For anyone who would like to ride the Watford North curve on a normal
service train, TfL has an Easter present for you.

Most of the Met will be closed for track work over the four day
weekend, but TfL says a "special Metropolitan line train service
operates between Northwood and Chesham/Amersham via Watford".

There will be replacement bus services covering the closed parts of
the line not covered by other LU lines.

On 02/04/2015 13:23, Recliner wrote:

For anyone who would like to ride the Watford North curve on a normal
service train, TfL has an Easter present for you.

Most of the Met will be closed for track work over the four day
weekend, but TfL says a "special Metropolitan line train service
operates between Northwood and Chesham/Amersham via Watford".

There will be replacement bus services covering the closed parts of
the line not covered by other LU lines.


Regarding the seemingly hard to financially justify (and increasingly
expensive) Croxley Link, one is again minded to think of the more
adventurous possibilities of (Chiltern) services from Aylesbury to
Watford Jn via the new route.

Mizter T wrote:
On 02/04/2015 13:23, Recliner wrote:

For anyone who would like to ride the Watford North curve on a normal
service train, TfL has an Easter present for you.

Most of the Met will be closed for track work over the four day
weekend, but TfL says a "special Metropolitan line train service
operates between Northwood and Chesham/Amersham via Watford".

There will be replacement bus services covering the closed parts of
the line not covered by other LU lines.


Regarding the seemingly hard to financially justify (and increasingly
expensive) Croxley Link, one is again minded to think of the more
adventurous possibilities of (Chiltern) services from Aylesbury to
Watford Jn via the new route.

Yes, that's certainly been suggested. A more likely possibility, but very
hard for TfL to justify financially, would be a 2tph Amersham to Watford
Junction shuttle. That would replace the services diverted to Chesham, and
let Amersham pax transfer to Chesham services to London, as well as going
to Watford.

But as both Amersham and Watford are well outside London, it's hard to see
why TfL and the London mayor would want to subsidise such services. Would
Bucks and Herts councils want to jointly subsidise such a service? Somehow,
I can't see it.

On Thu, 2 Apr 2015 15:29:44 +0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Mizter T wrote:
But as both Amersham and Watford are well outside London, it's hard to see
why TfL and the London mayor would want to subsidise such services. Would

If they're served by the tube then there's no reason why TfL shouldn't cough up
if the route is viable since they're getting ticket revenue from non london
residents. Otherwise put the buffers at Harrow and let chiltern take over the
rest of the line.

--
Spud

wrote:
On Thu, 2 Apr 2015 15:29:44 +0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Mizter T wrote:
But as both Amersham and Watford are well outside London, it's hard to see
why TfL and the London mayor would want to subsidise such services. Would

If they're served by the tube then there's no reason why TfL shouldn't cough up
if the route is viable since they're getting ticket revenue from non london
residents. Otherwise put the buffers at Harrow and let chiltern take over the
rest of the line.

I don't think the fare revenue from an Amersham Watford Junction shuttle
would even cover the operating costs, let alone the capital cost of a
couple of additional S8 trains. I suppose two car Chiltern DMUs might be a
better fit for the likely loadings. But the service would probably still
need a subsidy.

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Thu, 2 Apr 2015 15:29:44 +0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Mizter T wrote:
But as both Amersham and Watford are well outside London, it's hard to
see
why TfL and the London mayor would want to subsidise such services.
Would

If they're served by the tube then there's no reason why TfL shouldn't
cough up
if the route is viable since they're getting ticket revenue from non
london
residents. Otherwise put the buffers at Harrow and let chiltern take over
the
rest of the line.

I don't think the fare revenue from an Amersham Watford Junction shuttle
would even cover the operating costs, let alone the capital cost of a
couple of additional S8 trains.

That's a strange meaning of "Operating costs" that doesn't include the costs
of the stock

tim

Recliner wrote:

Regarding the seemingly hard to financially justify (and increasingly
expensive) Croxley Link, one is again minded to think of the more
adventurous possibilities of (Chiltern) services from Aylesbury to
Watford Jn via the new route.

Yes, that's certainly been suggested. A more likely possibility, but very
hard for TfL to justify financially, would be a 2tph Amersham to Watford
Junction shuttle. That would replace the services diverted to Chesham, and
let Amersham pax transfer to Chesham services to London, as well as going
to Watford.

It's probably a few years too late now but one possibility might have been
to convert the old Chesham shuttle into a Chesham to Watford route and keep
Amersham's 4tph. This could have solved the problems of the S stock being to
long for the Chalfont & Latimer bay, the lack of interchange between the
Watford branch and Chiltern north of Harrow, the journey length without
semi-fasts and the difficulties of serving both Amersham and Chesham.

Of course this would probably fail on stock availability and it may have
been hard to find the pax from Rickmansworth wanting to go to Croxley and
Cassiobridge, but it might have solved some other problems. Now it would
doubtessly bring howls from Chesham at the loss of through services to
London.

But as both Amersham and Watford are well outside London, it's hard to see
why TfL and the London mayor would want to subsidise such services. Would
Bucks and Herts councils want to jointly subsidise such a service?
Somehow,
I can't see it.

By that reasoning one could just stop the tube at border stations - so the
Met terminating at Moor Park or even Northwood and the Central at
Loughton/Buckhurst Hill. Howls of pain from pax beyond but they would have
no say in the Mayor's ballot box.

--
My blog: http://adf.ly/4hi4c

On Sat, 4 Apr 2015 11:11:06 +0100, "Tim Roll-Pickering"
wrote:

Recliner wrote:

Regarding the seemingly hard to financially justify (and increasingly
expensive) Croxley Link, one is again minded to think of the more
adventurous possibilities of (Chiltern) services from Aylesbury to
Watford Jn via the new route.

Yes, that's certainly been suggested. A more likely possibility, but very
hard for TfL to justify financially, would be a 2tph Amersham to Watford
Junction shuttle. That would replace the services diverted to Chesham, and
let Amersham pax transfer to Chesham services to London, as well as going
to Watford.

It's probably a few years too late now but one possibility might have been
to convert the old Chesham shuttle into a Chesham to Watford route and keep
Amersham's 4tph. This could have solved the problems of the S stock being to
long for the Chalfont & Latimer bay, the lack of interchange between the
Watford branch and Chiltern north of Harrow, the journey length without
semi-fasts and the difficulties of serving both Amersham and Chesham.

Of course this would probably fail on stock availability and it may have
been hard to find the pax from Rickmansworth wanting to go to Croxley and
Cassiobridge, but it might have solved some other problems. Now it would
doubtessly bring howls from Chesham at the loss of through services to
London.

Yes, I think that would have been a very good plan, and might be a
better idea even now than an Amersham (or Aylesbury) to Watford
Junction shuttle. I don't think the Chesham commuters would lose much,
and some may even value a direct link to Watford, as would some
Amersham residents.


But as both Amersham and Watford are well outside London, it's hard to see
why TfL and the London mayor would want to subsidise such services. Would
Bucks and Herts councils want to jointly subsidise such a service?
Somehow,
I can't see it.

By that reasoning one could just stop the tube at border stations - so the
Met terminating at Moor Park or even Northwood and the Central at
Loughton/Buckhurst Hill. Howls of pain from pax beyond but they would have
no say in the Mayor's ballot box.

It's one reason why the Ongar line died, when Essex refused to stump
up more subsidy. I don't know if Herts and Bucks councils make any
contribution to TfL, or if the services into those counties are
financially self-supporting. Or does central government chip in on
behalf of the home counties?

Recliner wrote:

Yes, I think that would have been a very good plan, and might be a
better idea even now than an Amersham (or Aylesbury) to Watford
Junction shuttle. I don't think the Chesham commuters would lose much,
and some may even value a direct link to Watford, as would some
Amersham residents.

Of course Watford High Street and Watford Junction are a different prospect.
Finding people who want to travel to the outskirts of Watford is a different
matter. The last attempt to make the Croxley Green branch work wound up as a
farce as empty trains ran back and forth during the day.

(Was the branch ever hooked up to other lines to provide through services
that people wanted? ISTR reading there were trains to Broad Street but was
that actually a popular commuter route or just a way to run extra trains on
the DC lines without clogging Watford Junction?)

--
My blog: http://adf.ly/4hi4c

On 04/04/2015 11:58, Recliner wrote:

It's one reason why the Ongar line died, when Essex refused to stump
up more subsidy. I don't know if Herts and Bucks councils make any
contribution to TfL, or if the services into those counties are
financially self-supporting. Or does central government chip in on
behalf of the home counties?

Maybe Herts and Bucks councils could copy the recent strategy for
generating a profit from the Ongar line?


--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK