|
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
On Feb 19, 9:20*am, Mizter T wrote:
On 19 Feb, 16:38, "Peter Masson" wrote: "John B" wrote Euston is the only sensible destination for a north/south HSL, in simple geography and engineering terms. A link to HS1 to allow NoL trains (which might be viable at 350km/h) would be sensible. Maybe a travelator to KXSP... Exactly. A branch from Heathrow to the HSL (in the Denham area, if the Chiltern corridor is used) would make sense (as suggested by Greengauge), but running the HSL from Euston/St Pancras to Birmingham via Heathrow is likely to be too slow, and certain to be too expensive, to be worthwhile.. Peter Additionally, if space is tight at Euston then the whole station could be rebuilt with longer platforms at the current level stretching to buffer stops just north of Euston Road (or at least north of the course of the Met & Circle lines) and with the station concourse being on the next level up above the platforms. A mighty expensive project of course, plus the main Underground concourse might well be in the way of all this subsurface shenanigans, but that's not an insuperable problem. For local distribution of arrivals Euston Square station needs to be moved. Or, Euston Square should be linked to the mainline and tube stations by a travelator. Adrian Urban groups added for wider readership. |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
On 19 Feb, 21:10, Adrian Auer-Hudson
wrote: On Feb 19, 9:20 am, Mizter T wrote: On 19 Feb, 16:38, "Peter Masson" wrote: "John B" wrote Euston is the only sensible destination for a north/south HSL, in simple geography and engineering terms. A link to HS1 to allow NoL trains (which might be viable at 350km/h) would be sensible. Maybe a travelator to KXSP... Exactly. A branch from Heathrow to the HSL (in the Denham area, if the Chiltern corridor is used) would make sense (as suggested by Greengauge), but running the HSL from Euston/St Pancras to Birmingham via Heathrow is likely to be too slow, and certain to be too expensive, to be worthwhile. Peter Additionally, if space is tight at Euston then the whole station could be rebuilt with longer platforms at the current level stretching to buffer stops just north of Euston Road (or at least north of the course of the Met & Circle lines) and with the station concourse being on the next level up above the platforms. A mighty expensive project of course, plus the main Underground concourse might well be in the way of all this subsurface shenanigans, but that's not an insuperable problem. For local distribution of arrivals Euston Square station needs to be moved. Or, Euston Square should be linked to the mainline and tube stations by a travelator. Adrian Urban groups added for wider readership. Well, if anyone on utl or misc.transport.urban-transit is reading this then I they won't be aware of the context - which basically came from a pretty pie-in-the-sky discussion of where a London terminus/through station for a new British north-south high speed line would be located. Euston appears to be the most realistic suggestion, if a new HSL ever actually got built (and that is a very big if!). However in a further reply to my post Peter Masson pointed out that the platforms at Euston station as they stand could likely handle any new long trains just fine, so my suggestion that Euston might have to be completely rebuilt (never really intended to be that serious) would in fact not even have to enter onto the drawing board. Which would be just as well really, as any new high speed line has less and less chance of ever even being considered the more ostentatious plans for it get. However linking up Euston Square with the rest of Euston might not be a bad ting to aim for in the long run, as has been discussed here many times before - and in the unlikely event that a high speed line into Euston ever got the go ahead then it should definitely be on the cards. In the meantime, passengers transferring between these stations can enjoy the fresh air of the Euston Road! |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
On Feb 19, 2:25*pm, Mizter T wrote:
On 19 Feb, 21:10, Adrian Auer-Hudson wrote: On Feb 19, 9:20 am, Mizter T wrote: On 19 Feb, 16:38, "Peter Masson" wrote: "John B" wrote Euston is the only sensible destination for a north/south HSL, in simple geography and engineering terms. A link to HS1 to allow NoL trains (which might be viable at 350km/h) would be sensible. Maybe a travelator to KXSP... Exactly. A branch from Heathrow to the HSL (in the Denham area, if the Chiltern corridor is used) would make sense (as suggested by Greengauge), but running the HSL from Euston/St Pancras to Birmingham via Heathrow is likely to be too slow, and certain to be too expensive, to be worthwhile. Peter Additionally, if space is tight at Euston then the whole station could be rebuilt with longer platforms at the current level stretching to buffer stops just north of Euston Road (or at least north of the course of the Met & Circle lines) and with the station concourse being on the next level up above the platforms. A mighty expensive project of course, plus the main Underground concourse might well be in the way of all this subsurface shenanigans, but that's not an insuperable problem. For local distribution of arrivals Euston Square station needs to be moved. *Or, Euston Square should be linked to the mainline and tube stations by a travelator. Adrian Urban groups added for wider readership. Well, if anyone on utl or misc.transport.urban-transit is reading this then I they won't be aware of the context - which basically came from a pretty pie-in-the-sky discussion of where a London terminus/through station for a new British north-south high speed line would be located. Euston appears to be the most realistic suggestion, if a new HSL ever actually got built (and that is a very big if!). However in a further reply to my post Peter Masson pointed out that the platforms at Euston station as they stand could likely handle any new long trains just fine, so my suggestion that Euston might have to be completely rebuilt (never really intended to be that serious) would in fact not even have to enter onto the drawing board. Points taken. Which would be just as well really, as any new high speed line has less and less chance of ever even being considered the more ostentatious plans for it get. Sort of: Part of the attraction of HS1 was/is its breadth of vision. Local upgrades form a small part of the overall budget. But I agree that rebuilding Euston would be a tall order. However linking up Euston Square with the rest of Euston might not be a bad ting to aim for in the long run, as has been discussed here many times before - and in the unlikely event that a high speed line into Euston ever got the go ahead then it should definitely be on the cards. In the meantime, passengers transferring between these stations can enjoy the fresh air of the Euston Road! Oh yes, all that fresh CO2. :-) The stations on the northern half of the circle may have made sense in the 1860s. They are inconvenient today. And, said side of the Circle misses interchange possibilities at almost every opportunity. The biggest omission IMHO is not having a station in front of Euston. It would be an expensive mistake to rectify. Adrian Adrian |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
