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
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Apr 13, 6:27*am, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Sun, 13 Apr 2008, Colin Rosenstiel wrote: In article , (Tom Anderson) wrote: On Fri, 11 Apr 2008, Colin Rosenstiel wrote: In article , (Tom Anderson) wrote: On Fri, 11 Apr 2008, Colin Rosenstiel wrote: In article , (Tom Anderson) wrote: On Thu, 10 Apr 2008, Adrian wrote: At one point the Met. considered building a mainline size tube to link their "Main Line" to Edgware Road Station. To join up with the Circle heading west, you mean? Or as a terminus? Neither of those sound like brilliant ideas to me, i have to say! To join up with the Circle line heading East, actually. The layout at Edgware Road was rebuilt with that link in mind and is still that way today. Was this before the link to Baker Street, or the link from the platforms there to the Circle, went in, or am i missing something? Before the Bakerloo extension to Stanmore. I don't get it then. This link would have allowed trains to do Finchley Road - Edgware Road - Aldgate? While they could already do Finchley Road - Baker Street - Aldgate? Would the second link somehow have increased capacity and allowed both Metroland and Stanmore trains to run to Aldgate? Or was the idea to run Metroland trains to the City via Edgware Road, and use all the Baker Street platforms to terminate Stanmore trains? The Bakerloo relieved the same stretch of line, the tunnels between Baker St and Finchley Road. Aha. Now i'm starting to get my head round this. The situation at the time was four Met tracks north of Finchley Road, one fast pair heading to Metroland, and a slow pair heading to Stanmore, with a single pair south of there into Baker Street, is that right? The tube that Adrian mentioned would have run all the way from Finchley Road [1] to Edgware Road, allowing the Metroland trains to run to Edgware Road and then Aldgate (or wherever), leaving the Stanmore trains with exclusive the existing line to Baker Street. The new tube would presumably have been non-stop, whereas the Baker Street line then had the three now-closed stations at Swiss Cottage, Marlborough Road and Lords on it, so it made sense to use that route for the slows. Broadly speaking: Yes. I read an account of this many years ago. I do not remember the title of the book. I thought the intention was to run Stanmore trains to High St Kensington and on thru Gloucester Rd. Colin Rosenstiel thinks otherwise, and I cannot argue with him. What i don't get is where the Stanmore trains would have gone after Baker Street. There can't have been capacity on the Circle line for both lots of trains, so either they would have terminated at Baker Street, or connection to the Bakerloo was part of the plan. I suppose that the Metropolitan had a mindset of being a normal railway, with lines running into a terminus on the edge of central London, with the fact that some trains went on into town being merely a bonus - Baker Street was London Bridge to Aldgate's Charing Cross. That would mean they were quite happy for all those Stanmore trains to terminate at Baker Street. See my remarks above. The Met. managed to avoid the 1923 grouping by claiming to be part of London's mass transit system. They did try to avoid becoming part of the LTPB by claiming to be a main line railway. That time they failed. :-) The Met. separated their property business and continued to exist as a property company for many years. Adrian tom [1] In fact, Kilburn - just found this in CULG. -- London has a suburb for every emotion. -- Cliff Laine- |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Apr 14, 5:14*pm, (Colin Rosenstiel) wrote:
In article , (Adrian) wrote: On Apr 13, 6:27*am, Tom Anderson wrote: On Sun, 13 Apr 2008, Colin Rosenstiel wrote: In article , (Tom Anderson) wrote: On Fri, 11 Apr 2008, Colin Rosenstiel wrote: In article , (Tom Anderson) wrote: On Fri, 11 Apr 2008, Colin Rosenstiel wrote: In article , (Tom Anderson) wrote: On Thu, 10 Apr 2008, Adrian wrote: At one point the Met. considered building a mainline size tube to link their "Main Line" to Edgware Road Station. To join up with the Circle heading west, you mean? Or as a terminus? Neither of those sound like brilliant ideas to me, i have to say! To join up with the Circle line heading East, actually. The layout at Edgware Road was rebuilt with that link in mind and is still that way today. Was this before the link to Baker Street, or the link from the platforms there to the Circle, went in, or am i missing something? Before the Bakerloo extension to Stanmore. I don't get it then. This link would have allowed trains to do Finchley Road - Edgware Road - Aldgate? While they could already do Finchley Road - Baker Street - Aldgate? Would the second link somehow have increased capacity and allowed both Metroland and Stanmore trains to run to Aldgate? Or was the idea to run Metroland trains to the City via Edgware Road, and use all the Baker Street platforms to terminate Stanmore trains? The Bakerloo relieved the same stretch of line, the tunnels between Baker St and Finchley Road. Aha. Now i'm starting to get my head round this. The situation at the time was four Met tracks north of Finchley Road, one fast pair heading to Metroland, and a slow pair heading to Stanmore, with a single pair south of there into Baker Street, is that right? The tube that Adrian mentioned would have run all the way from Finchley Road [1] to Edgware Road, allowing the Metroland trains to run to Edgware Road and then Aldgate (or wherever), leaving the Stanmore trains with exclusive the existing line to Baker Street. The new tube would presumably have been non-stop, whereas the Baker Street line then had the three now-closed stations at Swiss Cottage, Marlborough Road and Lords on it, so it made sense to use that route for the slows. Broadly speaking: Yes. *I read an account of this many years ago. *I do not remember the title of the book. *I thought the intention was to run Stanmore trains to High St Kensington and on thru Gloucester Rd. Colin Rosenstiel thinks otherwise, and I cannot argue with him. My source is "Steam to Silver" by J Graeme Bruce, first edition, 1970, pages 68 and 69. The relevant text reads: "The Metropolitan realised that some relief to the bottleneck between Finchley Road and Baker Street was required, especially as these two tracks carried the country service of the railway as well as catering for a local service calling at Swiss Cottage, Marlborough Road, and St. John's Wood. Plans were prepared for a connection from a point near Kilburn & Brondesbury to Edgware Road, in a 15 ft. 6 in. tube, so that a junction to the Circle Line would be made in the same direction as that arranged at Baker Street. In anticipation of this connection Edgware Road station was rebuilt in 1926 with four platforms as existing today, utilizing the space which had been vacated by moving the old Metropolitan Railway engine sheds to Neasden. The- train destination indicators placed on the' new platforms for many years contained descriptions such as 'Aylesbury Line' which were never required, because' the connection to Edgware Road was never built. The congestion in the bottleneck, however, grew so that the number of stopping trains between Finchley Road and Baker Street was severely limited and subsequently stops were not, in fact, made during the peak periods. Relief came under the 1935/40 New Works Programme by extending the Bakerloo tube to Finchley Road and re-arranging the tracks so that the Metropolitan fast lines were on the outside with the Bakerloo in the middle. The Bakerloo then took over the operation of the Stanmore branch, including the burrowing junction built north of Wembley Park which eliminated the problems created at this station by the previous expansion." Thank you for your clear, concise and helpful explanation. Adrian |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Disused railway tunnel under Regent Quarter, King's Cross | London Transport | |||
Totteridge Ground Frame | London Transport | |||
Lords debate on Buses | London Transport | |||
Above or Below Ground??? | London Transport | |||
does the tube come above ground at all? | London Transport |