|
The "Lasso Line"
In message , at 22:29:59 on Thu, 5
Mar 2009, Peter Smyth remarked: So Paddington (Circle line station) to KX will *always* require a change of train at Edgware Rd. Clockwise, anyway. Yes, but anyone going from Paddington east should use the H&C platforms which will have an increased frequency. But isn't step-free. Not even close. My most frequent usage is Heathrow-Paddington-KX, and clockwise is step free. To preserve that really *does* need a x-platform interchange at Edgware Rd. In case you are wondering, when I'm going out from Heathrow I'd normally have stayed overnight at an airport hotel, and so getting the Piccadilly from KX is step free, and not too inconveniently slow. -- Roland Perry |
The "Lasso Line"
|
The "Lasso Line"
|
The "Lasso Line"
On Thu, 5 Mar 2009, MIG wrote:
On Mar 5, 9:10*pm, "Paul Scott" wrote: "David Jackman" pleasereplytogroup wrote in message . 109.145... which has been reported by the Standard as "From December, Circle line trains will start in Hammersmith, run along the current Hammersmith & City line to Edgware Road and then do a clockwise lap of the Circle line and head back to Hammersmith. They would then do the journey anti-clockwise." A very similar mistaken description to the last time the Standard ran the story a few months back. *IIRC was discussed here at the time... Identical nonsense in The London Paper I noticed. Anyway, I really can't see Edgware Road being workable with the number of crossing movements. With 12 tph coming from Hammersmith (6 H&C, 6 Lasso), and going the other way, and 12 tph coming from Notting Hill Gate (6 Lasso, 6 Wimbleware), you've got 12 vs 12, which means, under ideal conditions, a five-minute gap between successive Hammersmith-bound trains, through which you have to fit the NHG-originating trains - every five minutes, all day, and vice versa! I think it's currently 7.5 tph H&C, 7.5 tph Circle, and something like 6 tph Wimbleware (?), which pits 13.5 against 7.5. As long as you can hold the westbound H&Cs at Edgware Road (which you can, due to there being two roads through it), that gives you 13.5 4-minute slots an hour into which to fit 7.5 trains. That sounds like it should be easier. The proximity to the reverse at Edgware Road means that anything which clobbers a train coming into the bay (from NHG) has the potential to affect trains doing the reverse, which since they share the line with the trains going to Hammersmith, means that you could, i think, get some kind of self-reinforcing cyclone of disaster. The spare slots in the current scheme effectively mitigate this. And for the punters, you'd never know which side of the bridge to run to to get to the Notting Hill direction (bad enough now). Given that cross-platform change is only 50 : 50 anyway, According to Quail, there is a trailing crossover to the *east* of the platforms. If a train's length of outer rail to the east of that was made reversible, then you could send all reversing trains into platform 2, with cross-platform change to platform 1 for trains to King's Cross, then carry on eastward and reverse them via the reversible patch and the crossover into platform 3, where they could pick up passengers cross-platform from westbound H&C trains. That would deliver the promised cross-platform interchange. It would also involve reversing trains on the bit of track that 12 tph of trains from Hammersmith are trying to use to get to King's Cross, but there you go. If that bit could be tripled, problem solved! the only way I could see it working would be with major remodelling (two new crossovers?) so that terminating trains could use the island platform 3/4 and trains to/from Hammersmith on the other side. At least you'd always know where to stand. I think you'd need one new scissors crossover, to the west of the divergence of the lines heading round each side of the islands. Or two single crossovers and two bits of reversible line, but that would be very painful. What you really want is to widen the bit from the junction to the station to four tracks, so trains can use platforms as you describe without any crossing at all. Well, what you *really* want is a flying junction. And four tracks. And tripling to the east to make a reversing siding: /-------------\ ----------/ ###### \ Ham /-------------+----+-- / / KX ---)/(------------+-+--------- / /----\ ###### / --/ / \------/ NHG / --/ That gives you a completely conflict-free, cross-platform solution. You'd have to demolish a good chunk of Paddington to do it, but that would then also give you the chance to construct a large stick, on which the moon could be mounted (for those who remember Fist of Fun). tom -- i'm prepared to do anything as long as someone else works out how to do it and gives me simple instructions... -- Sean |
The "Lasso Line"
"Paul Scott" wrote in news:8J-
: So just who actually brought 'Lasso' into it? "Insiders". I still prefer "tea-cup line"... :) |
The "Lasso Line"
Peter Smyth wrote:
The Metropolitan line will still go to Aldgate as present. The planned service is 6tph Hammersmith - Barking 6tph Hammersmith - Edgware Road - Aldgate - Victoria - Edgware Road 6tph Uxbridge - Aldgate 6tph Wimbledon - Edgware Road So the Circle, always crowded, will get less frequent... and the Hammersmith branch, always roomy[1], gets a doubling of frequency. Has anyone said why this is happening? The stuff about the Circle lacking a depot could be solved by running Hammersmith - Edgware Road - Aldgate - Victoria - Edgware Road - Barking at approximately the current frequency. [1] before Westfield.... haven't used it since. |
The "Lasso Line"
"John Rowland" wrote in
: Subject: The "Lasso Line" From: "John Rowland" Newsgroups: uk.transport.london Peter Smyth wrote: The Metropolitan line will still go to Aldgate as present. The planned service is 6tph Hammersmith - Barking 6tph Hammersmith - Edgware Road - Aldgate - Victoria - Edgware Road 6tph Uxbridge - Aldgate 6tph Wimbledon - Edgware Road So the Circle, always crowded, will get less frequent... It will? Isn't the Circle 6tph at the moment? |
The "Lasso Line"
In message of Thu, 5 Mar 2009 22:39:38 in
uk.transport.london, Roland Perry writes In message , at 22:29:59 on Thu, 5 Mar 2009, Peter Smyth remarked: So Paddington (Circle line station) to KX will *always* require a change of train at Edgware Rd. Clockwise, anyway. Yes, but anyone going from Paddington east should use the H&C platforms which will have an increased frequency. But isn't step-free. Not even close. My most frequent usage is Heathrow-Paddington-KX, and clockwise is step free. Only if you count escalators as step-free. http://directenquiries.com/stationdi...Detail&Title=N ational+Rail+(Platforms+1+to+8)+-+Entrance+to+Ticket+Hall&did=0218-003042 0_E2H&level=3 shows either 21 steps or an escalator down. I reckon step-free as equivalent to wheelchair-accessible. OTOH http://directenquiries.com/stationdi...Detail&Title=T he+Lawns+%26+National+Rail+-+Entrance+to+Ticket+Hall&did=0218-0030439_E2H &level=3 IS step-free. I had not clocked that access. I will check it out when I next visit Paddington. It is not mentioned in the January 2009 Step-free Tube guide which is available in large paper, small paper and online at http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/step-free-tube-guide-index.pdf and http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/step-free-tube-guide-map.pdf. I very much value this thread. I clocked "END OF THE CIRCLE LINE" (sic), displayed on the first page of "LONDON LITE" (sic) on the ITV London News program and went out into the cold for a copy. I am much more informed than I was by the paper. ;) -- Walter Briscoe |
The "Lasso Line"
On Mar 6, 1:02*am, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Thu, 5 Mar 2009, MIG wrote: On Mar 5, 9:10*pm, "Paul Scott" wrote: "David Jackman" pleasereplytogroup wrote in message 6.109.145... which has been reported by the Standard as "From December, Circle line trains will start in Hammersmith, run along the current Hammersmith & City line to Edgware Road and then do a clockwise lap of the Circle line and head back to Hammersmith. They would then do the journey anti-clockwise." A very similar mistaken description to the last time the Standard ran the story a few months back. *IIRC was discussed here at the time... Identical nonsense in The London Paper I noticed. Anyway, I really can't see Edgware Road being workable with the number of crossing movements. With 12 tph coming from Hammersmith (6 H&C, 6 Lasso), and going the other way, and 12 tph coming from Notting Hill Gate (6 Lasso, 6 Wimbleware), you've got 12 vs 12, which means, under ideal conditions, a five-minute gap between successive Hammersmith-bound trains, through which you have to fit the NHG-originating trains - every five minutes, all day, and vice versa! I think it's currently 7.5 tph H&C, 7.5 tph Circle, and something like 6 tph Wimbleware (?), which pits 13.5 against 7.5. As long as you can hold the westbound H&Cs at Edgware Road (which you can, due to there being two roads through it), that gives you 13.5 4-minute slots an hour into which to fit 7.5 trains. That sounds like it should be easier. The proximity to the reverse at Edgware Road means that anything which clobbers a train coming into the bay (from NHG) has the potential to affect trains doing the reverse, which since they share the line with the trains going to Hammersmith, means that you could, i think, get some kind of self-reinforcing cyclone of disaster. The spare slots in the current scheme effectively mitigate this. And for the punters, you'd never know which side of the bridge to run to to get to the Notting Hill direction (bad enough now). Given that cross-platform change is only 50 : 50 anyway, According to Quail, there is a trailing crossover to the *east* of the platforms. If a train's length of outer rail to the east of that was made reversible, then you could send all reversing trains into platform 2, with cross-platform change to platform 1 for trains to King's Cross, then carry on eastward and reverse them via the reversible patch and the crossover into platform 3, where they could pick up passengers cross-platform from westbound H&C trains. That would deliver the promised cross-platform interchange. It would also involve reversing trains on the bit of track that 12 tph of trains from Hammersmith are trying to use to get to King's Cross, but there you go. If that bit could be tripled, problem solved! the only way I could see it working would be with major remodelling (two new crossovers?) so that terminating trains could use the island platform 3/4 and trains to/from Hammersmith on the other side. *At least you'd always know where to stand. I think you'd need one new scissors crossover, to the west of the divergence of the lines heading round each side of the islands. Or two single crossovers and two bits of reversible line, but that would be very painful. What you really want is to widen the bit from the junction to the station to four tracks, so trains can use platforms as you describe without any crossing at all. Well, what you *really* want is a flying junction. And four tracks. And tripling to the east to make a reversing siding: * * * * * * * * */-------------\ * * *----------/ ###### * * * *\ Ham * * * */-------------+----+-- * * * * * */ * * * * * * / * * * * * *KX * * *---)/(------------+-+--------- * * * * */ /----\ ###### / * * *--/ / * * *\------/ NHG * * / * * *--/ That gives you a completely conflict-free, cross-platform solution. You'd have to demolish a good chunk of Paddington to do it, but that would then also give you the chance to construct a large stick, on which the moon could be mounted (for those who remember Fist of Fun). I still think that putting the moon on a stick is probably easier than getting the proposal to work. I give it six weeks of chaos before they revert to the current pattern. |
The "Lasso Line"
On Mar 6, 9:22*am, MIG wrote:
I still think that putting the moon on a stick is probably easier than getting the proposal to work. *I give it six weeks of chaos before they revert to the current pattern. Could it be any worse than the current circle line? From my limited experience the circle line simply doesn't work in the rush hour. If its not delayed its only because its not running at all. B2003 |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 09:11 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk