especially if you're going south. And I use the Highbury service quite
often to get to the Victoria line - and really the frequency is very
good for an overground train. As for overcrowding, try getting on the

Except its not really an overground route in the network rail sense. It had
stations tube line distance apart serving traditional tube line areas.

It should have been pretty obvious I would have thought - a major interchange
like highbury with a new service that provides a short cut to the City and
canary wharf.

Of course projections were made. Do you think we'd be better off
without the line?

Obviously not. But extending the line as far as clapham was asking for service
disruption issues and improving the service to highbury would be a no brainer
except they obviously can't be arsed.

Quite possibly. Frankly I'm sick of hearing foreign languages all the damn
time
everywhere in this city but thats another discussion.

Why don't you move to Clacton or somewhere you can have a UKIP MP as
their areas have some of the lowest numbers of nasty foreigners. You'll
be much happier.

Oh look, an insular little Islingtonite sneering. How completely out of
character!

I have actually been to clacton - I doubt you have. Probably like most of your
brainwashed metro liberal ilk the only time you ever go outside the M25 is on
an aircraft and think London = England. It doesn't. The only reason I stay in
this ****ing cesspit of a city (or zoo if I'm being kind) is for work.

--
Spud

On Sat, 6 Dec 2014 20:29:01 +0000
eastender wrote:
On 2014-12-06 18:02:01 +0000, Robin said:


I don't care - this used to be a tube line and we were promised a tube
style service. Using main line type stock on the ELL was an idiotic
decision.

I well recall the promise of a tube-style service of 12 tph for the ELL
and ISTM that's what we have. I don't recall a promise of tube-style
service for the ELL extension but, as is apparent, I am not an
enthusiast, merely a long-time user. Can you please help me with who
made the promise when?

He's being an idiot. Much of the service is on overground (with a small
o) lines and shared with other services.

The majority of the Underground is above ground you ****ing bell end.

--
Spud

wrote:
Quite possibly. Frankly I'm sick of hearing foreign languages all the damn
time
everywhere in this city but thats another discussion.

Why don't you move to Clacton or somewhere you can have a UKIP MP as
their areas have some of the lowest numbers of nasty foreigners. You'll
be much happier.

Oh look, an insular little Islingtonite sneering. How completely out of
character!

I have actually been to clacton - I doubt you have. Probably like most of your
brainwashed metro liberal ilk the only time you ever go outside the M25 is on
an aircraft and think London = England. It doesn't. The only reason I stay in
this ****ing cesspit of a city (or zoo if I'm being kind) is for work.

Funny that, having lived and worked in various parts of the UK over the
last 20 years, the zoo that is London is the only place I'd ever consider
living in again.

Then again, escaping from people like you is the reason I'm moving to
Romania to live...



I hope maybe if the idiots in the UK really do take charge of the asylum
and leave the EU that London will declare independence.

On Sun, 7 Dec 2014 21:33:51 +0000 (UTC)
Clank wrote:
Then again, escaping from people like you is the reason I'm moving to
Romania to live...

LOL ) Well enjoy. Hope you find yourself a nice hovel and a top of the
range donkey!

--
Spud

On Sat, Dec 06, 2014 at 05:48:12PM +0000, d wrote:

I don't care - this used to be a tube line and we were promised a tube
style service. Using main line type stock on the ELL was an idiotic decision.

It used to be the East London Line, which didn't have as frequent a
service as the rest of the Underground. I believe that that section now
has a more frequent service than it used to. Also, I've never seen
loading/unloading taking as long as you say.

--
David Cantrell | London Perl Mongers Deputy Chief Heretic

Godliness is next to Englishness

On 06/12/2014 00:33, Recliner wrote:

wrote:
[...]
I must admit I can't see why more trains don't go to Highbury. It's not
obvious why terminating at Dalston Junction is a good idea except that the
original ELL extension plan only went there, with the Highbury extension
following later for some reason.

Is it to do with track layout? There are two bay platforms at Dalston
Junction, but I think only one at H&I.


No, there are two bay platforms at H&I (well, effectively two bay
platforms because they're not technically bays, what with the as yet to
be commissioned stock transfer link between the ELL and NLL).

On 07/12/2014 19:32, d wrote:

On Sat, 6 Dec 2014 20:29:01 +0000
eastender wrote:

On 2014-12-06 18:02:01 +0000, Robin said:

I don't care - this used to be a tube line and we were promised a tube
style service. Using main line type stock on the ELL was an idiotic
decision.

I well recall the promise of a tube-style service of 12 tph for the ELL
and ISTM that's what we have. I don't recall a promise of tube-style
service for the ELL extension but, as is apparent, I am not an
enthusiast, merely a long-time user. Can you please help me with who
made the promise when?

He's being an idiot. Much of the service is on overground (with a small
o) lines and shared with other services.

The majority of the Underground is above ground you ****ing bell end.

What is wrong with you? Angry angry man.