|
Post by M1104 on Sept 22, 2017 13:21:55 GMT
Apologies if there are any threads like this available, except that I can't find any that are unlocked. Thought I would put this link here regarding proposed pictures and plans for the terminus station. www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/2017/09/22/see-the-plans-for-a-batterseas-northern-line-station/Regarding the ongoing tunneling, the new section's been joined up with the Kennington loop and the Battersea-bound tunnelling has now bored under the Victoria Line between Vauxhall and Stockwell.
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on Sept 26, 2017 22:15:02 GMT
Geoff Marshall and Londonist have taken a trip Inside the Northern Line extension
YouTube link
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 26, 2017 22:45:49 GMT
Apologies if there are any threads like this available, except that I can't find any that are unlocked. Thought I would put this link here regarding proposed pictures and plans for the terminus station. www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/2017/09/22/see-the-plans-for-a-batterseas-northern-line-station/Regarding the ongoing tunneling, the new section's been joined up with the Kennington loop and the Battersea-bound tunnelling has now bored under the Victoria Line between Vauxhall and Stockwell. Shame a stop at Vauxhall wasn't feasible for better interchange with the Victoria Line south of the river - not the worst thing in the world mind. I still hope that the Northern Line reaches Clapham Junction at some point though
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Sept 26, 2017 23:28:06 GMT
Shame a stop at Vauxhall wasn't feasible for better interchange with the Victoria Line south of the river - not the worst thing in the world mind. I still hope that the Northern Line reaches Clapham Junction at some point though Very doubtful that it ever will because every single train would be crush full to capacity all day long thus rendering the service unusable via BPS / Nine Elms / Kennington / Waterloo. It's going to be bad enough with currently largely empty trains from Kennington having more passengers on them thus removing space for the crowds at Waterloo. There is just far too much demand for a tube service at Clapham Junction for a relatively lowish frequency service via Battersea to be able to cope. The decision to terminate at BPS, while open to obvious criticism, is simply one of pure practicality. You will note that the only way TfL think they can serve Clapham Junction is by putting Crossrail 2 through it and even that's going to be a struggle because it will be pulling in so much demand from SW lines. Throw in transfers from Overground, Southern, the Windsor lines, buses and the large hinterland around C Junction and you have astronomic numbers to handle. If you were ever going to put the tube into Clapham Junction you really 2 or 3 lines all running at up to 36 tph and heading off in a variety of different directions to be able to cope with the loadings. As we have no strategy to expand the tube network it ain't gonna happen.
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Sept 27, 2017 8:17:41 GMT
Shame a stop at Vauxhall wasn't feasible for better interchange with the Victoria Line south of the river - not the worst thing in the world mind. I still hope that the Northern Line reaches Clapham Junction at some point though Very doubtful that it ever will because every single train would be crush full to capacity all day long thus rendering the service unusable via BPS / Nine Elms / Kennington / Waterloo. It's going to be bad enough with currently largely empty trains from Kennington having more passengers on them thus removing space for the crowds at Waterloo. There is just far too much demand for a tube service at Clapham Junction for a relatively lowish frequency service via Battersea to be able to cope. The decision to terminate at BPS, while open to obvious criticism, is simply one of pure practicality. If you were ever going to put the tube into Clapham Junction you really 2 or 3 lines all running at up to 36 tph and heading off in a variety of different directions to be able to cope with the loadings. As we have no strategy to expand the tube network it ain't gonna happen. Perhaps a branch could've been formed off the Victoria Line by extending the existing siding tunnels that are south of Victoria Station to Battersea and Clapham Junction. That could have been possible in conjunction with the existing NLE construction. I know the idea won't come without any problems (just a quick think idea).
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Sept 27, 2017 10:49:09 GMT
Very doubtful that it ever will because every single train would be crush full to capacity all day long thus rendering the service unusable via BPS / Nine Elms / Kennington / Waterloo. It's going to be bad enough with currently largely empty trains from Kennington having more passengers on them thus removing space for the crowds at Waterloo. There is just far too much demand for a tube service at Clapham Junction for a relatively lowish frequency service via Battersea to be able to cope. The decision to terminate at BPS, while open to obvious criticism, is simply one of pure practicality. If you were ever going to put the tube into Clapham Junction you really 2 or 3 lines all running at up to 36 tph and heading off in a variety of different directions to be able to cope with the loadings. As we have no strategy to expand the tube network it ain't gonna happen. Perhaps a branch could've been formed off the Victoria Line by extending the existing siding tunnels that are south of Victoria Station to Battersea and Clapham Junction. That could have been possible in conjunction with the existing NLE construction. I know the idea won't come without any problems (just a quick think idea). Problem then is that you have to split the Vic Line's service when trains leave full and standing from Brixton in the peaks with 36 tph. More get on at Stockwell and Vauxhall is a hell hole. Can you imagine how intolerable it would be if, say, half the Vic Line's service was branched off as you suggest? Worse you'd have issues about train speeds across the junction at Victoria - both W'stow and Brixton crossovers were rebuilt to remove speed restrictions to allow full speed entry into platforms and rapid acceleration out. This is integral to the operation of the high frequency service. Finally you would probably have extended dwell times at Victoria as people faffed about working out what train they needed and getting on or off trains and waiting on the platform. You don't really want to add more people waiting on Victoria's platforms as it just blocks people getting off trains which extends dwell times which reduces frequency. Sorry if that's a bit of a technical answer but the Vic Line service is very finely balanced and shifts huge numbers. I'd suggest it's going to be left alone with no branches or extensions added as it couldn't cope with extra demand. This is why I keep on saying we need a much wider strategy of building new tube lines to decongest the most crowded existing lines, spread footfall away fron overloaded interchanges and fill in network gaps. No one is interested in this despite worldwide evidence of more metro lines being built in many cities.