"Adrian" wrote The stations on the northern half of the circle may have made sense in the 1860s. They are inconvenient today. And, said side of the Circle misses interchange possibilities at almost every opportunity. The biggest omission IMHO is not having a station in front of Euston. It would be an expensive mistake to rectify. IIRC the entrance to Euston Square Circle Line station is at the west end of the platforms, and is near enough to Warren Street LUL station as to be considered an interchange. As the Circle Line runs under the Euston Road, and the buffer stops at Euston are a good way short of Euston Road, a perfect interchange would be unduly expensive. However, a much better interchange would be achieved if the entrance to Euston Square station was moved to the east end of the platforms (or a subsidiary entrance provided there). Incidentally, Euston Square station was originally named, more appropriately, Gower Street. It was only renamed in 1909 as a late reaction to the opening of tube stations at Euston on both the Hampstead Tube and the City & South London Railway (now the Charing Cross and Bank branches of the Northern Line). Peter. |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
Adrian wrote: On Feb 19, 2:25pm, Mizter T wrote: On 19 Feb, 21:10, Adrian Auer-Hudson wrote: On Feb 19, 9:20 am, Mizter T wrote: On 19 Feb, 16:38, "Peter Masson" wrote: "John B" wrote Euston is the only sensible destination for a north/south HSL, in simple geography and engineering terms. A link to HS1 to allow NoL trains (which might be viable at 350km/h) would be sensible. Maybe a travelator to KXSP... Exactly. A branch from Heathrow to the HSL (in the Denham area, if the Chiltern corridor is used) would make sense (as suggested by Greengauge), but running the HSL from Euston/St Pancras to Birmingham via Heathrow is likely to be too slow, and certain to be too expensive, to be worthwhile. Peter Additionally, if space is tight at Euston then the whole station could be rebuilt with longer platforms at the current level stretching to buffer stops just north of Euston Road (or at least north of the course of the Met & Circle lines) and with the station concourse being on the next level up above the platforms. A mighty expensive project of course, plus the main Underground concourse might well be in the way of all this subsurface shenanigans, but that's not an insuperable problem. For local distribution of arrivals Euston Square station needs to be moved. Or, Euston Square should be linked to the mainline and tube stations by a travelator. Adrian Urban groups added for wider readership. Well, if anyone on utl or misc.transport.urban-transit is reading this then I they won't be aware of the context - which basically came from a pretty pie-in-the-sky discussion of where a London terminus/through station for a new British north-south high speed line would be located. Euston appears to be the most realistic suggestion, if a new HSL ever actually got built (and that is a very big if!). However in a further reply to my post Peter Masson pointed out that the platforms at Euston station as they stand could likely handle any new long trains just fine, so my suggestion that Euston might have to be completely rebuilt (never really intended to be that serious) would in fact not even have to enter onto the drawing board. Points taken. I didn't mean to be quite as harsh as I came across! I'm just a little wary of being labelled as a fantasist - nothing wrong with flights of fancy per se on usenet of course, I just like to ensure they get appropriately flagged up! All that said, I'm guessing that the current 60's modernist station buildings at Euston won't last forever - indeed I would make the (perhaps quite wrong) assumption that it wasn't aren't built to last in quite the manner that St Pancras or Paddington was. And of course a significant part of the logic behind the 'new' Euston of the 60's was that it should handle parcels traffic effortlessly, hence the expansive parcels deck high above the platforms. The parcels handling function of Euston is now totally dead (at least I'm pretty sure it is!). It is this large parcels deck, floating above the platforms, that made me think a new two level passenger railway station at Euston would be possible - the site would appear to lend itself to such a proposition. Which would be just as well really, as any new high speed line has less and less chance of ever even being considered the more ostentatious plans for it get. Sort of: Part of the attraction of HS1 was/is its breadth of vision. Local upgrades form a small part of the overall budget. But I agree that rebuilding Euston would be a tall order. I was really thinking about whether the platforms would be long enough for a new breed of high speed trains - and the north-south high speed line proposition has the HS2 moniker these days, as HS1 is already with us in the form of the CTRL. However linking up Euston Square with the rest of Euston might not be a bad ting to aim for in the long run, as has been discussed here many times before - and in the unlikely event that a high speed line into Euston ever got the go ahead then it should definitely be on the cards. In the meantime, passengers transferring between these stations can enjoy the fresh air of the Euston Road! Oh yes, all that fresh CO2. :-) In terms of your lungs I think the extra CO2 is the least of your worries! There's some tasty pollutants out there, breath in deep! The stations on the northern half of the circle may have made sense in the 1860s. They are inconvenient today. And, said side of the Circle misses interchange possibilities at almost every opportunity. The biggest omission IMHO is not having a station in front of Euston. It would be an expensive mistake to rectify. Adrian Apart from at Euston and Marylebone I don't really see what's missing with regards to interchange opportunities on the northern (Met) half of the circle. Euston is a big omission, I'll grant you that, Marylebone less so. The platforms at Euston Square stretch from the entrance eastwards - i.e. towards Euston, so there have been various proposals mooted for that new passageways are built at the east end of the platforms to lead directly into the Euston station Underground complex. However even if the platforms weren't moved this would, as you say, be a mighty expensive endeavour. Perhaps this might have to wait until Euston gets rebuilt, if indeed that ever does happen as such. |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
On 19 Feb, 23:41, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"Adrian" wrote The stations on the northern half of the circle may have made sense in the 1860s. They are inconvenient today. And, said side of the Circle misses interchange possibilities at almost every opportunity. The biggest omission IMHO is not having a station in front of Euston. It would be an expensive mistake to rectify. IIRC the entrance to Euston Square Circle Line station is at the west end of the platforms, and is near enough to Warren Street LUL station as to be considered an interchange. As the Circle Line runs under the Euston Road, and the buffer stops at Euston are a good way short of Euston Road, a perfect interchange would be unduly expensive. However, a much better interchange would be achieved if the entrance to Euston Square station was moved to the east end of the platforms (or a subsidiary entrance provided there). Incidentally, Euston Square station was originally named, more appropriately, Gower Street. It was only renamed in 1909 as a late reaction to the opening of tube stations at Euston on both the Hampstead Tube and the City & South London Railway (now the Charing Cross and Bank branches of the Northern Line). Peter. Thanks for the history Peter. Wikipedia led me to this entry on alwaystouchout about Network Rail's plans o totally redevelop Euston, which would include a direct subway link to the Euston Square platforms: http://www.alwaystouchout.com/project/125 It vaguely rings a bell but that's all, I can't say I've heard anything about these plans recently. There's a link to a relevant page on the website of construction economists Franklin + Andrews. One gets the impression that this is all very much at the early stages of exploration. However looking the other way to Warren Street did make me think of a possible lost opportunity here. The major new University College Hospital (UCH) building on the Euston Road opened in 2005 after several years of construction - I'm wondering whether it might have been possible to carve out a bit of the basement so as to provide a subway from Euston Square all the way to Warren Street station. Without major rebuilding at Euston Square it wouldn't have been possible to keep this subway within the fare-paid zone (i.e. interchanging passengers would have to pass out and then back in through gates), and to be honest I can't quite recall whether the subterranean layout at Warren Street would be remotely conducive to such an endeavour. Plus there's the question of what other below surface obstructions there might be, along with the quite understandable reluctance of the hospital to give up space in their basement for this to happen, along with many other questions as to whether this would have been remotely feasible. And of course it ignores the rather crucial fact that the new UCH building has already been built! |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
In message
, at 14:25:31 on Tue, 19 Feb 2008, Mizter T remarked: Well, if anyone on utl or misc.transport.urban-transit is reading this then I they won't be aware of the context - which basically came from a pretty pie-in-the-sky discussion of where a London terminus/through station for a new British north-south high speed line would be located. Euston appears to be the most realistic suggestion, if a new HSL ever actually got built Given that the tracks to Euston divert almost literally half way round northern London (starting let's say in the Wembley area) I have no idea why it's such an "obvious" place to terminate a new line. -- Roland Perry |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
Am Wed, 20 Feb 2008 00:57:13 UTC, schrieb Mizter T
auf uk.railway : Without major rebuilding at Euston Square it wouldn't have been possible to keep this subway within the fare-paid zone (i.e. interchanging passengers would have to pass out and then back in through gates), get rid of the gates, and that problem isn't any any more. :-)) Cheers, L.W. |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
On 20 Feb, 09:23, "Lüko Willms" wrote:
Am Wed, 20 Feb 2008 00:57:13 UTC, schrieb Mizter T auf uk.railway : Without major rebuilding at Euston Square it wouldn't have been possible to keep this subway within the fare-paid zone (i.e. interchanging passengers would have to pass out and then back in through gates), get rid of the gates, and that problem isn't any any more. :-)) Yeah, everyone will just travel for free! |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
Am Wed, 20 Feb 2008 09:37:38 UTC, schrieb Mizter T
auf uk.railway : get rid of the gates, and that problem isn't any any more. :-)) Yeah, everyone will just travel for free! No, check it out in Berlin or Hamburg or Munich ... that can be very costly. Ticket gates are to public transport what DRM (Digital Rights Management) is to digital music and video. Cheers, L.W. |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
On Tue, 19 Feb 2008, Peter Masson wrote:
Incidentally, Euston Square station was originally named, more appropriately, Gower Street. It was only renamed in 1909 as a late reaction to the opening of tube stations at Euston on both the Hampstead Tube and the City & South London Railway (now the Charing Cross and Bank branches of the Northern Line). The story i heard is that it was a Windscale job, renamed after a series of gruesome murders in the area, which had rather tarnished the name of Gower Street. Tarnished it more than the presence of the Godless Institution already had, that is! tom -- At Forkmeeter in 12478, the Wracket Dispersal had reached the first limit of its bounding eastward rush. |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
On Tue, 19 Feb 2008, Mizter T wrote:
Adrian wrote: On Feb 19, 2:25pm, Mizter T wrote: On 19 Feb, 21:10, Adrian Auer-Hudson wrote: On Feb 19, 9:20 am, Mizter T wrote: On 19 Feb, 16:38, "Peter Masson" wrote: "John B" wrote Euston is the only sensible destination for a north/south HSL, in simple geography and engineering terms. A link to HS1 to allow NoL trains (which might be viable at 350km/h) would be sensible. Maybe a travelator to KXSP... Exactly. A branch from Heathrow to the HSL (in the Denham area, if the Chiltern corridor is used) would make sense (as suggested by Greengauge), but running the HSL from Euston/St Pancras to Birmingham via Heathrow is likely to be too slow, and certain to be too expensive, to be worthwhile. Additionally, if space is tight at Euston then the whole station could be rebuilt with longer platforms at the current level stretching to buffer stops just north of Euston Road (or at least north of the course of the Met & Circle lines) and with the station concourse being on the next level up above the platforms. A mighty expensive project of course, plus the main Underground concourse might well be in the way of all this subsurface shenanigans, but that's not an insuperable problem. How might the underground concourse be a problem? It's below the level of the platforms you'd be extending, no? The bus station, though, is right in the way. You could move it underground, but that would mean getting rid of the extant underground car park and taxi rank. You might be able to integrate the bus station and taxi rank, though, and i'd be happy to see the car park go: all that does is enable behaviours involving driving a car in central London, something which should be strongly discouraged. Euston appears to be the most realistic suggestion, if a new HSL ever actually got built (and that is a very big if!). I used to think this. However, i now think that the main consideration is the provision of a link to HS1 - it would be absolute madness, and a shafting of future generations, if HS2 was built in such a way that through services to HS1 were not well catered for. Whilst London-terminating services could go anywhere, you have to have a solution for large numbers of trains just passing through. I see three options he - have HS2 run into St Pancras, via some combination of tunnel and the Midland main line route; use that as the terminus, and run through services by reversing - have HS2 run down the WCML, with terminators going to Euston, and through trains running over new tracks along the Primrose Hill link to the NLL, and thus HS1, building a new station for through services at the north end of the KX railway lands - have HS2 run down the WCML, with terminators going to Euston, and through services going to an underground station lying along Euston Road, linked to Euston and KXSP at either end, with more tunnel at the end linking to HS1 The second option involves a really annoyingly placed new station, with crap local transport links; the third option would be astronomically expensive. The first option is probably the only practical one, and cuts Euston out altogether. And of course a significant part of the logic behind the 'new' Euston of the 60's was that it should handle parcels traffic effortlessly, hence the expansive parcels deck high above the platforms. The parcels handling function of Euston is now totally dead (at least I'm pretty sure it is!). It is this large parcels deck, floating above the platforms, that made me think a new two level passenger railway station at Euston would be possible - the site would appear to lend itself to such a proposition. I have a rival suggestion - reuse the vertical space for a huge office block, and use the money from that to compensate for getting rid of the horrible buildings between the current station front and the street. Move the bus station to where the underground carpark is now, as above. Thus, having freed up all the space between the station and the road, turn Euston Square into a genuinely useful and wonderful part of the public realm, without buildings, railings and roads crucifying it. The stations on the northern half of the circle may have made sense in the 1860s. They are inconvenient today. And, said side of the Circle misses interchange possibilities at almost every opportunity. The biggest omission IMHO is not having a station in front of Euston. It would be an expensive mistake to rectify. Apart from at Euston and Marylebone I don't really see what's missing with regards to interchange opportunities on the northern (Met) half of the circle. Since we're in pie-in-the-sky land ... Circle line platforms at Warren Street, allowing interchange to Northern and Victoria without congesting Euston or King's Cross, and at Regent's Park, allowing interchange to the Bakerloo without congesting Baker Street. A proper link between the Circle and Bakerloo platforms at Edgware Road, ditto. While i'm at it, a proper Bayswater / Queensway link, and disposition of the platforms at Baker Street so that all eastboun trains call at the same platforms, so you don't have to choose between the Circle and Met platforms, and risk missing a train. Oh, and a station at Mount Pleasant! tom -- At Forkmeeter in 12478, the Wracket Dispersal had reached the first limit of its bounding eastward rush. |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
On 20 Feb, 12:27, Tom Anderson wrote:
Whilst London-terminating services could go anywhere, you have to have a solution for large numbers of trains just passing through. I see three options he - have HS2 run into St Pancras, via some combination of tunnel and the Midland main line route; use that as the terminus, and run through services by reversing - have HS2 run down the WCML, with terminators going to Euston, and through trains running over new tracks along the Primrose Hill link to the NLL, and thus HS1, building a new station for through services at the north end of the KX railway lands - have HS2 run down the WCML, with terminators going to Euston, and through services going to an underground station lying along Euston Road, linked to Euston and KXSP at either end, with more tunnel at the end linking to HS1 The second option involves a really annoyingly placed new station, with crap local transport links; the third option would be astronomically expensive. The first option is probably the only practical one, and cuts Euston out altogether. Or 4) have HS2 run down the WCML, with terminators going to Euston, and through trains running over new tracks along the Primrose Hill link to the NLL, and thus HS1, with a Watford - Stratford - Ebbsfleet stopping pattern. It's cheaper, uses Euston space rather than scarcer St Pancras space, provides useful suburban connections, and means that through trains from the North to HS1 aren't delayed by a reversal combined with most of a trainload of HS2 passengers getting on and most of a trainload of HS1 passengers getting off. And if capacity on HS1 and HS2 becomes so scarce by 2040 that it's inefficient to use separate paths for through and terminating trains, then there's still scope to build the Primrose Hill station and link it to the Euston road with trams, maglevs, travelators, human trebuchets, etc. [we're also assuming here that either the insane rules on NoL trains to Europe will be repealed, or that there's a sizeable market for high- speed rail from Manchester to Chatham, Folkestone and Dover] -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
Tom Anderson writes:
While i'm at it, a proper Bayswater / Queensway link, and disposition of the platforms at Baker Street so that all eastboun trains call at the same platforms, so you don't have to choose between the Circle and Met platforms, and risk missing a train. Oh, and a station at Mount Pleasant! What about the combining the Eastbound H&C and Circle/District platforms at Paddington? |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008, John B wrote:
On 20 Feb, 12:27, Tom Anderson wrote: Whilst London-terminating services could go anywhere, you have to have a solution for large numbers of trains just passing through. I see three options he - have HS2 run into St Pancras, via some combination of tunnel and the Midland main line route; use that as the terminus, and run through services by reversing - have HS2 run down the WCML, with terminators going to Euston, and through trains running over new tracks along the Primrose Hill link to the NLL, and thus HS1, building a new station for through services at the north end of the KX railway lands - have HS2 run down the WCML, with terminators going to Euston, and through services going to an underground station lying along Euston Road, linked to Euston and KXSP at either end, with more tunnel at the end linking to HS1 The second option involves a really annoyingly placed new station, with crap local transport links; the third option would be astronomically expensive. The first option is probably the only practical one, and cuts Euston out altogether. Or 4) have HS2 run down the WCML, with terminators going to Euston, and through trains running over new tracks along the Primrose Hill link to the NLL, and thus HS1, with a Watford - Stratford - Ebbsfleet stopping pattern. So no stop in central London for Scotland - France trains? I'd say that was a complete non-starter, myself. It's cheaper, uses Euston space rather than scarcer St Pancras space, Is St Pancras space scarce? There are about a million Eurostar platforms now. Many aren't in use, as they're for domestic services, but even so, there really are a good number. provides useful suburban connections, Yes, but no more so than if there was a central London stop too. and means that through trains from the North to HS1 aren't delayed by a reversal combined with most of a trainload of HS2 passengers getting on and most of a trainload of HS1 passengers getting off. I don't see that the reversal per se would take much time: it's not like they have to run a loco around, and drivers could step back - London would be a natural place for a crew change anyway. The other elements of the stop would of course take time, but it's a fairly small addition to what is already quite a long journey, and doing it makes more seats available between the North and London, and London and Kent/France (Kent-Outre-Mer?), which are the corridors with the most demand. And if capacity on HS1 and HS2 becomes so scarce by 2040 that it's inefficient to use separate paths for through and terminating trains, then there's still scope to build the Primrose Hill station Just to clarify, i wasn't suggesting building a station in the vicinity of Primrose Hill; that's where the link from WCML to NLL is. I'm sure you knew that. If we were to build a station round there, though, i'm sure it would help relieve the congestion at Camden Town! The 'central' London station would be at the end of the King's Cross Railway Lands. The name Maiden Lane could be resurrected, but you know they'd call it St Pancras North or something asinine like that. and link it to the Euston road with trams, maglevs, travelators, human trebuchets, etc. True. Or, indeed, to build the underground station, or to run trains along the NLL and then down into St Pancras - there is a curve which allows this. Anyway, i doubt that paths will run out, but trains themselves are not cheap; i doubt the cross-London traffic will be enough to justify more than a couple a day, whereas if they stopped in London too, they could be a lot more frequent, and so offer a more convenient service to cross-London passengers. [we're also assuming here that either the insane rules on NoL trains to Europe will be repealed, Yes. or that there's a sizeable market for high- speed rail from Manchester to Chatham, Folkestone and Dover] That (even for a definition of 'Manchester' which includes Birmingham, Liverpool, Scotland, etc), not so much. Although if HS2 goes via Heathrow, there might be a lot of people travelling there from Kent. tom -- At Forkmeeter in 12478, the Wracket Dispersal had reached the first limit of its bounding eastward rush. |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008, Graham Murray wrote:
Tom Anderson writes: While i'm at it, a proper Bayswater / Queensway link, and disposition of the platforms at Baker Street so that all eastboun trains call at the same platforms, so you don't have to choose between the Circle and Met platforms, and risk missing a train. Oh, and a station at Mount Pleasant! What about the combining the Eastbound H&C and Circle/District platforms at Paddington? I'm assuming the entire H&C will be transferred to Crossrail, as it so manifestly should be! :) tom -- At Forkmeeter in 12478, the Wracket Dispersal had reached the first limit of its bounding eastward rush. |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 17:08:38 +0000, Tom Anderson
wrote: On Wed, 20 Feb 2008, John B wrote: On 20 Feb, 12:27, Tom Anderson wrote: Whilst London-terminating services could go anywhere, you have to have a solution for large numbers of trains just passing through. I see three options he - have HS2 run into St Pancras, via some combination of tunnel and the Midland main line route; use that as the terminus, and run through services by reversing - have HS2 run down the WCML, with terminators going to Euston, and through trains running over new tracks along the Primrose Hill link to the NLL, and thus HS1, building a new station for through services at the north end of the KX railway lands - have HS2 run down the WCML, with terminators going to Euston, and through services going to an underground station lying along Euston Road, linked to Euston and KXSP at either end, with more tunnel at the end linking to HS1 The second option involves a really annoyingly placed new station, with crap local transport links; the third option would be astronomically expensive. The first option is probably the only practical one, and cuts Euston out altogether. Or 4) have HS2 run down the WCML, with terminators going to Euston, and through trains running over new tracks along the Primrose Hill link to the NLL, and thus HS1, with a Watford - Stratford - Ebbsfleet stopping pattern. So no stop in central London for Scotland - France trains? I'd say that was a complete non-starter, myself. Why should there be ? If the train is providing a Scotland (or bits of England between SCT and London)-France service then London is merely an intermediate stop which is already served by other trains for shorter journeys along the same way. The mentality that insists "everything must stop in London" is one of the impediments to a properly-organised transport system which does not have parallels in most other countries. Leaving out London is no different from the omission of other "important" places on other journeys when made so that a proper service is provided between other places along a route. It's cheaper, uses Euston space rather than scarcer St Pancras space, Is St Pancras space scarce? There are about a million Eurostar platforms now. Many aren't in use, as they're for domestic services, but even so, there really are a good number. provides useful suburban connections, Yes, but no more so than if there was a central London stop too. and means that through trains from the North to HS1 aren't delayed by a reversal combined with most of a trainload of HS2 passengers getting on and most of a trainload of HS1 passengers getting off. I don't see that the reversal per se would take much time: it's not like they have to run a loco around, and drivers could step back - London would be a natural place for a crew change anyway. The other elements of the stop would of course take time, but it's a fairly small addition to what is already quite a long journey, and doing it makes more seats available between the North and London, and London and Kent/France (Kent-Outre-Mer?), which are the corridors with the most demand. And if capacity on HS1 and HS2 becomes so scarce by 2040 that it's inefficient to use separate paths for through and terminating trains, then there's still scope to build the Primrose Hill station Just to clarify, i wasn't suggesting building a station in the vicinity of Primrose Hill; that's where the link from WCML to NLL is. I'm sure you knew that. If we were to build a station round there, though, i'm sure it would help relieve the congestion at Camden Town! The 'central' London station would be at the end of the King's Cross Railway Lands. The name Maiden Lane could be resurrected, but you know they'd call it St Pancras North or something asinine like that. and link it to the Euston road with trams, maglevs, travelators, human trebuchets, etc. True. Or, indeed, to build the underground station, or to run trains along the NLL and then down into St Pancras - there is a curve which allows this. Anyway, i doubt that paths will run out, but trains themselves are not cheap; i doubt the cross-London traffic will be enough to justify more than a couple a day, whereas if they stopped in London too, they could be a lot more frequent, and so offer a more convenient service to cross-London passengers. [we're also assuming here that either the insane rules on NoL trains to Europe will be repealed, Yes. or that there's a sizeable market for high- speed rail from Manchester to Chatham, Folkestone and Dover] That (even for a definition of 'Manchester' which includes Birmingham, Liverpool, Scotland, etc), not so much. Although if HS2 goes via Heathrow, there might be a lot of people travelling there from Kent. tom |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 11:47:58 +0100, "L=?ISO-8859-1?B?/A==?=ko Willms"
wrote: No, check it out in Berlin or Hamburg or Munich ... that can be very costly. Doesn't stop a lot of people doing it. Ticket gates are to public transport what DRM (Digital Rights Management) is to digital music and video. Hardly. Ticket gates don't stop you using the transport in a reasonable manner; DRM stops you using music in a reasonable (to the average listener) manner. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 11:55:13 +0000, Tom Anderson
wrote: The story i heard is that it was a Windscale job, renamed after a series of gruesome murders in the area, which had rather tarnished the name of Gower Street. Tarnished it more than the presence of the Godless Institution already had, that is! TfL surveyors have been about Euston itself and Euston Square of late trying to ascertain flows. Could it be that they're proposing a new entrance, perhaps disabled-accessible, at the Euston station end? Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 18:01:31 +0000, Charles Ellson
wrote: Why should there be ? If the train is providing a Scotland (or bits of England between SCT and London)-France service then London is merely an intermediate stop which is already served by other trains for shorter journeys along the same way. The mentality that insists "everything must stop in London" is one of the impediments to a properly-organised transport system which does not have parallels in most other countries. Hardly. More like, if London were omitted any Scotland-France service would be hopelessly uneconomic. That's largely what killed NoL E*. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
|
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 20:33:07 +0000, Charles Ellson
wrote: When did Eurostar operate directly from Scotland to France ? It was going to do so - the NoL Eurostar. It didn't happen because it wouldn't have been economic without being able to also carry Scotland-London and London-France passengers on the same trains. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
|
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 11:55:13 +0000, Tom Anderson wrote
On Tue, 19 Feb 2008, Peter Masson wrote: Incidentally, Euston Square station was originally named, more appropriately, Gower Street. It was only renamed in 1909 as a late reaction to the opening of tube stations at Euston on both the Hampstead Tube and the City & South London Railway (now the Charing Cross and Bank branches of the Northern Line). The story i heard is that it was a Windscale job, renamed after a series of gruesome murders in the area, which had rather tarnished the name of Gower Street. Tarnished it more than the presence of the Godless Institution already had, that is! What's "a Windscale job"? ....other than employment at the UKAEA's Windscale plant in Cumbria, of course! |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
"Stimpy" wrote in message
. co.uk... On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 11:55:13 +0000, Tom Anderson wrote On Tue, 19 Feb 2008, Peter Masson wrote: Incidentally, Euston Square station was originally named, more appropriately, Gower Street. It was only renamed in 1909 as a late reaction to the opening of tube stations at Euston on both the Hampstead Tube and the City & South London Railway (now the Charing Cross and Bank branches of the Northern Line). The story i heard is that it was a Windscale job, renamed after a series of gruesome murders in the area, which had rather tarnished the name of Gower Street. Tarnished it more than the presence of the Godless Institution already had, that is! What's "a Windscale job"? He means changing the name of something that has developed a tarnished reputation. After the Windscale fire in 1957 they changed the name of the plant to Sellafield in 1961. -- David Biddulph |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 23:17:06 +0000, David Biddulph wrote
The story i heard is that it was a Windscale job, renamed after a series of gruesome murders in the area, which had rather tarnished the name of Gower Street. Tarnished it more than the presence of the Godless Institution already had, that is! What's "a Windscale job"? He means changing the name of something that has developed a tarnished reputation. After the Windscale fire in 1957 they changed the name of the plant to Sellafield in 1961. It didn't happen *quite* like that... The site was called Sellafield when it was a Royal Ordnance factory in the 1930's. In 1947, the Calder Hall power station, the Sellafield weapons factory and the Windscale research piles were grouped under common administration and the whole site was called Windscale. The component sites retained their individual names. In 1981, the production and research arms were formally separated, rather than being several (differently named) sites under one owner - the production & industrial (BNFL) part of the site remained Sellafield whilst the research and academic (UKAEA) facility remained Windscale. In general, the public didn't differentiate the different areas of the site whilst it was all under UKAEA control. This distinction only entered use when the production facility was hived off to BNFL and the site name 'Sellafield' entered common public usage. Nothing was renamed - the 'factory' has always been Sellafield, and the 'research' has always been done at Windscale. |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
|
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
In message , at 00:01:28 on
Thu, 21 Feb 2008, Charles Ellson remarked: When did Eurostar operate directly from Scotland to France ? It was going to do so - the NoL Eurostar. It didn't happen because it wouldn't have been economic without being able to also carry Scotland-London and London-France passengers on the same trains. If it never ran then there was no way of knowing what would actually happen. Many new services which really have run have enjoyed better than forecast figures. And some enjoy worse than forecast (Robin Hood line, for example). As the low cost airlines have shown, it's also important to be able to tune your services, to keep the load factors up. Stansted/Geneva seems to have lot several flights to Gatwick this year, for example. But the "tuning out" of Ashford seems to have caused quite a stir! -- Roland Perry |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
Am Thu, 21 Feb 2008 00:01:28 UTC, schrieb Charles Ellson
auf uk.railway : It was going to do so - the NoL Eurostar. It didn't happen because it wouldn't have been economic without being able to also carry Scotland-London and London-France passengers on the same trains. If it never ran then there was no way of knowing what would actually happen. Many new services which really have run have enjoyed better than forecast figures. It was the opinion of the Arthur D. Little report "Review of regional Eurostar services: summary report" http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/passenger/europe/reviewofregionaleurostarserv3325 especially section 4 in the chapter linked below: http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/passenger/europe/reviewofregionaleurostarserv3325?page=11#a1014 Cheers, L.W. |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
Stimpy wrote:
It didn't happen *quite* like that... The site was called Sellafield when it was a Royal Ordnance factory in the 1930's. In 1947, the Calder Hall power station, the Sellafield weapons factory and the Windscale research piles were grouped under common administration and the whole site was called Windscale. The component sites retained their individual names. In 1981, the production and research arms were formally separated, rather than being several (differently named) sites under one owner - the production & industrial (BNFL) part of the site remained Sellafield whilst the research and academic (UKAEA) facility remained Windscale. In general, the public didn't differentiate the different areas of the site whilst it was all under UKAEA control. This distinction only entered use when the production facility was hived off to BNFL and the site name 'Sellafield' entered common public usage. Nothing was renamed - the 'factory' has always been Sellafield, and the 'research' has always been done at Windscale. This might be what happened in official terms, but as far as the media were concerned the whole site was Windscale until the late 1970s or early 1980s, when the site was in the news because of finds of radioactive contamination in the area (including Seascale beach) and Greenpeace attempting to block the outfall pipe into the Irish Sea on several occasions. After that, as far as media reporting was concerned, the name of the site suddenly became Sellafield. A lot of people read all sorts of things into the apparent change of name... -- Jeremy Double jmd.nospam@btinternet {real email address, include the nospam!} Steam and transport photos at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jmdoubl...7603834894248/ |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
Charles Ellson wrote:
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 17:08:38 +0000, Tom Anderson wrote: On Wed, 20 Feb 2008, John B wrote: On 20 Feb, 12:27, Tom Anderson wrote: Whilst London-terminating services could go anywhere, you have to have a solution for large numbers of trains just passing through. I see three options he - have HS2 run into St Pancras, via some combination of tunnel and the Midland main line route; use that as the terminus, and run through services by reversing - have HS2 run down the WCML, with terminators going to Euston, and through trains running over new tracks along the Primrose Hill link to the NLL, and thus HS1, building a new station for through services at the north end of the KX railway lands - have HS2 run down the WCML, with terminators going to Euston, and through services going to an underground station lying along Euston Road, linked to Euston and KXSP at either end, with more tunnel at the end linking to HS1 The second option involves a really annoyingly placed new station, with crap local transport links; the third option would be astronomically expensive. The first option is probably the only practical one, and cuts Euston out altogether. Or 4) have HS2 run down the WCML, with terminators going to Euston, and through trains running over new tracks along the Primrose Hill link to the NLL, and thus HS1, with a Watford - Stratford - Ebbsfleet stopping pattern. So no stop in central London for Scotland - France trains? I'd say that was a complete non-starter, myself. Why should there be ? If the train is providing a Scotland (or bits of England between SCT and London)-France service then London is merely an intermediate stop which is already served by other trains for shorter journeys along the same way. The mentality that insists "everything must stop in London" is one of the impediments to a properly-organised transport system which does not have parallels in most other countries. Leaving out London is no different from the omission of other "important" places on other journeys when made so that a proper service is provided between other places along a route. At one time there was a train from Scotland to Harwich which used the North London Line but did not stop at a London terminus. They cancelled it because too many people used it. -- Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management decisions. -From “Rollerball” |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
In message
Martin Edwards wrote: [snip] At one time there was a train from Scotland to Harwich which used the North London Line but did not stop at a London terminus. They cancelled it because too many people used it. That sounds like an urban mcmyth. -- Graeme Wall This address is not read, substitute trains for rail. Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
On 21 Feb, 09:13, Martin Edwards wrote:
At one time there was a train from Scotland to Harwich which used the North London Line but did not stop at a London terminus. They cancelled it because too many people used it. Err, cite? [happy to believe that there was a train and that it was cancelled] -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
John B wrote:
On 21 Feb, 09:13, Martin Edwards wrote: At one time there was a train from Scotland to Harwich which used the North London Line but did not stop at a London terminus. They cancelled it because too many people used it. Err, cite? [happy to believe that there was a train and that it was cancelled] -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org Sorry, I really can't remember, but I took it from Birmingham to Chelmsford several times. There was a great view of the "Scrubs". -- Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management decisions. -From “Rollerball” |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
Graeme Wall wrote:
In message Martin Edwards wrote: [snip] At one time there was a train from Scotland to Harwich which used the North London Line but did not stop at a London terminus. They cancelled it because too many people used it. That sounds like an urban mcmyth. See the post which should come in above. -- Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management decisions. -From “Rollerball” |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
Martin Edwards wrote:
John B wrote: On 21 Feb, 09:13, Martin Edwards wrote: At one time there was a train from Scotland to Harwich which used the North London Line but did not stop at a London terminus. They cancelled it because too many people used it. Err, cite? [happy to believe that there was a train and that it was cancelled] Sorry, I really can't remember, but I took it from Birmingham to Chelmsford several times. There was a great view of the "Scrubs". I believe this is the train which was discussed on That's Life. BR wanted to get rid of it, but they weren't allowed to, because too many people used it. So they omitted it from all public timetables for a few years, but carried on running it. When this caused usage to plummet, they were then allowed to get rid of it. This would be approx 1980. |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
In message , at 15:57:14 on Thu,
21 Feb 2008, John Rowland remarked: On 21 Feb, 09:13, Martin Edwards wrote: At one time there was a train from Scotland to Harwich which used the North London Line but did not stop at a London terminus. They cancelled it because too many people used it. Err, cite? [happy to believe that there was a train and that it was cancelled] Sorry, I really can't remember, but I took it from Birmingham to Chelmsford several times. There was a great view of the "Scrubs". I believe this is the train which was discussed on That's Life. BR wanted to get rid of it, but they weren't allowed to, because too many people used it. So they omitted it from all public timetables for a few years, but carried on running it. When this caused usage to plummet, they were then allowed to get rid of it. This would be approx 1980. Edinburgh to Harwich features in the index, and Table 18, of my 1974/5 timetable. Although there are no especially long distance through trains, but connections to Edinburgh are shown. The route is via Ely and Peterborough. -- Roland Perry |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008, Stimpy wrote:
On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 23:17:06 +0000, David Biddulph wrote The story i heard is that it was a Windscale job, renamed after a series of gruesome murders in the area, which had rather tarnished the name of Gower Street. Tarnished it more than the presence of the Godless Institution already had, that is! What's "a Windscale job"? He means changing the name of something that has developed a tarnished reputation. After the Windscale fire in 1957 they changed the name of the plant to Sellafield in 1961. It didn't happen *quite* like that... (snip) Interesting info, thanks. Nonetheless, whether accurate or not, the perception of a section of the public is that the name was changed to erase memories of the Windscale incident. And, as Sellars and Yeatman sagely observed "history is what you can remember". :) tom -- Once, at a fair on the Heath, [Geoffrey Fletcher] overheard a man saying that Hampstead wasn't thrilling enough. Fletcher reached over in the darkness and stuck an ice lolly down the back of his shirt. |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
On Thu, 21 Feb 2008, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:57:14 on Thu, 21 Feb 2008, John Rowland remarked: On 21 Feb, 09:13, Martin Edwards wrote: At one time there was a train from Scotland to Harwich which used the North London Line but did not stop at a London terminus. They cancelled it because too many people used it. Err, cite? [happy to believe that there was a train and that it was cancelled] Sorry, I really can't remember, but I took it from Birmingham to Chelmsford several times. There was a great view of the "Scrubs". I believe this is the train which was discussed on That's Life. BR wanted to get rid of it, but they weren't allowed to, because too many people used it. So they omitted it from all public timetables for a few years, but carried on running it. When this caused usage to plummet, they were then allowed to get rid of it. This would be approx 1980. Edinburgh to Harwich features in the index, and Table 18, of my 1974/5 timetable. Although there are no especially long distance through trains, but connections to Edinburgh are shown. The route is via Ely and Peterborough. Anglia Railways ran a train from the GEML (can't remember where) to Reading or something, ISTR; that went via the NLL. *gogols* London Crosslink, that was it. Chelmsford (or Ipswich, according to some sources) to Basingstoke, apparently; i would have assumed it was Basingstoke via Reading, but from the sound of this (from a press release): "The first of the schemes given the go ahead today was proposed by train operator Anglia Railways. The innovative Crosslink service will run from Chelmsford to Basingstoke across North London using new rolling stock. It will provide a link to Heathrow via Feltham Gateway and to the Millennium Dome via Stratford, as well as three Underground interchanges and a link to Thameslink services. The new route aims to attract people who currently use the congested A12/M25 corridors. The SSRA has agreed in principle to support the development of the Crosslink service over three years to the tune of approximately L2.8 million, subject to finalising legal documentation, and the service should be up and running by May 2000 if detailed negotiations are successfully completed by the train operator. The scheme is subject to agreement on train paths between Anglia Railways and Railtrack." It went via Feltham and Staines. How? I've turned up mentions of Richmond, too; can you come down the NLL into Richmond and carry onto the Windsor lines? Anyway, it didn't do well. It wasn't well advertised, and it was also rather slow, due to the congestion and all that - it interacted with the GEML, the NLL and the Windsor lines, so it must have been a nightmare to run reliably. Still, being able to catch a direct train from High & I to Feltham would have been handy! tom -- Once, at a fair on the Heath, [Geoffrey Fletcher] overheard a man saying that Hampstead wasn't thrilling enough. Fletcher reached over in the darkness and stuck an ice lolly down the back of his shirt. |
How to terminate a North-South HSL in London?
On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 17:33:57 +0000, Tom Anderson
wrote: On Wed, 20 Feb 2008, Stimpy wrote: On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 23:17:06 +0000, David Biddulph wrote The story i heard is that it was a Windscale job, renamed after a series of gruesome murders in the area, which had rather tarnished the name of Gower Street. Tarnished it more than the presence of the Godless Institution already had, that is! What's "a Windscale job"? He means changing the name of something that has developed a tarnished reputation. After the Windscale fire in 1957 they changed the name of the plant to Sellafield in 1961. It didn't happen *quite* like that... (snip) Interesting info, thanks. Nonetheless, whether accurate or not, the perception of a section of the public is that the name was changed to erase memories of the Windscale incident. And, as Sellars and Yeatman sagely observed "history is what you can remember". :) There's more than a grain of truth to that. I remember pundits answering questions on programs like Today, saying things like "What reprocessing plant at Windscale?" when everybody was still calling it that. The Grauniad cartoons didn't help either - two headed sheep in a field outside an obvious nuclear plant called "Leafy Meadow". tom |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 09:51 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk