On Mon, 30 May 2005, Charlie Pearce wrote:

On Fri, 27 May 2005, Dave Arquati wrote:

ONscotland wrote:

I read that LUL are withdrawing the "Circle" line service, as it
causes far too many delays at the various bottlenecks on the route.

It's an old plan which gets revived every few years; Metronet have it
in their sights now.

Nobody's asked the most important question - what's this going to do to
the look of the map?! :-)

My money's on the Hammersmith end of the H&C being a horizontal line
though Paddington, Edgware Road and Baker Street, with the Edgware Road
end, along with the Wimbleware, running into it vertically, much in the
manner of Hammersmith or Elephant & Castle. Paddington would have circles
on the lines in both directions; they would not necessarily be linked with
a stem, since there isn't an in-station interchange between them (i think
they're separate on the current tube map; i only have a London Connections
to hand).

Here's some ascii (minus the Bakerloo!):

Edgware Road
---------O---O---O---
Paddington | Baker Street
|
O Paddington
|
|
+ Bayswater
|
|

Hence, i suppose, the name 'T-cup'.

tom

--
I think it would be a good idea -- Mohandas Gandhi, on Western civilisation

On Mon, 30 May 2005, Dave Arquati wrote:

Tim Roll-Pickering wrote:
ONscotland wrote:

I read that LUL are withdrawing the "Circle" line service, as it
causes far too many delays at the various bottlenecks on the route.

Naturally, the lines will still be there (ie: H&C, Met and District
Line will still have services), but without a circular service
operating. The nickname "tea-cup" was mentioned, as this will
basically cover the stylised map of new routes that will be utilised.

Does anyone have any other details on this: or is it just another plan
that is being considered?

The problem is that although the proposed change is meant to improve
reliability on the Circle and increase the service to Hammersmith, it
requires that Met trains are diverted from Aldgate to Whitechapel or
Barking to replace the lost H&C service from Liverpool Street eastwards.
Not only does that mean that Met City services are required to traverse
an extra flat junction at Aldgate East, the longer route will be more
susceptible to delay.

Isn't there also a significant increase in the number of movements over
Praed Street junction? 22.5 up to 30 tph springs to mind, BICBW. I'm
skeptical about the chances of a plan which increases the exposure to two
flat junctions increasing reliability!

I was thinking about this the other day, and i realised there's another
downside: no direct trains from east of Aldgate to Paddington. Not a
showstopper, but it does make catching a train out west that bit harder
from the east end. Again, the improved overall frequency in practice
should more than make up for this, but still, a pain.

tom

--
I think it would be a good idea -- Mohandas Gandhi, on Western civilisation

Tom Anderson wrote:

Hence, i suppose, the name 'T-cup'.

I thought the tea-cup name came from:

/----+---------------\
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| \---------------/


which looks a bit like a tea cup to me

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
h.li...

While we're on the H&C station at Paddington, i noticed the other day that
there are two mainline platforms on the fare-paid side of the barriers;
what are those all about? Are they used for suburban services?

They are used by First Great Western Link suburban services. The original
layout of the four platforms was different and was remodelled in the 1960s,
when through services from the GW suburban stations ceased. LUL trains used
to run through the centre pair of platforms, whilst GW suburban services
used the outer faces, giving cross-platform changes between the two services
in each direction. The remodelling concentrated suburban services on the two
faces of the southern island and LU services on the two faces of the
northern island and removed the crossovers and all physical links between
the two systems. For some reason, although it is possible to walk along the
platform from the mainline station to the suburban platform unimpeded, the
LUL gates need to be traversed when accessing the suburban platforms from
the footbridge. Conversely, it is possible to gain access to the LUL
platforms without passing through the barriers by using the mainline access
to the suburban platforms and then crossing via the footbridge!

On Mon, 30 May 2005 23:52:23 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

I was thinking about this the other day, and i realised there's another
downside: no direct trains from east of Aldgate to Paddington. Not a
showstopper, but it does make catching a train out west that bit harder
from the east end. Again, the improved overall frequency in practice
should more than make up for this, but still, a pain.

I personally don't use the District or Circle for a journey of that
length because it's too slow/infrequent. Such passengers would
probably be better off using the Central and changing.

Neil

--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:15:33 on Sat,
28 May 2005, Michael Hopkins remarked:

I think what was meant was not how the lines are printed on the map, but
what happens in practice, for instance a Hammersmith Edgware Road
service,
then becomes a Circle for a few times, then becomes a Barking train
(as it
were). I know most H&C run as that, but are there some that do the
loop in
between?


If you are saying that a train leaves Hammersmith as "H&C" and then is
re-branded "Circle" when it gets to Edgware Rd, then does a few
'circles', eventually being rebranded as "H&C" at Liverpool St and
heading off to Barking; then that's not something I'd ever noticed.

It is, however, very similar to the plan I referred to earlier.

I have been on a circle train coming round from the City (Eastbound on
the district), and as soon as it reached Liverpool St, the automatic
lady told me it was a Hammersmith and City line train to Hammersmith.
Was a few years ago (probably about 5), but I recall asking on here at
the time and being told it was not unusual. My memory might be at fault.

Robin

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Mon, 30 May 2005, Dave Arquati wrote:

Tim Roll-Pickering wrote:

ONscotland wrote:

I read that LUL are withdrawing the "Circle" line service, as it
causes far too many delays at the various bottlenecks on the route.


Naturally, the lines will still be there (ie: H&C, Met and District
Line will still have services), but without a circular service
operating. The nickname "tea-cup" was mentioned, as this will
basically cover the stylised map of new routes that will be utilised.

Does anyone have any other details on this: or is it just another plan
that is being considered?


The problem is that although the proposed change is meant to improve
reliability on the Circle and increase the service to Hammersmith, it
requires that Met trains are diverted from Aldgate to Whitechapel or
Barking to replace the lost H&C service from Liverpool Street
eastwards. Not only does that mean that Met City services are required
to traverse an extra flat junction at Aldgate East, the longer route
will be more susceptible to delay.


Isn't there also a significant increase in the number of movements over
Praed Street junction? 22.5 up to 30 tph springs to mind, BICBW. I'm
skeptical about the chances of a plan which increases the exposure to
two flat junctions increasing reliability!

Well, yes. There's also a need to reverse a large number of trains at
Edgware Road. I wonder what alternative plans have been considered and
why they have been rejected. All sorts of combinations of H&C, Met,
Circle and Wimbleware services are possible, and I think there was a big
discussion about this on here a few months ago.

I wondered whether Crossrail could take over Hammersmith - Paddington;
it would make use of some/all of those 15tph from the east that would be
terminating at Paddington (or rather, reverse at Westbourne Park
sidings), it would remove all conflicting movements across Praed St
junction, and would release two platforms at Paddington for suburban
services to use. Frequency on the northern side of the Circle could be
maintained by extending Wimblewares through to Whitechapel etc.

The problems would include the resiting of Royal Oak station (as the
Crossrail tunnel will surface right next to it) and poorer access to
stations Edgware Road - King's Cross.

I was thinking about this the other day, and i realised there's another
downside: no direct trains from east of Aldgate to Paddington. Not a
showstopper, but it does make catching a train out west that bit harder
from the east end. Again, the improved overall frequency in practice
should more than make up for this, but still, a pain.

tom



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

Jack Taylor wrote:
For some reason, although it is possible to walk along the
platform from the mainline station to the suburban platform unimpeded, the
LUL gates need to be traversed when accessing the suburban platforms from
the footbridge. Conversely, it is possible to gain access to the LUL
platforms without passing through the barriers by using the mainline access
to the suburban platforms and then crossing via the footbridge!

I've also noticed this - I presume that the gateline had to be
installed further down the footbridge, thus including the suburban
platforms, for reasons of space and safety. But the lack of gates to
get onto the suburban platforms from the mainline concourse (which is
not a secret route - it is a signposted route from the concourse) makes
this a distinctly leaky part of the central London Underground network.

Recently when entering the H&C platforms using this route when I was to
use Oyster Pre-Pay (there are readers on the H&C platforms to touch-in
on), there were revenue protection staff from First Great Western Link
checking tickets on the route from the mainline concourse to the
suburban platforms. As I had no ticket to present to them as such, all
I had to do was say "I'm going on the Underground & I'm using Pre-Pay"
and they let me through, as of course they had to.

I presume that if the tea-cup plan were to be implemented, then
gatelines would be installed on the route from the mainline concourse
to the suburban station, thus eliminating this anomaly.

On Tue, 31 May 2005, James Farrar wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:

Hence, i suppose, the name 'T-cup'.

I thought the tea-cup name came from:

/----+---------------\
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| \---------------/

which looks a bit like a tea cup to me

Good god! I think you're right. I knew the tube diagram was an exercise in
fiendish Masonic symbolism, but this, this i had never expected!

How about a route like this:

Hammersmith
Edgware Road
Liverpool Street
Aldgate
Tower Hill
Gloucester Road
Edgware Road (reverse)
Gloucester Road
Tower Hill
Aldgate East
Barking (reverse and do the whole thing backwards)

That, i think you'll find, would make it a tea-pot service!

Now, how can we do scones?

tom

--
power to the people and the beats

Tom Anderson writes:
How about a route like this:

Hammersmith
Edgware Road
Liverpool Street
Aldgate
Tower Hill
Gloucester Road
Edgware Road (reverse)
Gloucester Road
Tower Hill
Aldgate East
Barking (reverse and do the whole thing backwards)

That, i think you'll find, would make it a tea-pot service!

Yep, "Barking" is the word, all right! :-)
--
Mark Brader | "But [he] had already established his own reputation
Toronto | as someone who wrote poetry that mentioned the el."
| --Al Kriman