On Jul 12, 11:32 pm, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"sweek" wrote



Initially, TfL may substitute the current trains running the Euston -
Watford service (aged Class 313 and Class 508 trains) with some
(modified) stock cascaded from the Victoria line after that line
receives its new trains.

i.e. substituting aged (30-year-old) Class 313 and 508 trains with modern
(40-year old) Victoria line stock.



Just what I was thinking, but then I thought "Don't say anything ...
any plan to replace 313s and 508s must be encouraged".

On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 23:31:08 -0700, MIG
wrote:

On Jul 12, 11:32 pm, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"sweek" wrote



Initially, TfL may substitute the current trains running the Euston -
Watford service (aged Class 313 and Class 508 trains) with some
(modified) stock cascaded from the Victoria line after that line
receives its new trains.

i.e. substituting aged (30-year-old) Class 313 and 508 trains with modern
(40-year old) Victoria line stock.

Just what I was thinking, but then I thought "Don't say anything ...
any plan to replace 313s and 508s must be encouraged".

Unfortunately, about the only thing that is more uncomfortable than a
313 on the DC line is a tube train.

"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 23:31:08 -0700, MIG
wrote:

Just what I was thinking, but then I thought "Don't say anything ...
any plan to replace 313s and 508s must be encouraged".

Unfortunately, about the only thing that is more uncomfortable than a
313 on the DC line is a tube train.

Ever since I first heard this, I wondered if passengers really want, or
need, tube stock all the way out to Watford Junction, given the competing
County service for 'whole route' travel. What are the loadings like on the
upper reaches of the DC lines anyway - and is it possible TfL's drive for
high frequency tube style services could get a bit carried away?

If the 378s (4 car of courses) are in use for an intervening few years, with
main line size, comfort, speed and acceleration; are tube trains, even fully
refurbished, really going to cut it?

Paul

On Jul 13, 10:57 pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
"Charles Ellson" wrote in message

...

On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 23:31:08 -0700, MIG
wrote:
Just what I was thinking, but then I thought "Don't say anything ...
any plan to replace 313s and 508s must be encouraged".

Unfortunately, about the only thing that is more uncomfortable than a
313 on the DC line is a tube train.

Ever since I first heard this, I wondered if passengers really want, or
need, tube stock all the way out to Watford Junction, given the competing
County service for 'whole route' travel. What are the loadings like on the
upper reaches of the DC lines anyway - and is it possible TfL's drive for
high frequency tube style services could get a bit carried away?

TfL are pretty much obligated to provide a service to Watford anyway,
so I think the idea is that sending Bakerloo Line trains up is cheaper
than running a whole separate operation.

If the 378s (4 car of courses) are in use for an intervening few years, with
main line size, comfort, speed and acceleration; are tube trains, even fully
refurbished, really going to cut it?

The jump from 3 to 6 trains an hour should be fair compensation.

U

--
http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/

On Fri, 13 Jul 2007, Mr Thant wrote:

On Jul 13, 10:57 pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
"Charles Ellson" wrote in message

...

On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 23:31:08 -0700, MIG
wrote:

Just what I was thinking, but then I thought "Don't say anything ...
any plan to replace 313s and 508s must be encouraged".

Unfortunately, about the only thing that is more uncomfortable than a
313 on the DC line is a tube train.

Ever since I first heard this, I wondered if passengers really want, or
need, tube stock all the way out to Watford Junction, given the
competing County service for 'whole route' travel. What are the
loadings like on the upper reaches of the DC lines anyway - and is it
possible TfL's drive for high frequency tube style services could get a
bit carried away?

Isn't the theory that these services will be for local travel around
Watford - people commuting in to Watford from the south etc? I've
certainly heard that idea in connection with the Croxley Link, so i assume
something similar applies here to some extent.

If not, i'd agree. Tube stock is not really suitable for this service.

TfL are pretty much obligated to provide a service to Watford anyway, so
I think the idea is that sending Bakerloo Line trains up is cheaper than
running a whole separate operation.

TfL are going to be running proper trains along the NLR as well, so no
whole separate operation is needed.

tom

--
The girlfriend of my friend is my enemy.

On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:57:56 +0100, "Paul Scott"
wrote:


"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 23:31:08 -0700, MIG
wrote:

Just what I was thinking, but then I thought "Don't say anything ...
any plan to replace 313s and 508s must be encouraged".

Unfortunately, about the only thing that is more uncomfortable than a
313 on the DC line is a tube train.

Ever since I first heard this, I wondered if passengers really want, or
need, tube stock all the way out to Watford Junction, given the competing
County service for 'whole route' travel. What are the loadings like on the
upper reaches of the DC lines anyway - and is it possible TfL's drive for
high frequency tube style services could get a bit carried away?

Any time I have been down that way the non-rush hour loadings of the
tube trains on the DC line hardly seem to exceed about a dozen people
by the time they reach Harrow. Overall, I would have seen more sense
in the new "Overground" services running to WJ and continuing to cover
the current services into Euston with the Bakerloo services staying as
they are or even reduced. In the past my impression was that outwith
the rush-hours most of the passengers joining the DC line via the
Bakerloo Line had left at the intervening three stations by the time
the trains reached Stonebridge Park.

If the 378s (4 car of courses) are in use for an intervening few years, with
main line size, comfort, speed and acceleration; are tube trains, even fully
refurbished, really going to cut it?

On Jul 13, 3:57 pm, Charles Ellson wrote:

Any time I have been down that way the non-rush hour loadings of the
tube trains on the DC line hardly seem to exceed about a dozen people

Really IMHO what needs to be done - nay should have been done under
WCML PUG - is abandon the DC out of Euston, convert it to AC and have
a full 6 track railway between Euston and Watford.

--
Nick

On Jul 14, 12:57 am, D7666 wrote:
On Jul 13, 3:57 pm, Charles Ellson wrote:

Any time I have been down that way the non-rush hour loadings of the
tube trains on the DC line hardly seem to exceed about a dozen people

Really IMHO what needs to be done - nay should have been done under
WCML PUG - is abandon the DC out of Euston, convert it to AC and have
a full 6 track railway between Euston and Watford.

Well, it's a nice idea, but not without its problems. Where, for
example, would the Bakerloo terminate?

More realistically, if the bit into Euston is abandoned, and the
Bakerloo runs all the Watford services,it will make life a lot simpler
from an electrical supply point of view.

The line can go over to a proper LT 'floating' 4th rail system, rather
than a 4th bonded to the running rails. That means that Bakerloo
stock no longer needs enhanced insulation on the positive side (though
having Stratford - Queens Park services could present a problem at the
latter) .

It gets rid of the nuisance bits electrified on both AC and DC on the
way into Euston (and on the Down Fast at Watford Jcn), which in turn
makes life simpler for S&T. Probably also an opportunity to optimise
section gaps to suit Tube stock.

As for the reservations about using ex-Victoria Line 1967 stock on the
extended Bakerloo, while it isn't ideal, I'd guess that the fact that
they have spent all their working life (apart from going to the depot
at Northumberland Park) underground may mean that they have lasted
rather better than would otherwise be the case.

On Jul 14, 2:49 am, wrote:
On Jul 14, 12:57 am, D7666 wrote:

On Jul 13, 3:57 pm, Charles Ellson wrote:

Any time I have been down that way the non-rush hour loadings of the
tube trains on the DC line hardly seem to exceed about a dozen people

Really IMHO what needs to be done - nay should have been done under
WCML PUG - is abandon the DC out of Euston, convert it to AC and have
a full 6 track railway between Euston and Watford.

Well, it's a nice idea, but not without its problems. Where, for
example, would the Bakerloo terminate?

More realistically, if the bit into Euston is abandoned, and the
Bakerloo runs all the Watford services,it will make life a lot simpler
from an electrical supply point of view.

The line can go over to a proper LT 'floating' 4th rail system, rather
than a 4th bonded to the running rails. That means that Bakerloo
stock no longer needs enhanced insulation on the positive side (though
having Stratford - Queens Park services could present a problem at the
latter) .

It gets rid of the nuisance bits electrified on both AC and DC on the
way into Euston (and on the Down Fast at Watford Jcn), which in turn
makes life simpler for S&T. Probably also an opportunity to optimise
section gaps to suit Tube stock.

As for the reservations about using ex-Victoria Line 1967 stock on the
extended Bakerloo, while it isn't ideal, I'd guess that the fact that
they have spent all their working life (apart from going to the depot
at Northumberland Park) underground may mean that they have lasted
rather better than would otherwise be the case.


I still think a new crossover between Kilburn and Queen's Park and
reopening the platforms at Queen's Park would allow some kind of semi-
fast services to call Euston, South Hampstead, Kilburn (cross tracks),
Queens Park, Wembley, Harrow, Watford etc. All connection options
would remain instead of two stations losing their connection to
Euston. There would surely be enough paths between Queen's Park and
Chalk Farm to include the NLL services as well.

I don't understand why half of Queen's Park station is currently
abandoned.

As for the Victoria Line stock, it hasn't had to deal with the
horrible bends that exist on the Bakerloo either, so it's probably in
a better condition than a lot of stock. The 313s were never fit for
any purpose, so their age is irrelevant.

On Fri, 13 Jul 2007, D7666 wrote:

On Jul 13, 3:57 pm, Charles Ellson wrote:

Any time I have been down that way the non-rush hour loadings of the
tube trains on the DC line hardly seem to exceed about a dozen people

Really IMHO what needs to be done - nay should have been done under WCML
PUG - is abandon the DC out of Euston, convert it to AC and have a full
6 track railway between Euston and Watford.

To what end? It's 4-track north of Watford Junction, so having six tracks
between Euston and there doesn't increase the functional capacity of the
line. The only thing i can think of that you could use these new OHLE
tracks for would be a local service to WJ - and they're doing that pretty
well with DC electrification. Unless you're suggesting a rather more
frequent service to St Albans Abbey?

tom

--
The girlfriend of my friend is my enemy.