In 'ackney,'aggerston and 'oxton hunderground 'ardly 'appens
 

http://www.publications.parliament.u...70627h0006.htm

Martin Linton secured an adjournment debate on the 27th June 2007
about bringing forward the ELLX phase two extension to Clapham
Junction. There were some interesting comments about taking over SLL
services from Victoria to London Bridge into the Overground network,
the need for connections to Finsbury Park, the dropping of the
Wimbledon link and what is described as "creative thinking" by TfL at
Dalston Junction/Kingsland.Does anybody have further details?

In 'ackney,'aggerston and 'oxton hunderground 'ardly 'appens
 

Bob wrote:

http://www.publications.parliament.u...70627h0006.htm

Meg Hillier says:

'I think that we can claim the one staircase at Old Street station, in Shoreditch in the south
of my constituency; the rest belongs to the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for
Islington, North (Jeremy Corbyn).'

Surely the rest of Old Street is in Islington South.

E.

In 'ackney,'aggerston and 'oxton hunderground 'ardly 'appens
 

In message .com, Bob
writes

Martin Linton secured an adjournment debate on the 27th June 2007
about bringing forward the ELLX phase two extension to Clapham
Junction.

I just loved the claim that "6 million people will shift from buses,
cars, the tube and other rail services on to the line".

That'll need a bit more than 4 trains an hour, then!

--
Paul Terry

In 'ackney,'aggerston and 'oxton hunderground 'ardly 'appens
 

eastender wrote:
Bob wrote:

http://www.publications.parliament.u...70627h0006.htm

Meg Hillier says:

'I think that we can claim the one staircase at Old Street station,
in Shoreditch in the south of my constituency; the rest belongs to
the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Islington, North
(Jeremy Corbyn).'

That is a dumb thing for an MP to say. She shouldn't be complaining about
the fact that Old Street has only one entrance in her constituency, when
most stations only have one entrance at all.

In 'ackney,'aggerston and 'oxton hunderground 'ardly 'appens
 

On 4 Jul, 12:15, "John Rowland"
wrote:
Meg Hillier says:

'I think that we can claim the one staircase at Old Street station,
in Shoreditch in the south of my constituency; the rest belongs to
the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Islington, North
(Jeremy Corbyn).'

That is a dumb thing for an MP to say. She shouldn't be complaining about
the fact that Old Street has only one entrance in her constituency, when
most stations only have one entrance at all.

Err, her actual point is that there is only one Tube station in her
constituency, and that even that one doesn't serve her constituency
alone - the point about Old Street entrances is a joke, of sorts.

Compared to most inner-London constituencies, this is indeed poor
provision.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

In 'ackney,'aggerston and 'oxton hunderground 'ardly 'appens
 

On Wed, 4 Jul 2007, Bob wrote:

http://www.publications.parliament.u...70627h0006.htm

Or, for those preferring a slicker interface with wee pictures of the
interlocutors:

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/whall/...7-06-27a.101.1

Martin Linton secured an adjournment debate on the 27th June 2007 about
bringing forward the ELLX phase two extension to Clapham Junction. There
were some interesting comments about taking over SLL services from
Victoria to London Bridge into the Overground network, the need for
connections to Finsbury Park, the dropping of the Wimbledon link

Linton mentions an idea i hadn't heard before, of extending the ELL from
CJ to Wimbledon via the Wimbledon branch of the District line. There's
some capacity available there, clearly, but how do you get from CJ to East
Putney? Doesn't that mean sharing tracks with Windsor line trains? Isn't
that a terrible idea?

and what is described as "creative thinking" by TfL at Dalston
Junction/Kingsland. Does anybody have further details?

Not me, sorry. They can't be considering an off-street walking route, can
they? That would involve underpasses or viaducts that would cost
hojillions. I imagine it won't run to much more than some wider pavements
and re-phased lights.

Things i thought were interesting:

Linton saying:

"[...] most of south London is poorly served by the underground, and that
it suffers badly as a result. It suffers economically because all the
railways go in a purely radial direction to London termini, which is okay
for getting to and from work but useless for getting around town. People
find it much more difficult to get to shops, restaurants and entertainment
centres in south London than in north London."

What? North London has the NLL; south London has two SLLs, and quite an
orbital slant to the Chatham lines. The vast majority of 'getting around
town' in north London is either on radial lines or buses, which the south
has plenty of, so i think he's talking nonsense here.

Linton again, on the usefulness of the orbital line for cross-London
travellers:

"For instance, they will be able to get off a Southampton train at Clapham
Junction, go around the orbital and catch a Hastings train from Peckham,
catch a Glasgow train at Watford or go to Finsbury Park to catch a train
on the east coast main line, if my geography is right. They will be able
to do all that without needing to go through the centre, alight in a
congested terminus, get on the congested Circle line and fight their way
through the crowds."

How many Glasgow trains stop at Watford, then? And how many long-distance
ECML trains at Finsbury Park? And how long will ELL from Clapham Junction
to Finsbury Park take compared to riding in to Victoria and getting the
Victoria line to King's Cross? Indeed, do any of those journeys involve
the Circle line?

"The new route will offer an opportunity to serve the huge population of
12,000 in north Battersea who are remote from stations because of the 1.8
mile gap between Clapham Junction and the next station. I shall certainly
workwith Wandsworth council, I hopeto make a business case for a station
between those two."

Interesting. Where's this 1.8 mile gap? It sounds like he's talking about
north of CJ, but i make it 1.2 miles to Queenstown Road Battersea. Does he
mean south of CJ? I would have called that Wandsworth, i think, and it's
still only 1.4 miles to Wandsworth Common. QRB isn't going to be on the
ELLX; it did occur to me the other day that one could build platforms on
it there without too much trouble, though (although they'd be curved).

Corbyn asks why the NLR is going to be run by a concessionaire, and
Hillier gives him an answer that indicates that she has as little idea as
him about why this is being done. Although Corbers does later say "I study
old railway maps and think about those matters quite a lot", so he's one
of us really!

Brake brings up Land Value Capture. Good man.

tom

--
SOY! SOY! SOY! Soy makes you strong! Strength crushes enemies! SOY!

In 'ackney,'aggerston and 'oxton hunderground 'ardly 'appens
 

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
h.li...
On Wed, 4 Jul 2007, Bob wrote:

http://www.publications.parliament.u...70627h0006.htm

Or, for those preferring a slicker interface with wee pictures of the
interlocutors:

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/whall/...7-06-27a.101.1

Martin Linton secured an adjournment debate on the 27th June 2007 about
bringing forward the ELLX phase two extension to Clapham Junction. There
were some interesting comments about taking over SLL services from
Victoria to London Bridge into the Overground network, the need for
connections to Finsbury Park, the dropping of the Wimbledon link

Linton mentions an idea i hadn't heard before, of extending the ELL from
CJ to Wimbledon via the Wimbledon branch of the District line. There's
some capacity available there, clearly, but how do you get from CJ to East
Putney? Doesn't that mean sharing tracks with Windsor line trains? Isn't
that a terrible idea?


I hadn't heard of this before, but there is a down line from the Windsor
line to East Putney, still plainly visible trailing in on the left at East
Putney station. Its still in use by SWT for depot access and diversions.
Using it for a service to Wimbledon would probably require the Up flyover to
be reinstated, but much of the viaduct is still there.

Sharing with Windsor line trains is about as terrible as sharing with main
line trains in the direction of Croydon and Crystal Palace? There are
probably enough existing trains on the route to flle it under 'difficult but
not impossible'...

Paul

In 'ackney,'aggerston and 'oxton hunderground 'ardly 'appens
 

On Wed, 4 Jul 2007, Paul Scott wrote:


"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
h.li...
On Wed, 4 Jul 2007, Bob wrote:

http://www.publications.parliament.u...70627h0006.htm

Or, for those preferring a slicker interface with wee pictures of the
interlocutors:

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/whall/...7-06-27a.101.1

Martin Linton secured an adjournment debate on the 27th June 2007 about
bringing forward the ELLX phase two extension to Clapham Junction. There
were some interesting comments about taking over SLL services from
Victoria to London Bridge into the Overground network, the need for
connections to Finsbury Park, the dropping of the Wimbledon link

Linton mentions an idea i hadn't heard before, of extending the ELL
from CJ to Wimbledon via the Wimbledon branch of the District line.
There's some capacity available there, clearly, but how do you get from
CJ to East Putney? Doesn't that mean sharing tracks with Windsor line
trains? Isn't that a terrible idea?

I hadn't heard of this before, but there is a down line from the Windsor
line to East Putney, still plainly visible trailing in on the left at
East Putney station. Its still in use by SWT for depot access and
diversions. Using it for a service to Wimbledon would probably require
the Up flyover to be reinstated, but much of the viaduct is still there.

I knew it was used, but didn't know about the ex-viaduct. Although that
would explain the huge brick pilings you see as you go down the line ...

Sharing with Windsor line trains is about as terrible as sharing with main
line trains in the direction of Croydon and Crystal Palace?

Exactly! :)

There are probably enough existing trains on the route to flle it under
'difficult but not impossible'...

I guess i was thinking there were enough trains on the Windsor line that
it would just be impossible, but perhaps not - it is four-track, after
all.

tom

--
Do more with less -- R. Buckminster Fuller

In 'ackney,'aggerston and 'oxton hunderground 'ardly 'appens
 

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Wed, 4 Jul 2007, Bob wrote:

http://www.publications.parliament.u...70627h0006.htm

Or, for those preferring a slicker interface with wee pictures of the
interlocutors:

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/whall/...7-06-27a.101.1


Linton mentions an idea i hadn't heard before, of extending the ELL
from CJ to Wimbledon via the Wimbledon branch of the District line.
There's some capacity available there, clearly, but how do you get
from CJ to East Putney? Doesn't that mean sharing tracks with Windsor
line trains? Isn't that a terrible idea?

In 2000 or so, track utilisation on the Windsor lines was very low (peak
service of 6tph on each of the 4 tracks between Barnes and Waterloo, IIRC)
and I don't think much has changed since.

In 'ackney,'aggerston and 'oxton hunderground 'ardly 'appens
 

In message , John Rowland
writes

In 2000 or so, track utilisation on the Windsor lines was very low (peak
service of 6tph on each of the 4 tracks between Barnes and Waterloo, IIRC)
and I don't think much has changed since.

A rather significant change occurred in late 2004: the up lines (but not
the down lines) were swapped, giving the following pattern (from north
to south)

up slow
up fast
down slow
down fast

This would mean that down services to Wimbledon via East Putney would
have to share the Windsor line, but up services (if the Putney flyover
was to be reinstated) would have to share the slow line.

Probably still not impossible, but it would involve some complex
timetabling - especially since timings of both Windsor and stopping
services are already heavily constrained by the four level crossings on
the two-track part of the line between Barnes and Richmond.
--
Paul Terry

In 'ackney,'aggerston and 'oxton hunderground 'ardly 'appens
 

On Jul 5, 7:16 am, Paul Terry wrote:
A rather significant change occurred in late 2004: the up lines (but not
the down lines) were swapped, giving the following pattern (from north
to south)

up slow
up fast
down slow
down fast

This would mean that down services to Wimbledon via East Putney would
have to share the Windsor line, but up services (if the Putney flyover
was to be reinstated) would have to share the slow line.

Probably still not impossible, but it would involve some complex
timetabling - especially since timings of both Windsor and stopping
services are already heavily constrained by the four level crossings on
the two-track part of the line between Barnes and Richmond.

Future Airtrack requirements from Waterloo to Heathrow also need to
factored into the calculations. There also the question of acess to
the Latchmere and Ludgate routes at CJ.

In 'ackney,'aggerston and 'oxton hunderground 'ardly 'appens
 

On Thu, 5 Jul 2007, Paul Terry wrote:

In message , John Rowland
writes

In 2000 or so, track utilisation on the Windsor lines was very low
(peak service of 6tph on each of the 4 tracks between Barnes and
Waterloo, IIRC) and I don't think much has changed since.

Ah, okay, no problem then.

A rather significant change occurred in late 2004: the up lines (but not
the down lines) were swapped, giving the following pattern (from north
to south)

up slow
up fast
down slow
down fast

This would mean that down services to Wimbledon via East Putney would
have to share the Windsor line, but up services (if the Putney flyover
was to be reinstated) would have to share the slow line.

Really, you want both directions on the slows; that means either a new
viaduct or a flat junction. Given that there's only 6 tph on each track,
the flat junction doesn't seem to bad.

Probably still not impossible, but it would involve some complex
timetabling - especially since timings of both Windsor and stopping
services are already heavily constrained by the four level crossings on
the two-track part of the line between Barnes and Richmond.

Ah yes, that.

tom

--
DO NOT WANT!

In 'ackney,'aggerston and 'oxton hunderground 'ardly 'appens
 

On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 04:54:37PM +0100, Tom Anderson wrote:

"For instance, they will be able to get off a Southampton train at Clapham
Junction, go around the orbital and catch a Hastings train from Peckham,

That would be particularly stupid when you could just get a train to
Hastings from Clapham Junction, or travel via Brighton.

--
David Cantrell | top google result for "internet beard fetish club"

What a lovely day! Now watch me spoil it for you.