[Mrs Redboots]

Rupert Candy wrote to uk.transport.london on Tue, 31 May 2005:



Boltar wrote:

Rather pointless terminus = area that is already served by mainline
trains
to liverpool street, NLL, central line & DLR. I'm trying to think of a
reason
that a run down tip like stratford would need yet another tube line to
go
there.

How about so that NR passengers from the huge commuter hinterland of NE
London and Essex can get to the equally huge centre of employment at
Canary Wharf without having to go into Central London or use the DLR's
pretend trains?

Also, ditto & likewise, when the CTRL comes on-line in a year or so,
there will be an easy link for business people who use it to get to/from
Docklands without having to.....
--
"Mrs Redboots"
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/
Website updated 23 May 2005

[Richard J.]

Boltar wrote:
only assume you don't know the footprint, layout and available
development space in and around London City Airport. Unless you
wish to demolish everything to the south of the Royal Docks to the
riverbank the airport is never going to provide any more
passengers that a 10-minute frequency on the DLR can comfortably
handle.

You mean almost the same as what they did to build Canary Wharf?
No , I'm sure that would never happen again. Never. Ever.

You've also got the airspace above it congested with the traffic to
exisiting airports. Why do you think that the government, desperately
trying to find somewhere to build new runways in the South East, ruled
out any major expansion of London City?
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

[Tim Roll-Pickering]

wrote:

Obviously once the Dome was confirmed for 2000 it then became critical
to complete the Jubilee Line in time - original completion date at the
start of construction was March 1998,

It was presented as summer 1997 on the line maps back in 1993-5 odd!

[Dave Arquati]

Tim Roll-Pickering wrote:
wrote:


Obviously once the Dome was confirmed for 2000 it then became critical
to complete the Jubilee Line in time - original completion date at the
start of construction was March 1998,


It was presented as summer 1997 on the line maps back in 1993-5 odd!

Probably much the same as Shepherd's Bush WLL and Imperial Wharf
stations being presented as opening in summer 2005... I'm afraid I
haven't even seen a man in a high-vis jacket at the location of Imperial
Wharf station, let alone any platforms!

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

[Mike Bristow]

In article .com,
Boltar wrote:
And i'd be interested to know just
how many extra people travel to stratford now the JLE goes there
who wouldn't have used the DLR previously.

Lots.

Mostly they get off a NR train and change onto the JLE (instead,
probably, of changing onto another line at Liverpool Street).

They couldn't have used the DLR previously because the DLR is still
packed leaving Stratford (because another bunch of people have piled
of the NR trains onto it)

--
Mike Bristow - really a very good driver

[Baffobear]

It is true to say the Docklands Area has outgrown the Docklands Light
Railway. Due to the mass movement of businesses from the city to the
docklands, the transport infrastructure has not grown with it. It may
not be understandable to some, but the city had it's railway stations,
(Kings Cross, Canon Street, Liverpool Street, Waterloo, etc) all
serving the city. However with such movement, these commuters have been
"forced" on to the jubilee line, which serves, London Bridge, Waterloo,
or have been "forced" on to the DLR at Bank). While for now this may be
fine, we have to remind ourselves that now the Thames Gateway Region is
being expanded, Regeneration of the lea valley is taking place,
Stansted is growing and Homes are being built in Essex and
Hertfordshire.

Crossrail, although a good scheme, in peak times is only likely to
benefit those to the west of Paddington, who have no direct access to
the docklands and subsequently cause overcrowing at Baker st. Great
Western commuters would be kept happier (in the short term) with a
clockface timetable, and longer trains, increasing ridership. Capacity
constraints and the prority of the Heathrow Express means that they
suffer. In the East, Great Eastern Services are frequent and fast and
crossrail's plans do nothing to improve the level of service already
offered, except to remove some fast Ilford peak time services to ensure
timetable simplicity.

Now where Docklands Transport fails is where the long distance and
outer suburban market is concerned. Pre-Lewisham Extension, the only
connection with outer suburban services was stratford. Along with
Central Line, Great Eastern, North London and One Anglian services,
alot of passengers must be accomodated on trains of two cars and on the
jubilee line. The Lewisham Extensions do well to accomodate those from
the South East. However, with the thames gateway region plans becoming
reality, major overcrowding will take place at Lewisham and Greenwich.
Now if the DLR was built to heavy rail guidelines, it would have been
possible to provide extra trains to the docklands via the south. It has
taken years to realise that Heavy Rail is better than smaller metro
systems.

Lets take an example of the Victoria Line in the 1960s. No doubt if it
was built today, it would have been built to a heavy rail gauge,
connected at Wood Street, Walthamstow - for chingford, Tottenham Hale -
for Cheshunt, Stansted and at Victoria or Herne Hill - for South London
Destinations. Knowing that there is no case for extension to the
victoria line, Crossrail 2 has been proposed.


The NLL Statford - North Woolich line should be seen as an important
line that has potential to serve both South and North of The River
similar in a "Thameslink" Style. If a thames tunnel was built between
North Woolwich and Woolwich Arsenal. and a connection was made from the
North London line to the Lea Valley line. A huge number of potential
routes would be available. Stansted - Dartford or Cheshunt to Abbey
Wood for example. Even complementary services from Enfield or Chingford
could be diverted into this route.

Where the DLR also fails is its catchment areas. Stations are too
close, so by the time the train as a change to accelerate, it has to
slow down again. Look at the Beckton Extension with Stations Royal
Albert, Beckton Park and Cyprus. If only one station was there, say
Cyprus, then more emphasis onto providing subsidary bus services would
have taken place, therefore having a bigger catchment area.

Honestly it would be best if DLR ceased operations north of West India
Quay. And heavy rail was reinstated from Fenchurch Street to a new
overground Isle of Dogs Station (probably around billingsgate market)
witin a good walking distance of Canary Wharf. A line would continue to
pass through Canning Town, and diverge into two, one diving under the
thames as crossrail envisages, and the other continuing to custom
house, Gallions Reach Barking Reach and following the C2C line to
Pitsea. Simple. It makes much more sense to provide longer 8 - 12 car
trains which can transport more people, and has the 'potential' to have
the same frequency of the DLR service. I would even continue to say
that Crossrail should be realigned to serve Fenchurch street as well as
Bank before connecting with the main alignment at Farringdon. However,
lets be realistic, that wont happen

And is it me? but with the jubilee line you have to walk miles to get
to the train. I suspect the same will happen with Crossrail. Happy
missing last Train!

[Baffobear]

It is true to say the Docklands Area has outgrown the Docklands Light
Railway. Due to the mass movement of businesses from the city to the
docklands, the transport infrastructure has not grown with it. It may
not be understandable to some, but the city had it's railway stations,
(Kings Cross, Canon Street, Liverpool Street, Waterloo, etc) all
serving the city. However with such movement, these commuters have been
"forced" on to the jubilee line, which serves, London Bridge, Waterloo,
or have been "forced" on to the DLR at Bank). While for now this may be
fine, we have to remind ourselves that now the Thames Gateway Region is
being expanded, Regeneration of the lea valley is taking place,
Stansted is growing and Homes are being built in Essex and
Hertfordshire.

Crossrail, although a good scheme, in peak times is only likely to
benefit those to the west of Paddington, who have no direct access to
the docklands and subsequently cause overcrowing at Baker st. Great
Western commuters would be kept happier (in the short term) with a
clockface timetable, and longer trains, increasing ridership. Capacity
constraints and the prority of the Heathrow Express means that they
suffer. In the East, Great Eastern Services are frequent and fast and
crossrail's plans do nothing to improve the level of service already
offered, except to remove some fast Ilford peak time services to ensure
timetable simplicity.

Now where Docklands Transport fails is where the long distance and
outer suburban market is concerned. Pre-Lewisham Extension, the only
connection with outer suburban services was stratford. Along with
Central Line, Great Eastern, North London and One Anglian services,
alot of passengers must be accomodated on trains of two cars and on the
jubilee line. The Lewisham Extensions do well to accomodate those from
the South East. However, with the thames gateway region plans becoming
reality, major overcrowding will take place at Lewisham and Greenwich.
Now if the DLR was built to heavy rail guidelines, it would have been
possible to provide extra trains to the docklands via the south. It has
taken years to realise that Heavy Rail is better than smaller metro
systems.

Lets take an example of the Victoria Line in the 1960s. No doubt if it
was built today, it would have been built to a heavy rail gauge,
connected at Wood Street, Walthamstow - for chingford, Tottenham Hale -
for Cheshunt, Stansted and at Victoria or Herne Hill - for South London
Destinations. Knowing that there is no case for extension to the
victoria line, Crossrail 2 has been proposed.


The NLL Statford - North Woolich line should be seen as an important
line that has potential to serve both South and North of The River
similar in a "Thameslink" Style. If a thames tunnel was built between
North Woolwich and Woolwich Arsenal. and a connection was made from the
North London line to the Lea Valley line. A huge number of potential
routes would be available. Stansted - Dartford or Cheshunt to Abbey
Wood for example. Even complementary services from Enfield or Chingford
could be diverted into this route.

Where the DLR also fails is its catchment areas. Stations are too
close, so by the time the train as a change to accelerate, it has to
slow down again. Look at the Beckton Extension with Stations Royal
Albert, Beckton Park and Cyprus. If only one station was there, say
Cyprus, then more emphasis onto providing subsidary bus services would
have taken place, therefore having a bigger catchment area.

Honestly it would be best if DLR ceased operations north of West India
Quay. And heavy rail was reinstated from Fenchurch Street to a new
overground Isle of Dogs Station (probably around billingsgate market)
witin a good walking distance of Canary Wharf. A line would continue to
pass through Canning Town, and diverge into two, one diving under the
thames as crossrail envisages, and the other continuing to custom
house, Gallions Reach Barking Reach and following the C2C line to
Pitsea. Simple. It makes much more sense to provide longer 8 - 12 car
trains which can transport more people, and has the 'potential' to have
the same frequency of the DLR service. I would even continue to say
that Crossrail should be realigned to serve Fenchurch street as well as
Bank before connecting with the main alignment at Farringdon. However,
lets be realistic, that wont happen

And is it me? but with the jubilee line you have to walk miles to get
to the train. I suspect the same will happen with Crossrail. Happy
missing last Train!

[Tom Anderson]

On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, Baffobear wrote:

It may not be understandable to some, but the city had it's railway
stations, (Kings Cross, Canon Street, Liverpool Street, Waterloo, etc)
all serving the city. However with such movement, these commuters have
been "forced" on to the jubilee line, which serves, London Bridge,
Waterloo, or have been "forced" on to the DLR at Bank).

Or Stratford, if they're coming from the east.

Not sure i'd describe King's Cross as a City station, though!

In the East, Great Eastern Services are frequent and fast and
crossrail's plans do nothing to improve the level of service already
offered, except to remove some fast Ilford peak time services to ensure
timetable simplicity.

That's not true - the current service is something like 16 tph with 8-car
trains, or 128 cars per hour (cph); Crossrail will be 12 tph with 10-car
trains, which is only 120 cph, but there will also be a rump GE service, 6
tph @ 8 cars, whose 48 cph make for a total of 168 cph, 30% more than at
present. If Crossrail gets 12-car trains, the Crossrail part will be 144
cph, more than the current service just by itself.

(info and working shamelessly nicked from alwaystouchout.com!)

Lets take an example of the Victoria Line in the 1960s. No doubt if it
was built today, it would have been built to a heavy rail gauge,
connected at Wood Street, Walthamstow - for chingford, Tottenham Hale -
for Cheshunt, Stansted and at Victoria or Herne Hill - for South London
Destinations.

Hang on - the Victoria line *is* heavy rail; it has reasonably big trains,
travelling at high speed and high frequency. Of course, they're smaller
(shorter and narrower) than mainline trains, but they're still very
significantly bigger than light rail (eg DLR) trains. Moreover, the track
specifications are compatible with NR lines: very similar trains share
tracks with mainline trains on the Bakerloo / Watford DC joint line
between Queens Park and Harrow & Wealdstone. Thus, if the connections were
built, and suitable power and signals provided, Victoria line trains
could, on a technical level, do exactly that.

The reason they don't, as was kindly explained to me a few days ago, is
that there isn't capacity on the central section of the line - traffic
from the existing stations is already enough to saturate it, so adding
more stations at the ends would overload it. If the frequency of service
can be improved, then yes, more stations could perhaps be added, but at
present, that wouldn't be sensible.

The NLL Statford - North Woolich line should be seen as an important
line that has potential to serve both South and North of The River
similar in a "Thameslink" Style. If a thames tunnel was built between
North Woolwich and Woolwich Arsenal. and a connection was made from the
North London line to the Lea Valley line. A huge number of potential
routes would be available. Stansted - Dartford or Cheshunt to Abbey Wood
for example. Even complementary services from Enfield or Chingford could
be diverted into this route.

Honestly it would be best if DLR ceased operations north of West India
Quay. And heavy rail was reinstated from Fenchurch Street to a new
overground Isle of Dogs Station (probably around billingsgate market)
witin a good walking distance of Canary Wharf. A line would continue to
pass through Canning Town, and diverge into two, one diving under the
thames as crossrail envisages, and the other continuing to custom house,
Gallions Reach Barking Reach and following the C2C line to Pitsea.
Simple.

That makes a lot of sense. It's similar in spirit to what i was
suggesting, although more practical - provide a heavy rail cross-river
suburban metro service focused on Docklands. A sort of
'Thamesgatewaylink', if you will.

It makes much more sense to provide longer 8 - 12 car
trains which can transport more people, and has the 'potential' to have
the same frequency of the DLR service.

Bingo.

tom

--
:-( bad :-) bad :-| good