Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
Andy wrote: On Mar 28, 9:12�am, Mizter T wrote: On 28 Mar, 01:48, Andy wrote: On Mar 27, 11:59 pm, Tom Anderson wrote: On Wed, 26 Mar 2008, Andy wrote: (snip) There will also be the East London Line extension feeding passengers in at Whitechapel. These passengers who would currently goto London Bridge for the Jubilee line. Oh, i see. So, Kent - New Cross Gate - Whitechapel - Canary Wharf? They'll make two changes and a sort of spiral round Docklands? No, not Kent, London Bridge is not purely served by South Eastern, but by Southern as well. The ELLX will run West Croydon and Crystal Palace to Whitechapel giving passengers one stop on Crossrail to Docklands. North Kent will be served by changing at Abbey Wood, as others have suggested. There will also be the possibility of Thameslink passengers changing at Farringdon from the south. (I think Tom was getting somewhat confused between NX and NXG but anyway...) Though for those travelling via the ELLX to Canary Wharf from points south I find it difficult to believe that anyone would do anything other than change onto the Jubilee at Canada Water - going via Whitechapel and Crossrail would entail staying on the ELLX for three extra stops. I was kind of forgetting Rotherhithe, Wapping and Shadwell on the ELLX, however, the first two stations are very close together and close to Canada Water!! The Crossrail station at Isle of Dogs will be on the other side of Canary Wharf (it will be under West India Dock between Canary Wharf and West India Quay, to the east of the West Indix Quay DLR station ) from the Jubilee station and the extra time spent on the ELLX train would be made up for any passengers heading to the Northern side of the offices here. Sorry Andy but I just don't buy that. Crossrail may have many benefits but this is not going to be one of them. Even if we take a worst case scenario that Rotherhithe and Wapping might have to close at some point in the more distant future if there is some plan for longer trains on the ELLX, the extra distance and journey time from Canada Water to Whitechapel (with at least one stop at Shadwell) just doesn't compare to a direct trip under the Thames from Canada Water to Canary Wharf on the Jubilee. Passengers are not going to choose to introduce this extra dogleg into their journey, especially given the very easy interchange offered at Canada Water. I also simply don't agree with your argument that the location of the Isle of Dogs Crossrail station will be so advantageous that some passengers will wish to choose it over the Jubilee line station - the tube station really is hardly any distance away so only the *most* stupid and lazy would possibly factor in these few saved paces and decide to build there commute around that. Of course passengers traveling via the ELLX and the Jubilee will benefit indirectly from Crossrail as it'll take the strain off the overcrowded Jubilee line by removing passengers from points west. I don't think it likely that Thameslink passengers from the south will pass through London Bridge and go up to Farringdon for Crossrail rather than changing to the Jubilee from London Bridge, though this will certainly look like a good move for those coming from the Wimbledon/Sutton loop (or other similar south London suburban start points if the Thameslink service gets rejigged). Even if the interchange at Farringdon is very easy, Crossrail will be of benefit directly or indirectly (through relief of overcrowding) for many Docklands commuters no doubt, but I don't think it's that great an idea to try and shoehorn all potential Docklands- bound journeys into somehow making use of Crossrail! |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
On Mar 28, 12:54Â*pm, Mizter T wrote:
Andy wrote: On Mar 28, 9:12�am, Mizter T wrote: On 28 Mar, 01:48, Andy wrote: On Mar 27, 11:59 pm, Tom Anderson wrote: On Wed, 26 Mar 2008, Andy wrote: (snip) There will also be the East London Line extension feeding passengers in at Whitechapel. These passengers who would currently goto London Bridge for the Jubilee line. Oh, i see. So, Kent - New Cross Gate - Whitechapel - Canary Wharf? They'll make two changes and a sort of spiral round Docklands? No, not Kent, London Bridge is not purely served by South Eastern, but by Southern as well. The ELLX will run West Croydon and Crystal Palace to Whitechapel giving passengers one stop on Crossrail to Docklands. North Kent will be served by changing at Abbey Wood, as others have suggested. There will also be the possibility of Thameslink passengers changing at Farringdon from the south. (I think Tom was getting somewhat confused between NX and NXG but anyway...) Though for those travelling via the ELLX to Canary Wharf from points south I find it difficult to believe that anyone would do anything other than change onto the Jubilee at Canada Water - going via Whitechapel and Crossrail would entail staying on the ELLX for three extra stops. I was kind of forgetting Rotherhithe, Wapping and Shadwell on the ELLX, however, the first two stations are very close together and close to Canada Water!! The Crossrail station at Isle of Dogs will be on the other side of Canary Wharf (it will be under West India Dock between Canary Wharf and West India Quay, to the east of the West Indix Quay DLR station Â*) from the Jubilee station and the extra time spent on the ELLX train would be made up for any passengers heading to the Northern side of the offices here. Sorry Andy but I just don't buy that. Crossrail may have many benefits but this is not going to be one of them. Even if we take a worst case scenario that Rotherhithe and Wapping might have to close at some point in the more distant future if there is some plan for longer trains on the ELLX, the extra distance and journey time from Canada Water to Whitechapel (with at least one stop at Shadwell) just doesn't compare to a direct trip under the Thames from Canada Water to Canary Wharf on the Jubilee. Passengers are not going to choose to introduce this extra dogleg into their journey, especially given the very easy interchange offered at Canada Water. I also simply don't agree with your argument that the location of the Isle of Dogs Crossrail station will be so advantageous that some passengers will wish to choose it over the Jubilee line station - the tube station really is hardly any distance away so only the *most* stupid and lazy would possibly factor in these few saved paces and decide to build there commute around that. I think that you would be surprised that the number of passengers who will do anything to avoid the tube!! I'm not saying it will be a large number of people taking that route, but it won't be zero either. Of course passengers traveling via the ELLX and the Jubilee will benefit indirectly from Crossrail as it'll take the strain off the overcrowded Jubilee line by removing passengers from points west. I don't think it likely that Thameslink passengers from the south will pass through London Bridge and go up to Farringdon for Crossrail rather than changing to the Jubilee from London Bridge, though this will certainly look like a good move for those coming from the Wimbledon/Sutton loop (or other similar south London suburban start points if the Thameslink service gets rejigged). Even if the interchange at Farringdon is very easy, I wasn't really thinking of the Thameslink passengers from the Brighton / Croydon - London mainline, who as you say have alternatives. I was thinking of the Wimbledon / Sutton loop (or wherever in the future) passengers. Farringdon is only be a few minutes from Blackfriars and connections will certainly be easier to Docklands than they currently for the non London Bridge Thameslink passengers. Crossrail will be of benefit directly or indirectly (through relief of overcrowding) for many Docklands commuters no doubt, but I don't think it's that great an idea to try and shoehorn all potential Docklands- bound journeys into somehow making use of Crossrail! |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
On 28 Mar, 14:22, Andy wrote: On Mar 28, 12:54 pm, Mizter T wrote: Andy wrote: On Mar 28, 9:12�am, Mizter T wrote: (snip) Though for those travelling via the ELLX to Canary Wharf from points south I find it difficult to believe that anyone would do anything other than change onto the Jubilee at Canada Water - going via Whitechapel and Crossrail would entail staying on the ELLX for three extra stops. I was kind of forgetting Rotherhithe, Wapping and Shadwell on the ELLX, however, the first two stations are very close together and close to Canada Water!! The Crossrail station at Isle of Dogs will be on the other side of Canary Wharf (it will be under West India Dock between Canary Wharf and West India Quay, to the east of the West Indix Quay DLR station ) from the Jubilee station and the extra time spent on the ELLX train would be made up for any passengers heading to the Northern side of the offices here. Sorry Andy but I just don't buy that. Crossrail may have many benefits but this is not going to be one of them. Even if we take a worst case scenario that Rotherhithe and Wapping might have to close at some point in the more distant future if there is some plan for longer trains on the ELLX, the extra distance and journey time from Canada Water to Whitechapel (with at least one stop at Shadwell) just doesn't compare to a direct trip under the Thames from Canada Water to Canary Wharf on the Jubilee. Passengers are not going to choose to introduce this extra dogleg into their journey, especially given the very easy interchange offered at Canada Water. I also simply don't agree with your argument that the location of the Isle of Dogs Crossrail station will be so advantageous that some passengers will wish to choose it over the Jubilee line station - the tube station really is hardly any distance away so only the *most* stupid and lazy would possibly factor in these few saved paces and decide to build there commute around that. I think that you would be surprised that the number of passengers who will do anything to avoid the tube!! I'm not saying it will be a large number of people taking that route, but it won't be zero either. You make a good point there, there are a sizeable number of people who wish to avoid the tube, especially when it's busy, even if it is for just one stop. I suppose against that I'd say that Crossrail should relieve the overcrowding Jubilee line somewhat, and indeed Crossrail could get just as busy as the Jubilee. Though there will be those who'd always prefer to travel in a full sized carriage rather than a tube sized one, even if it is similarly busy. The other factor I hadn't really though about was people trying to get seats. Those heading back home could conceivably travel via Crossrail and Whitechapel in the hope that they'd be more likely to pick up a seat on an ELLX train there rather than joining the scrum at Canada Water. Whether they'd be many free seats remaining on a rush-hour southbound ELLX after the City commuters got on board at Shoreditch High Street remains to be seen! Of course passengers traveling via the ELLX and the Jubilee will benefit indirectly from Crossrail as it'll take the strain off the overcrowded Jubilee line by removing passengers from points west. I don't think it likely that Thameslink passengers from the south will pass through London Bridge and go up to Farringdon for Crossrail rather than changing to the Jubilee from London Bridge, though this will certainly look like a good move for those coming from the Wimbledon/Sutton loop (or other similar south London suburban start points if the Thameslink service gets rejigged). Even if the interchange at Farringdon is very easy, I wasn't really thinking of the Thameslink passengers from the Brighton / Croydon - London mainline, who as you say have alternatives. I was thinking of the Wimbledon / Sutton loop (or wherever in the future) passengers. Farringdon is only be a few minutes from Blackfriars and connections will certainly be easier to Docklands than they currently for the non London Bridge Thameslink passengers. Crossrail will be of benefit directly or indirectly (through relief of overcrowding) for many Docklands commuters no doubt, but I don't think it's that great an idea to try and shoehorn all potential Docklands- bound journeys into somehow making use of Crossrail! |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
Sorry, I didn't respond to your second point in my first reply, hence
this second reply! On 28 Mar, 14:22, Andy wrote: On Mar 28, 12:54 pm, Mizter T wrote: (snip) I don't think it likely that Thameslink passengers from the south will pass through London Bridge and go up to Farringdon for Crossrail rather than changing to the Jubilee from London Bridge, though this will certainly look like a good move for those coming from the Wimbledon/Sutton loop (or other similar south London suburban start points if the Thameslink service gets rejigged). Even if the interchange at Farringdon is very easy, (Apols - it appears I never finished my sentence above! I'll leave it hanging - you get the gist.) I wasn't really thinking of the Thameslink passengers from the Brighton / Croydon - London mainline, who as you say have alternatives. I was thinking of the Wimbledon / Sutton loop (or wherever in the future) passengers. Farringdon is only be a few minutes from Blackfriars and connections will certainly be easier to Docklands than they currently for the non London Bridge Thameslink passengers. That's all very true. At the moment there really isn't a decent route for such passengers - alight at Elephant & Castle then crammed Northern line to London Bridge and change to the Jubilee is the most obvious I suppose. Other more imaginative routes could involve walking from Blackfriars to Bank for the DLR, though if you were to do that you might as well walk (or even get the bus against the flow) from Blackfriars to Southwark station (Jubilee), or walk or bus it from E&C to Southwark. Depending upon what happens to the Thameslink service pattern in south London it could even take some of the strain off of the Northern and Jubilee lines, other mainline services into London Bridge and generally relieve London Bridge somewhat as an interchange point by diverting Docklands-bound commuters up to Farringdon for interchange with Crossrail. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
"Mizter T" wrote in message ... Depending upon what happens to the Thameslink service pattern in south London it could even take some of the strain off of the Northern and Jubilee lines, other mainline services into London Bridge and generally relieve London Bridge somewhat as an interchange point by diverting Docklands-bound commuters up to Farringdon for interchange with Crossrail. At the risk of going off at a slight tangent, are Thameslink services on the Wimbledon loop constrained currently by the single platform and bidirectional working at Wimbledon? Given the eventual proposed Thameslink frequencies, will the decision to give a platform over to Tramlink come to be regretted ? Paul S |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
On Mar 28, 3:50*pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote: "Mizter T" wrote in message ... Depending upon what happens to the Thameslink service pattern in south London it could even take some of the strain off of the Northern and Jubilee lines, other mainline services into London Bridge and generally relieve London Bridge somewhat as an interchange point by diverting Docklands-bound commuters up to Farringdon for interchange with Crossrail. At the risk of going off at a slight tangent, are Thameslink services on the Wimbledon loop constrained currently by the single platform and bidirectional working at Wimbledon? Given the eventual proposed Thameslink frequencies, will the decision to give a platform over to Tramlink come to be regretted ? Paul S I think that there are constrained from getting much more frequent on the Wimbledon to Sutton bit, due to the single platform. From memory, services are approximately every 30 minutes around the loop in each direction (even during the peak hours), giving 4 trains per hour through the single platform. I suppose that the frequency could be increased, but probably not to much more than every 15 minutes in each direction without affecting reliability and pathing. However (and I don't know if this is planned), there is the terminating track at the north end of the platform where the Tramlink platform is. This would allow a greater frequency on the Wimbledon - Tooting - Thameslink route. There are a couple of trains that use this already during the peak shoulders. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
Andy wrote:
On Mar 28, 3:50 pm, "Paul Scott" wrote: At the risk of going off at a slight tangent, are Thameslink services on the Wimbledon loop constrained currently by the single platform and bidirectional working at Wimbledon? Given the eventual proposed Thameslink frequencies, will the decision to give a platform over to Tramlink come to be regretted ? Paul S I think that there are constrained from getting much more frequent on the Wimbledon to Sutton bit, due to the single platform. From memory, services are approximately every 30 minutes around the loop in each direction (even during the peak hours), giving 4 trains per hour through the single platform. I suppose that the frequency could be increased, but probably not to much more than every 15 minutes in each direction without affecting reliability and pathing. However (and I don't know if this is planned), there is the terminating track at the north end of the platform where the Tramlink platform is. This would allow a greater frequency on the Wimbledon - Tooting - Thameslink route. There are a couple of trains that use this already during the peak shoulders. Thanks, presumably only 4 car trains though? I did notice the other day that platform 10 still has the same stop markers as platform 9, for trains arriving from the southwest through back to back buffer stops presumably! Paul S |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
Andy wrote:
On Mar 28, 3:50 pm, "Paul Scott" wrote: I think that there are constrained from getting much more frequent on the Wimbledon to Sutton bit, due to the single platform. From memory, services are approximately every 30 minutes around the loop in each direction (even during the peak hours), giving 4 trains per hour through the single platform. I suppose that the frequency could be increased, but probably not to much more than every 15 minutes in each direction without affecting reliability and pathing. However (and I don't know if this is planned), there is the terminating track at the north end of the platform where the Tramlink platform is. This would allow a greater frequency on the Wimbledon - Tooting - Thameslink route. There are a couple of trains that use this already during the peak shoulders. Now that the South London RUS is out - I see Wimbledon loop trains will be terminating in the bays at Blackfriars in the final Thameslink arrangement, avoiding the crossing moves south of Blackfriars that we have discussed in the past. There seems no real reason why the service might not be transferred to Southern (or LO) then, using DC stock, leaving FCC or their successor to concentrate on the main routes? Paul S |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Crossrail could bankrupt London - says Ken Livingstone
On Wed, 2 Apr 2008, Paul Scott wrote:
Andy wrote: On Mar 28, 3:50 pm, "Paul Scott" wrote: I think that there are constrained from getting much more frequent on the Wimbledon to Sutton bit, due to the single platform. From memory, services are approximately every 30 minutes around the loop in each direction (even during the peak hours), giving 4 trains per hour through the single platform. I suppose that the frequency could be increased, but probably not to much more than every 15 minutes in each direction without affecting reliability and pathing. However (and I don't know if this is planned), there is the terminating track at the north end of the platform where the Tramlink platform is. This would allow a greater frequency on the Wimbledon - Tooting - Thameslink route. There are a couple of trains that use this already during the peak shoulders. Now that the South London RUS is out - I see Wimbledon loop trains will be terminating in the bays at Blackfriars in the final Thameslink arrangement, Blimey. Bit of a blow to south Londoners. avoiding the crossing moves south of Blackfriars that we have discussed in the past. Has anyone proposed a flyover somewhere that would allow them to get on to the through lines without conflicts? I know there are all sorts of planned bits of infrastructure down there, and i can't keep track of them. There seems no real reason why the service might not be transferred to Southern (or LO) then, using DC stock, leaving FCC or their successor to concentrate on the main routes? That would fit perfectly with Thameslink's new focus on outer suburban / middle-distance services. But not with Ken/TfL/London Rail's growing power to promote inner suburban services. Unless he thought he could get more frequency on that route by making it LO. Or making it a part of the ELL! tom -- We don't contact anybody or seek anybody's permission for what we do. Even if it's impersonating postal employees. -- Birdstuff |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Ken Livingstone Polluting the Planet | London Transport | |||
KEN LIVINGSTONE: RACIST | London Transport | |||
London population not increasing as much as Ken Livinstone says | London Transport | |||
A big Thank You to Ken Livingstone | London Transport | |||
Ken says yes to Crystal Palace tram extension | London Transport |