|
London Metropolitan line Watford
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 11:11:10 -0600,
wrote: In article , (e27002 aurora) wrote: On Mon, 19 Dec 2016 07:25:43 -0600, wrote: In article , d () wrote: I never really got the rationalle behind cutting the bakerloo back to harrow. It was actually cut back to Queen's Park and only extended north of there when Stonebridge Park Depot was built. There's obviously a commuter demand for it (hence LO) and it wasn't even the longest tube line when it did run there so its not as if it was going miles. The Bakerloo only had a limited peak hour service (to access Croxley Green Depot) long before even that was withdrawn. IMHO it makes more sense to run the Bakerloo to Watford than the Overground. Why do you say that? It is very much within the London conurbation, and ones suspects most users would prefer a direct rapid transit train to the West End and Docklands than a suburban train to a terminus. Just my USD0.02. |
London Metropolitan line Watford
e27002 aurora wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 11:11:10 -0600, wrote: In article , (e27002 aurora) wrote: On Mon, 19 Dec 2016 07:25:43 -0600, wrote: In article , d () wrote: I never really got the rationalle behind cutting the bakerloo back to harrow. It was actually cut back to Queen's Park and only extended north of there when Stonebridge Park Depot was built. There's obviously a commuter demand for it (hence LO) and it wasn't even the longest tube line when it did run there so its not as if it was going miles. The Bakerloo only had a limited peak hour service (to access Croxley Green Depot) long before even that was withdrawn. IMHO it makes more sense to run the Bakerloo to Watford than the Overground. Why do you say that? It is very much within the London conurbation, and ones suspects most users would prefer a direct rapid transit train to the West End and Docklands than a suburban train to a terminus. Just my USD0.02. Actually, as I'm sure you're very well aware, Watford is in Herts, well outside London and the zonal area. And the Bakerloo line has never gone to Docklands. Furthermore, people from Watford who want to travel to central London are far more likely to take a fast LM train, not an excruciatingly slow LU or LO train. |
London Metropolitan line Watford
On 12/23/2016 5:24 PM, e27002 aurora wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 11:11:10 -0600, wrote: In article , (e27002 aurora) wrote: On Mon, 19 Dec 2016 07:25:43 -0600, wrote: In article , d () wrote: I never really got the rationalle behind cutting the bakerloo back to harrow. It was actually cut back to Queen's Park and only extended north of there when Stonebridge Park Depot was built. There's obviously a commuter demand for it (hence LO) and it wasn't even the longest tube line when it did run there so its not as if it was going miles. The Bakerloo only had a limited peak hour service (to access Croxley Green Depot) long before even that was withdrawn. IMHO it makes more sense to run the Bakerloo to Watford than the Overground. Why do you say that? It is very much within the London conurbation, and ones suspects most users would prefer a direct rapid transit train to the West End and Docklands than a suburban train to a terminus. Just my USD0.02. In the 50s it did run there, and there were still a few in the 60s. -- Myth, after all, is what we believe naturally. History is what we must painfully learn and struggle to remember. -Albert Goldman |
London Metropolitan line Watford
On 12/23/2016 8:40 PM, Recliner wrote:
e27002 aurora wrote: On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 11:11:10 -0600, wrote: In article , (e27002 aurora) wrote: On Mon, 19 Dec 2016 07:25:43 -0600, wrote: In article , d () wrote: I never really got the rationalle behind cutting the bakerloo back to harrow. It was actually cut back to Queen's Park and only extended north of there when Stonebridge Park Depot was built. There's obviously a commuter demand for it (hence LO) and it wasn't even the longest tube line when it did run there so its not as if it was going miles. The Bakerloo only had a limited peak hour service (to access Croxley Green Depot) long before even that was withdrawn. IMHO it makes more sense to run the Bakerloo to Watford than the Overground. Why do you say that? It is very much within the London conurbation, and ones suspects most users would prefer a direct rapid transit train to the West End and Docklands than a suburban train to a terminus. Just my USD0.02. Actually, as I'm sure you're very well aware, Watford is in Herts, well outside London and the zonal area. And the Bakerloo line has never gone to Docklands. Furthermore, people from Watford who want to travel to central London are far more likely to take a fast LM train, not an excruciatingly slow LU or LO train. Outside, but not well outside. It has a border with the London Borough of Harrow. It might make sense to put it in the zonal area. Bushey used to be in the Met Police area. -- Myth, after all, is what we believe naturally. History is what we must painfully learn and struggle to remember. -Albert Goldman |
London Metropolitan line Watford
On Sat, 24 Dec 2016 13:14:28 +0000, Martin Edwards
wrote: On 12/23/2016 8:40 PM, Recliner wrote: e27002 aurora wrote: On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 11:11:10 -0600, wrote: In article , (e27002 aurora) wrote: On Mon, 19 Dec 2016 07:25:43 -0600, wrote: In article , d () wrote: I never really got the rationalle behind cutting the bakerloo back to harrow. It was actually cut back to Queen's Park and only extended north of there when Stonebridge Park Depot was built. There's obviously a commuter demand for it (hence LO) and it wasn't even the longest tube line when it did run there so its not as if it was going miles. The Bakerloo only had a limited peak hour service (to access Croxley Green Depot) long before even that was withdrawn. IMHO it makes more sense to run the Bakerloo to Watford than the Overground. Why do you say that? It is very much within the London conurbation, and ones suspects most users would prefer a direct rapid transit train to the West End and Docklands than a suburban train to a terminus. Just my USD0.02. Actually, as I'm sure you're very well aware, Watford is in Herts, well outside London and the zonal area. And the Bakerloo line has never gone to Docklands. Furthermore, people from Watford who want to travel to central London are far more likely to take a fast LM train, not an excruciatingly slow LU or LO train. Outside, but not well outside. It has a border with the London Borough of Harrow. It might make sense to put it in the zonal area. Bushey used to be in the Met Police area. Until recent times there was no connection (apart from its innermost boundary with the capital city) between the Metropolitan Police District and local authority areas. It was based on rough proximity to Charing Cross to deal with matters within the metropolis. |
London Metropolitan line Watford
In article ,
(Charles Ellson) wrote: On Sat, 24 Dec 2016 13:14:28 +0000, Martin Edwards wrote: On 12/23/2016 8:40 PM, Recliner wrote: e27002 aurora wrote: On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 11:11:10 -0600, wrote: In article , (e27002 aurora) wrote: On Mon, 19 Dec 2016 07:25:43 -0600, wrote: In article , d () wrote: I never really got the rationalle behind cutting the bakerloo back to harrow. It was actually cut back to Queen's Park and only extended north of there when Stonebridge Park Depot was built. There's obviously a commuter demand for it (hence LO) and it wasn't even the longest tube line when it did run there so its not as if it was going miles. The Bakerloo only had a limited peak hour service (to access Croxley Green Depot) long before even that was withdrawn. IMHO it makes more sense to run the Bakerloo to Watford than the Overground. Why do you say that? It is very much within the London conurbation, and ones suspects most users would prefer a direct rapid transit train to the West End and Docklands than a suburban train to a terminus. Just my USD0.02. Actually, as I'm sure you're very well aware, Watford is in Herts, well outside London and the zonal area. And the Bakerloo line has never gone to Docklands. Furthermore, people from Watford who want to travel to central London are far more likely to take a fast LM train, not an excruciatingly slow LU or LO train. Outside, but not well outside. It has a border with the London Borough of Harrow. It might make sense to put it in the zonal area. Bushey used to be in the Met Police area. Until recent times there was no connection (apart from its innermost boundary with the capital city) between the Metropolitan Police District and local authority areas. It was based on rough proximity to Charing Cross to deal with matters within the metropolis. Actually, the Metropolitan Police District did correspond to a set of pre-1965 local authorities, but they got reorganised in 1965 (within Greater London) and 1974 (elsewhere). -- Colin Rosenstiel |
London Metropolitan line Watford
|
London Metropolitan line Watford
"Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 03:24:05 on Sun, 25 Dec 2016, remarked: Until recent times there was no connection (apart from its innermost boundary with the capital city) between the Metropolitan Police District and local authority areas. It was based on rough proximity to Charing Cross to deal with matters within the metropolis. Actually, the Metropolitan Police District did correspond to a set of pre-1965 local authorities, but they got reorganised in 1965 (within Greater London) and 1974 (elsewhere). I think they retreated from places like Esher (Surrey) much more recently than that. and Epsom as well Greater London Authority Act 1999, it seems -- Roland Perry --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
London Metropolitan line Watford
In article , (tim...)
wrote: "Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 03:24:05 on Sun, 25 Dec 2016, remarked: Until recent times there was no connection (apart from its innermost boundary with the capital city) between the Metropolitan Police District and local authority areas. It was based on rough proximity to Charing Cross to deal with matters within the metropolis. Actually, the Metropolitan Police District did correspond to a set of pre-1965 local authorities, but they got reorganised in 1965 (within Greater London) and 1974 (elsewhere). I think they retreated from places like Esher (Surrey) much more recently than that. and Epsom as well Greater London Authority Act 1999, it seems Indeed. I didn't mean to imply otherwise. All I was saying was that the Metropolitan Police District comprised whole local authority areas as they existed at the time the boundaries were defined. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 06:36 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk