"Andrew P Smith" wrote in message
...
In article , Jack Taylor
writes
Bear in mind that north of Amersham 100% of
the revenue goes to Chiltern, from the LUL stations only a proportion
(fixed
by the annual passenger survey) goes into Chiltern's pockets.

Can you please tell me when this came into effect?

I understand that Chiltern get free access to LU 'metals' in return for
no passenger revenue from LU stations.

Interesting! That was always my understanding until you or someone else on
this group corrected me last year, insisting that I was wrong and that a
payment was made based upon the annual passenger survey! If Chiltern are not
making anything out of LUL passengers (as I previously understood that they
didn't) then there is even more reason for removing stops from LUL stations
for the benefit of the greater number of revenue-earning passengers from
Amersham and beyond.

In reply to news post, which Jack Taylor wrote on
Sat, 21 Feb 2004 -

Another solution, which would benefit flexibility (as CR services are
frequently delayed by late running all stations Met services from the City
to Amersham) would be to reinstate the down avoiding line at Chorleywood, to
enable semi-fast CR services to pass late running Met services. It is not
uncommon for a Chiltern service from Marylebone, first stop Great Missenden
or Amersham, to be stuck behind a stopping Met service all the way from
Harrow to Amersham, resulting in a right-time departure from Marylebone
becoming a 15 or 20-minute late arrival at Aylesbury. Sometimes this is
entirely down to the bloody-minded intransigence of Harrow box, who
*deliberately* bring the CR service to a stand at Harrow and let the LUL
stopper out in front of the CR service - I've lost count of the number of
times that that has happened to me over the past ten years.




I believe that it is not possible to put the line back in at Chorley
Wood owing to the car park. I often thought that if a connection from
the fast to the slow lines was made between Northwood and Moor park,
then this would create in effect a passing loop. Met trains could be
routed via this connection through the Watford platforms at Moor Park
(providing better inter change with services) and back onto the fast at
the junction south of Rickmansworth. This would allow faster trains to
overtake. I doubt this will happen owing to cost and I wonder if the
LUL points could cope with the increased movements.


Addressing a number of other points -

1 It is not just Chiltern trains that get held up by other operators
trains, there are many occasions a train is held at Harrow to allow a
Chiltern through delaying the Met train. Only last Friday a Met train
at Amersham was "wedged" (well OK I exaggerate a bit!) because the fast
Chiltern service was 20 minutes late

2 If you reduce the stopping trains south of Amersham, this will effect
passengers for Chesham.

3 The gates at Amersham are more often than not manned at peak times
A.M. and P.M. and Saturday A.M. as well

4 There is also quite a lot of people who use Chiltern to get to and
from Harrow, altering the stopping pattern would cause these people
great inconvenience

5 If the Croxley Link ever happens, would Chiltern not wish to get some
revenue from it? Aylesbury / Watford service could be a money spinner

6 If the West Hampstead interchange is built - something Chiltern are
keen on - then this will only allow more LUL passengers onto Chiltern
trains.

7 Chiltern's service to Aylesbury is not a main line. It used to be,
but the long history of the line has made for a complex arrangement of
two companies proving a service to all stations and I always thought
that a ticket for a journey of say 3 miles was just as valid as a ticket
for a journey of 30 miles. If Aylesbury passengers don't like LUL
travellers, why not catch a train via High Wycombe and avoid them all
together, but that would be inconvenient just as not getting on a
Chiltern train would be at LUL stations.
--
Matthew P Jones - www.amersham.org.uk
My view of the Metropolitan Line www.metroland.org.uk - actually I like it
Don't reply to it will not be read
You can reply to knap AT Nildram dot co dot uk

In article , Jack Taylor
writes

"Andrew P Smith" wrote in message
...
In article , Jack Taylor
writes
Bear in mind that north of Amersham 100% of
the revenue goes to Chiltern, from the LUL stations only a proportion
(fixed
by the annual passenger survey) goes into Chiltern's pockets.

Can you please tell me when this came into effect?

I understand that Chiltern get free access to LU 'metals' in return for
no passenger revenue from LU stations.

Interesting! That was always my understanding until you or someone else on
this group corrected me last year, insisting that I was wrong and that a
payment was made based upon the annual passenger survey! If Chiltern are not
making anything out of LUL passengers (as I previously understood that they
didn't) then there is even more reason for removing stops from LUL stations
for the benefit of the greater number of revenue-earning passengers from
Amersham and beyond.


I never corrected you, must have been someone else. Yes there is reason
for Chiltern to non stop that section of line but I hope they never do.
They should be working with LU to provide a top level service. Chiltern
should get a cut of the money and pay track access fees to LU.
--
Andrew
Electronic communications can be altered and therefore the integrity of this
communication can not be guaranteed.
Views expressed in this communication are those of the author and not
associations or companies I am involved with.

In article , Matthew P Jones
writes

Addressing a number of other points -

1 It is not just Chiltern trains that get held up by other operators
trains, there are many occasions a train is held at Harrow to allow a
Chiltern through delaying the Met train. Only last Friday a Met train
at Amersham was "wedged" (well OK I exaggerate a bit!) because the
fast Chiltern service was 20 minutes late


My understanding is that Chiltern trains must enter the LU controlled
sections in a specified 'time slot' and if they miss this slot then they
follow on behind a Met train if that train is ready to enter the
section.

2 If you reduce the stopping trains south of Amersham, this will
effect passengers for Chesham.


I never use the Chesham service so can't comment.

3 The gates at Amersham are more often than not manned at peak times
A.M. and P.M. and Saturday A.M. as well


Rarely seen the gates manned peak PM times at Amersham.

4 There is also quite a lot of people who use Chiltern to get to and
from Harrow, altering the stopping pattern would cause these people
great inconvenience


I agree.

5 If the Croxley Link ever happens, would Chiltern not wish to get
some revenue from it? Aylesbury / Watford service could be a money
spinner


I hope the link is built, I also hope the line to MK is re-opened.

6 If the West Hampstead interchange is built - something Chiltern are
keen on - then this will only allow more LUL passengers onto Chiltern
trains.


7 Chiltern's service to Aylesbury is not a main line. It used to be,
but the long history of the line has made for a complex arrangement of
two companies proving a service to all stations and I always thought
that a ticket for a journey of say 3 miles was just as valid as a
ticket for a journey of 30 miles. If Aylesbury passengers don't like
LUL travellers, why not catch a train via High Wycombe and avoid them
all together, but that would be inconvenient just as not getting on a
Chiltern train would be at LUL stations.

Taking the train from HW means paying a lot more money....
--
Andrew
Electronic communications can be altered and therefore the integrity of this
communication can not be guaranteed.
Views expressed in this communication are those of the author and not
associations or companies I am involved with.

"Jack Taylor" wrote in message
...

"Kevin Bean" wrote in message
. ..
If there were fewer Chiltern services from Amersham/Chesham to
Harrow-on-the-Hill, then London Underground would have to run more
trains,
which would just slow the Chiltern Trains. (I am assuming that peak hour
trains every 30 minutes would be unacceptable?)

Considering London Underground's track-record (?!) surely it would be
better
to hand over this branch to Chiltern and allow them to run trains
according
to their timetable, some could be all-stoppers and some express etc.

I entirely agree, I was (once) quite looking forward to Crossrail. If CRCL
had sole operation of the fast lines north of Harrow-on-the-Hill, with LUL
concentrating on the Uxbridge and Watford branches, then the whole service
could be run in a more professional and satisfactory manner, IMHO!

Even better to hand over *all* the services on the line via Harrow
(including the Watford services) to Chiltern Railways and leave LUL to do
what it does best: short-distance high-intensity services rather than long
distance services. I'm amazed that people choose to travel all the way from
Amersham to London in a clapped-out LUL train rather than a fast,
comfortable DMU, for the dubious advantage of not changing at Marylebone /
Baker Street.

The thought of Crossrail, in the form that it has been proposed, is
horrendous: yet another railway line irreparably spoiled by the erection of
ugly OHLE gantries; the probable closure of Marylebone after it's had all
that money invested in modernising it - the exchange of a light and airy
terminus station in London for either Paddington (very out-of-the-way for
passengers coming from central London) or else cramped Underground-style
stations closer into Central London. The Crossrail money would be much
better spent upgrading the line north of Aylesbury to provide a service to
Milton Keynes, feeding into a reopened Oxford-MK line. With all services
being DMU or 3rd-rail EMU rather than OHLE EMU. If only the people that I
have to share this planet with weren't too stupid to realise that you don't
touch the live rail, it wouldn't be banned on H&S grounds.

"Andrew P Smith" wrote in message
...

7 Chiltern's service to Aylesbury is not a main line. It used to be,
but the long history of the line has made for a complex arrangement of
two companies proving a service to all stations and I always thought
that a ticket for a journey of say 3 miles was just as valid as a
ticket for a journey of 30 miles. If Aylesbury passengers don't like
LUL travellers, why not catch a train via High Wycombe and avoid them
all together, but that would be inconvenient just as not getting on a
Chiltern train would be at LUL stations.

Taking the train from HW means paying a lot more money....

No it doesn't. Any ticket from Aylesbury to London is valid via either
Amersham or High Wycombe.

Peter Smyth

In article , Peter Smyth
writes

"Andrew P Smith" wrote in message
...

7 Chiltern's service to Aylesbury is not a main line. It used to be,
but the long history of the line has made for a complex arrangement of
two companies proving a service to all stations and I always thought
that a ticket for a journey of say 3 miles was just as valid as a
ticket for a journey of 30 miles. If Aylesbury passengers don't like
LUL travellers, why not catch a train via High Wycombe and avoid them
all together, but that would be inconvenient just as not getting on a
Chiltern train would be at LUL stations.

Taking the train from HW means paying a lot more money....

No it doesn't. Any ticket from Aylesbury to London is valid via either
Amersham or High Wycombe.

Peter Smyth


That's a ticket from Aylesbury. If I buy a return ticket at Amersham
into London I won't be able to get through the gates at High Wycombe.
I'm talking about Amersham - not Aylesbury.
--
Andrew
Electronic communications can be altered and therefore the integrity of this
communication can not be guaranteed.
Views expressed in this communication are those of the author and not
associations or companies I am involved with.

In reply to news post, which Martin Underwood wrote on
Sun, 22 Feb 2004 -
distance services. I'm amazed that people choose to travel all the way from
Amersham to London in a clapped-out LUL train rather than a fast,
comfortable DMU, for the dubious advantage of not changing at Marylebone /
Baker Street.


One of the advantages of the Met at the moment is that you will get a
seat in the mornings, and with Marylebone tube closed in the mornings
getting to Baker Street for onward connections could be quicker than
the long walk along the Marylebone platforms and then the walk to Baker
Street, although hundreds of people seem to do this. Also, although the
ride of the Chiltern trains is better, there is more leg room on the Met
trains, the Chiltern's can be very cramped and the newer seats are not
as comfortable.



--
Matthew P Jones - www.amersham.org.uk
My view of the Metropolitan Line www.metroland.org.uk - actually I like it
Don't reply to it will not be read
You can reply to knap AT Nildram dot co dot uk

"Martin Underwood" wrote in message
s.com...

The thought of Crossrail, in the form that it has been proposed, is
horrendous: yet another railway line irreparably spoiled by the erection
of
ugly OHLE gantries; the probable closure of Marylebone after it's had all
that money invested in modernising it - the exchange of a light and airy
terminus station in London for either Paddington (very out-of-the-way for
passengers coming from central London) or else cramped Underground-style
stations closer into Central London.


Crossrail's changed a lot since it was proposed to take over the Aylesbury
line. Now it will be less like Thameslink and more like an RER, focusing on
services across London - just an express tube really.

It's planned to run from Heathrow and Kingston in the west to Shenfield and
Ebbsfleet in the east - it shouldn't affect Marylebone at all.

Jonn

"Andrew P Smith" wrote in message
...
In article , Joe
writes

Actually many other TOCs like Virgin have done it in the past, and still
do
it. Trains will be announced as 'Not stopping'

OK, so if it's non stopping how will the people get off? You could hold
people at the barriers but if the gate line isn't manned then it won't
happen.

I've not seen the gate line manned at Amersham expect for the AM peak.

What about people already on the platform?

Not really workable is it?

What happens at Euston is that Inter-cities are not advetised as stopping at
Watford Junc. and people with watfor tickets are not allowed past the
barrier. It's advertised at Watford for n/b passengers - to pick up only.

Michael