|
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On Jun 5, 11:28 pm, Paul Corfield wrote: On Fri, 5 Jun 2009 12:47:05 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T wrote: On Jun 5, 8:31 pm, Paul Weaver wrote: On 5 June, 20:20, Paul Corfield wrote: Other than the above I know nothing else and would suggest it is prudent to have a contingency plan in place if you absolutely have to get around London on the 11th. A bike is a perfectly adequate way of getting around zones 1 and 2 Getting a bike to zones 1 and 2 could present more of an issue though. True but the OP has not indicated what their particular requirements are. It might be there is some clever way of getting about that he has not considered. I appreciate there are no guarantees about being able to get on trains, DLR or buses but there may be options by being "unconventional" that people would not routinely consider. People also need to bear in mind that a number of former NR stations are now LUL managed and therefore might well be affected - the former Silverlink stations! This creates new problems and restrictions - especially in NW London. Good point about the ex-Silverlink stations now under LUL management - that's all stations from Harrow & Wealdstone to Queen's Park with the exception of Willesden Jn, Kew Gardens, Gunnersbury, plus there's the other stations where LU now "manage" the Overground platforms - i.e. West Brompton, Highbury & Islington, Blackhorse Road. Then there's stations where LUL manages the main bit of the station though not the National Rail platforms - e.g. West Ham, Seven Sisters, Stratford. I'm guessing that LU would deploy what staff they had so as to cover these major interchange stations, but maybe there wouldn't be enough suitably qualified staff to cover the Harrow & Wealdstone to Queen's Park stretch? That said, weren't some of these stations unmanned for at least some of the day in the Silverlink era? And what about Chiltern Railways - there's the question of whether they could call at their normal LU stations - i.e. Amersham, Chalfont & Latimer, Chorleywood, Rickmansworth, Harrow-on-the-Hill - but is there also any question about whether they could actually run - are the LU signallers going on strike too? Even if they could call at those stations. |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On Jun 6, 1:05*pm, Paul Corfield wrote: On Sat, 6 Jun 2009 04:55:47 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T wrote: On Jun 5, 11:28 pm, Paul Corfield wrote: [snip] True but the OP has not indicated what their particular requirements are. It might be there is some clever way of getting about that he has not considered. *I appreciate there are no guarantees about being able to get on trains, DLR or buses but there may be options by being "unconventional" that people would not routinely consider. *People also need to bear in mind that a number of former NR stations are now LUL managed and therefore might well be affected - the former Silverlink stations! *This creates new problems and restrictions - especially in NW London. Good point about the ex-Silverlink stations now under LUL management - that's all stations from Harrow & Wealdstone to Queen's Park with the exception of Willesden Jn, Kew Gardens, Gunnersbury, plus there's the other stations where LU now "manage" the Overground platforms - i.e. West Brompton, Highbury & Islington, Blackhorse Road. Err I thought Gunnersbury and Kew Gardens were with LU now. That's what I said - but re-reading it, I see it wasn't at all clear - the exception I was speaking of was simply Willesden Jn on the H&W to Queen's Park stretch of the DC lines - Kew Gardens and Gunnersbury were just meant to be in the list of LUL managed stations. Then there's stations where LUL manages the main bit of the station though not the National Rail platforms - e.g. West Ham, Seven Sisters, Stratford. Correct. *Tottenham Hale in terms of the ticket office but there is independent access to the NR platforms, similar applies to Walthamstow Central. Well of course the NR side of Walthamstow Central can operate quite independently as the ticket offices aren't in the LU bit (of course you know all this very well!). At Tottenham Hale there's at least one if not two NR ticket machines outside the LU building in the covered area near the platforms - NXEA could just send some RPIs up there to sell tickets. I'm guessing that LU would deploy what staff they had so as to cover these major interchange stations, but maybe there wouldn't be enough suitably qualified staff to cover the Harrow & Wealdstone to Queen's Park stretch? That said, weren't some of these stations unmanned for at least some of the day in the Silverlink era? I doubt the ex Silverlink stations could run unmanned today as I believe there have been changes to the safety case etc. *Not 100% certain on this point. Which is an interesting follow-on discussion in and of itself - though I hesitate to follow that line of discussion without being in full possession of the facts. And what about Chiltern Railways - there's the question of whether they could call at their normal LU stations - i.e. Amersham, Chalfont & Latimer, Chorleywood, Rickmansworth, Harrow-on-the-Hill - but is there also any question about whether they could actually run - are the LU signallers going on strike too? Even if they could call at those stations. [Sorry, unfinished sentence alert! I'll finish this point below...] It's all RMT staff so that includes the signal staff so even if ASLEF drivers predominate on a line then it could be as in the past where lack of signal staff mean few if any trains run. OK, thanks for clearing that up. As I was going to say before I interrupted myself(!)... Even if they (Chiltern Railway) could call at those stations (i.e. the LU stations on the Aylesbury route), they might not want to as their trains could end up being overrun. But if there's no signallers, then they wouldn't be able to run a service at all. (I suppose Chiltern could possibly run a Harrow-on-the-Hill to Marylebone shuttle if a few non-striking LU signallers could be found - though are there any crossovers south of HotH?) [For those reading this thread on utl, sorry for the cross-posting confusion - I've x-posted two separate parts of a uk.railway thread to utl, hence the somewhat non-sequiter nature of how this appears in utl.] |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On 6 June, 15:23, Mizter T wrote:
On Jun 6, 1:05*pm, Paul Corfield wrote: On Sat, 6 Jun 2009 04:55:47 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T wrote: On Jun 5, 11:28 pm, Paul Corfield wrote: [snip] True but the OP has not indicated what their particular requirements are. It might be there is some clever way of getting about that he has not considered. *I appreciate there are no guarantees about being able to get on trains, DLR or buses but there may be options by being "unconventional" that people would not routinely consider. *People also need to bear in mind that a number of former NR stations are now LUL managed and therefore might well be affected - the former Silverlink stations! *This creates new problems and restrictions - especially in NW London. Good point about the ex-Silverlink stations now under LUL management - that's all stations from Harrow & Wealdstone to Queen's Park with the exception of Willesden Jn, Kew Gardens, Gunnersbury, plus there's the other stations where LU now "manage" the Overground platforms - i.e. West Brompton, Highbury & Islington, Blackhorse Road. Err I thought Gunnersbury and Kew Gardens were with LU now. That's what I said - but re-reading it, I see it wasn't at all clear - the exception I was speaking of was simply Willesden Jn on the H&W to Queen's Park stretch of the DC lines - Kew Gardens and Gunnersbury were just meant to be in the list of LUL managed stations. Then there's stations where LUL manages the main bit of the station though not the National Rail platforms - e.g. West Ham, Seven Sisters, Stratford. Correct. *Tottenham Hale in terms of the ticket office but there is independent access to the NR platforms, similar applies to Walthamstow Central. Well of course the NR side of Walthamstow Central can operate quite independently as the ticket offices aren't in the LU bit (of course you know all this very well!). At Tottenham Hale there's at least one if not two NR ticket machines outside the LU building in the covered area near the platforms - NXEA could just send some RPIs up there to sell tickets. I'm guessing that LU would deploy what staff they had so as to cover these major interchange stations, but maybe there wouldn't be enough suitably qualified staff to cover the Harrow & Wealdstone to Queen's Park stretch? That said, weren't some of these stations unmanned for at least some of the day in the Silverlink era? I doubt the ex Silverlink stations could run unmanned today as I believe there have been changes to the safety case etc. *Not 100% certain on this point. Which is an interesting follow-on discussion in and of itself - though I hesitate to follow that line of discussion without being in full possession of the facts. And what about Chiltern Railways - there's the question of whether they could call at their normal LU stations - i.e. Amersham, Chalfont & Latimer, Chorleywood, Rickmansworth, Harrow-on-the-Hill - but is there also any question about whether they could actually run - are the LU signallers going on strike too? Even if they could call at those stations. [Sorry, unfinished sentence alert! I'll finish this point below...] It's all RMT staff so that includes the signal staff so even if ASLEF drivers predominate on a line then it could be as in the past where lack of signal staff mean few if any trains run. OK, thanks for clearing that up. As I was going to say before I interrupted myself(!)... Even if they (Chiltern Railway) could call at those stations (i.e. the LU stations on the Aylesbury route), they might not want to as their trains could end up being overrun. But if there's no signallers, then they wouldn't be able to run a service at all. (I suppose Chiltern could possibly run a Harrow-on-the-Hill to Marylebone shuttle if a few non-striking LU signallers could be found - though are there any crossovers south of HotH?) There aren't. |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On Jun 6, 3:48*pm, MIG wrote: On 6 June, 15:23, Mizter T wrote: [snip] (I suppose Chiltern could possibly run a Harrow-on-the-Hill to Marylebone shuttle if a few non-striking LU signallers could be found - though are there any crossovers south of HotH?) There aren't. I'd like to say 'well in that case they can run two trains in steam' on each line, but I'm sure there'd be problems with trying to treat two non-reversible lines as reversible! |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On 6 June, 16:53, Mizter T wrote:
On Jun 6, 3:48*pm, MIG wrote: On 6 June, 15:23, Mizter T wrote: [snip] (I suppose Chiltern could possibly run a Harrow-on-the-Hill to Marylebone shuttle if a few non-striking LU signallers could be found - though are there any crossovers south of HotH?) There aren't. I'd like to say 'well in that case they can run two trains in steam' on each line, but I'm sure there'd be problems with trying to treat two non-reversible lines as reversible! Actually, my mistake, there is a trailing crossover at Neasden, but I don't think it would help. |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On 6 June, 17:23, MIG wrote:
On 6 June, 16:53, Mizter T wrote: On Jun 6, 3:48*pm, MIG wrote: On 6 June, 15:23, Mizter T wrote: [snip] (I suppose Chiltern could possibly run a Harrow-on-the-Hill to Marylebone shuttle if a few non-striking LU signallers could be found - though are there any crossovers south of HotH?) There aren't. I'd like to say 'well in that case they can run two trains in steam' on each line, but I'm sure there'd be problems with trying to treat two non-reversible lines as reversible! Actually, my mistake, there is a trailing crossover at Neasden, but I don't think it would help. Oh ang on though, if they used platform 1 at HotH, I think there may be a crossover. Not sure if it isn't just a track crossing to/from the Metropolitan or if it leads to/from the up Chiltern track as well. |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On Jun 6, 5:29*pm, MIG wrote:
On 6 June, 17:23, MIG wrote: On 6 June, 16:53, Mizter T wrote: On Jun 6, 3:48*pm, MIG wrote: On 6 June, 15:23, Mizter T wrote: [snip] (I suppose Chiltern could possibly run a Harrow-on-the-Hill to Marylebone shuttle if a few non-striking LU signallers could be found - though are there any crossovers south of HotH?) There aren't. I'd like to say 'well in that case they can run two trains in steam' on each line, but I'm sure there'd be problems with trying to treat two non-reversible lines as reversible! There's no access for Down train to the Up Harrow at any point beyond Marylebone itself, so there'd be no way of running such services with the main Chiltern route open. Actually, my mistake, there is a trailing crossover at Neasden, but I don't think it would help. Unfortunately, that's on the Marylebone side of the junction and is almost certainly not signalled from Up trains from the Down Harrow line. Oh ang on though, if they used platform 1 at HotH, I think there may be a crossover. *Not sure if it isn't just a track crossing to/from the Metropolitan or if it leads to/from the up Chiltern track as well. I can't remember if this crossover can be used from Up departures from Platform 1 at Harrow. My memory tells me that there is no signal for this route. What I can't remember is if the crossover from the NB Fast to the Platform 1 just passes over the intervening Up line or whether there is pointwork in the Up line allowing access. |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was: Tube strike]
|
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On 9 June, 00:38, asdf wrote:
On Sat, 6 Jun 2009 10:20:56 -0700 (PDT), wrote: Oh ang on though, if they used platform 1 at HotH, I think there may be a crossover. *Not sure if it isn't just a track crossing to/from the Metropolitan or if it leads to/from the up Chiltern track as well. I can't remember if this crossover can be used from Up departures from Platform 1 at Harrow. My memory tells me that there is no signal for this route. What I can't remember is if the crossover from the NB Fast to the Platform 1 just passes over the intervening Up line or whether there is pointwork in the Up line allowing access. There isn't pointwork - it's one of those things that I think is referred to as a diamond crossing. Thanks, I though it probably was, but couldn't remember. Then again, all the signalling in that area (and for some distance to the east of Harrow, even on the NR lines) is LU-operated anyway. Or at least the signals look like LU ones. So LU signallers would be needed in any case (and if any were available, the trains could just reverse using the trailing crossover to the west of Harrow). That's true. Besides, in this age of can't-be-bothered railway operations, even Chiltern would have to be absolute saints to run a Harrow-Marylebone shuttle under such circumstances, what with the far easier option on the table of just cancelling everything. Chiltern have run such shuttles in the past, when there has been engineering work in the Wembley area. They reversed using the crossover north/west of the station as you suggested. |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On 9 June, 14:40, wrote:
On 9 June, 00:38, asdf wrote: On Sat, 6 Jun 2009 10:20:56 -0700 (PDT), wrote: Oh ang on though, if they used platform 1 at HotH, I think there may be a crossover. *Not sure if it isn't just a track crossing to/from the Metropolitan or if it leads to/from the up Chiltern track as well. I can't remember if this crossover can be used from Up departures from Platform 1 at Harrow. My memory tells me that there is no signal for this route. What I can't remember is if the crossover from the NB Fast to the Platform 1 just passes over the intervening Up line or whether there is pointwork in the Up line allowing access. There isn't pointwork - it's one of those things that I think is referred to as a diamond crossing. Thanks, I though it probably was, but couldn't remember. It can't be that simple though, because it has to allow for Metropolitan trains in both directions, doesn't it? So there must be something from the up Chiltern to the Met as well as the diamond from the Met to the down Chiltern, even if nothing from platform 1 to the up Chiltern? Then again, all the signalling in that area (and for some distance to the east of Harrow, even on the NR lines) is LU-operated anyway. Or at least the signals look like LU ones. So LU signallers would be needed in any case (and if any were available, the trains could just reverse using the trailing crossover to the west of Harrow). That's true. Besides, in this age of can't-be-bothered railway operations, even Chiltern would have to be absolute saints to run a Harrow-Marylebone shuttle under such circumstances, what with the far easier option on the table of just cancelling everything. Chiltern have run such shuttles in the past, when there has been engineering work in the Wembley area. They reversed using the crossover north/west of the station as you suggested. |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On 9 June, 14:49, MIG wrote:
On 9 June, 14:40, wrote: On 9 June, 00:38, asdf wrote: On Sat, 6 Jun 2009 10:20:56 -0700 (PDT), wrote: Oh ang on though, if they used platform 1 at HotH, I think there may be a crossover. *Not sure if it isn't just a track crossing to/from the Metropolitan or if it leads to/from the up Chiltern track as well. I can't remember if this crossover can be used from Up departures from Platform 1 at Harrow. My memory tells me that there is no signal for this route. What I can't remember is if the crossover from the NB Fast to the Platform 1 just passes over the intervening Up line or whether there is pointwork in the Up line allowing access. There isn't pointwork - it's one of those things that I think is referred to as a diamond crossing. Thanks, I though it probably was, but couldn't remember. It can't be that simple though, because it has to allow for Metropolitan trains in both directions, doesn't it? *So there must be something from the up Chiltern to the Met as well as the diamond from the Met to the down Chiltern, even if nothing from platform 1 to the up Chiltern? Platform 1 is only accessible from the Down Chiltern and the NB Met fast, via the diamond crossing, heading north (to the NB Met fast), with no access heading south without a shunt. Platform 2 only has access to the Up Chiltern, heading south from the SB Met fast, or the NB Met fast heading north via the trailing crossover. There is no access to other Met line tracks (i.e. the both southbound, NB slow or the Uxbridge lines). Met line trains only use Platform 1 heading north, from the NB fast or platform 2 reversing from SB to NB. There are no other Met line possibilities, with the current layout. |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On Jun 6, 12:55*pm, Mizter T wrote:
And what about Chiltern Railways - there's the question of whether they could call at their normal LU stations - i.e. Amersham, Chalfont & Latimer, Chorleywood, Rickmansworth, Harrow-on-the-Hill - but is there also any question about whether they could actually run - are the LU signallers going on strike too? Even if they could call at those stations. This is from the National Rail website: The following stations which are served by Chiltern Railways, as well as London Underground, will be closed, and no services will be calling: * Harrow-on-the-Hill * Rickmansworth * Chorleywood * Chalfont & Latimer * Amersham C2C services will not call at West Ham station from 18:45 on Tuesday 9 June until the start of service on Friday 12 June London Overground will run a normal service throughout this industrial action. -- http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/servic...e/details.html |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On 9 June, 16:41, wrote:
On 9 June, 14:49, MIG wrote: On 9 June, 14:40, wrote: On 9 June, 00:38, asdf wrote: On Sat, 6 Jun 2009 10:20:56 -0700 (PDT), wrote: Oh ang on though, if they used platform 1 at HotH, I think there may be a crossover. *Not sure if it isn't just a track crossing to/from the Metropolitan or if it leads to/from the up Chiltern track as well. I can't remember if this crossover can be used from Up departures from Platform 1 at Harrow. My memory tells me that there is no signal for this route. What I can't remember is if the crossover from the NB Fast to the Platform 1 just passes over the intervening Up line or whether there is pointwork in the Up line allowing access. There isn't pointwork - it's one of those things that I think is referred to as a diamond crossing. Thanks, I though it probably was, but couldn't remember. It can't be that simple though, because it has to allow for Metropolitan trains in both directions, doesn't it? *So there must be something from the up Chiltern to the Met as well as the diamond from the Met to the down Chiltern, even if nothing from platform 1 to the up Chiltern? Platform 1 is only accessible from the Down Chiltern and the NB Met fast, via the diamond crossing, heading north (to the NB Met fast), with no access heading south without a shunt. Platform 2 only has access to the Up Chiltern, heading south from the SB Met fast, or the NB Met fast heading north via the trailing crossover. There is no access to other Met line tracks (i.e. the both southbound, NB slow or the Uxbridge lines). Met line trains only use Platform 1 heading north, from the NB fast or platform 2 reversing from SB to NB. There are no other Met line possibilities, with the current layout.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Ah right, so you can't take the Met south through platform 2, I think you are saying, and it's electricked only for reversing back north. That seems a bit unbalanced given that you can go north through platform 1, but if that's the way it is ... Hard to tell from diagrams. |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On Jun 9, 4:46*pm, Martin Deutsch wrote:
http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/servic...e/details.html I can't see any reason at all not to accept LU-valid rail tickets on cross-London buses (as it's an internal matter within TfL, no external stakeholders required) - is this some kind of spite directed at the TOCs for not co-operating on PAYG? "Please be aware that National Rail tickets which are valid for cross- London transfers on the London Underground will not be valid on London Buses." -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
Noticed this on the TfL website - worthy of inclusion in Private Eye.
"Suspended between Queens Park and Harrow & Wealdstone with severe delays on the rest of the line due to operational issues. Valid tickets are being accepted on local bus services between Queen's Park and Harrow & Wealdstone. See how we are transforming the Tube ." -- gordon |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On Jun 9, 4:58*pm, MIG wrote:
On 9 June, 16:41, wrote: On 9 June, 14:49, MIG wrote: On 9 June, 14:40, wrote: On 9 June, 00:38, asdf wrote: On Sat, 6 Jun 2009 10:20:56 -0700 (PDT), wrote: Oh ang on though, if they used platform 1 at HotH, I think there may be a crossover. *Not sure if it isn't just a track crossing to/from the Metropolitan or if it leads to/from the up Chiltern track as well. I can't remember if this crossover can be used from Up departures from Platform 1 at Harrow. My memory tells me that there is no signal for this route. What I can't remember is if the crossover from the NB Fast to the Platform 1 just passes over the intervening Up line or whether there is pointwork in the Up line allowing access. There isn't pointwork - it's one of those things that I think is referred to as a diamond crossing. Thanks, I though it probably was, but couldn't remember. It can't be that simple though, because it has to allow for Metropolitan trains in both directions, doesn't it? *So there must be something from the up Chiltern to the Met as well as the diamond from the Met to the down Chiltern, even if nothing from platform 1 to the up Chiltern? Platform 1 is only accessible from the Down Chiltern and the NB Met fast, via the diamond crossing, heading north (to the NB Met fast), with no access heading south without a shunt. Platform 2 only has access to the Up Chiltern, heading south from the SB Met fast, or the NB Met fast heading north via the trailing crossover. There is no access to other Met line tracks (i.e. the both southbound, NB slow or the Uxbridge lines). Met line trains only use Platform 1 heading north, from the NB fast or platform 2 reversing from SB to NB. There are no other Met line possibilities, with the current layout.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Ah right, so you can't take the Met south through platform 2, I think you are saying, and it's electricked only for reversing back north. That seems a bit unbalanced given that you can go north through platform 1, but if that's the way it is ... *Hard to tell from diagrams. |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On Jun 9, 5:35*pm, wrote: On Jun 9, 4:46*pm, Martin Deutsch wrote: http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/servic...e/details.html I can't see any reason at all not to accept LU-valid rail tickets on cross-London buses (as it's an internal matter within TfL, no external stakeholders required) - is this some kind of spite directed at the TOCs for not co-operating on PAYG? "Please be aware that National Rail tickets which are valid for cross- London transfers on the London Underground will not be valid on London Buses." I wonder if this is not more likely to simply be the result of misunderstanding and/or miscommunication on the part of NRE (who run the NR site)? In reality I imagine bus drivers would probably wave anyone through who presented such a ticket and explained what they were doing - their priority will be to keep things moving, not quibble over ticket validities. If however this really is the official position as dictated by TfL, then perhaps the worry is people presenting any old NR ticket to bus drivers and therefore getting a free ride? (Of course that thought is somewhat incompatible with my comment in the previous paragraph.) |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On Jun 9, 4:58*pm, MIG wrote:
On 9 June, 16:41, wrote: On 9 June, 14:49, MIG wrote: On 9 June, 14:40, wrote: On 9 June, 00:38, asdf wrote: On Sat, 6 Jun 2009 10:20:56 -0700 (PDT), wrote: Oh ang on though, if they used platform 1 at HotH, I think there may be a crossover. *Not sure if it isn't just a track crossing to/from the Metropolitan or if it leads to/from the up Chiltern track as well. I can't remember if this crossover can be used from Up departures from Platform 1 at Harrow. My memory tells me that there is no signal for this route. What I can't remember is if the crossover from the NB Fast to the Platform 1 just passes over the intervening Up line or whether there is pointwork in the Up line allowing access. There isn't pointwork - it's one of those things that I think is referred to as a diamond crossing. Thanks, I though it probably was, but couldn't remember. It can't be that simple though, because it has to allow for Metropolitan trains in both directions, doesn't it? *So there must be something from the up Chiltern to the Met as well as the diamond from the Met to the down Chiltern, even if nothing from platform 1 to the up Chiltern? Platform 1 is only accessible from the Down Chiltern and the NB Met fast, via the diamond crossing, heading north (to the NB Met fast), with no access heading south without a shunt. Platform 2 only has access to the Up Chiltern, heading south from the SB Met fast, or the NB Met fast heading north via the trailing crossover. There is no access to other Met line tracks (i.e. the both southbound, NB slow or the Uxbridge lines). Met line trains only use Platform 1 heading north, from the NB fast or platform 2 reversing from SB to NB. There are no other Met line possibilities, with the current layout.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Ah right, so you can't take the Met south through platform 2, I think you are saying, and it's electricked only for reversing back north. That seems a bit unbalanced given that you can go north through platform 1, but if that's the way it is ... *Hard to tell from diagrams. That's right. To go south to the Met from platform 2 would require crossing both northbound tracks, so all crossing moves happen at Harrow North Junction, where only the NB slow is crossed. On the other hand, using platform 1 for NB Met fast services takes only takes them across the SB Chiltern and gives extra platform capacity in the evening peak. |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On Jun 6, 12:55*pm, Mizter T wrote:
Then there's stations where LUL manages the main bit of the station though not the National Rail platforms - e.g. West Ham, Seven Sisters, Stratford. First Capital Connect are saying this: Please note: It is our expectation we will be able to operate between Finsbury Park and Moorgate. However, this will depend upon the availability of London Underground personnel who staff many of these stations. (from http://www.firstcapitalconnect.co.uk...=MajorIncident ) |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On 9 June, 19:17, Martin Deutsch wrote:
First Capital Connect are saying this: Please note: It is our expectation we will be able to operate between Finsbury Park and Moorgate. However, this will depend upon the availability of London Underground personnel who staff many of these stations. and this ..... "Thameslink route service alterations: there is a shortage of available trains as a result of a fault which means some services on the Thameslink route are only 4 carriages long instead of 8. Additional stops have also been put in to other services to relieve crowding. The problem will be rectified soon, meanwhile we apologise for the inconvenience this is causing customers." Handy when the tubes are erm down the tubes. -- gordon |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On Jun 9, 7:25*pm, " wrote:
On 9 June, 19:17, Martin Deutsch wrote: First Capital Connect are saying this: Please note: It is our expectation we will be able to operate between Finsbury Park and Moorgate. However, this will depend upon the availability of London Underground personnel who staff many of these stations. and this ..... "Thameslink route service alterations: there is a shortage of available trains as a result of a fault which means some services on the Thameslink route are only 4 carriages long instead of 8. Additional stops have also been put in to other services to relieve crowding. The problem will be rectified soon, meanwhile we apologise for the inconvenience this is causing customers." Handy when the tubes are erm down the tubes. That was happening Monday as well. Looks like the shortage of class 377/5 units is starting to catch up with them!! ---- I've also just seen this on the National Rail website: "London Overground and Southern services will not call at Wembley Central or North Wembley stations on Wednesday 10 June from approximately 18:00. A normal service is expected to run at all other times." So it looks there there is a slight shortage of station staff in the evening. I notice that the Bakerloo north of Queens Park finished early tonight (from about 5pm), does this mean that the line is a 'hot- bed' of RMT activists? As I write this (21.40), only the Northern and Piccadilly are still running a 'good service' |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On Jun 9, 9:45*pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Tue, 9 Jun 2009 13:39:38 -0700 (PDT), wrote: "London Overground and Southern services will not call at Wembley Central or North Wembley stations on Wednesday 10 June from approximately 18:00. A normal service is expected to run at all other times." Surely it is to do with the England match at Wembley and the obvious decision that there will be *no* rail based access to Wembley? All the stations in the area are shut or else trains will not stop - Chiltern included. Possibly, I didn't think of that. If one station was known to be open it would be swamped to dangerous levels so perverse as it seems it is better to have them all closed and thus the risk of crush conditions in stations disappears. But isn't S********** P*** nearly as close as North Wembley, with S*** K***** not much further either? I know most fans might not realise this, but there will be a few who will be able to work it out. -- Paul C |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On Jun 9, 7:25*pm, " wrote:
On 9 June, 19:17, Martin Deutsch wrote: First Capital Connect are saying this: Please note: It is our expectation we will be able to operate between Finsbury Park and Moorgate. However, this will depend upon the availability of London Underground personnel who staff many of these stations. and this ..... "Thameslink route service alterations: there is a shortage of available trains as a result of a fault which means some services on the Thameslink route are only 4 carriages long instead of 8. Additional stops have also been put in to other services to relieve crowding. The problem will be rectified soon, meanwhile we apologise for the inconvenience this is causing customers." The latter is the ongoing 'not enough 377s delivered but we need to shut the terminus platforms at Blackfriars right now' 'fault', rather than a today thing, isn't it? -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was: Tube strike]
wrote in message ... On Jun 9, 7:25 pm, " wrote: "Thameslink route service alterations: there is a shortage of available trains as a result of a fault which means some services on the Thameslink route are only 4 carriages long instead of 8. Additional stops have also been put in to other services to relieve crowding. The problem will be rectified soon, meanwhile we apologise for the inconvenience this is causing customers." The latter is the ongoing 'not enough 377s delivered but we need to shut the terminus platforms at Blackfriars right now' 'fault', rather than a today thing, isn't it? No - it's the 'just enough 377s had been delivered to muddle through, but we've had to take the newest six out of service due to wheel bearing problems' fault... Paul S |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On Jun 10, 10:49*am, "Paul Scott" wrote: wrote: On Jun 9, 7:25 pm, " wrote: "Thameslink route service alterations: there is a shortage of available trains as a result of a fault which means some services on the Thameslink route are only 4 carriages long instead of 8. Additional stops have also been put in to other services to relieve crowding. The problem will be rectified soon, meanwhile we apologise for the inconvenience this is causing customers." The latter is the ongoing 'not enough 377s delivered but we need to shut the terminus platforms at Blackfriars right now' 'fault', rather than a today thing, isn't it? No - it's the 'just enough 377s had been delivered to muddle through, but we've had to take the newest six out of service due to wheel bearing problems' fault... Thanks for clearing that one up. To my mind the wording of the original message from FCC certainly suggested a specific problem with some of their existing trains. Is there a significant quality control issue with the 377s then, as there have been other suggestions of various issues with them? |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On Jun 10, 12:06*am, wrote: On Jun 9, 9:45*pm, Paul Corfield wrote: On Tue, 9 Jun 2009 13:39:38 -0700 (PDT), wrote: "London Overground and Southern services will not call at Wembley Central or North Wembley stations on Wednesday 10 June from approximately 18:00. A normal service is expected to run at all other times." Surely it is to do with the England match at Wembley and the obvious decision that there will be *no* rail based access to Wembley? All the stations in the area are shut or else trains will not stop - Chiltern included. Possibly, I didn't think of that. That's what's happening, yes. If one station was known to be open it would be swamped to dangerous levels so perverse as it seems it is better to have them all closed and thus the risk of crush conditions in stations disappears. But isn't S********** P*** nearly as close as North Wembley, with S*** K***** not much further either? I know most fans might not realise this, but there will be a few who will be able to work it out. They're one step ahead of you - S********** P*** is now also going to be closed as well, though S*** K***** appears to have survived the cull - and there's H******** station to the south as well of course. Those who are keen can work these things out, of course - mapping websites such as http://www.streetmap.co.uk and http:// www.walkit.com/ being useful especially for those without an A-Z to hand (plus walkit.com is good for the time estimate anyway). The additional closure of S********** P*** is according to the NRE strike disruptions page he http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/servic...e/details.html Meanwhile TfL's own "Current Overground network status" page (which is part of their "Live travel news" section) is as naff as ever - it only mentions that Blackhorse Road is shut (as it's LUL managed), which is the same message as yesterday evening. Meanwhile NRE page seems more up to date as it currently states "Blackhorse Road station is currently open for London Overground services, but may be closed at short notice." The fact there's no mention of the forthcoming closure of the three stations in the vicinity of Wembley this evening on the TfL page is really rather shabby - I kinda expected TfL to do a better job of this. I've just remembered the place to go for up to date LO information is of course JourneyCheck - TfL/LO don't advertise the existence of it publicly anywhere these days, though just after they took over the ex- Silverlink routes a link to id did appear on the TfL website for a short while - so I dare say it's aimed rather more at their own staff. Anyway, one can get to it he http://www.jcheck.com/londonoverground |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On Jun 10, 5:33*pm, Paul Corfield wrote: On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 08:23:48 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T wrote: Meanwhile TfL's own "Current Overground network status" page (which is part of their "Live travel news" section) is as naff as ever - it only mentions that Blackhorse Road is shut (as it's LUL managed), which is the same message as yesterday evening. Meanwhile NRE page seems more up to date as it currently states "Blackhorse Road station is currently open for London Overground services, but may be closed at short notice." from what I could see at 0630 this morning Blackhorse Road was most definitely open as it was at 1430 when I got back from my stint of volunteering at Turnpike Lane. Thanks - nothing like an eyewitness account! Curious to know, would TfL buildings have been like ghost towns today, i.e. what proportion of staff would have been out on the front line? And do people volunteer or 'volunteer' to do this, IYSWIM? I've just remembered the place to go for up to date LO information is of course JourneyCheck - TfL/LO don't advertise the existence of it publicly anywhere these days, though just after they took over the ex- Silverlink routes a link to it did appear on the TfL website for a short while - so I dare say it's aimed rather more at their own staff. Anyway, one can get to it he http://www.jcheck.com/londonoverground It is very odd that the TfL website doesn't seem to deal with Overground service status terribly well. It's rather disappointing. I remember expecting, on TfL/LO taking over from Silverlink, for there to be much improved efforts to communicate information on the web. Instead, as I recall it was initially far worse - there was nothing! No weekend engineering works information at all (!!!), no live running information, just the same stale old webpages on what TfL planned to do when they took over the ex- Silverlink Metro routes - after a short while the link to the JourneyCheck service appeared on TfL's 'live travel news' page for under the "Rail" mode tab, but it subsequently disappeared after while - presumably the logic being that the 'live travel news' pages would instead be updated with up to the minute stuff. Well, they're not! Also, LO never appears as disrupted on the real-time Tube map either, despite the fact that it appears on the map (shaded-out, as if there's no disruption). It looks like the NLL and Euston Watfords are suffering a bit "due to an unusually large passenger flow" - what a lovely turn of phrase. It'll get flushed out of the system eventually, I'm sure. This message has belatedly appeared on the "Current Overground network status page: ---quote--- LONDON OVERGROUND, EUSTON - WATFORD JUNCTION: Severe delays are occurring due to overcrowding. Trains are not calling at Stonebridge Park, Wembley Central and North Wembley due to industrial action. ---/quote--- A somewhat disingenuous explanation perhaps, though undoubtedly it is only happening because of the strike. Incidentally, I've only now worked out the spectacularly complicated way the items on that page are ordered, which I remember puzzling over beforehand - it's that strange thing called alphabetical order! I am however now doubting myself a little and wondering whether I had scrolled down the page enough to see all the items that were on display, or whether I've gone on a rant about lack of information that was in fact there all along... That said, I'm pretty sure I looked at it properly last time and didn't miss anything, but I can;t be sure. However, either way it demonstrates that the way the information presented is far from ideal - because of the alphabetical ordering of items, really important things could appear 'below the fold' (newsprint term) - i.e. you'd need to scroll down to see them. Surely the most up to date, er, updates should always show at the top of the page, whilst other more permanent items such as the info about the 20 minute frequencies on the WLL and NLL south west of Willesden Jn should appear further down [1]. Though I'd favour overhauling it and displaying information on a route basis, e.g. NLL, GOBLIN etc. Yes, there is some crossover between the NLL and WLL, but that wouldn't be a show stopper - any information that pertains to both routes could be displayed in both categories. ---------- [1] I do just have to have a bit of a rant about this specifically, having read and digested it. The item in question reads as follows: ---quote--- LONDON OVERGROUND (RICHMOND - CLAPHAM JUNCTION - STRATFORD): Monday to Friday 0600-0900 and 1600-1900 trains operate every 20 minutes on each line in both directions. As a result trains operate every 10 minutes between Willesden Junction and Stratford. ---/quote--- Now, who could possibly blame anyone who might come away from reading that with the erroneous impression that LO operated a service from Richmond via Clapham Jn to Willesden Jn? I'm deeply unimpressed. |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was: Tube strike]
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 17:33:12 +0100, Paul Corfield wrote:
It is very odd that the TfL website doesn't seem to deal with Overground service status terribly well. It looks like the NLL and Euston Watfords are suffering a bit "due to an unusually large passenger flow" - what a lovely turn of phrase. They're crowded enough in the a.m. peak on a normal day (to the point of people regularly being left behind on the platform) - I was a bit surprised that media reports were emphasising that the route was running, as most people wouldn't have a hope of getting on. And on top of the strike, the London Midland service was well and truly stuffed by a signal failure in the Carpenders Park area. So I imagine the sport of "how many people can you fit in a 313?" was well practised this morning. |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On Jun 10, 11:33*pm, asdf wrote: On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 17:33:12 +0100, Paul Corfield wrote: It is very odd that the TfL website doesn't seem to deal with Overground service status terribly well. It looks like the NLL and Euston Watfords are suffering a bit "due to an unusually large passenger flow" - what a lovely turn of phrase. They're crowded enough in the a.m. peak on a normal day (to the point of people regularly being left behind on the platform) - I was a bit surprised that media reports were emphasising that the route was running, as most people wouldn't have a hope of getting on. I know the NLL is crazy busy during morning and evening peaks, but how hectic does is get on the DC line? I know people who live up Kensal Green way, but none of them ever seem to use the service at the height of the peaks (explained by cycling, walking, bus, odd shifts, doesn't go where they need to be). And on top of the strike, the London Midland service was well and truly stuffed by a signal failure in the Carpenders Park area. So I imagine the sport of "how many people can you fit in a 313?" was well practised this morning. Joyous! |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was: Tube strike]
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:41:53 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T
wrote: On Jun 10, 11:33*pm, asdf wrote: On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 17:33:12 +0100, Paul Corfield wrote: It is very odd that the TfL website doesn't seem to deal with Overground service status terribly well. It looks like the NLL and Euston Watfords are suffering a bit "due to an unusually large passenger flow" - what a lovely turn of phrase. They're crowded enough in the a.m. peak on a normal day (to the point of people regularly being left behind on the platform) - I was a bit surprised that media reports were emphasising that the route was running, as most people wouldn't have a hope of getting on. I know the NLL is crazy busy during morning and evening peaks, but how hectic does is get on the DC line? I know people who live up Kensal Green way, but none of them ever seem to use the service at the height of the peaks (explained by cycling, walking, bus, odd shifts, doesn't go where they need to be). I suspect a lot of people have managed to pass it (and other DC line stations) without noticing it is there. Much of the DC line signage is still as bad as it was after "British Rail" was invented (see the picture of Kenton Station in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenton_station and compare with historical photographs of DC/NLL stations showing more prominent signage _above_ the entrance canopy). While the LMS/early BR listing of 1001 destinations would be a bit OTT, the signage still needs improvement so that people notice the stations and have basic information amounting to more than a couple of overgrown badges. Kensal Green station does not look a lot better [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kensal_...ilway_station], having the appearance of a warehouse or village hall and an apparent failure to make the LO/NR symbols prominent on a contrasting background; putting "station" at the end of the name would also help. And on top of the strike, the London Midland service was well and truly stuffed by a signal failure in the Carpenders Park area. So I imagine the sport of "how many people can you fit in a 313?" was well practised this morning. Joyous! |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was: Tube strike]
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 16:41:53 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T wrote:
On Jun 10, 11:33*pm, asdf wrote: On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 17:33:12 +0100, Paul Corfield wrote: It is very odd that the TfL website doesn't seem to deal with Overground service status terribly well. It looks like the NLL and Euston Watfords are suffering a bit "due to an unusually large passenger flow" - what a lovely turn of phrase. They're crowded enough in the a.m. peak on a normal day (to the point of people regularly being left behind on the platform) - I was a bit surprised that media reports were emphasising that the route was running, as most people wouldn't have a hope of getting on. I know the NLL is crazy busy during morning and evening peaks, but how hectic does is get on the DC line? Actually, I neglected to mention that I was writing that about the DC line (though I bet the NLL wasn't pretty either). |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On 10 June, 23:33, asdf wrote:
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 17:33:12 +0100, Paul Corfield wrote: It is very odd that the TfL website doesn't seem to deal with Overground service status terribly well. It looks like the NLL and Euston Watfords are suffering a bit "due to an unusually large passenger flow" - what a lovely turn of phrase. They're crowded enough in the a.m. peak on a normal day (to the point of people regularly being left behind on the platform) - I was a bit surprised that media reports were emphasising that the route was running, as most people wouldn't have a hope of getting on. And on top of the strike, the London Midland service was well and truly stuffed by a signal failure in the Carpenders Park area. So I imagine the sport of "how many people can you fit in a 313?" was well practised this morning. Apparantly LO are running additional services Harrow & Wealdstone - Kilburn High Road, to take some of the load off. There was certainly a 313 in Harrow sidings yesterday morning and there platform displays were advertising the service this morning too. From experience, the LO trains are full on the Euston to/from about Willesden / Wembley section during a normal peak, but you can usually get on. As soon as there is any disruption to either the London Midland or Bakerloo services, you'd be hard put to get on at intermediate stations. Yesterday things wouldn't have been helped by the lack of Southern services, as these are quite busy on Watford - Shepherds Bush / Kensington Olympia leg and this was the part cancelled due to the Carpenders Park problem. |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On 9 June, 18:32, wrote:
On Jun 9, 4:58*pm, MIG wrote: On 9 June, 16:41, wrote: On 9 June, 14:49, MIG wrote: On 9 June, 14:40, wrote: On 9 June, 00:38, asdf wrote: On Sat, 6 Jun 2009 10:20:56 -0700 (PDT), wrote: Oh ang on though, if they used platform 1 at HotH, I think there may be a crossover. *Not sure if it isn't just a track crossing to/from the Metropolitan or if it leads to/from the up Chiltern track as well. I can't remember if this crossover can be used from Up departures from Platform 1 at Harrow. My memory tells me that there is no signal for this route. What I can't remember is if the crossover from the NB Fast to the Platform 1 just passes over the intervening Up line or whether there is pointwork in the Up line allowing access. There isn't pointwork - it's one of those things that I think is referred to as a diamond crossing. Thanks, I though it probably was, but couldn't remember. It can't be that simple though, because it has to allow for Metropolitan trains in both directions, doesn't it? *So there must be something from the up Chiltern to the Met as well as the diamond from the Met to the down Chiltern, even if nothing from platform 1 to the up Chiltern? Platform 1 is only accessible from the Down Chiltern and the NB Met fast, via the diamond crossing, heading north (to the NB Met fast), with no access heading south without a shunt. Platform 2 only has access to the Up Chiltern, heading south from the SB Met fast, or the NB Met fast heading north via the trailing crossover. There is no access to other Met line tracks (i.e. the both southbound, NB slow or the Uxbridge lines). Met line trains only use Platform 1 heading north, from the NB fast or platform 2 reversing from SB to NB. There are no other Met line possibilities, with the current layout.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Ah right, so you can't take the Met south through platform 2, I think you are saying, and it's electricked only for reversing back north. That seems a bit unbalanced given that you can go north through platform 1, but if that's the way it is ... *Hard to tell from diagrams. That's right. To go south to the Met from platform 2 would require crossing both northbound tracks, so all crossing moves happen at Harrow North Junction, where only the NB slow is crossed. On the other hand, using platform 1 for NB Met fast services takes only takes them across the SB Chiltern and gives extra platform capacity in the evening peak.- A bit late to go back to this one, but I got round to checking the right Quails. The Southern (most up-to-date) edition corresponds exactly to what you say, with the electrification not even extending from platform 2 as far back as the diamond. But the Western edition is very different, showing more electrification and difficult to interpret whether there's a crossover, because of the colours not quite lining up. I wonder if there has been a change in recent years or one there was a mistake? |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was: Tube strike]
MIG wrote:
On 9 June, 18:32, wrote: That's right. To go south to the Met from platform 2 would require crossing both northbound tracks, so all crossing moves happen at Harrow North Junction, where only the NB slow is crossed. On the other hand, using platform 1 for NB Met fast services takes only takes them across the SB Chiltern and gives extra platform capacity in the evening peak.- A bit late to go back to this one, but I got round to checking the right Quails. The Southern (most up-to-date) edition corresponds exactly to what you say, with the electrification not even extending from platform 2 as far back as the diamond. That is correct. There is no route SB from platform 2, other than up to Marylebone. Electrification ends at the south end of the platform. In practise, the only services that use P2 are terminating trains from the north, that then run back to Rickmansworth to stable. AFAIR that only actually consists of one evening service at around 20:15. |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was: Tube strike]
"asdf" wrote in message ... Actually, I neglected to mention that I was writing that about the DC line (though I bet the NLL wasn't pretty either). It wasn't (excuse me coming to this late). I was on the very crowded train scheduled to leave Gospel Oak for Clapham Junction around 0920 on Thursday. All trains through Gospel Oak seemed to be running around 6-10 minutes late just because of extra time at stations to handle the crowds. The driver announced that a freight train had been routed immediately in front of us and we had to wait at the platform until the freight train had cleared Hampstead Tunnel - that's past the next station and then some. I wonder whether that's a single block section or whether there's some other safety-related issue. So we were around 15 minutes late at Clapham, and at Willesden Junction in particular staff were stopping people from trying to board the train Martin |
LU strike and possible knock-on effects on NR / LO services [was:Tube strike]
On 13 June, 20:50, MIG wrote:
On 9 June, 18:32, wrote: On Jun 9, 4:58*pm, MIG wrote: On 9 June, 16:41, wrote: On 9 June, 14:49, MIG wrote: On 9 June, 14:40, wrote: On 9 June, 00:38, asdf wrote: On Sat, 6 Jun 2009 10:20:56 -0700 (PDT), wrote: Oh ang on though, if they used platform 1 at HotH, I think there may be a crossover. *Not sure if it isn't just a track crossing to/from the Metropolitan or if it leads to/from the up Chiltern track as well. I can't remember if this crossover can be used from Up departures from Platform 1 at Harrow. My memory tells me that there is no signal for this route. What I can't remember is if the crossover from the NB Fast to the Platform 1 just passes over the intervening Up line or whether there is pointwork in the Up line allowing access. There isn't pointwork - it's one of those things that I think is referred to as a diamond crossing. Thanks, I though it probably was, but couldn't remember. It can't be that simple though, because it has to allow for Metropolitan trains in both directions, doesn't it? *So there must be something from the up Chiltern to the Met as well as the diamond from the Met to the down Chiltern, even if nothing from platform 1 to the up Chiltern? Platform 1 is only accessible from the Down Chiltern and the NB Met fast, via the diamond crossing, heading north (to the NB Met fast), with no access heading south without a shunt. Platform 2 only has access to the Up Chiltern, heading south from the SB Met fast, or the NB Met fast heading north via the trailing crossover. There is no access to other Met line tracks (i.e. the both southbound, NB slow or the Uxbridge lines). Met line trains only use Platform 1 heading north, from the NB fast or platform 2 reversing from SB to NB. There are no other Met line possibilities, with the current layout.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Ah right, so you can't take the Met south through platform 2, I think you are saying, and it's electricked only for reversing back north. That seems a bit unbalanced given that you can go north through platform 1, but if that's the way it is ... *Hard to tell from diagrams. That's right. To go south to the Met from platform 2 would require crossing both northbound tracks, so all crossing moves happen at Harrow North Junction, where only the NB slow is crossed. On the other hand, using platform 1 for NB Met fast services takes only takes them across the SB Chiltern and gives extra platform capacity in the evening peak.- A bit late to go back to this one, but I got round to checking the right Quails. *The Southern (most up-to-date) edition corresponds exactly to what you say, with the electrification not even extending from platform 2 as far back as the diamond. But the Western edition is very different, showing more electrification and difficult to interpret whether there's a crossover, because of the colours not quite lining up. *I wonder if there has been a change in recent years or one there was a mistake? There were quite a few mistakes introduced when Quail switched to colour and the Western version is definately wrong. I don't think that there have been any changes to the electrification on the 'Chiltern' platforms for many years, possibily not since the 1960s. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 06:07 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk