On Sat, 6 Jun 2015 04:10:09 +0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

Charles Ellson wrote:
On Fri, 5 Jun 2015 22:42:09 +0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

Charles Ellson wrote:
On Fri, 5 Jun 2015 08:07:26 +0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

e27002 aurora wrote:
On Thu, 4 Jun 2015 12:06:21 +0100, Robert
wrote:

On 2015-06-04 10:36:20 +0000, Graeme Wall said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-33002819

Now they can start building the railway... :-)

Indeed. But it would be good if Crossrail/TfL/NR could add some more
West and Northwest destinations, Gerards Cross, Tring, anywhere. :-)

Yes, I think there's still a hope that Crossrail will provide the WCML
locals to Tring, but I don't know if there's been any progress on the idea.
It may have to wait till the start of the Euston rebuilding for HS2. I
don't think there's any chance that they'll also serve the Chiltern line.


Still, this is a happy day for GB rail development. This tunnel is
going to be a real game-changer.

Through the requirement that all trains using it be built for it (as with
the new Thameslink) does reduce the flexibility: you can't just route any
old electric train through either of these cross London routes (or the East
London line), unlike the West London line.

You can't route any old train down the WLL; it needs to be DC-capable
south of North Pole and AC-capable north of North Pole or else
self-powered.

Yup, plenty of diesels on the WLL, but zero on Crossrail, Thameslink and
the ELL.

cough!
"You can't just route any old electric train ..... unlike the West
London line."
/cough!

Many modern EMUs are dual voltage and could travel on the WLL, but not the
other lines.

But they're not "any old electric train".

On 06/06/2015 09:05, wrote:
On Sat, 06 Jun 2015 08:00:47 +0100, Graeme Wall
wrote:


!

Many modern EMUs are dual voltage and could travel on the WLL, but not the
other lines.


Err, many modern EMUs are equipped for dual voltage operation, only a
subset can actually do so.

But not a 4 Subset.


Can't have Southern jokes, you'll upset Mr B.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.

wrote:
On Sat, 06 Jun 2015 08:00:47 +0100, Graeme Wall
wrote:


!

Many modern EMUs are dual voltage and could travel on the WLL, but not the
other lines.


Err, many modern EMUs are equipped for dual voltage operation, only a
subset can actually do so.

But not a 4 Subset.

groan

We haven't had the uk.railway awards recently, but I'd nominate that one
for worst pun.
--
Jeremy Double

In article ,
Charles Ellson wrote:

You can't route any old train down the WLL; it needs to be DC-capable
south of North Pole and AC-capable north of North Pole or else
self-powered.

I was so wishing that that was north of the North Pole rather than just
north of North Pole.

Sam

--
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with registration number SC005336.

On 06/06/2015 09:47, Paul Corfield wrote:
SNIP

The DfT have instituted a study for the WCML link to finalise the
preferred route and determine the business case. There are two
options - one through a new tunnel and one via remodelled existing
tracks between Old Oak Common and the WCML. I don't know when the
report is due.

http://www.railjournal.com/index.php...wcml-link.html

The Crossrail project have said they will do nothing about the link
until they receive a sponsors instruction to proceed. It would also be
a separate piece of work so it did not distract from the delivery of
the main project.


That's exactly what I want to hear - scope creep = busted budget

On 2015\06\09 15:06, John Kenyon wrote:
On 06/06/2015 09:47, Paul Corfield wrote:
SNIP

The DfT have instituted a study for the WCML link to finalise the
preferred route and determine the business case. There are two
options - one through a new tunnel and one via remodelled existing
tracks between Old Oak Common and the WCML. I don't know when the
report is due.

http://www.railjournal.com/index.php...wcml-link.html

The Crossrail project have said they will do nothing about the link
until they receive a sponsors instruction to proceed. It would also be
a separate piece of work so it did not distract from the delivery of
the main project.


That's exactly what I want to hear - scope creep = busted budget

I know what you're saying, but terminating half the trains at Paddington
is blimming ridiculous, and I wonder how many years will pass before
that is resolved.

I'm not over keen on them going to the WCML though. I'd rather see them
all go to Mitre Bridge (new interchange with the WLL) then half go onto
the NLL to Acton Central and South Acton, and then a quarter go to
Richmond and a quarter go to Hounslow, Staines and Windsor Riverside.
The NLL trains from Stratford can all go to Clapham Junction,
interchanging at Mitre Bridge for anyone who wants Richmond.