On 19 Oct, 21:44, Roland Perry wrote:
Thameslink 2012 seems like the best name for it.

The most significant parts of it don't happen until 2012-15
(rebuilding London Bridge and adding flyovers on its approaches,
wiring up the ECML connection, and replacing the whole fleet), so
you'd probably want to call it Thameslink 2015*.

(* unless you're in the camp who thinks the second phase won't happen,
which I've been pondering joining)

U

In message
, at
14:35:03 on Sun, 19 Oct 2008, Mr Thant
remarked:
The most significant parts of it don't happen until 2012-15
(rebuilding London Bridge and adding flyovers on its approaches,
wiring up the ECML connection, and replacing the whole fleet), so
you'd probably want to call it Thameslink 2015*.

(* unless you're in the camp who thinks the second phase won't happen,
which I've been pondering joining)

Thameslink 2015 it is, then I won't believe it's finished until I
can get a through train from Cambridge to Gatwick - one of the original
attractions of the scheme for me.
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message
, at
14:35:03 on Sun, 19 Oct 2008, Mr Thant
remarked:
The most significant parts of it don't happen until 2012-15
(rebuilding London Bridge and adding flyovers on its approaches,
wiring up the ECML connection, and replacing the whole fleet), so
you'd probably want to call it Thameslink 2015*.

(* unless you're in the camp who thinks the second phase won't happen,
which I've been pondering joining)

Thameslink 2015 it is, then I won't believe it's finished until I can
get a through train from Cambridge to Gatwick - one of the original
attractions of the scheme for me.

Not a total pessimist then, they won't believe it's finished until they can
get from Littlehampton to Kings Lynn...

Paul

In message , at 11:42:40 on
Mon, 20 Oct 2008, Paul Scott remarked:
I won't believe it's finished until I can
get a through train from Cambridge to Gatwick - one of the original
attractions of the scheme for me.

Not a total pessimist then, they won't believe it's finished until they can
get from Littlehampton to Kings Lynn...

Without changing trains? One of the enigmas about the plans are that
there are just three routes north of London, but twelve to the south
(including four 'beyond' Gatwick).

http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co...loadMedia.asp?
MediaDetailsID=1195
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 11:42:40 on
Mon, 20 Oct 2008, Paul Scott remarked:
I won't believe it's finished until I can
get a through train from Cambridge to Gatwick - one of the original
attractions of the scheme for me.

Not a total pessimist then, they won't believe it's finished until they
can
get from Littlehampton to Kings Lynn...

Without changing trains? One of the enigmas about the plans are that
there are just three routes north of London, but twelve to the south
(including four 'beyond' Gatwick).

http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co...DetailsID=1195

Just having a dig at the amount of stale information about. The linked map
shows early ideas extracted from all the planning documentation, but as
captioned, that map is only 'indicative'. The difference south of the river
is that an hourly Thameslink service at say Guildford is just an add on to
other intensive services, it's a bit different on the northern network, as
you say the 3 to 12 is quite noticeable.

As regularly discussed here though, the current South London RUS no longer
shows the south west parts of the network, eg Littlehampton and Guildford.
The Wimbledon loop is also to be turned into a Blackfriars - London Bridge
service. This is to avoid too many fast/slow flat crossing moves south of
Blackfriars.

It is about time NR brought their Thameslink site more up to date...

Paul

In message , at 12:16:04 on
Mon, 20 Oct 2008, Paul Scott remarked:
It is about time NR brought their Thameslink site more up to date...

Maybe that's a reasonable target to have for 2012?
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 12:16:04 on Mon,
20 Oct 2008, Paul Scott remarked:
It is about time NR brought their Thameslink site more up to date...

Maybe that's a reasonable target to have for 2012?

Good one! Even they might know what their final plan is by then, there'll
probably have been a decent drawing in Modern Railways by then...

Paul

In article ,
(Paul Scott) wrote:

Not a total pessimist then, they won't believe it's finished until
they can get from Littlehampton to Kings Lynn...

King's Lynn is already off, I gather.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Oct 20, 9:51 am, Roland Perry wrote:

you'd probably want to call it Thameslink 2015*.

(* unless you're in the camp who thinks the second phase won't happen,
which I've been pondering joining)

Thameslink 2015 it is, then I won't believe it's finished until I
can get a through train from Cambridge to Gatwick - one of the original

I am now of the opinion you won't.

Even though they completed the tunnelling into SPILL I have alwys been
sceptical about connecting up GN to it.

They are going to all this trouble of re-arranging appoaches to
Blackfriars and south/east thereof to avoid as far as possible
conflicting moves to make 24 TPH in the core work, and then build a
new junction across which every move will conflict right *in* the
core ?!?!?!?

IMHO as a practical connection the GN was lost when the re-jigged
SPILL from being a 4 platform station under KX/SP of pre-Eusostar days
to 2-platforms under-SPILL box. With 4 platforms you could dovetail /
hold / alternate / regulate around junction, with 2 platforms you
cannot.

--
Nick

In message
, at
04:06:19 on Mon, 20 Oct 2008, D7666 remarked:
I won't believe it's finished until I
can get a through train from Cambridge to Gatwick - one of the original

I am now of the opinion you won't.

Even though they completed the tunnelling into SPILL I have alwys been
sceptical about connecting up GN to it.

They are going to all this trouble of re-arranging appoaches to
Blackfriars and south/east thereof to avoid as far as possible
conflicting moves to make 24 TPH in the core work, and then build a
new junction across which every move will conflict right *in* the
core ?!?!?!?

Is it a flat junction? I thought the northbound line tunnelled under.

--
Roland Perry