"John Salmon" wrote in message
...

"Jack Taylor" wrote
At West Ruislip the centre road is an
up through line (although, IIRC, it is bi-directionally signalled ...

Not according to Quail.

Thx for that. I wasn't entirely sure and haven't got a Quail to refer to.
Actually, now I think about it, I should have looked at my LNW Periodical
Operating Notices.

"John Salmon" wrote in message
...

"Jack Taylor" wrote
At West Ruislip the centre road is an
up through line (although, IIRC, it is bi-directionally signalled ...

Not according to Quail.

If a stopping train is let out of Marylebone in front of a fast, the first
opportunity for the fast to overtake is Princes Risborough. In the up
direction there are overtaking opportunities at High Wycombe (where the down
platform line is reversibly signalled), and at West Ruislip (using the Up
Platfrom Loop).

Peter

Peter Masson wrote:

If a stopping train is let out of Marylebone in front of a fast,
the first opportunity for the fast to overtake is Princes Risborough.
In the up direction there are overtaking opportunities at High
Wycombe (where the down platform line is reversibly signalled), and
at West Ruislip (using the Up Platfrom Loop).

This is one of the reasons why the restoration of the through roads at
Beaconsfield and the down platform loop at West Ruislip was
investigated; this would have provided additional passing places on the
Chiltern route south of Aynho Junction. Unfortunately, Chiltern has
since found that adding such infrastructure is not necessary, and have
instead chosen to thoroughly resignal the route north of High Wycombe
and provide bidirectional signalling on both roads between Princes
Risborough and Bicester North.

TheOneKEA wrote:
Peter Masson wrote:

If a stopping train is let out of Marylebone in front of a fast,
the first opportunity for the fast to overtake is Princes Risborough.
In the up direction there are overtaking opportunities at High
Wycombe (where the down platform line is reversibly signalled), and
at West Ruislip (using the Up Platfrom Loop).


This is one of the reasons why the restoration of the through roads at
Beaconsfield and the down platform loop at West Ruislip was
investigated; this would have provided additional passing places on the
Chiltern route south of Aynho Junction. Unfortunately, Chiltern has
since found that adding such infrastructure is not necessary, and have
instead chosen to thoroughly resignal the route north of High Wycombe
and provide bidirectional signalling on both roads between Princes
Risborough and Bicester North.

Where did the fourth track originally fit through West Ruislip? The
present station layout only permits three between the two current
Chiltern platforms.


--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
...

Where did the fourth track originally fit through West Ruislip? The
present station layout only permits three between the two current
Chiltern platforms.

The down platform has been built out over the site of the former down slow.
The original platform was very narrow.

Peter

"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
...

Also, frequency is the central point of John's criticism -
more trains should stop at these stations, then the fast
journey to London wouldn't be crippled by aeons-long waits!
I don't know much about the Chiltern services, but i should
imagine there are enough trains that you could get
4 or even 6 tph at these stations.

Really don't think there is any demand - 12tph total to
the Sudbury area would probably be a gross oversupply.

It isn't about supplying the Sudbury area, it's about interchange!

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

John Rowland wrote:
"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
...

Also, frequency is the central point of John's criticism -
more trains should stop at these stations, then the fast
journey to London wouldn't be crippled by aeons-long waits!
I don't know much about the Chiltern services, but i should
imagine there are enough trains that you could get
4 or even 6 tph at these stations.

Really don't think there is any demand - 12tph total to
the Sudbury area would probably be a gross oversupply.


It isn't about supplying the Sudbury area, it's about interchange!

The demand for interchange at the Ruislips is pretty low, and I reckon
demand at Sudbury is even lower. How is the expense of frequent
inner-suburban trains on Chiltern justified to meet such a low demand?

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

Another hare-brained scheme
Build a dual tunnel from Limehouse to Marylebone, get rid of the
Renwick Road (Barking) and the Canary Wharf Northern Access traffic
lights (pretty pointless), and also grade-separate Gypsy Corner and the
A4000 junction.

Hey presto - a nice non-stop drive from Barking to Greenford
/another hare-brained scheme

Further to the whole Greenford thing, I totally forgot that the
Greenford branch may *not* lose all its passengers if it is cut back to
West Ealing for Crossrail, as Crossrail proposes that the frequency of
the branch is doubled to 4tph (making connections to Crossrail at West
Ealing). There would be cross-platform interchange from a bay platform
for Greenford trains to eastbound Crossrail trains.

Journey times from Greenford to Liverpool Street would be marginally
quicker via Crossrail than via the Central line (35 mins vs. 38 mins).


--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

Dave Arquati wrote:
Further to the whole Greenford thing, I totally forgot that the
Greenford branch may *not* lose all its passengers if it is cut
back to West Ealing for Crossrail, as Crossrail proposes that the
frequency of the branch is doubled to 4tph (making connections to
Crossrail at West Ealing). There would be cross-platform interchange
from a bay platform for Greenford trains to eastbound Crossrail
trains.

Journey times from Greenford to Liverpool Street would be marginally
quicker via Crossrail than via the Central line (35 mins vs. 38
mins).

How much faster would journey times be from a hypothetical Crossrail
station at North Acton and/or Park Royal instead of the companion LU
station?

I was at North Acton today and could see just how absurdly easy it
would be to dig out the northern edge of the cutting, reinstate double
track and build a pair of side platforms, with stairwell interchange at
North Acton. You could even get a set of lifts to the Central Line
platforms without any major issues...