"zen83237" wrote in message
...

"tim....." wrote in message
...

wrote in message ...
Nick Catford seems to have added a shed load more photos of broad street
as was. Quite interesting not just for the railway itself but because
you
can see the slow change in the City as the towers go up during the 70s.

If Broad street was still open today would it be a useful way of
relieving
passenger and train congestion on other lines and termini? I assume when
it
was demonlished it wasn't serving much useful purpose but then back then
the city had less people working in it. Would they be able to get away
with
demolishing it today?


Broad Street was a useless station because the only lines that could run
to it were Richmond and Watford. It took up far too much space for the
small number of people that arrived there.

When they demolished it, they routed the Richmond trains to Stratford
(and later to N Woolwich) to create the "modern NLL and built the Graham
Road curve (into LST) for the rush hour only Watford services. After a
few years they gave up with the latter.

Before the Richmond services were diverted to Stratford, there was no
service on this part of the line

So yes, they could close it now!

tim

And what about the trains that used to come from the Great Northern lines.

These were removed before my time. My Baker from the period just before BS
was closed, shows this route as not possible at that time.

I have also discovered from a 1940 map, that the stations: Dalston to
Stratford had a service into BS via a Dalston East curve. This (service)
had gone by 1953, not sure when the curve was lifted.

As for the distasterous service into Liverpool St. Was it downgraded to
just one train in the morning and one in the evening.

6 trains a day, rush hours only, but IIRC it wasn't any different to the BS
service provided at closure, it just took 15 minutes longer and people
stopped using it because changing onto the Met at Wembley Park was quicker.

I also think that the change in the nature of city jobs from strict 9 to 5
must have had an effect on usage!

tim

tim..... wrote:
"zen83237" wrote in message
...

And what about the trains that used to come from the Great Northern
lines.

These were removed before my time. My Baker from the period just
before BS was closed, shows this route as not possible at that time.

Really? It would still be possible today. Head up the GN, turn left at
Finsbury Park, up Canonbury curve, then east down the North London line and
branch off at Dalston up to Broad Street.

That's why they were proposing Finsbury Park as a terminus for some ELLX
services at one time.

On 31/3/09 23:07, in article , "Jack
Taylor" wrote:

tim..... wrote:
"zen83237" wrote in message
...

And what about the trains that used to come from the Great Northern
lines.

These were removed before my time. My Baker from the period just
before BS was closed, shows this route as not possible at that time.

Really? It would still be possible today. Head up the GN, turn left at
Finsbury Park, up Canonbury curve, then east down the North London line and
branch off at Dalston up to Broad Street.

That's why they were proposing Finsbury Park as a terminus for some ELLX
services at one time.

The line was closed for a time while the track through the tunnel was
singled to provide clearance for electrification, but I can't remember when
this was.

On Tue, 31 Mar 2009 23:07:02 +0100
"Jack Taylor" wrote:
That's why they were proposing Finsbury Park as a terminus for some ELLX
services at one time.

A missed opportunity if ever there was one. It could have provided a cross
platform link for FCC & ECML passengers to docklands and the south london
lines and vice verca. Its utterly absurd this wasn't forced through.

B2003

"Jack Taylor" wrote in message
...
tim..... wrote:
"zen83237" wrote in message
...

And what about the trains that used to come from the Great Northern
lines.

These were removed before my time. My Baker from the period just
before BS was closed, shows this route as not possible at that time.

Really? It would still be possible today. Head up the GN, turn left at
Finsbury Park, up Canonbury curve, then east down the North London line
and branch off at Dalston up to Broad Street.

According to my map, the road from Canonbury Curve had no connection to the
NLL until beyond Dalston Junction.

It could still be like that today (as there is no Dalston Junction to check
against)

That's why they were proposing Finsbury Park as a terminus for some ELLX
services at one time.

This line is a complete rebuild (albeit on an old right of way), any
suggested service for this new build proves nothing about what was there
before

tim

On 31 Mar, 12:48, wrote:
Nick Catford seems to have added a shed load more photos of broad street
as was. Quite interesting not just for the railway itself but because you
can see the slow change in the City as the towers go up during the 70s.

If Broad street was still open today would it be a useful way of relieving
passenger and train congestion on other lines and termini? I assume when it
was demonlished it wasn't serving much useful purpose but then back then
the city had less people working in it. Would they be able to get away with
demolishing it today?

B2003

I've mentioned this idea before elsewhere, but as a tangent for the
discussion, what I think would've been a good use of the site would've
been to demolish Broad St. (sadly, it was pretty redundant), but to
use the site to expand Liverpool Street eastwards, offering more
platforms. by using the right of way north and that of the Bishopsgate
site, you could have fitted at least another pair of tracks at least
to Bethnal Green Junction, giving the WAML route it's own dedicated
set of lines and platforms.

Running with that idea, with dedicated slow lines to Bethnal Green,
resurrecting the old link to the Metropolitan (probably doubling it)
could be possible, with the H&C taking over the WAML urban services,
further increasing the platforms available for suburban and intercity
services both on the WAML and GEML.

The tower blocks could then still have been built using the air rights
of the station site and right of way, and the site would still have
been able to offer a valuable transport service. This would've been
much more impractical with Broad Street's old layout due to it's
elevation.

In article
,
(Jamie Thompson) wrote:

I've mentioned this idea before elsewhere, but as a tangent for the
discussion, what I think would've been a good use of the site would've
been to demolish Broad St. (sadly, it was pretty redundant), but to
use the site to expand Liverpool Street eastwards, offering more
platforms. by using the right of way north and that of the Bishopsgate
site, you could have fitted at least another pair of tracks at least
to Bethnal Green Junction, giving the WAML route it's own dedicated
set of lines and platforms.

Running with that idea, with dedicated slow lines to Bethnal Green,
resurrecting the old link to the Metropolitan (probably doubling it)
could be possible, with the H&C taking over the WAML urban services,
further increasing the platforms available for suburban and intercity
services both on the WAML and GEML.

The tower blocks could then still have been built using the air rights
of the station site and right of way, and the site would still have
been able to offer a valuable transport service. This would've been
much more impractical with Broad Street's old layout due to it's
elevation.

Isn't the problem that Broad St was on a viaduct while Liverpool St is in
a cutting? The approaches are also in rather different directions.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

BTW, I meant westwards, not eastwards

Isn't the problem that Broad St was on a viaduct while Liverpool St is in
a cutting? The approaches are also in rather different directions.

....firstly, yes, which is why demolition was required.

....secondly, yes, but for a few hundred metres or so they are both
heading north until the eastern line turn east, easily enough for the
throat required for the new platforms.

On 2 Apr, 10:42, Jamie Thompson wrote:
...firstly, yes, which is why demolition was required.

Not cutting exactly. The northernmost pair are in actual tunnel (or
"covered way" at least) west of Brick Lane.

...secondly, yes, but for a few hundred metres or so they are both
heading north until the eastern line turn east, easily enough for the
throat required for the new platforms.

Only if you demolish an enormous swathe of Shoreditch. And if you're
planning to 8 track the line west of Bethnal Green junction (which you
probably need to do to have enough trains to need more platforms),
there's an enormous amount of digging to do as well.

Hence my suggestion of re-using the Bishopsgate Goods Yard viaduct
route, which starts at roughly Bethnal Green, and would require far
less demolition. You could even have used the original GE19 bridge,
and maybe the Braithwaite viaduct, and Broad Street station itself.

U

On 2 Apr, 13:04, Mr Thant
wrote:
Only if you demolish an enormous swathe of Shoreditch. And if you're
planning to 8 track the line west of Bethnal Green junction (which you
probably need to do to have enough trains to need more platforms),
there's an enormous amount of digging to do as well.

Here's a quick dump of what I mean:
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps/ms?ie=...16ea694c6d0ce2

....I'm not clear how that entails demolishing a great chunk of
Shoreditch? A couple of buildings on the high street, yes, but new
shops could be constructed afterwards to replace them on the top of
the tunnel. Bear in mind I'm not advocating this now....the point I
was making that had this been built in the basement of those
skyscrapers when they were being built on Broad Street's still-warm
corpse, we could have had both a station and the buildings.

Dispose of the GE13 bridge and ramp and you're clear for more tracks
to Tapp Street, only a (literal!) stone's throw from Bethnal Green
Junction.

Hence my suggestion of re-using the Bishopsgate Goods Yard viaduct
route, which starts at roughly Bethnal Green, and would require far
less demolition. You could even have used the original GE19 bridge,
and maybe the Braithwaite viaduct, and Broad Street station itself.

An equally valid suggestion that I concluded as well myself at first
when I first saw the aerial imagery. Downsides to it are that you
would have less additional room for more tracks into as you'd
essentially have a big division between the stations and their
throats, and and you'd also gain some width from not having the
Bishopsgate structure there at all (clearances, etc). You'd also have
a two-level station, which would be less convenient than having
everything on the level...and finally, you'd not have the massive cash
injection BR got from selling the site. My idea may have provided less
than what they actually got, but it would still be more than
preserving Broad Street.