On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 11:42:55 -0000, Chris Tolley wrote:


Whilst I'm sure that the people of Watford (other than the affected
nimbys) will rejoice, one can't help wondering if this august body has
all its faculties in working order. There are umpteen other East of
England PT projects that should be greater priorities, like increasing
capacity on the ECML, and upgrading cross-country links, especially for
freight flows from the ports.


I think technically there is ample capacity on the ECML, its only
restricted because of the contracts that Network Rail (Railtrack) have
entered into.
Doing things like;
cancelling the NoL Eurostar Paths
banning freight at peak times
increasing the speeds on the slow lines
reducing the line limit to 90 mph south of stevenage
increasing the services to 12 car
would provide enough capacity for the foreseeable future.

Paul

Paul Hutchinson wrote:
I think technically there is ample capacity on the ECML
IOW - "there's no problem with capacity ...

Doing things like;
cancelling the NoL Eurostar Paths
banning freight at peak times
.... so long as you take some trains away."

I think you've contradicted yourself. Don't you?

On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 10:44:36 -0000, Chris Tolley wrote:

Paul Hutchinson wrote:
I think technically there is ample capacity on the ECML
IOW - "there's no problem with capacity ...

Doing things like;
cancelling the NoL Eurostar Paths
banning freight at peak times
... so long as you take some trains away."

I think you've contradicted yourself. Don't you?

No I dont.
As far as I am aware the NOL Eurostars have never run except on test it is
ludicrous that the paths are still reserved.
The freight would simply be timetabled away from pinch times. The only
reason this isnt done is because of the freight operators inflexible
access agreements.

The East Coast Main Line is currently way below the capacity achieved on
the Southern Main Lines every day.

Paul

"Paul Hutchinson" wrote

As far as I am aware the NOL Eurostars have never run except on test it is
ludicrous that the paths are still reserved.

IIRC there was a hearing before the Rail Regulator some time ago when E*
contended that either their paths should stay reserved or they should not
have to pay for them any more. AIUI the outcome was that Network Rail could
resell the paths, subject to E*s right to have them back if they were
actually going to use them, but that meanwhile E* would have to keep paying.
One of the barristers in the hearing before the Rail Regulator was a Mr
Choo-Choy.

Peter

"Peter Masson" wrote

IIRC there was a hearing before the Rail Regulator some time ago when E*
contended that either their paths should stay reserved or they should not
have to pay for them any more. AIUI the outcome was that Network Rail
could
resell the paths, subject to E*s right to have them back if they were
actually going to use them, but that meanwhile E* would have to keep
paying.
One of the barristers in the hearing before the Rail Regulator was a Mr
Choo-Choy.

To add to my previous post, I've now found the ORR Press Notice about the
decision (which is effectively as I outlined). It is at
http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/server/show/ConWebDoc.5407

Peter

Paul Hutchinson wrote:

The East Coast Main Line is currently way below the capacity achieved on
the Southern Main Lines every day.

Of that there is little doubt, in general. But then they are very
different railways, in general. The one which possibly comes closest to
the ECML in character is the SWML, and that has many similar capacity
issues to the ECML, with much the same causes.

(I think it's a great pity that the DN&SR, which was perceived as a
strategically important railway and upgraded in WW2, was allowed to
disappear, but that's an entirely different topic).