Tom Anderson wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 wrote:

Dave Arquati wrote:

wrote:


He (Ken Livingstone) added: "Simply bidding for the Games has
brought forward a host of transport improvements - with the East
London Line extension, the new £400m ticket hall at King's Cross,
and the £91m package of improvements to the North London Line all
given added momentum." What are the improvements to the NLL? £91M
doesn't seem to by much these days so it can't be much of an
improvement.


It should be for:
- signalling enhancements
- improved power supply
- new "resilience measures" to counter late-running freight services - I
think this just means a new/reinstated freight loop
- platform extensions for 6-car trains where necessary
- frequency doubling to 8tph

I'm not sure how they are squeezing the £91m for those measures, but
that's what it's for.


Are they actually planning to increase the length of trains, where
will the extra trains come from, also for increased frequency.
Incredible for a line that 30 years ago BR would hve quite happily
confined to the waste dump (passenger services anyway). I have always
thought the 3 car trains from Euston to Watford Junc needed extra
carriages when you see the overcrowding so would have thought that
this should take priority over the NLL.


The same could be said about the trains on the WAGN lines. I really
don't get Ken's infatuation with the NLL; it's just not serving a
corridor with heavy demand, so why give it so much attention?

It's something he can actually do something about. Silverlink Metro will
be the pilot project for more TfL direction over London railways. It
doesn't suffer the terminal capacity problems that the radial railways
have (which are very expensive to solve - for example, capacity is being
improved at Liverpool Street as part of a cost of £10bn...).

And it may not have the extremely heavy demand of the radial routes like
the West Anglia, but demand is still pretty high. It should also help
improve orbital journeys somewhat, which becomes important when
combating rising car usage outside the very centre. Oh, and it connects
some areas targeted for regeneration - Willesden Junction, Hackney and
Stratford.

Mind you, 91 million isn't exactly a lot.

Correct. I'm not entirely sure how that will be stretched to provide
what it's supposed to, but I'm just a messenger.


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

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 11:48:58 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 wrote:

Dave Arquati wrote:
wrote:

He (Ken Livingstone) added: "Simply bidding for the Games has brought
forward a host of transport improvements - with the East London Line
extension, the new £400m ticket hall at King's Cross, and the £91m
package of improvements to the North London Line all given added
momentum." What are the improvements to the NLL? £91M doesn't seem to
by much these days so it can't be much of an improvement.

It should be for:
- signalling enhancements
- improved power supply
- new "resilience measures" to counter late-running freight services - I
think this just means a new/reinstated freight loop
- platform extensions for 6-car trains where necessary
- frequency doubling to 8tph

I'm not sure how they are squeezing the £91m for those measures, but
that's what it's for.

Are they actually planning to increase the length of trains, where will
the extra trains come from, also for increased frequency. Incredible for
a line that 30 years ago BR would hve quite happily confined to the
waste dump (passenger services anyway). I have always thought the 3 car
trains from Euston to Watford Junc needed extra carriages when you see
the overcrowding

Unfortunately, the entire 313 fleet is already deployed.

With the recent(ish) requirement to withdraw all slam door stock,
there is a serious shortage of 3rd rail EMUs. So you can continue to
cram yourself into the 3 car units safe in the knowledge that it is
for your own Health & Safety.

so would have thought that this should take priority
over the NLL.

The same could be said about the trains on the WAGN lines. I really don't
get Ken's infatuation with the NLL; it's just not serving a corridor with
heavy demand,

Have you BEEN on it during the peaks?

so why give it so much attention?

Mind you, 91 million isn't exactly a lot.

tom

In article ,
asdf wrote:
[the NLL]
Have you BEEN on it during the peaks?

Only when demand is so heavy on the GOBLIN that there are passengers
left stranded on the platform when the trains departs - which happens
about once a month.

--
Mike Bristow - really a very good driver

In article ,
lid (asdf) wrote:

Are they actually planning to increase the length of trains, where
will the extra trains come from, also for increased frequency.
Incredible for a line that 30 years ago BR would hve quite happily
confined to the waste dump (passenger services anyway). I have
always thought the 3 car trains from Euston to Watford Junc needed
extra carriages when you see the overcrowding

Unfortunately, the entire 313 fleet is already deployed.

With the recent(ish) requirement to withdraw all slam door stock,
there is a serious shortage of 3rd rail EMUs. So you can continue to
cram yourself into the 3 car units safe in the knowledge that it is
for your own Health & Safety.

There is (or was) a surplus of class 507/8 units. A few are deployed on
Euston-Watford services and a few in Kent. The latter could transfer to
Euston-Watford services and free up some 313s, surely?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 11:48:58 +0100, Tom Anderson wrote:


The same could be said about the trains on the WAGN lines. I really don't
get Ken's infatuation with the NLL; it's just not serving a corridor with
heavy demand, so why give it so much attention?
Hackne

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 11:48:58 +0100, Tom Anderson wrote:



The same could be said about the trains on the WAGN lines. I really don't
get Ken's infatuation with the NLL; it's just not serving a corridor with
heavy demand, so why give it so much attention?
Hackney Wick is on the N

Four hundred million pounds? For a ticket hall? Are they mad?

--

In a word: Yes

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005, John Hearns wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 11:48:58 +0100, Tom Anderson wrote:

The same could be said about the trains on the WAGN lines. I really don't
get Ken's infatuation with the NLL; it's just not serving a corridor with
heavy demand, so why give it so much attention?

Hackney Wick is on the N

The NLL?

Never seen a usenet stutter before. So, what's the significance of
Hackneys Wicked in Ken's masterplan, then? Or is it just a recognition
that it is simply the most desirable place to live in the whole city?

tom

--
Hit to death in the future head

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005, asdf wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 11:48:58 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 wrote:

Dave Arquati wrote:
wrote:

91m package of improvements to the North London Line

the 3 car trains from Euston to Watford Junc needed extra carriages
when you see the overcrowding

The same could be said about the trains on the WAGN lines. I really
don't get Ken's infatuation with the NLL; it's just not serving a
corridor with heavy demand,

Have you BEEN on it during the peaks?

It has peaks?

tom

--
Hit to death in the future head

"MaxB" wrote in message
...
What about some improvements to the South London Line? Reinstating a
station
at Brixton (with platform level interchange to the main line) would be a
start!
Regards,
Max B

Does anybody have comparative figures of the number of miles of commuter
rail north and south of the Thames and within the M25 ?
Cheerz,
Baz