Edward Cowling London UK wrote:

Ok, my two pennorth on how to improve the NLL.

1. Get the stations manned ! That will give control over the fare dodgers
who seem to think the service is free. It will also give more control of
the huge amount of haulage that goes on. Plus it will get rid of the
impression that no one is in charge of it.

Agree.

2. Get longer trains now. Not in 5 or 7 years but make it a priority to
get the platforms enlarged and get the 4 carriage trains within the year
and extend to 6 carriages by 2012.

Good idea but... Some stations could have the platforms easily lengthened by
bringing back into service the extremes. Others can't - you're looking at
stations in cuttings or on embankments/viaducts where a lot of demolition
and construction would be needed, with all the planning permissions and
other hassles that involves.

3. Get all the mile long goods trains to run at night. No exceptions.
During the day it's for carrying Londoners, not bags of cement.

Yes but there's not much time at night and then the freight has to run on
other lines as well. How about that freight link bypass for London that's
been proposed on this group?

4. Get the staff trained in how to deal with the public. I see the
problems the Tube got rid of years ago. Not a huge moan about obviously
tired and harassed staff.... they just need training.

No comment - I either hardly ever see staff or the main stations I use
(Stratford, Highbury & Islington, Richmond) have other company staff so it's
hard to know who's who.

On Mar 16, 2:08 pm, "Tim Roll-Pickering" T.C.Roll-
wrote:
Edward Cowling London UK wrote:

Ok, my two pennorth on how to improve the NLL.
1. Get the stations manned ! That will give control over the fare dodgers
who seem to think the service is free. It will also give more control of
the huge amount of haulage that goes on. Plus it will get rid of the
impression that no one is in charge of it.

Agree.

2. Get longer trains now. Not in 5 or 7 years but make it a priority to
get the platforms enlarged and get the 4 carriage trains within the year
and extend to 6 carriages by 2012.

Good idea but... Some stations could have the platforms easily lengthened by
bringing back into service the extremes. Others can't - you're looking at
stations in cuttings or on embankments/viaducts where a lot of demolition
and construction would be needed, with all the planning permissions and
other hassles that involves.

3. Get all the mile long goods trains to run at night. No exceptions.
During the day it's for carrying Londoners, not bags of cement.

Yes but there's not much time at night and then the freight has to run on
other lines as well. How about that freight link bypass for London that's
been proposed on this group?

4. Get the staff trained in how to deal with the public. I see the
problems the Tube got rid of years ago. Not a huge moan about obviously
tired and harassed staff.... they just need training.

No comment - I either hardly ever see staff or the main stations I use
(Stratford, Highbury & Islington, Richmond) have other company staff so it's
hard to know who's who.

Strangely the freight bypass has, in part, recently been mentioned in
a RUS. Unfortunately not the part that would really help the NLL.

The recent freight RUS has suggested that re-
opening of the Oxford, Claydon, Bletchley line could offer a
preferable Up routeing option for Southampton container services.

Unfortunately for the NLL it the Felixstowe container trafic that is,
in part, clogging the NLL. To divert that we need the Bletchly,
Cambridge section, plus some!

Adrian

On Mar 16, 9:35 pm, "Adrian" wrote:

Unfortunately for the NLL it the Felixstowe container trafic that is,
in part, clogging the NLL. To divert that we need the Bletchly,
Cambridge section, plus some!

Not really - Ipswich-Peterborough would do (widening and
electrification, please).

TimB wrote:
On Mar 16, 9:35 pm, "Adrian" wrote:

Unfortunately for the NLL it the Felixstowe container trafic that is,
in part, clogging the NLL. To divert that we need the Bletchly,
Cambridge section, plus some!

Not really - Ipswich-Peterborough would do (widening and
electrification, please).

Part of the problem is the number of larger containers that are currently
only passed for the route via the NLL. IIRC Hutchinson Ports have already
offered to contribute towards gauge enhancements on the Ipswich to
Peterborough route, to allow trains to run that way.

On Mar 16, 10:20 pm, "Jack Taylor" wrote:
plus some!

Not really - Ipswich-Peterborough would do (widening and
electrification, please).

Part of the problem is the number of larger containers that are currently
only passed for the route via the NLL. IIRC Hutchinson Ports have already
offered to contribute towards gauge enhancements on the Ipswich to
Peterborough route, to allow trains to run that way.

Which is what I meant by widening. The sooner the better!

On Fri, 16 Mar 2007, TimB wrote:

On Mar 16, 10:20 pm, "Jack Taylor" wrote:
plus some!

Not really - Ipswich-Peterborough would do (widening and
electrification, please).

Part of the problem is the number of larger containers that are
currently only passed for the route via the NLL. IIRC Hutchinson Ports
have already offered to contribute towards gauge enhancements on the
Ipswich to Peterborough route, to allow trains to run that way.

Which is what I meant by widening. The sooner the better!

I believe the issue with the gauge is not one of width, but rather of
height - the shipping industry of moving from standard containers with a
height of 8'6" to the 'high cube' type with a height of 9'6". Standard
containers will go through the W8 gauge, but high cubes won't; i *think*
high cubes will fit in W9 gauge, but don't quote me on that - it rather
depends on how high the bed of the wagon is.

So, if by 'widening', you meant 'increasing the height', fine. But i wish
you'd said so in the first place!

tom

--
WHO REPLACED THE CLIENT FILES WITH TEQUILA.. ALFONZ??

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Fri, 16 Mar 2007, TimB wrote:

Which is what I meant by widening. The sooner the better!

I believe the issue with the gauge is not one of width, but rather of
height - the shipping industry of moving from standard containers
with a height of 8'6" to the 'high cube' type with a height of 9'6".
Standard containers will go through the W8 gauge, but high cubes
won't; i *think* high cubes will fit in W9 gauge, but don't quote me
on that - it rather depends on how high the bed of the wagon is.

That is correct, AIUI.

On Mar 17, 7:26 pm, Tom Anderson wrote:

I believe the issue with the gauge is not one of width, but rather of
height - the shipping industry of moving from standard containers with a
height of 8'6" to the 'high cube' type with a height of 9'6". Standard
containers will go through the W8 gauge, but high cubes won't; i *think*
high cubes will fit in W9 gauge, but don't quote me on that - it rather
depends on how high the bed of the wagon is.

So, if by 'widening', you meant 'increasing the height', fine. But i wish
you'd said so in the first place!

Yup, ok - horizontal and vertical 'widening' - my fault!

In article ,
(Tom Anderson) wrote:

I believe the issue with the gauge is not one of width, but rather
of height - the shipping industry of moving from standard
containers with a height of 8'6" to the 'high cube' type with a
height of 9'6". Standard containers will go through the W8 gauge,
but high cubes won't; i *think* high cubes will fit in W9 gauge,
but don't quote me on that - it rather depends on how high the bed
of the wagon is.

W10 gauge enhancement is what's needed.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article .com,
(TimB) wrote:

On Mar 16, 10:20 pm, "Jack Taylor" wrote:
plus some!

Not really - Ipswich-Peterborough would do (widening and
electrification, please).

Part of the problem is the number of larger containers that are
currently only passed for the route via the NLL. IIRC Hutchinson
Ports have already offered to contribute towards gauge enhancements
on the Ipswich to Peterborough route, to allow trains to run that
way.

Which is what I meant by widening. The sooner the better!

You going to pay the cost of double tracking from Soham to Ely?

Also, some people here seem to be overlooking that some freight actually
originates and terminates in London!

--
Colin Rosenstiel