I've given up using the overground from highbury - its just a totally
inadequate service.

The main problem I can see a

- Train service too infrequent in the rush hour. Waiting 6-7 minutes for a
train to turn up then leave when the platform is bursting is absurd.

- The 387s are hopeless for a metro service. Poor acceleration and whoever
thought 2 narrow sets of doors would be adequate for a line this busy
should be sacked. I timed a packed train emptying at Highbury this week
and it took over 2 minutes for everyone to get off through all the people
waiting to get on.

- 2 out of every 3 northbound trains terminating at dalston junction is a
joke. Hardly anyone goes to Dalston, almost everyone goes to highbury.

--
Spud

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.

--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid

Having used that service quite a lot recently, I agree that the proportion of services extended to H&I is too small. Especially when northbound evening peak services lto H&I lose time due to sheer passenger numbers, and then get terminated short at Dalston.

The service also suffers from using 2 platforms at H&I that don't share an island - both overbridges could do with "Next southbound ELL service..." displays.

On Sat, 6 Dec 2014 10:37:11 -0000
"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.

I haven't yet failed to get on. But I've never yet got a seat and there was
always a delay and its always crush loading at highbury. The journey is
potentially more pleasent than using the tube but I just can't put up with the
**** poor service anymore.

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

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.

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.

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

--
Spud

On 2014-12-06 17:54:06 +0000, d said:

On Sat, 6 Dec 2014 10:37:11 -0000
"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.

I haven't yet failed to get on. But I've never yet got a seat and there was
always a delay and its always crush loading at highbury. The journey is
potentially more pleasent than using the tube but I just can't put up with the
**** poor service anymore.

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
Victoria at Highbury going south in the morning rushhour.


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

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?

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.

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.

E.

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

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 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.

In message , at 18:14:35 on Sat, 6 Dec 2014,
" remarked:
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?

The new trains on whatever the Hammersmith and City is called this week
do that at stations which aren't long enough (and neither have a
realistic expectation of being extended).
--
Roland Perry

On 06.12.14 19:39, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 18:14:35 on Sat, 6 Dec 2014,
" remarked:
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?

The new trains on whatever the Hammersmith and City is called this week
do that at stations which aren't long enough (and neither have a
realistic expectation of being extended).

All S-series trains cut out their end doors at certain stations.