Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 The Bakerloo only had a limited peak hour service (to access Croxley Green Depot) long before even that was withdrawn.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. |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 The Bakerloo only had a limited peak hour service (to access Croxley Green Depot) long before even that was withdrawn.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. |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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. |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 12/25/2016 1:18 AM, 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. Thanks for the update. -- Myth, after all, is what we believe naturally. History is what we must painfully learn and struggle to remember. -Albert Goldman |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
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 |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Saturday, December 24, 2016 at 10:14:04 PM UTC, Ian Batten wrote:
On Saturday, 24 December 2016 13:18:04 UTC, Recliner wrote: On Sat, 24 Dec 2016 13:11:46 +0000, Martin Edwards wrote: 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. It has never run to Docklands. And someone wanting to get to the West End would get there a lot quicker if they took a main line train to Euston, then changed to a bus or Tube train. OK Ian, so I think you are conflating two streams of thought here. "Smooth Operator" Nigel is referring to the LO route to Watford Junction. Unfortunately, he loses the plot sometimes. there are 16 stations south of Watford junction, up to, and including Queens Park. None of them are served by mainline trains. Although Harrow & Wealdstone, and, Wembley Central do have suburban trains. One would venture to suggest that the further south one starts on this route, the more attractive is a metro service. Conversely, the less attractive one would find navigating the chaos at Euston. Vanity project with unclear objectives, descoped and cost-reduced to just about get it under the bar, since when it's virtually doubled in cost. Of course it's going to be looked at sceptically. If Herts can't fund it, TfL have better things to spend a third of a billion quid on. You OTOH are referring to the County of Hertford's desire to see Metropolitan Line services run into Watford Junction station. Opinions differ. I do not share yours. I think having a central interchange at Watford will be a very good thing. TfL is back under the control of the tin pot mayor of an artificial county. Given the national importance of London's transport infrastructure TfL ought to answer to Parliament. The LPTB worked perfectly well. |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 28 Dec 2016 09:23:53 +0000, e27002 aurora
wrote: On Saturday, December 24, 2016 at 10:14:04 PM UTC, Ian Batten wrote: On Saturday, 24 December 2016 13:18:04 UTC, Recliner wrote: On Sat, 24 Dec 2016 13:11:46 +0000, Martin Edwards wrote: 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. It has never run to Docklands. And someone wanting to get to the West End would get there a lot quicker if they took a main line train to Euston, then changed to a bus or Tube train. OK Ian, so I think you are conflating two streams of thought here. "Smooth Operator" Nigel is referring to the LO route to Watford Junction. Unfortunately, he loses the plot sometimes. there are 16 stations south of Watford junction, up to, and including Queens Park. None of them are served by mainline trains. Although Harrow & Wealdstone, and, Wembley Central do have suburban trains. That's "mainline" or are Birmingham and Northampton now suburbs of London ? You also missed out Bushey. One would venture to suggest that the further south one starts on this route, the more attractive is a metro service. Conversely, the less attractive one would find navigating the chaos at Euston. Vanity project with unclear objectives, descoped and cost-reduced to just about get it under the bar, since when it's virtually doubled in cost. Of course it's going to be looked at sceptically. If Herts can't fund it, TfL have better things to spend a third of a billion quid on. You OTOH are referring to the County of Hertford's desire to see Metropolitan Line services run into Watford Junction station. Opinions differ. I do not share yours. I think having a central interchange at Watford will be a very good thing. TfL is back under the control of the tin pot mayor of an artificial county. Given the national importance of London's transport infrastructure TfL ought to answer to Parliament. The LPTB worked perfectly well. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Metropolitan line Watford | London Transport | |||
New Connection Watford Triangle - Metropolitan Line | London Transport | |||
Metropolitan Line | London Transport | |||
Metropolitan Line Extension | London Transport | |||
Metropolitan Line Questions | London Transport |