|
TfL expanding its empire
How long before TfL is renamed to Network Southeast?
https://www.railmagazine.com/news/ne...-suburban-take over-plan |
TfL expanding its empire
On 29/06/2020 18:14, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 16:05:20 on Mon, 29 Jun 2020, remarked: How long before TfL is renamed to Network Southeast? https://www.railmagazine.com/news/ne...fl-inner-subur ban-take over-plan If they can do better job than GTR, it would be OK. But one of GTR's problems is that as probably the busiest classic franchise, they have bitten off more than they can chew. I think RAIL's info seems a bit out of date... I don't think any inner suburbans go past Stevenage any more. https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/202...into-moorgate/ .... has a little more info. How should it be branded. Some people will suggest it should be part of the Overground, but I think it's more logical to make it part of the Underground, as the line south of Drayton Park used to be. Stations like Drayton Park and Essex Road would get more use if they were branded as U-D, even without any change to frequency, because the U-D has a better reputation than the O-D. Also Highbury & Islington already has O-D platforms, and the corridor signage would be impenetrable if it had two more. The only potential downside is that the less than stellar service at stations like Bayford would tarnish the U-D brand, but like Chesham it's a station that's only used by locals and so won't damage the U-D brand in the way a bad service at Old Street would. I suspect enthusiasts will say a train with pantographs should not be part of the U-D, but I don't think that is a valid basis for quite an important business decision. I'd call it the Finsbury Line, because it serves Finsbury Park as well as Finsbury Square / Circus. Or maybe the Alexandra Line - anything but the Northern City Line, a name that has to be burned at the stake for wilfully spreading confusion. -- Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to Cleaners From Venus - 1981 - Blow Away Your Troubles (2012 version) |
TfL expanding its empire
On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 19:24:05 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote: On 29/06/2020 18:14, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 16:05:20 on Mon, 29 Jun 2020, remarked: How long before TfL is renamed to Network Southeast? https://www.railmagazine.com/news/ne...fl-inner-subur ban-take over-plan If they can do better job than GTR, it would be OK. But one of GTR's problems is that as probably the busiest classic franchise, they have bitten off more than they can chew. I think RAIL's info seems a bit out of date... I don't think any inner suburbans go past Stevenage any more. https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/202...into-moorgate/ ... has a little more info. How should it be branded. Some people will suggest it should be part of the Overground, but I think it's more logical to make it part of the Underground, as the line south of Drayton Park used to be. Stations like Drayton Park and Essex Road would get more use if they were branded as U-D, even without any change to frequency, because the U-D has a better reputation than the O-D. Also Highbury & Islington already has O-D platforms, and the corridor signage would be impenetrable if it had two more. The only potential downside is that the less than stellar service at stations like Bayford would tarnish the U-D brand, but like Chesham it's a station that's only used by locals and so won't damage the U-D brand in the way a bad service at Old Street would. I suspect enthusiasts will say a train with pantographs should not be part of the U-D, but I don't think that is a valid basis for quite an important business decision. I'd call it the Finsbury Line, because it serves Finsbury Park as well as Finsbury Square / Circus. Or maybe the Alexandra Line - anything but the Northern City Line, a name that has to be burned at the stake for wilfully spreading confusion. Could make the challenge to visit all the Underground stations much more interesting! Is there a challenge for all the Underground, Overground and TFL rail yet? |
TfL expanding its empire
Basil Jet wrote:
On 29/06/2020 18:14, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 16:05:20 on Mon, 29 Jun 2020, remarked: How long before TfL is renamed to Network Southeast? https://www.railmagazine.com/news/ne...fl-inner-subur ban-take over-plan If they can do better job than GTR, it would be OK. But one of GTR's problems is that as probably the busiest classic franchise, they have bitten off more than they can chew. I think RAIL's info seems a bit out of date... I don't think any inner suburbans go past Stevenage any more. https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/202...into-moorgate/ ... has a little more info. How should it be branded. Some people will suggest it should be part of the Overground, but I think it's more logical to make it part of the Underground, as the line south of Drayton Park used to be. Stations like Drayton Park and Essex Road would get more use if they were branded as U-D, even without any change to frequency, because the U-D has a better reputation than the O-D. Also Highbury & Islington already has O-D platforms, and the corridor signage would be impenetrable if it had two more. The only potential downside is that the less than stellar service at stations like Bayford would tarnish the U-D brand, but like Chesham it's a station that's only used by locals and so won't damage the U-D brand in the way a bad service at Old Street would. I suspect enthusiasts will say a train with pantographs should not be part of the U-D, but I don't think that is a valid basis for quite an important business decision. I'd call it the Finsbury Line, because it serves Finsbury Park as well as Finsbury Square / Circus. Or maybe the Alexandra Line - anything but the Northern City Line, a name that has to be burned at the stake for wilfully spreading confusion. While the Underground has apart from the interlude from the late 70’s to the 90’s when it had an off period enjoyed a reasonably good reputation since the LPTB built on the foundations of quality laid by the Combine there has alway been the odd corner that didn’t reach it. The Northern City line was one of them, a half finished scheme that was an oddment that came into Metropolitan Railways ownership but even they couldn’t do much with it and its ambience when transferred to the Northern line did not improve. The transfer to British Rail enabling it to perform its original brief actually improved it though it has fot pretty rough around the edges again in the past couple of decades. It would be ironical it it returned to the successor of the LPTB to improve it now. As for electrification it once had its own version of fourth rail with both current rails on the outside up till 1939 when tube stock replaced the original stock. LPTB was running 3 variety’s of live rail installations up till then, the 4 th rail system as is still used, the 4th rail system of the GN&C and the central 3rd of the Central line which was also replaced around then. If the Met had adopted the proposed 3 phase system we would have had pantographs galore. I always wondered how they would have squeezed the overhead into the tunnels but recently came across a source which I must find again which suggested it was going to be quite a complicated system with the wires set to one side at cant rail level with a twin pick up on the side , not dissimilar in a way to the old Glasgow Subway which obtained lighting power from small live rails on the subway wall. Easy to do on the subway with no junctions, gawd knows how the Met would have coped with those with different sets of pick ups being retracted and extended. Pantagraphs on the side do exist overseas on some freight locos where the catenary is switched to one side to enable top loading of bulk wagons . If the Met had chosen the Ganz system the top of Sarah Siddons might resemble this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantog...11_0000945.jpg GH |
TfL expanding its empire
On Mon, 29 Jun 2020 19:24:05 +0100
Basil Jet wrote: On 29/06/2020 18:14, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 16:05:20 on Mon, 29 Jun 2020, remarked: How long before TfL is renamed to Network Southeast? https://www.railmagazine.com/news/ne...fl-inner-subur ban-take over-plan If they can do better job than GTR, it would be OK. But one of GTR's problems is that as probably the busiest classic franchise, they have bitten off more than they can chew. I think RAIL's info seems a bit out of date... I don't think any inner suburbans go past Stevenage any more. https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/202...keover-of-grea t-northern-line-into-moorgate/ .... has a little more info. How should it be branded. Some people will suggest it should be part of the Overground, but I think it's more logical to make it part of the Underground, as the line south of Drayton Park used to be. Stations like Doesn't make sense to me. Its part of NR despite being in tunnel and it can only be used by mainline stock, not LU stock. Its a shame the Northern Heights branch was never completed as Crouch End could really used a tube station. Even more so Muswell Hill which is probably the only large suburb in north london without any station at all. Yes you can get a bus to alexandra palace station but its hardly convenient. I'd call it the Finsbury Line, because it serves Finsbury Park as well as Finsbury Square / Circus. Or maybe the Alexandra Line - anything but the Northern City Line, a name that has to be burned at the stake for wilfully spreading confusion. IMO the Northern City line was a daft name, it should have been called something entirely seperate. Fingate Line or something. |
TfL expanding its empire
|
TfL expanding its empire
On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 17:14:19 +0100
"Clive D.W. Feather" wrote: In article , writes IMO the Northern City line was a daft name, Central London Railway - Central Line Metropolitan Railway - Metropolitan Line Metropolitan District Railway - District Line Great Northern and City Railway - Northern City Line Looks obvious to me. About as obvious as the ELL being called the Metropolitan East Line or the Waterloo and City being called the Central Waterloo Line. Calling it the *northern* city just confused people as they assumed it was linked to the northern line rather than being a completely seperate line. |
TfL expanding its empire
wrote:
On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 17:14:19 +0100 "Clive D.W. Feather" wrote: In article , writes IMO the Northern City line was a daft name, Central London Railway - Central Line Metropolitan Railway - Metropolitan Line Metropolitan District Railway - District Line Great Northern and City Railway - Northern City Line Looks obvious to me. About as obvious as the ELL being called the Metropolitan East Line or the Waterloo and City being called the Central Waterloo Line. Calling it the *northern* city just confused people as they assumed it was linked to the northern line rather than being a completely seperate line. The Northern City line was so-named before there even was an LT 'Northern Line'. And, of course it was intended to be a branch of what became the Northern Line. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 03:07 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk