On Apr 7, 2:24*pm, Mizter T wrote:
And it came up again very recently on uk.r - this poster says it's
still in daily use:http://groups.google.com/group/uk.ra...95434bd797bce5

So, we've solved the Edgware Road teacup problem - I'm sure Boris will
just bat away any H&S concerns - so what next?

I'm sure there are plenty of stations that this would make step-free
access at a lot cheaper.

--
Abi

On Tue, 7 Apr 2009 06:59:44 +0100, Walter Briscoe
wrote:

Since then, I have been thinking about the teacup proposals, whose main
rationale seems to be that there is nowhere to store Circle line trains.
Aldgate seems a good candidate in both directions. Gloucester Road
clockwise and the line between High Street Kensington and Gloucester
Road anti-clockwise seem OK. (Does the latter allow passing Wimbledons?)
Hence my question above.

Given that Aldgate-Tower Hill is the only bit of the Circle not served
by another line, long layovers there would be likely to be unpopular.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

On Tue, 7 Apr 2009 05:32:12 -0700 (PDT), Jamie Thompson
wrote:

...that gives you a direct service from wherever you are to wherever
you want to go

No, it doesn't - I'd like to go from Tower Hill to Euston! (I
normally walk to Aldgate as, umm, the Circle Line is so unreliable)

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

On Tue, 7 Apr 2009 05:32:12 -0700 (PDT), Jamie Thompson
wrote:

...that gives you a direct service from wherever you are to wherever
you want to go, with plenty of opportunities for recovery. The
stations needn't be those given, they're just for illustration of the
concept.

Fair enough, ignore my other moan

Another option could be to increase service as short journeys on
existing lines and, for example, extend some Met trains to Tower Hill
to fill in that gap.

The thing about the Circle Line, though, is that it's easy to
understand for tourists. You see a lot of tourists on the Circle, but
few on the Met.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

On Apr 7, 7:51*pm, (Neil Williams)
wrote:

On Tue, 7 Apr 2009 06:59:44 +0100, Walter Briscoe
wrote:
Since then, I have been thinking about the teacup proposals, whose main
rationale seems to be that there is nowhere to store Circle line trains.
Aldgate seems a good candidate in both directions. Gloucester Road
clockwise and the line between High Street Kensington and Gloucester
Road anti-clockwise seem OK. (Does the latter allow passing Wimbledons?)
Hence my question above.

Given that Aldgate-Tower Hill is the only bit of the Circle not served
by another line, long layovers there would be likely to be unpopular.


Er, that and Gloucester Road to High Street Ken.

In general I avoid both stretches - there's normally a better way than
relying on the Circle line!

"Tim Roll-Pickering" wrote in
:

Walter Briscoe wrote:

Since then, I have been thinking about the teacup proposals, whose
main rationale seems to be that there is nowhere to store Circle line
trains. Aldgate seems a good candidate in both directions. Gloucester
Road clockwise and the line between High Street Kensington and
Gloucester Road anti-clockwise seem OK. (Does the latter allow
passing Wimbledons?) Hence my question above.

It's more than just storing trains - the Circle Line basically
involves trains running continuously for c20 hours, with no turn
arounds and no opportunity to recover time from delays. The latter has
a knock-on effect on the other three lines that share the tracks.
(It's because of this that I doubt there will ever be an "outer
circle" *service* on London Overground.) By introducing a couple of
terminuses the individual train journeys shrink to a far more
managable length, they all turn around and it will be possible to
terminate a train early and reverse it in order to recover some of the
lost time table.

One problem is going to be *where* do you terminate your late running train
early? The plan is to run Hammersmith - Outer Circle - Edgware Road -
Inner Circle - Hammersmith - Whitechapel/Barking - Hammersmith. Once past
Aldgate on the Outer Circle there is simply nowhere to park a train until
reaching Moorgate on the run to Whitechapel/Barking, unless you drop the
Inner Circle trip and run straight to Moorgate (or Aldgate) from Egdware
Road - which is pretty much what the Circle does at times of disruption
now.


It seems to also offer an increased frequency on the Hammersmith
branch as well as on the Circle-only sections of track - I find myself
avoiding relying on Aldgate-Tower Hill services as much as possible
(instead taking wide detours to get the District elsewhere) because
they have a reputation as being just too unreliable.



The Circle will be every 10 rather than 8 minutes. I suspect part of the
plan is to run everything on a 10 minute cycle - at least in the off peak.

David

"David Jackman" pleasereplytogroup wrote in message
. 109.145...

One problem is going to be *where* do you terminate your late running
train
early? The plan is to run Hammersmith - Outer Circle - Edgware Road -
Inner Circle - Hammersmith - Whitechapel/Barking - Hammersmith. Once past
Aldgate on the Outer Circle there is simply nowhere to park a train until
reaching Moorgate on the run to Whitechapel/Barking, unless you drop the
Inner Circle trip and run straight to Moorgate (or Aldgate) from Egdware
Road - which is pretty much what the Circle does at times of disruption
now.


Are you assuming trains will interwork on both H&C and Circle routes?
Surely it will be more reliable to have two discrete sub fleets on a day to
day basis, doing H&C OR Circle, and then delays will not transfer from one
service to the other?

Paul S

David Jackman pleasereplytogroup wrote on 07 April 2009 21:36:12 ...
"Tim Roll-Pickering" wrote in
:

Walter Briscoe wrote:

Since then, I have been thinking about the teacup proposals, whose
main rationale seems to be that there is nowhere to store Circle line
trains. Aldgate seems a good candidate in both directions. Gloucester
Road clockwise and the line between High Street Kensington and
Gloucester Road anti-clockwise seem OK. (Does the latter allow
passing Wimbledons?) Hence my question above.

It's more than just storing trains - the Circle Line basically
involves trains running continuously for c20 hours, with no turn
arounds and no opportunity to recover time from delays. The latter has
a knock-on effect on the other three lines that share the tracks.
(It's because of this that I doubt there will ever be an "outer
circle" *service* on London Overground.) By introducing a couple of
terminuses the individual train journeys shrink to a far more
managable length, they all turn around and it will be possible to
terminate a train early and reverse it in order to recover some of the
lost time table.

One problem is going to be *where* do you terminate your late running train
early? The plan is to run Hammersmith - Outer Circle - Edgware Road -
Inner Circle - Hammersmith - Whitechapel/Barking - Hammersmith. Once past
Aldgate on the Outer Circle there is simply nowhere to park a train until
reaching Moorgate on the run to Whitechapel/Barking, unless you drop the
Inner Circle trip and run straight to Moorgate (or Aldgate) from Egdware
Road - which is pretty much what the Circle does at times of disruption
now.

The "Outer Circle" was an entirely different route. You mean "Outer
Rail" and "Inner Rail" if you're referring to the clockwise and
anticlockwise tracks of the (Inner) Circle.
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

Walter Briscoe wrote:

Since then, I have been thinking about the teacup proposals,

BRAINWAVE.

On this group, we have two long-standing conundra: how to run the circle
line efficiently, and what to do with the recently disused Widened Lines.

Each is, of course, the solution to the other. We have the exclusive use
of the Widened Lines between Farringdon junction and Moorgate. On that
stretch, there are platforms at Barbican. We build two new bits of track,
and a bunch of crossovers:

- a trailing link from the inner Circle to the up Widened as far west as
possible; east of Farringdon, west of Barbican - this would be a trivial
extension of the Cowcross Street sidings

- a facing crossover from the up to the down Widened immediately east of
the above

- a facing crossover from the outer to the inner Circle also immediately
east of the link

- a facing link from the up Widened to the inner Circle west of Moorgate -
probably involving the Met sidings at Moorgate, at their western end

- a trailing crossover from the up Widened to the inner Circle west of the
link, which probably means west of the existing facing crossover (which is
west of the existing trailing crossover)

- a trailing crossover from the down to the up Widened west of the link

You then redesignate (fast/slow is arbitrary here):

- outer Circle - outer Circle fast
- inner Circle - outer Circle slow
- up Widened - inner Circle slow
- down Widened - outer Circle fast

And you have a four-track Circle between Farringdon and Moorgate, with no
flat crossings. Essentially, Barbican looks just like Edgware Road. You
can have trains on the slows sit in the platforms for as long as they need

Currently looks like this (|- denotes the severed tracks at Farringdon):

Barbican Moorgate

### ###
------------------------------+---------+---------
\ /
--+-----------------------------+---+-+-----------
\ ### \ ####
CX St ------+-+-------#
sgds \ #
+-----#
### ####
|------------------------------------------------#
#
|------------------------------------------------#
### ####

And would become (tracks not in routine use dashed):

### ###
---+---------------------+---+---------+---------
\ / \ /
---+-+-----------------+- - - -+-+-+-+-----------
\ ### / \ ####
\ +- - -+-+- - - -#
\ / \ #
\ / +- - -#
\ ### / ####
|- - - - -+-+-------------+-+- - - - - - - - - -#
\ / #
|- - - - - - -+---------+- - - - - - - - - - - -#
### ####

The stubs of Widened line at the Farringdon end probably wouldn't be long
enough to be of any use, but the stubs at the Moorgate end would all be
usable in one way or another. You might need a few more links or
crossovers to make full use of them. Whatever you do, they'll involve flat
crossings, though.

Actually, a cheaper version of this plan would just be to rearrange the
Cowcross Street sidings as a short four-track stretch. I'm not sure it's
long enough, but if it is, that would be somewhere to hold trains which
needed holding.

tom

--
Argumentative and pedantic, oh, yes. Although it's properly called "correct" -- Huge

On Tue, 7 Apr 2009, Mr Thant wrote:

On 7 Apr, 11:36, "John Rowland"
wrote:
Would one of these fit?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1NwXQaVAKA

That'd be perfect. And given said bridge is currently in storage (or
was last time I checked) due to maintenance expenses/vandalism/god
knows what,

Sexual exhaustion, by the look of John's link ...

tom

--
Argumentative and pedantic, oh, yes. Although it's properly called "correct" -- Huge