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on Sept 27, 2017 12:32:17 GMT
If we have the crayons out on extending the Northern Line beyond Battersea - i think an extension to Roehampton could work, calling at:
- Imperial Wharf (connections with the London Overground and West London Route / provides a locally desired direct link to Central London / could allow or encourage more dense urban development) - Putney Bridge (connections with the District Line and bus hub / reduces overcrowding in the District Line) - Barnes (connections South Western Railway and popular bus routes) - Roehampton (allows for redevelopment or regeneration of the area with higher density housing / brings an outer london area with relatively poor transport connections onto the tube map with multiple interchange opportunities)
If the the station box was to face due south then there be ability for further extension onto Kingston or New Malden and Tolworth
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 27, 2017 13:10:20 GMT
If we have the crayons out on extending the Northern Line beyond Battersea - i think an extension to Roehampton could work, calling at: - Imperial Wharf (connections with the London Overground and West London Route / provides a locally desired direct link to Central London / could allow or encourage more dense urban development) - Putney Bridge (connections with the District Line and bus hub / reduces overcrowding in the District Line) - Barnes (connections South Western Railway and popular bus routes) - Roehampton (allows for redevelopment or regeneration of the area with higher density housing / brings an outer london area with relatively poor transport connections onto the tube map with multiple interchange opportunities) If the the station box was to face due south then there be ability for further extension onto Kingston or New Malden and Tolworth I stopped at Clapham Junction for fear of complaints from the yuppie crowd who populate the area surrounding Clapham Junction but if it was possible and using more crayons, then I'd like it to serve Wandsworth on its way to Roehampton just for my own satisfaction (now reaching Cineworld is possible without having to wait for an unreliable route or change buses) but the new links it's brings as well. Wandsworth could be plonked in instead of running out to Barnes but that means the line would have a winding look to it so maybe serve Wandsworth, Roehampton & Kingston instead?
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on Sept 27, 2017 13:33:36 GMT
If we have the crayons out on extending the Northern Line beyond Battersea - i think an extension to Roehampton could work, calling at: - Imperial Wharf (connections with the London Overground and West London Route / provides a locally desired direct link to Central London / could allow or encourage more dense urban development) - Putney Bridge (connections with the District Line and bus hub / reduces overcrowding in the District Line) - Barnes (connections South Western Railway and popular bus routes) - Roehampton (allows for redevelopment or regeneration of the area with higher density housing / brings an outer london area with relatively poor transport connections onto the tube map with multiple interchange opportunities) If the the station box was to face due south then there be ability for further extension onto Kingston or New Malden and Tolworth I stopped at Clapham Junction for fear of complaints from the yuppie crowd who populate the area surrounding Clapham Junction but if it was possible and using more crayons, then I'd like it to serve Wandsworth on its way to Roehampton just for my own satisfaction (now reaching Cineworld is possible without having to wait for an unreliable route or change buses) but the new links it's brings as well. Wandsworth could be plonked in instead of running out to Barnes but that means the line would have a winding look to it so maybe serve Wandsworth, Roehampton & Kingston instead? What i was kind of going for with this idea is a Jubilee Line of the west with multiple river crossing linking nearby areas that are relatively difficult to get to. Although, i quite like your idea as well. However i would keep Imperial Wharf on the route in order to create an alternative interchange station to crowded Clapham Junction. As well as keeping the handy cross river links between Battersea-IW-Wandsworth.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Sept 27, 2017 16:46:55 GMT
If we have the crayons out on extending the Northern Line beyond Battersea - i think an extension to Roehampton could work, calling at: - Imperial Wharf (connections with the London Overground and West London Route / provides a locally desired direct link to Central London / could allow or encourage more dense urban development) - Putney Bridge (connections with the District Line and bus hub / reduces overcrowding in the District Line) - Barnes (connections South Western Railway and popular bus routes) - Roehampton (allows for redevelopment or regeneration of the area with higher density housing / brings an outer london area with relatively poor transport connections onto the tube map with multiple interchange opportunities) If the the station box was to face due south then there be ability for further extension onto Kingston or New Malden and Tolworth How about Barnes - Roehampton - [Southfields] - Earlsfield - Clapham Junc - BPS - Sloane Square - Hyde Park Corner - Marble Arch - Edgware Road - Kilburn Park/High Rd - Brondesbury / Kilburn - Brent Cross Shopping Centre. That's an example of my idea of new links and connecting with stns that are not interchanges today. It would be terribly tempting to go via Victoria - Green Park - Bond St but think of the enormous expense of adding to those stations. That's not to underestimate the cost of adapting the other stations *but* it would spread the load and offer new links which today are very heavily bussed, perhaps excessively so. It would take some pressure off existing very heavily loaded sections of tube / NR routes. Earlsfield NR will be worse off post CR2 despite the huge demand at that location so a tube would be a palliative.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2017 19:49:42 GMT
A new tube route idea then.
West Croydon - East Croydon - Selhurst - Norwood Junction - Anerley - Crystal Palace - Gipsy Hill - West Dulwich - North Dulwich - Herne Hill - Denmark Hill - Camberwell - Elephant & Castle - Blackfriars - Farringdon - Russell Square - Euston - Albany Street - Primrose Hill - West Hampstead - Cricklewood - Brent Cross.
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Sept 27, 2017 23:52:53 GMT
A new tube route idea then. West Croydon - East Croydon - Selhurst - Norwood Junction - Anerley - Crystal Palace - Gipsy Hill - West Dulwich - North Dulwich - Herne Hill - Denmark Hill - Camberwell - Elephant & Castle - Blackfriars - Farringdon - Russell Square - Euston - Albany Street - Primrose Hill - West Hampstead - Cricklewood - Brent Cross. Miles too long winded in South London ... take forever
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 28, 2017 0:54:59 GMT
A new tube route idea then. West Croydon - East Croydon - Selhurst - Norwood Junction - Anerley - Crystal Palace - Gipsy Hill - West Dulwich - North Dulwich - Herne Hill - Denmark Hill - Camberwell - Elephant & Castle - Blackfriars - Farringdon - Russell Square - Euston - Albany Street - Primrose Hill - West Hampstead - Cricklewood - Brent Cross. I had a sort of similar one before except it was more an extension of the Victoria Line which is unfeasible to extend given how high frequency the line is and how busy the line is so here is this idea but amended as a brand new line: East Croydon, West Croydon, Thornton Heath Pond, Norbury, Streatham, West Norwood, Streatham Hill, Tulse Hill, Herne Hill, Brixton and then continues north terminating at Hyde Park Corner. Alternatively, a Bakerloo branch after Elephant & Castle could do a route via Camberwell and then Brixton onto my proposed route above.
|
|
|
Post by ilovelondonbuses on Sept 28, 2017 4:36:41 GMT
A new tube route idea then. West Croydon - East Croydon - Selhurst - Norwood Junction - Anerley - Crystal Palace - Gipsy Hill - West Dulwich - North Dulwich - Herne Hill - Denmark Hill - Camberwell - Elephant & Castle - Blackfriars - Farringdon - Russell Square - Euston - Albany Street - Primrose Hill - West Hampstead - Cricklewood - Brent Cross. I had a sort of similar one before except it was more an extension of the Victoria Line which is unfeasible to extend given how high frequency the line is and how busy the line is so here is this idea but amended as a brand new line: East Croydon, West Croydon, Thornton Heath Pond, Norbury, Streatham, West Norwood, Streatham Hill, Tulse Hill, Herne Hill, Brixton and then continues north terminating at Hyde Park Corner. Alternatively, a Bakerloo branch after Elephant & Castle could do a route via Camberwell and then Brixton onto my proposed route above. Definitely would support this idea. However, I have to come to accept that South London will never have it's own tube line because the soil is "too soft" lol. We will just continue to struggle to use the unreliable trains here. Goodness knows how the trains will cope with ever increasing demand in the next 10 years and beyond.
|
|
|
Post by John tuthill on Sept 28, 2017 9:17:22 GMT
I had a sort of similar one before except it was more an extension of the Victoria Line which is unfeasible to extend given how high frequency the line is and how busy the line is so here is this idea but amended as a brand new line: East Croydon, West Croydon, Thornton Heath Pond, Norbury, Streatham, West Norwood, Streatham Hill, Tulse Hill, Herne Hill, Brixton and then continues north terminating at Hyde Park Corner. Alternatively, a Bakerloo branch after Elephant & Castle could do a route via Camberwell and then Brixton onto my proposed route above. Definitely would support this idea. However, I have to come to accept that South London will never have it's own tube line because the soil is "too soft" lol. We will just continue to struggle to use the unreliable trains here. Goodness knows how the trains will cope with ever increasing demand in the next 10 years and beyond. Shouldn't be a problem nowadays. I remember when the Victoria Line was being built, there was a high water content around Vauxhall. Solution was to freeze the ground, drill the tunnel and line it with a waterproof membrane.
|
|