On Jun 13, 2:59 am, David of Broadway
wrote:
Mr Thant wrote:
On 12 Jun, 18:40, Tom Anderson wrote:
"the service frequency from King's Cross to
Blackfriars makes it almost as good as any other tube line" is also shown
to be an outrageous lie - 8 tph is barely a turn-up-and-go frequency, and
not what i call tube frequency.

The Circle Line, the only other direct service, has a frequency of 7
tph.

But it's a direct service in either direction, so that gives you 14 tph!
--
David of Broadway
New York, NY, USA



I think the Circle Line is generally accepted to be a myth. The
mystery to me is where all the trains go (I suppose not that many)
every time the service stops running in one direction or other.
Diverted to the H & C?

On Tue, 12 Jun 2007, David of Broadway wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:

Thus, my point that the frequency at the suburban stations is too low
to be useful as a tube line stands, and moreover, Jon Morris's point,
which you've helpfully snipped, that "the service frequency from King's
Cross to Blackfriars makes it almost as good as any other tube line" is
also shown to be an outrageous lie - 8 tph is barely a turn-up-and-go
frequency, and not what i call tube frequency. Perhaps if you've been
unlucky enough to grow up out in the western branches of the Magical
District Line Tree, you might think so, but as someone who lives at
Finsbury Park, i don't.

Just as a point of comparison - several NYC subway routes run less
frequently than 8 tph during rush hours. And midday timetables on many
(most?) routes call for 6 tph.

To be fair, what's considered a single route in NYC might in many cases
be considered one branch of a line in London.

Quite so. The New Yorkist idea of a 'line' is different to ours, in that
it's wrong.

But presumably, that does mean that out in the suburbs, where the
lines/branches go their separate ways, the frequency really is down to 6-8
tph. There are places where that's the case in London (or even less -
there are some places with sub-4 tph off-peak service) too, although it's
rare, and they really are at the fringes of the network. Jon's example of
Oakwood is unfortunately one.

tom

--
We must perform a quirkafleeg

On Tue, 12 Jun 2007, Mr Thant wrote:

On 12 Jun, 18:40, Tom Anderson wrote:

My apologies. I was thinking of the post-TLnK plan, where there should be
24 tph through the core, but only 6 tph suburban trains.

Where'd you get that from?

Reading between the lines at:

http://www.alwaystouchout.com/project/23

Not authoritative, of course.

The various sample timetables floating around are pretty vague, but they
all seem to imply minimal changes to the existing routes, with
everything else added around them.

Right - and all the added services are long-distance ones which are very
unlikely to call at Kentish Town, and won't go anyhwere near Elephant.

"the service frequency from King's Cross to Blackfriars makes it almost
as good as any other tube line" is also shown to be an outrageous lie -
8 tph is barely a turn-up-and-go frequency, and not what i call tube
frequency.

The Circle Line, the only other direct service, has a frequency of 7
tph.

If you actually want to go from KX to Blackfriars, then i would certainly
agree that Thameslink is probably your best bet. However, if you want to
go from somewhere-north-of-KX to somewhere-south-of-Blackfriars, it
probably isn't part of your route of choice.

tom

--
We must perform a quirkafleeg

On Jun 13, 3:09 pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
Reading between the lines at:

http://www.alwaystouchout.com/project/23

Which part are you looking at? The list under "service pattern"
includes:

# Bedford - London Bridge - Brighton (4tph)
# Luton - Elephant & Castle - Sutton, Wimbledon (4tph)
clockwise via Sutton then Wimbledon (2tph)
anticlockwise via Wimbledon then Sutton (2tph)

Which I believe is the same as the current basic service pattern,
although without seeing calling patterns it's hard to say.

Right - and all the added services are long-distance ones which are very
unlikely to call at Kentish Town, and won't go anyhwere near Elephant.

The "St Albans - Elephant & Castle - Sevenoaks" train is new, and
could conceivably call at both.

If you actually want to go from KX to Blackfriars, then i would certainly
agree that Thameslink is probably your best bet. However, if you want to
go from somewhere-north-of-KX to somewhere-south-of-Blackfriars, it
probably isn't part of your route of choice.

No. Especially if you're trying get to Kentish Town and you board a St
Albans express, which I've obviously never done.

U

In message , at
15:09:11 on Wed, 13 Jun 2007, Tom Anderson
remarked:
If you actually want to go from KX to Blackfriars, then i would
certainly agree that Thameslink is probably your best bet.

I used it quite often between City Thameslink (which is very close to
Blackfriars of course) and KX.

However, if you want to go from somewhere-north-of-KX to
somewhere-south-of-Blackfriars, it probably isn't part of your route of
choice.

I did LAP-Gatwick a few months ago

And next week I'll probably do Blackfriars-LAP (unless I convince myself
that WestminsterLUL-WestHampstedLUL-LAP is quicker).
--
Roland Perry

On Tue, 12 Jun 2007, jonmorris wrote:

On 12 Jun, 18:40, Tom Anderson wrote:

Jon Morris's point, which you've helpfully snipped, that "the service
frequency from King's Cross to Blackfriars makes it almost as good as
any other tube line" is also shown to be an outrageous lie - 8 tph is
barely a turn-up-and-go frequency, and not what i call tube frequency.

I think a train every 7.5 minutes - or twice that if you need go to
stations that aren't covered by the fast trains) - is quite frequent

Okay. I don't.

You can certainly turn up and go most of the time, although colleagues
at work do look at the timetable. Now, at Farringdon where I work, you
should also use a timetable for the tube lines - but I bet few people
do, even though there is obviously a set pattern for H&C, Circle and Met
line trains. Rest assured, if you need one specific service you'll
potentially wait just as long as for a TL train.

True - relying on specific services on the shallow lines is also something
i've learned not to do.

Perhaps if you've been unlucky enough to grow up out in the western
branches of the Magical District Line Tree, you might think so, but as
someone who lives at Finsbury Park, i don't.

...As someone who used to use Finsbury Park every day (but now goes
through it), I can agree that the Victoria line is certainly better -
but many - or most - other lines (especially in the outer reaches -
such as Oakwood and Cockfosters which were other stations I used a
lot) are anything up to 10 minutes apart or more at certain times of
the day. It's certainly not just the District Line which I've never
understood properly.
Â
Remember, if you're after the Piccadilly Line from Finsbury Park in the
off peak period and want to go to beyond the centre of town then you'll
need to divide up the service frequency between trains going to
different destinations. Lord knows how I used to manage getting to
Oakwood when so many trains suddenly changed to be turned back at Arnos
Grove with about one stations notice!

If you're heading into the branches off-peak, no, things are not so hot.
But that "other lines [...] are anything up to 10 minutes apart or more at
certain times of the day"? If by "anything up to 10 minutes apart or more"
(which as it stands covers rather a range of times!) you mean "10 minutes
apart or more", and you're referring to the major service on a piece of
track (ie not counting the Piccadilly service beyond Rayner's Lane), and
by "certain times" you don't meen right before the trains go to bed, then
i think the number of places where this is true is very small indeed.

tom

--
We must perform a quirkafleeg

On Jun 13, 3:02 pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
But presumably, that does mean that out in the suburbs, where the
lines/branches go their separate ways, the frequency really is down to 6-8
tph. There are places where that's the case in London [...] too, although it's
rare

On the SSL, the service on the Watford, Richmond, Ealing Broadway
(District), and Hammermisth (H&C) branches is 7tph.

The tube lines I'm not sure about, but you don't have to go that far
out to find 10 tph frequencies, especially in the middle of the day.

U

On Jun 13, 3:09 pm, Tom Anderson wrote:

If you actually want to go from KX to Blackfriars, then i would certainly
agree that Thameslink is probably your best bet. However, if you want to
go from somewhere-north-of-KX to somewhere-south-of-Blackfriars, it
probably isn't part of your route of choice.

tom

--
We must perform a quirkafleeg

Two routes where thameslink seems to compete with the tube are from
elephant and castle or london bridge to kings cross. In each case the
thameslink route looks shorter and has fewer intermediate stations,
but thameslink takes longer, in my experience and according to the TfL
journey planner. The trains often wait for 5 - 10 minutes at
blackfriars. Presumably this is to give a robust timetable, but it
surely won't be possible if they want 24tph - what will happen then?

"brixtonite" wrote in message
oups.com...


Two routes where thameslink seems to compete with the tube are from
elephant and castle or london bridge to kings cross. In each case the
thameslink route looks shorter and has fewer intermediate stations,
but thameslink takes longer, in my experience and according to the TfL
journey planner. The trains often wait for 5 - 10 minutes at
blackfriars. Presumably this is to give a robust timetable, but it
surely won't be possible if they want 24tph - what will happen then?


Presumably they will manage 24 tph as predicted - don't forget the whole
line will have been resignalled, the Moorgate branch will be closed,
Blackfriars and Farringdon stations completely rebuilt, the lines to London
Bridge quadrupled, London Bridge completely rebuilt, various flyovers
constructed, Blackfriars terminating platforms moved etc.

I've wondered though, what will be the average speed of successive trains
between St Pancras and Blackfriars, given station dwell times etc, and how
far apart will they be?

Paul

On Wed, 13 Jun 2007, Mr Thant wrote:

On Jun 13, 3:02 pm, Tom Anderson wrote:

But presumably, that does mean that out in the suburbs, where the
lines/branches go their separate ways, the frequency really is down to 6-8
tph. There are places where that's the case in London [...] too, although it's
rare

On the SSL, the service on the Watford, Richmond, Ealing Broadway
(District), and Hammermisth (H&C) branches is 7tph.

Watford and Richmond are the kind of fringey case i was thinking of.
Ealing Broadway also has at least 9 tph of Central line trains.
Hammersmith, though, is an excellent example, and one i'd forgotten about;
a fairly central area with a low frequency service even in the peaks, and
without another service along the same tracks.

The tube lines I'm not sure about, but you don't have to go that far out
to find 10 tph frequencies, especially in the middle of the day.

You know, what we need is a map which shows lines with their frequencies
somehow.

tom

--
intelligence, purity, the potential freedom of space, and the potential
aesthetics of mathematical computations