On 13 Nov, 07:50, "Richard J." wrote:
Basil Jet wrote on 13 November
2009 03:21:14 ...





Richard J. wrote:
David of Broadway wrote on 13 November
2009 00:38:44 ...

I wonder why a different service pattern wasn't used, specifically to
avoid this problem. *For instance: H&C operates from Hammersmith to
Edgware Rd (with one lap around the circle) and Wimbleware
(Wimbleking?) is extended to Whitechapel/Barking; the Circle is
eliminated entirely. That maintains most existing one-seat rides
that make sense, and the new two-seat rides (Gloucester Road and
vicinity to Baker Street and vicinity, Royal Oak and beyond to
Aldgate East and beyond) all have easy transfers. *Edgware Road also
doesn't end up with two terminating services. *Only the west end of
the H&C loses out, but I don't know if the planned doubling of
frequencies was a deliberate design goal or a side effect of the
service plan chosen. So - am I missing something?
Yes, you've lost the increased frequency between Hammersmith and
Paddington, which I believe was one of the requirements of the new
timetable in order to meet increased demand on that section.

But if you take David's plan and extend the Edgware Road terminators back to
Hammersmith (i.e. Hamm - KX - Vic - Edg Road - Hammersmith, running in both
directions) then you have ...

... confusion! *Since your "extension" is actually a reversal, you
effectively have (a) a Hammersmith - Edgware Road shuttle, (b)
Hammersmith - KX - Vic - Edgware Road in both directions. *You now have
two services terminating at Edgware Road, which is what David's plan was
trying to avoid. *In addition, both David's plan and yours pollute the
reliability of the Wimbleware service by extending it over another three
flat junctions. *Back to the drawing board!

Stick with the current pattern. It may be crap, but all the proposals
are worse (unless more trains can be found to extend either loopers or
Wimbles to Moorgate).

The problem is always going to be the flat junctions, but they aren't
going anywhere. We have an unreliable service caused by the
junctions, and plan to fix it by changing the service pattern.
Doesn't address the problem and creates some enormous new problems.

Richard J. wrote:
Basil Jet wrote on 13
November 2009 03:21:14 ...

But if you take David's plan and extend the Edgware Road terminators
back to Hammersmith (i.e. Hamm - KX - Vic - Edg Road - Hammersmith,
running in both directions) then you have ...

... confusion! Since your "extension" is actually a reversal, you
effectively have (a) a Hammersmith - Edgware Road shuttle, (b)
Hammersmith - KX - Vic - Edgware Road in both directions. You now
have two services terminating at Edgware Road, which is what David's
plan was trying to avoid.

No, you would have 12-16 trains an hour reversing without waiting.

--
We are the Strasbourg. Referendum is futile.

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 06:11:46PM -0600, wrote:
In article ,
(solar penguin) wrote:
David Cantrell wrote:
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 06:02:31PM -0600,
wrote:
This would also appear to be because the Journey Planner thinks
there will still be a Circle Line service from king's Cross to High
St Kensington on 14 December! Bloody useless!
There will be. It'll just take a long time, going the wrong way roudn
the circle.
Or going via Hammersmith.
No effing use for users of the Wimbledon branch!

The Circle line has never been of any use for people wanting to go to
Wimbledon.

--
David Cantrell | Godless Liberal Elitist

More people are driven insane through religious hysteria than
by drinking alcohol. -- W C Fields

On 13 Nov, 09:59, David Cantrell wrote:
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 06:11:46PM -0600, wrote:
In article ,
(solar penguin) wrote:
David Cantrell wrote:
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 06:02:31PM -0600,
wrote:
This would also appear to be because the Journey Planner thinks
there will still be a Circle Line service from king's Cross to High
St Kensington on 14 December! Bloody useless!
There will be. *It'll just take a long time, going the wrong way roudn
the circle.
Or going via Hammersmith.
No effing use for users of the Wimbledon branch!

The Circle line has never been of any use for people wanting to go to
Wimbledon.

It has for cross-platform interchange.

(We are going round in circles [boom, tish]).

On Nov 12, 9:22*pm, wrote:
In article
,

(Mr Thant) wrote:
On 10 Nov, 16:54, "Paul Scott" wrote:
I think I've lost track of that aspect. Weren't there at one time
supposed to be some slight changes to the Met and District to
maintain numbers along the north and south sides of the common routes
as well?

The 2010 frequencies are on slide 15 onwards of this document:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...es-Proposed-Se...
Changes.pdf

I've now found time to read through that document. It takes the breath
away at how complacent it is about the negatives which barely get a
mention. Like the Underground service at Paddington now being on a
chronically overcrowded and narrow platform miles from the Lawn where main
line passengers might actually want to go.

I'd've thought mainline passengers would want to go to the mainline
platforms, which are easier from the H&C than they are from the
Circle.

The need to change at Edgware Road is dismissed in a few words: "Circle
line customers who travel through Edgware Road will need to change trains
(small in number)". So no consideration at all of mobility issues, for
example.

And there is the outright lie about Paddington: "Customers travelling east
from Paddington will no longer face the dilemma over whether to use the
H&C line or District and Circle line station –all trains beyond Edgware
Road will depart from the H&C line station, with a more frequent service"..
The total eastbound frequency from Paddington will be cut.

....but that's an academic 'cut', as someone arriving at Paddington
currently must, completely arbitrarily, eliminate the possibility of
getting 50% of eastbound trains by choosing one or the other platform.
For all practical purposes, it's an increase.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

In article ,
(David Cantrell) wrote:

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 06:11:46PM -0600,
wrote:
In article ,
(solar penguin) wrote:
David Cantrell wrote:
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 06:02:31PM -0600,
wrote:
This would also appear to be because the Journey Planner thinks
there will still be a Circle Line service from king's Cross to
High St Kensington on 14 December! Bloody useless!
There will be. It'll just take a long time, going the wrong way
roudn the circle.
Or going via Hammersmith.
No effing use for users of the Wimbledon branch!

The Circle line has never been of any use for people wanting to go to
Wimbledon.

It is if they want to go from anywhere between Baker St and Liverpool St
and want a same platform interchange. That covers all the main line
terminals serving the North and East.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article
,
(John B) wrote:

On Nov 12, 9:22*pm, wrote:
In article
,

(Mr Thant) wrote:
On 10 Nov, 16:54, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
I think I've lost track of that aspect. Weren't there at one time
supposed to be some slight changes to the Met and District to
maintain numbers along the north and south sides of the common
routes as well?

The 2010 frequencies are on slide 15 onwards of this document:


http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...posed-Service-
Changes.pdf

I've now found time to read through that document. It takes the breath
away at how complacent it is about the negatives which barely get a
mention. Like the Underground service at Paddington now being on a
chronically overcrowded and narrow platform miles from the Lawn where
main line passengers might actually want to go.

I'd've thought mainline passengers would want to go to the mainline
platforms, which are easier from the H&C than they are from the
Circle.

Not if your trains is not on the departure indicators with each platform
having its own gates off the bridge! BTDT, thank you.

The need to change at Edgware Road is dismissed in a few words:
"Circle line customers who travel through Edgware Road will need to
change trains (small in number)". So no consideration at all of
mobility issues, for example.

And there is the outright lie about Paddington: "Customers travelling
east from Paddington will no longer face the dilemma over whether to
use the H&C line or District and Circle line station _all trains
beyond Edgware Road will depart from the H&C line station, with a
more frequent service". The total eastbound frequency from Paddington
will be cut.

...but that's an academic 'cut', as someone arriving at Paddington
currently must, completely arbitrarily, eliminate the possibility of
getting 50% of eastbound trains by choosing one or the other platform.
For all practical purposes, it's an increase.

They get more trains on the District/Circle now than there will be in
total from December. Half the present service require a change at Edgware
Road. The access from Paddington is much easier, though

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Basil Jet wrote on 13 November
2009 10:46:44 ...
Richard J. wrote:
Basil Jet wrote on 13
November 2009 03:21:14 ...

But if you take David's plan and extend the Edgware Road terminators
back to Hammersmith (i.e. Hamm - KX - Vic - Edg Road - Hammersmith,
running in both directions) then you have ...

... confusion! Since your "extension" is actually a reversal, you
effectively have (a) a Hammersmith - Edgware Road shuttle, (b)
Hammersmith - KX - Vic - Edgware Road in both directions. You now
have two services terminating at Edgware Road, which is what David's
plan was trying to avoid.

No, you would have 12-16 trains an hour reversing without waiting.

Ha ha, very funny. :-)

--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

"MIG" wrote in message
...
On 13 Nov, 07:50, "Richard J." wrote:
Basil Jet wrote on 13 November
2009 03:21:14 ...





Richard J. wrote:
David of Broadway wrote on 13 November
2009 00:38:44 ...

I wonder why a different service pattern wasn't used, specifically to
avoid this problem. For instance: H&C operates from Hammersmith to
Edgware Rd (with one lap around the circle) and Wimbleware
(Wimbleking?) is extended to Whitechapel/Barking; the Circle is
eliminated entirely. That maintains most existing one-seat rides
that make sense, and the new two-seat rides (Gloucester Road and
vicinity to Baker Street and vicinity, Royal Oak and beyond to
Aldgate East and beyond) all have easy transfers. Edgware Road also
doesn't end up with two terminating services. Only the west end of
the H&C loses out, but I don't know if the planned doubling of
frequencies was a deliberate design goal or a side effect of the
service plan chosen. So - am I missing something?
Yes, you've lost the increased frequency between Hammersmith and
Paddington, which I believe was one of the requirements of the new
timetable in order to meet increased demand on that section.

But if you take David's plan and extend the Edgware Road terminators
back to
Hammersmith (i.e. Hamm - KX - Vic - Edg Road - Hammersmith, running in
both
directions) then you have ...

... confusion! Since your "extension" is actually a reversal, you
effectively have (a) a Hammersmith - Edgware Road shuttle, (b)
Hammersmith - KX - Vic - Edgware Road in both directions. You now have
two services terminating at Edgware Road, which is what David's plan was
trying to avoid. In addition, both David's plan and yours pollute the
reliability of the Wimbleware service by extending it over another three
flat junctions. Back to the drawing board!

Stick with the current pattern. It may be crap, but all the proposals
are worse (unless more trains can be found to extend either loopers or
Wimbles to Moorgate).

The problem is always going to be the flat junctions, but they aren't
going anywhere. We have an unreliable service caused by the
junctions, and plan to fix it by changing the service pattern.
Doesn't address the problem and creates some enormous new problems.

.

I wonder if an acceptable compromise would be to run the Circle as a "Lasso"
instead of a teacup?

In this mode, a train leaving Hammersmith runs via Edgeware Rd, Aldgate, HS
Ken, Edgeware Rd, Aldgate, HS Ken to terminate at Edgeware Rd. At Aldgate,
the trains terminating at Edgeware Rd change blind from "Circle" to
"Edgeware Rd".

In the reverse, trains run a complete Inner rail Circle then continue via HS
Ken as a teacup ... again at Aldgate, changing destination from "Circle" to
"Edgeware Rd."

Aldgate and Edgeware Rd become formal timing points. The terminating runs
become different train numbers/ids at Aldgate - a formality intended to
ensure the desto procedure is followed. Recovery time would also be
integrated at Aldgate (I suspect as at present).

The LU plan AIUI, was for 6tph (down from 7.5) Wimbleware, 6tph (down from
7.5) teacup Circle, 6tph H&C with an eastern terminus at West Ham (?),
giving 12tph between Edgeware Rd and Hammersmith.

With this "lasso" arrangement, a likely outcome would be 6.666 tph H&C,
6.666 tph Circle (9 min intervals), 6.666 tph Wimbleware, and 10 tph between
Edgeware Rd and Hammersmith.

My proposal while yielding less tph to Hammersmith (10 instead of 12) still
represents AIUI, and increase from 7.5, ie a 33.33% increase. The upsides
are that a "Circle" train is just that, and will run through Edgeware Rd,
that service intervals are increased only from 8 to 9 minutes, rather than
to 10, also intervals for Circle trains through Edgeware Rd become 18
minutes rather than no service at all.

I confess I have no idea how these intervals would impact the junctions with
the District and the operation of the South side of the Circle. Perhaps
those conversant with the bigger picture could chime in.

In general, how does this sound as a "Plan B", Folks?

DW downunder

On Sat, 14 Nov 2009 13:14:07 +0800, DW downunder wrote:

I wonder if an acceptable compromise would be to run the Circle as a "Lasso"
instead of a teacup?

In this mode, a train leaving Hammersmith runs via Edgeware Rd, Aldgate, HS
Ken, Edgeware Rd, Aldgate, HS Ken to terminate at Edgeware Rd. At Aldgate,
the trains terminating at Edgeware Rd change blind from "Circle" to
"Edgeware Rd".

In general, how does this sound as a "Plan B", Folks?

Something similar was trialled one weekend a while back (combining the
Circle and H&C into a service that runs Hammersmith - Edgware Road -
one loop of the Circle - Barking), and they decided it didn't work out
because the end-to-end running time was too long. (I never understood
why this was such a problem, as the current Circle end-to-end running
time is "infinite".)

By the way, your post was hard to read due to too much Edgeware.