Barking-Greenford?
 

Aidan Stanger wrote:
Barry Salter wrote:


On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 13:15:31 +1030, (Aidan Stanger)
wrote:


The GOBLIN has a far greater potential as a light rail route.

And what would you propose doing with the substantial freight traffic
along the route should such a conversion come to fruition?


(snip NLL plan)

Speaking of light rail, and returning to the Greenford branch, perhaps
it would be useful to convert the Greenford branch to tram and connect
it to the West London Tram at West Ealing Broadway (passing over or
under the GWML from Drayton Green to reach Eccleston Road, perhaps).
Services could run from Greenford to both Shepherd's Bush via Ealing and
Uxbridge via Southall, providing some orbital links.

At Greenford, it might be useful to serve the industrial estates around
the canal, or the business estates at Perivale. From Greenford, a
tramline might connect up to Harrow (providing excellent orbital links
from radial stations at Harrow-on-the-Hill, South Harrow or improved
Chiltern services at Northolt Park), or even from Perivale via Alperton
and the canalside industrial areas to Wembley and/or Park Royal -
perhaps even onwards to Willesden Junction.

A whole host of potentially useful semi-orbital services could then feed
into the radial ones along the West London Tram route, and would also
provide one-change access from the M4 corridor via Crossrail (changing
at Hanwell) to Park Royal.


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

Barking-Greenford?
 

Colin McKenzie wrote in message ...
Adrian Auer-Hudson wrote:

Operationally converting the [Greenford] branch to be a Central
Line extension makes sense. The question is: Would the
construction costs be justified?

And which end do you connect it at?

Though a loop at both ends has its attractions from an aesthetic point
of view!

If tube tunnels were dug between West Ealing and just east of Ealing
Broadway, it would free up surface capacity at Ealing Broadway station
for the desperately-needed rebuilding.

There are endless options, and I think a wholesale reorganisation of
services might be beneficial, because
- the area needs north-south rail services
- the line parallel to the Central line is ridiculously under-used
- passengers beyond Northolt are not best served by an all-stations
service
- The Ealing Broadway Central Line branch will lose most of its
passengers to Crossrail

I'm thinking maybe a much enhanced Chiltern service from the Ruislips,
and new Central Line branches closer in: West Ealing via Castlebar
Park, and maybe something heading north into Park Royal.

Colin McKenzie

Hi Colin,

My thinking was in favor of a connection at the southern end of the
Greenford Branch. The Central Line would run in sub-surface tunnels
much as they do under the former GE lines at the Central Line's
eastern end.

However, I have to say I like your way of looking at this. The
underutilized capacity on the mainline around Northolt is
un-believable. Some Central line development in this area would surely
be useful.

Adrian.

Barking-Greenford?
 

"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
...

Speaking of light rail, and returning to the Greenford
branch, perhaps it would be useful to convert the
Greenford branch to tram and connect it to the
West London Tram at West Ealing Broadway

This sort of thing was investigated and rejected by the tram project team.

--
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

Barking-Greenford?
 

snip

But what would replace the Greenford triangle, to allow HSTs to reverse
formation after interesting diversions in the West Country?

Barking-Greenford?
 

TheOneKEA wrote:
snip

But what would replace the Greenford triangle, to allow HSTs to reverse
formation after interesting diversions in the West Country?

I'm sure some alternative could be found. A giant turntable, perhaps...
or setting up some sort of circuit around the Willesden railway lands.

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

Barking-Greenford?
 

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

Speaking of light rail, and returning to the Greenford
branch, perhaps it would be useful to convert the
Greenford branch to tram and connect it to the
West London Tram at West Ealing Broadway


This sort of thing was investigated and rejected by the tram project team.

Any idea why?

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

Barking-Greenford?
 

On 16 Feb 2005 13:43:03 -0800, TheOneKEA wrote:

But what would replace the Greenford triangle, to allow HSTs to reverse
formation after interesting diversions in the West Country?

Hammersmith & City to Aldgate East, to Tower Hill, to Paddington :o)

--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9781404.html
(The (old) train in the Drain - S57S at Bank in 1995)

Barking-Greenford?
 

Colin McKenzie wrote:

If tube tunnels were dug between West Ealing and just east of
Ealing Broadway, it would free up surface capacity at Ealing
Broadway station for the desperately-needed rebuilding.

Indeed. Ealing Broadway is an excellent example of the brutalist
architectural paradigm that gave us London Euston...


There are endless options, and I think a wholesale reorganisation
of services might be beneficial, because
- the area needs north-south rail services

Roll on the Park Royal interchange...

- the line parallel to the Central line is ridiculously under-used

Because there's no capacity at Paddington. Considering that 14tph is
going to terminate at Paddington, perhaps it would be sensible to see
if electrifying Old Oak West - North Acton - Park Royal and running
6tph up there to interchange with the Picc/Central at PR might be
useful.

It would probably empty North Acton to PR and Ealing Common to PR, but
the branches beyond there would get much busier; if the buses could be
rejigged, the effects could get even better.

- passengers beyond Northolt are not best served by an all-stations
service

There's always the option of electrifying all the way to West Ruislip
and interchanging with Chiltern - though that would probably decimate
the Ruislip branch of the Central.

A better option would be to find a spare bit of brownfield land next to
the old GW line and building a largish carpark on it, with good access
from the A40. Then you could extend more tph from Paddington to the new
parkway station and abstract traffic off of the A40.

Plus there's also the fact that Greenford still has an NR service to
Paddington; if that does get cut back to West Ealing, adding a
mini-curve to the Greenford triangle and running some of that wasted
tph up _there_ could be investigated as well.

Barking-Greenford?
 

TheOneKEA wrote:
Colin McKenzie wrote:

If tube tunnels were dug between West Ealing and just east of
Ealing Broadway, it would free up surface capacity at Ealing
Broadway station for the desperately-needed rebuilding.

Indeed. Ealing Broadway is an excellent example of the brutalist
architectural paradigm that gave us London Euston...

There are endless options, and I think a wholesale reorganisation
of services might be beneficial, because
- the area needs north-south rail services

Roll on the Park Royal interchange...

Does anyone have news about that? I don't even have an estimated
completion date.

- the line parallel to the Central line is ridiculously under-used

Because there's no capacity at Paddington. Considering that 14tph is
going to terminate at Paddington, perhaps it would be sensible to see
if electrifying Old Oak West - North Acton - Park Royal and running
6tph up there to interchange with the Picc/Central at PR might be
useful.

It would probably empty North Acton to PR and Ealing Common to PR, but
the branches beyond there would get much busier; if the buses could be
rejigged, the effects could get even better.

A Park Royal bus/train/tube interchange with some sort of intermediate
mode link to Willesden Junction and to Ealing to join the West London
Tram. In any case, there should be high quality links to a Crossrail
station to attract people from the west who might otherwise drive. Acton
Main Line would be a good candidate.

- passengers beyond Northolt are not best served by an all-stations
service


There's always the option of electrifying all the way to West Ruislip
and interchanging with Chiltern - though that would probably decimate
the Ruislip branch of the Central.

A better option would be to find a spare bit of brownfield land next to
the old GW line and building a largish carpark on it, with good access
from the A40. Then you could extend more tph from Paddington to the new
parkway station and abstract traffic off of the A40.

Ooh, the old park-and-ride problem. I think you'd actually generate
quite a bit of traffic on the A40 to the west as people switch from the
current stations to the parkway one. A parkway station would be better
off further out.

Plus there's also the fact that Greenford still has an NR service to
Paddington; if that does get cut back to West Ealing, adding a
mini-curve to the Greenford triangle and running some of that wasted
tph up _there_ could be investigated as well.

Presumably there isn't the traffic for it, otherwise they would have
suggested it.

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

Barking-Greenford?
 

This is interesting. But let me add a few points.

1. Turning crossrail trains back @ Paddington is just crazy when there
is a lack of capacity in the mainline station.

2. Better for now just to electrify one mainline, i.e. Paddington to
Maidenhead.

3. We are stuck with the Central Line to West Ruislip because of the
depot.

So, better drop the Central Line into a tunnel for the Ealing Broadway
to West Ealing Stretch. Have the Central Line take over the Greenford
Loop.

Then extend the instead of turning back crossrail trains at Paddington,
reverse them from new platforms at Ealing. These platforms would
replace the Central Line tube platforms.

Then, use some of the freed-up terminal space at Paddington to for some
Chiltern trains from Birmingham.

Adrian.

Barking-Greenford?
 

Adrian Auer-Hudson wrote:
This is interesting. But let me add a few points.

1. Turning crossrail trains back @ Paddington is just crazy when there
is a lack of capacity in the mainline station.

2. Better for now just to electrify one mainline, i.e. Paddington to
Maidenhead.

3. We are stuck with the Central Line to West Ruislip because of the
depot.

So, better drop the Central Line into a tunnel for the Ealing Broadway
to West Ealing Stretch. Have the Central Line take over the Greenford
Loop.

Then extend the instead of turning back crossrail trains at Paddington,
reverse them from new platforms at Ealing. These platforms would
replace the Central Line tube platforms.

Then, use some of the freed-up terminal space at Paddington to for some
Chiltern trains from Birmingham.

Noo... don't send Chiltern services into Paddington! Marylebone is
getting two new platforms this year so Chiltern should manage OK. The
line from Northolt into Paddington would also need some major trackwork
as it is, at present, extremely slooooow.


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

Crossrail and the GW link line (was: Barking-Greenford?)
 

Dave Arquati wrote:

Does anyone have news about that? I don't even have an estimated
completion date.

I haven't heard a thing about it lately. I suspect that it will roll
over and sink like the BLE proposals for Camberwell...


A Park Royal bus/train/tube interchange with some sort of
intermediate mode link to Willesden Junction and to Ealing to join
the West London Tram. In any case, there should be high quality
links to a Crossrail station to attract people from the west who
might otherwise drive. Acton Main Line would be a good candidate.

Are you talking about journeys off of the GWML onto the GW link line?


Ooh, the old park-and-ride problem. I think you'd actually generate
quite a bit of traffic on the A40 to the west as people switch from
the current stations to the parkway one. A parkway station would be
better off further out.

How about a four-tracked terminal station with an island platform where
the GW/GC crosses the M25? There's almost nothing along that part of
the corridor, so there'd be plenty of space for a park&ride.

And the best part is that Chiltern, Crossrail and the Central Line
would all benefit - Crossrail carries the heavy commuter traffic into
the city, Chiltern carries traffic from local areas along the M25 to
areas north, and people living on the upper part of the Central Line
can interchange to both and reach the parkway station.

The only issue is that Chiltern might want a piece of that commuter pie
as well...


Plus there's also the fact that Greenford still has an NR service
to Paddington; if that does get cut back to West Ealing, adding a
mini-curve to the Greenford triangle and running some of that
wasted tph up _there_ could be investigated as well.

Presumably there isn't the traffic for it, otherwise they would have
suggested it.

If the through service is cut back to West Ealing, people will probably
switch to the Central Line anyway.

Crossrail and the GW link line (was: Barking-Greenford?)
 

"TheOneKEA" wrote in message
oups.com...

How about a four-tracked terminal station with an island platform where
the GW/GC crosses the M25? There's almost nothing along that part of
the corridor, so there'd be plenty of space for a park&ride.

Denham Golf Club Parkway? Get rid of a station that virtually nobody uses
and replace it with a *useful* facility! Actually, if you positioned the new
station between the M25 and Denham itself you might be able to replace
Denham Golf Club and Denham itself, in one fell swoop. It surprises me that
the normally forward-thinking Chiltern have never proposed such a thing. It
would also lighten the load on Gerrards Cross, which is getting very busy
now.

Crossrail and the GW link line
 

On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 11:08:27 GMT, Jack Taylor wrote:

Denham Golf Club Parkway? Get rid of a station that virtually nobody uses
and replace it with a *useful* facility! Actually, if you positioned the new
station between the M25 and Denham itself you might be able to replace
Denham Golf Club and Denham itself, in one fell swoop. It surprises me that
the normally forward-thinking Chiltern have never proposed such a thing. It
would also lighten the load on Gerrards Cross, which is getting very busy
now.

Just tarmac over the golf course, then the station doesn't need to
move, and there'll be plenty of space for cars. ;-)

--
My most recent pictu
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p11858315.html
(170 504 passing Slindon at speed on 31 Jan 2005)

Barking-Greenford?
 

"Adrian Auer-Hudson" wrote:

So, better drop the Central Line into a tunnel for the Ealing Broadway
to West Ealing Stretch.


So you propose building a tunnel at astronomic cost for the section of
the route that will carry the least traffic?

I have no doubt that there are a great many better ways of spending
the money.


Tony

Crossrail and the GW link line (was: Barking-Greenford?)
 

Jack Taylor wrote:

Denham Golf Club Parkway? Get rid of a station that virtually nobody
uses and replace it with a *useful* facility! Actually, if you
positioned the new station between the M25 and Denham itself you
might be able to replace Denham Golf Club and Denham itself, in one
fell swoop. It surprises me that the normally forward-thinking
Chiltern have never proposed such a thing. It would also lighten the
load on Gerrards Cross, which is getting very busy now.

How good is road access from the M25 corridor to Denham? If it's no
good or regularly jammed, then siting the parking lot at Denham Golf
Club would probably be a poor move.

To be honest, I suspect that Chiltern have adopted a wait-and-see
attitude about park&ride on the GW/GC route; if/when they complete the
realignment at Beaconsfield and the additional signalling north of High
Wycombe, they may experience a "sparks effect" and start thinking about
such improvements - especially if it happens to link in with Crossrail
and increase the chances of people using their trains to reach the
Crossrail services.

Denham Golf Club Parkway (was Crossrail and the GW link line)
 

"TheOneKEA" wrote in message
oups.com...

How good is road access from the M25 corridor to Denham? If it's no
good or regularly jammed, then siting the parking lot at Denham Golf
Club would probably be a poor move.

Actually I was getting my geography a bit confused there, so disregard the
comments abount Denham itself! DGC is actually south of the M25, which runs
between DGC and GX (for some reason I was having a mental aberration and
thinking that it was between Denham and DGC). There is, however, a
considerable amount of spare land in the area. DGC actually lies very close
to the A40/A413 junction and just up the M25 from junction 1a, the M25/M40
interchange, so a spur from that junction ought to be possible, assuming
that the land can be acquired. A DGC Parkway would not necesssarily have to
be exactly on the existing site, it could move further from the Golf Club
and closer to the M25 to facilitate a Parkway-style station, serving traffic
from the M25, M40, A40 and A413, if properly planned.

Crossrail and the GW link line
 

TheOneKEA wrote:
Dave Arquati wrote:

Does anyone have news about that? I don't even have an estimated
completion date.


I haven't heard a thing about it lately. I suspect that it will roll
over and sink like the BLE proposals for Camberwell...

Although the redevelopment plans at Elephant and Castle have been
designed so as not to impede any Bakerloo line extension.

A Park Royal bus/train/tube interchange with some sort of
intermediate mode link to Willesden Junction and to Ealing to join
the West London Tram. In any case, there should be high quality
links to a Crossrail station to attract people from the west who
might otherwise drive. Acton Main Line would be a good candidate.

Are you talking about journeys off of the GWML onto the GW link line?

I actually meant there should at least be frequent and fast bus links
between the GWML/Crossrail (e.g. Acton ML) and the Park Royal estate. A
Crossrail branch up the joint line would be an extra step forward but
doesn't really help with access from the west to Park Royal; the
majority of workers at Park Royal currently drive, and I suspect most of
them come from the west.

Ooh, the old park-and-ride problem. I think you'd actually generate
quite a bit of traffic on the A40 to the west as people switch from
the current stations to the parkway one. A parkway station would be
better off further out.


How about a four-tracked terminal station with an island platform where
the GW/GC crosses the M25? There's almost nothing along that part of
the corridor, so there'd be plenty of space for a park&ride.

The "nothing" is all Green Belt land...

And the best part is that Chiltern, Crossrail and the Central Line
would all benefit - Crossrail carries the heavy commuter traffic into
the city, Chiltern carries traffic from local areas along the M25 to
areas north, and people living on the upper part of the Central Line
can interchange to both and reach the parkway station.

The only issue is that Chiltern might want a piece of that commuter pie
as well...

Chiltern would be worried about traffic being abstracted from them if
such a station were built. A lot of people in Chiltern's catchment drive
to a local station at the moment; with a Crossrail P+R they probably
would drive to that instead.

I doubt that a lot of traffic to points north would be generated.
Chances are, if someone is already in their car on the motorway, they
will use it all the way, especially as the M40 serves almost all the
areas that Chiltern does.

Plus there's also the fact that Greenford still has an NR service
to Paddington; if that does get cut back to West Ealing, adding a
mini-curve to the Greenford triangle and running some of that
wasted tph up _there_ could be investigated as well.

Presumably there isn't the traffic for it, otherwise they would have
suggested it.


If the through service is cut back to West Ealing, people will probably
switch to the Central Line anyway.

I should imagine that everyone who could already switch to the Central
line has already done so. The only remaining traffic is probably to
Ealing Broadway or to the local area around Paddington.

Would hypothetical Crossrail trains to Greenford need to cross eastbound
trains from Heathrow & Maidenhead at grade? That could be a disbenefit
to other Crossrail services.

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

Barking-Greenford?
 

Tony Polson wrote:
"Adrian Auer-Hudson" wrote:

So, better drop the Central Line into a tunnel for the Ealing
Broadway
to West Ealing Stretch.


So you propose building a tunnel at astronomic cost for the section
of
the route that will carry the least traffic?

I have no doubt that there are a great many better ways of spending
the money.


Tony

You are of course correct. The aesthetics of a loop at the western end
of the Central Line to match the one at the eastern end appeal to me!
:-)

Maybe the Greenford loop could be served only from its Northern end by
the Central Line?

There is, I believe, still merit in the idea of terminating Crossrail
trains at Ealing as opposed to Paddington. But, sending all Central
Line trains to West Ruislip would be an over supply of service.

Adrian.

Barking-Greenford?
 

"Adrian Auer-Hudson" wrote:

You are of course correct. The aesthetics of a loop at the western end
of the Central Line to match the one at the eastern end appeal to me!
:-)

LOL!! ;-)

Tony

Denham Golf Club Parkway (was Crossrail and the GW link line)
 

In article ,
Jack Taylor wrote:

"TheOneKEA" wrote in message
oups.com...

How good is road access from the M25 corridor to Denham? If it's no
good or regularly jammed, then siting the parking lot at Denham Golf
Club would probably be a poor move.

Actually I was getting my geography a bit confused there, so disregard
the comments abount Denham itself! DGC is actually south of the M25,
which runs between DGC and GX (for some reason I was having a mental
aberration and thinking that it was between Denham and DGC). There is,
however, a considerable amount of spare land in the area. DGC actually
lies very close to the A40/A413 junction and just up the M25 from
junction 1a, the M25/M40 interchange, so a spur from that junction ought
to be possible, assuming that the land can be acquired. A DGC Parkway
would not necesssarily have to be exactly on the existing site, it could
move further from the Golf Club and closer to the M25 to facilitate a
Parkway-style station, serving traffic from the M25, M40, A40 and A413,
if properly planned.


The record for previous initiatives of this kind is not very encouraging.
There were similar proposals many years ago for a park and ride at Iver on
the GWML which is practically adjacent to the M25 and has lots of unused
land adjacent to the station. I believe the DfT objected because it would
require a new junction on the M25, and it would also generate more traffic
on nearby motorways rather than relieving them.

David

Barking-Greenford?
 

In article ,
Dave Arquati wrote:

Noo... don't send Chiltern services into Paddington! Marylebone is
getting two new platforms this year so Chiltern should manage OK. The
line from Northolt into Paddington would also need some major trackwork
as it is, at present, extremely slooooow.

Of course in steam days this was a very fast stretch with speeds of around
80mph not uncommon through Greenford in the up direction, and 27-28min
running times for High Wycombe-Paddington. What a contrast with the sad
neglected state of the line today.

David

Barking-Greenford?
 

gwr4090 wrote:
In article ,
Dave Arquati wrote:


Noo... don't send Chiltern services into Paddington! Marylebone is
getting two new platforms this year so Chiltern should manage OK. The
line from Northolt into Paddington would also need some major trackwork
as it is, at present, extremely slooooow.


Of course in steam days this was a very fast stretch with speeds of around
80mph not uncommon through Greenford in the up direction, and 27-28min
running times for High Wycombe-Paddington. What a contrast with the sad
neglected state of the line today.

David

Can anyone back me up on this? When I first came to Birmingham in 1972,
I am sure the journey from Watford Junction took about 1hr 20 mins. Now
this is being touted as a target speed for the far future.

--
You can't fool me: there ain't no Sanity Clause. -Chico Marx

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/1955

Barking-Greenford?
 

"Martin Edwards" wrote in message
...

Can anyone back me up on this? When I first came to Birmingham in 1972,
I am sure the journey from Watford Junction took about 1hr 20 mins. Now
this is being touted as a target speed for the far future.

In the 1971-72 imetable fast trains from atfrod Junction to Birmingham New
Street took 1h17m, with one stop at Coventry. They now take 1h16m, with two
stops, Coventry and Birmingham International, and there is prospect of some
further acceleration. However, in 1971-72, fast trains from Watford Junction
to Birmingham only ran in the morning peak - last one was 1002. After this
you'd have had to travel on the much slower local (now Silverlink) service.
Now they're hourly all day.

Peter

Denham Golf Club Parkway (was Crossrail and the GW link line)
 

"gwr4090" wrote in message
...

The record for previous initiatives of this kind is not very encouraging.
There were similar proposals many years ago for a park and ride at Iver on
the GWML which is practically adjacent to the M25 and has lots of unused
land adjacent to the station. I believe the DfT objected because it would
require a new junction on the M25, and it would also generate more traffic
on nearby motorways rather than relieving them.

Yet Haddenham & Thame Parkway went ahead, without objections and with no
improvement to the local road system whatever - access only being via the
back road that parallels the A418 between Aylesbury and Thame! As the car
park at that station now extends almost to the A418 at the northern end, it
is surprising that access there hasn't been improved, given the number of
cars that thunder along the back road. Many of theses are local but there
are also many users who drive to H&T Pkwy from the M40.

On that basis, even a DGC Parkway without a direct M25 connection, serving
the local area, the A40 and A418 would be of benefit and would relieve the
pressure on the centre of Gerrards Cross and the area to the west of
Chorleywood.

Denham Golf Club Parkway (was Crossrail and the GW link line)
 

gwr4090 wrote:

The record for previous initiatives of this kind is not very encouraging.
There were similar proposals many years ago for a park and ride at Iver on
the GWML which is practically adjacent to the M25 and has lots of unused
land adjacent to the station. I believe the DfT objected because it would
require a new junction on the M25, and it would also generate more traffic
on nearby motorways rather than relieving them.

The M25/M4/M40/Heathrow area is one of the busiest and most congested
sections of the motorway network. The proposed park and ride station
at Iver would only have made the situation worse.

Far better to encourage people to travel by train from further out, to
the point where the train portion of their journey is maximised.

Tony

Denham Golf Club Parkway (was Crossrail and the GW link line)
 

"Tony Polson" wrote in message
...
gwr4090 wrote:

The record for previous initiatives of this kind is not very encouraging.
There were similar proposals many years ago for a park and ride at Iver
on
the GWML which is practically adjacent to the M25 and has lots of unused
land adjacent to the station. I believe the DfT objected because it would
require a new junction on the M25, and it would also generate more
traffic
on nearby motorways rather than relieving them.

The M25/M4/M40/Heathrow area is one of the busiest and most congested
sections of the motorway network. The proposed park and ride station
at Iver would only have made the situation worse.

Far better to encourage people to travel by train from further out, to
the point where the train portion of their journey is maximised.

Tony

There would also be considerable local opposition to building in green belt
land. Proposals for a GC freight terminal and a theme park at Hillingdon
were seen off for this reason. The third runway at Heathrow cannot be built
unless the already very high levels of air pollution are reduced. What
looks like 'spare land' to the casual observer is in fact highly appreciated
countryside, such as Denham Country Park.

Barking-Greenford?
 

Peter Masson wrote:
"Martin Edwards" wrote in message
...

Can anyone back me up on this? When I first came to Birmingham in 1972,
I am sure the journey from Watford Junction took about 1hr 20 mins. Now
this is being touted as a target speed for the far future.


In the 1971-72 imetable fast trains from atfrod Junction to Birmingham New
Street took 1h17m, with one stop at Coventry. They now take 1h16m, with two
stops, Coventry and Birmingham International, and there is prospect of some
further acceleration. However, in 1971-72, fast trains from Watford Junction
to Birmingham only ran in the morning peak - last one was 1002. After this
you'd have had to travel on the much slower local (now Silverlink) service.
Now they're hourly all day.

Peter


Thanks for the update. Unfortunately the Silverlink service only rusn
to Northampton, having been bounced out of New Stret in the interest of
free markets.

--
You can't fool me: there ain't no Sanity Clause. -Chico Marx

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Agora/1955

Denham Golf Club Parkway (was Crossrail and the GW link line)
 

"Orienteer" wrote:

There would also be considerable local opposition to building in green belt
land. Proposals for a GC freight terminal and a theme park at Hillingdon
were seen off for this reason.

And rightly so.

The third runway at Heathrow cannot be built
unless the already very high levels of air pollution are reduced.

Same comment applies.

What looks like 'spare land' to the casual observer is in fact highly
appreciated countryside, such as Denham Country Park.

It is so often the case that developers, construction professionals
and townies in general see green space merely as a potential
construction site, without taking the time to appreciate its value for
other purposes, or indeed for no particular purpose at all.

We live on a very crowded island. Our landscape is unique and
precious. Open spaces should be nurtured and protected from the
over-development for which future generations will not forgive us.


Tony

Barking-Greenford?
 

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005, Dave Arquati wrote:

TheOneKEA wrote:

But what would replace the Greenford triangle, to allow HSTs to
reverse formation after interesting diversions in the West Country?

I'm sure some alternative could be found. A giant turntable, perhaps...
or setting up some sort of circuit around the Willesden railway lands.

Half-pipe?

tom

--
So the moon is approximately 24 toasters from S****horpe.

Barking-Greenford?
 

On 18 Feb 2005, Adrian Auer-Hudson wrote:

Tony Polson wrote:
"Adrian Auer-Hudson" wrote:

So, better drop the Central Line into a tunnel for the Ealing
Broadway to West Ealing Stretch.

I have no doubt that there are a great many better ways of spending
the money.

You are of course correct. The aesthetics of a loop at the western end
of the Central Line to match the one at the eastern end appeal to me!
:-)

Finally, someone who sees the big picture!

Maybe the Greenford loop could be served only from its Northern end by
the Central Line?

You mean Perivale - South Greenford - Castle Bar Park - Drayton Green?
That's daft. No offence, but it is - you'd have to head out of London to
get to the city centre!

Although now i think about it, a few minutes on the journey might be worth
it to get ten times the frequency.

There is, I believe, still merit in the idea of terminating Crossrail
trains at Ealing as opposed to Paddington.

Agreed.

But, sending all Central Line trains to West Ruislip would be an over
supply of service.

They could be sent round the east curve - North Acton, Ealing Broadway,
Castle Bar Park, then over the Greenford east curve, Perivale, Park Royal,
North Acton.

tom

--
dream warrior, sun dancer

Barking-Greenford?
 

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005, Colin McKenzie wrote:

There are endless options, and I think a wholesale reorganisation of
services might be beneficial, because
- the area needs north-south rail services
- the line parallel to the Central line is ridiculously under-used
- passengers beyond Northolt are not best served by an all-stations
service
- The Ealing Broadway Central Line branch will lose most of its
passengers to Crossrail

I'm thinking maybe a much enhanced Chiltern service from the Ruislips,
and new Central Line branches closer in: West Ealing via Castlebar Park,
and maybe something heading north into Park Royal.

How about killing the Chiltern services to everywhere inward of Denham (or
perhaps West Ruislip, for interchange), so that the services left can run
fast all the way into Marylebone, and then speeding up the Central Line's
services from these outer stations by taking over the GW Perivale line run
some trains fast, say from Greenford to East Acton (via new links at both
stations), possibly with a stop at Park Royal. Essentially, you have the
Central running inner suburban and 'middle suburban' services.

tom

--
dream warrior, sun dancer

Barking-Greenford?
 

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
...

How about killing the Chiltern services to everywhere inward of Denham (or
perhaps West Ruislip, for interchange), so that the services left can run
fast all the way into Marylebone, and then speeding up the Central Line's
services from these outer stations by taking over the GW Perivale line run
some trains fast, say from Greenford to East Acton (via new links at both
stations), possibly with a stop at Park Royal. Essentially, you have the
Central running inner suburban and 'middle suburban' services.

And how would the freight trains that use the Greenford loop and the ex-GW
main line to get to the Chiltern route then do so?

Barking-Greenford?
 

In article ,
Jack Taylor wrote:

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
...

How about killing the Chiltern services to everywhere inward of Denham
(or perhaps West Ruislip, for interchange), so that the services left
can run fast all the way into Marylebone, and then speeding up the
Central Line's services from these outer stations by taking over the
GW Perivale line run some trains fast, say from Greenford to East
Acton (via new links at both stations), possibly with a stop at Park
Royal. Essentially, you have the Central running inner suburban and
'middle suburban' services.

And how would the freight trains that use the Greenford loop and the
ex-GW main line to get to the Chiltern route then do so?

The answer is to extend Crossrail (rather than Central line) services to
West Ruislip via Northolt with a few via Drayton Park. Mixing Crossrail
and freight should be less of a problem.

David

Barking-Greenford?
 

In article .com,
Adrian Auer-Hudson writes
1. Turning crossrail trains back @ Paddington is just crazy when there
is a lack of capacity in the mainline station.

Capacity in the mainline station won't be involved. The trains will "tip
out" at the new Crossrail island platform, run forward to a siding
between the tracks around Royal Oak, then back into service on the other
side of the same island platform. They never go near (except vertically)
the main terminus.

I'm told that the sidings will be authorised for passenger use so that
there's no need to search the terminating trains by hand. This is
necessary to provide the capacity.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

Barking-Greenford?
 

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
...

How about killing the Chiltern services to everywhere inward
of Denham (or perhaps West Ruislip, for interchange),
so that the services left can run fast all the way into Marylebone,

What about Northolt Park and Wembley Stadium?

--
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

Barking-Greenford?
 

On Sun, 20 Feb 2005, John Rowland wrote:

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
...

How about killing the Chiltern services to everywhere inward of Denham
(or perhaps West Ruislip, for interchange), so that the services left
can run fast all the way into Marylebone,

What about Northolt Park and Wembley Stadium?

Ah, i forgot about Northolt Park. Wembley Stadium could perhaps only be
served on match days (or other days when there's a major event at
Wembley), but yes, you'd need to stop at Northolt Park.

tom

--
I am the best at what i do.

Barking-Greenford?
 

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
...

Wembley Stadium could perhaps only be
served on match days (or other days when
there's a major event at Wembley),

That would be popular with the locals. Or perhaps you think every station in
London should be shut except when there is a big event nearby?

--
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

Barking-Greenford?
 

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005, Dave Arquati wrote:


TheOneKEA wrote:


But what would replace the Greenford triangle, to allow HSTs to
reverse formation after interesting diversions in the West Country?

I'm sure some alternative could be found. A giant turntable, perhaps...
or setting up some sort of circuit around the Willesden railway lands.


Half-pipe?

They could make it a rollercoaster and sell tickets for it at Paddington
- make some money out of turning the trains around!

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

Barking-Greenford?
 

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Sun, 20 Feb 2005, John Rowland wrote:


"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
...


How about killing the Chiltern services to everywhere inward of Denham
(or perhaps West Ruislip, for interchange), so that the services left
can run fast all the way into Marylebone,

What about Northolt Park and Wembley Stadium?


Ah, i forgot about Northolt Park. Wembley Stadium could perhaps only be
served on match days (or other days when there's a major event at
Wembley), but yes, you'd need to stop at Northolt Park.

Wembley's quite an important destination in its own right. If anything,
the service should be improved.

Sudbury Hill Harrow and Sudbury & Harrow Road are a bit less important
as they are mirrored by Piccadilly line stations; however, Chiltern is
quicker for some journeys to the City if the timetable suits, and they
could be useful bus interchanges for people heading from south
Buckinghamshire to some parts of West London.


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