|
|
Post by snoggle on May 29, 2018 10:03:08 GMT
My suggestions for tube cuts, off peaks: Victoria:BRI - WAC every 3 - 6 minutes BRI - SVS every 12 minutes Again it’s hard to find available cuts here due to the nature of the line. The upgrades allow for over 30 tph though, so these frequencies still represent cuts.W&C:Every 20 minutes I think if TfL want to make savings they switch off the electricity altogether on this between the peaks, however since it’s an alternative you may as well make it as unattractive as possible with trains and drivers on standby in case of disruption elsewhere. I’d at least end the Saturday service.You do realise that sort of off peak frequency on the Vic would send us back to the 1980s in terms of service levels despite patronage being vastly higher than then. That base frequency would be unworkable between Brixton and Seven Sisters - people would be left behind on platforms. Even at the north end patronage is much higher now with trains decently loaded off peak. I don't use the W&C much but did use it off peak recently. I was pleasantly surprised as to how busy it was. Not packed but plenty of people using it both ways. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2018 10:32:48 GMT
My suggestions for tube cuts, off peaks: Victoria:BRI - WAC every 3 - 6 minutes BRI - SVS every 12 minutes Again it’s hard to find available cuts here due to the nature of the line. The upgrades allow for over 30 tph though, so these frequencies still represent cuts.W&C:Every 20 minutes I think if TfL want to make savings they switch off the electricity altogether on this between the peaks, however since it’s an alternative you may as well make it as unattractive as possible with trains and drivers on standby in case of disruption elsewhere. I’d at least end the Saturday service.You do realise that sort of off peak frequency on the Vic would send us back to the 1980s in terms of service levels despite patronage being vastly higher than then. That base frequency would be unworkable between Brixton and Seven Sisters - people would be left behind on platforms. Even at the north end patronage is much higher now with trains decently loaded off peak. I don't use the W&C much but did use it off peak recently. I was pleasantly surprised as to how busy it was. Not packed but plenty of people using it both ways. Fair point about the Vic, although I assumed the high frequency was a standardisation reflecting the busiest times ie the peaks. If it’s just as busy outside the peaks then it’s a success story for the line as people have taken advantage of the increased service levels to a level that isn’t reflected elsewhere. As for the W&C I guess it’s a similar story although there are better alternatives to make use of. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on May 29, 2018 10:40:48 GMT
Fair point about the Vic, although I assumed the high frequency was a standardisation reflecting the busiest times ie the peaks. If it’s just as busy outside the peaks then it’s a success story for the line as people have taken advantage of the increased service levels to a level that isn’t reflected elsewhere. As for the W&C I guess it’s a similar story although there are better alternatives to make use of. As I don't use the Vic as much as I used to do I tend to notice changes more clearly now. It is not unusual to have 20-30 people waiting at Blackhorse Rd southbound off peak even on a 2 min headway. No one hurries down escalators any more as you know the wait time is minimal. Also places like T Hale are vastly busier due to development near the station. People also noticeably opt for the Vic over the Picc at F Park as it is faster, more frequent and reliable. Finally the interchange numbers at Highbury are huge these days given the Overground links. All these factors have changed the nature, pattern and volume of travel at the north end of the line. I don't see much changing that will change this. In fact things like STAR coming to T Hale will only cause more changes as it will make Stratford and Crossrail more accessible. |
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on May 29, 2018 10:50:43 GMT
You do realise that sort of off peak frequency on the Vic would send us back to the 1980s in terms of service levels despite patronage being vastly higher than then. That base frequency would be unworkable between Brixton and Seven Sisters - people would be left behind on platforms. Even at the north end patronage is much higher now with trains decently loaded off peak. I don't use the W&C much but did use it off peak recently. I was pleasantly surprised as to how busy it was. Not packed but plenty of people using it both ways. Fair point about the Vic, although I assumed the high frequency was a standardisation reflecting the busiest times ie the peaks. If it’s just as busy outside the peaks then it’s a success story for the line as people have taken advantage of the increased service levels to a level that isn’t reflected elsewhere. As for the W&C I guess it’s a similar story although there are better alternatives to make use of. The Waterloo & City line could be made more useful. There have been suggestions in the past to extend, with proposals to merge it with the Northern City line at Moorgate or the DLR at Bank. I think the line would be more useful by just adding one intermediate station between Waterloo and Bank. Platforms built on the line at Blackfriars, with interchange to the existing station. Provides a useful connection from the ThamesLink programme, as well as the Circle/District lines. As the W&C crosses the river, a new station could have entrances at both sides of the Thames like the existing Thameslink station does. Also, while not entirely related, the interchange at Bank/Monument seems an unusual choice of stations to link. Announcements encourage interchange from the Circle/District lines to other lines at Bank, but the time taken to transfer to most of these lines means it is sometimes easier to change elsewhere (e.g. Liverpool Street, Tower Hill/Gateway). However, Cannon Street Station is much closer to Bank than Monument is, especially with the Bank station entrance on Walbrook being less than a minute walk away from Cannon Street. A Cannon Street link to Bank would also provide an interchange between National Rail services at Cannon Street and Cen/Nor/W&C/DLR at Bank. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on May 29, 2018 11:23:30 GMT
Fair point about the Vic, although I assumed the high frequency was a standardisation reflecting the busiest times ie the peaks. If it’s just as busy outside the peaks then it’s a success story for the line as people have taken advantage of the increased service levels to a level that isn’t reflected elsewhere. As for the W&C I guess it’s a similar story although there are better alternatives to make use of. The Waterloo & City line could be made more useful. There have been suggestions in the past to extend, with proposals to merge it with the Northern City line at Moorgate or the DLR at Bank. I think the line would be more useful by just adding one intermediate station between Waterloo and Bank. Platforms built on the line at Blackfriars, with interchange to the existing station. Provides a useful connection from the ThamesLink programme, as well as the Circle/District lines. As the W&C crosses the river, a new station could have entrances at both sides of the Thames like the existing Thameslink station does. Also, while not entirely related, the interchange at Bank/Monument seems an unusual choice of stations to link. Announcements encourage interchange from the Circle/District lines to other lines at Bank, but the time taken to transfer to most of these lines means it is sometimes easier to change elsewhere (e.g. Liverpool Street, Tower Hill/Gateway). However, Cannon Street Station is much closer to Bank than Monument is, especially with the Bank station entrance on Walbrook being less than a minute walk away from Cannon Street. A Cannon Street link to Bank would also provide an interchange between National Rail services at Cannon Street and Cen/Nor/W&C/DLR at Bank. I seem to remember reading somewhere that extending the W&C to Moorgate to merge with the Northern City line would be prohibitively difficult which is a shame as it could have eventually made another Crossrail. As things stand I'm not sure there is much need for the W&C outside of peak hours. I wonder what the chances are of a station at Northumberland Park making the staff service on the Victoria Line available for public use? It would also allow the withdrawal of the 476. |
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on May 29, 2018 11:55:36 GMT
I wonder what the chances are of a station at Northumberland Park making the staff service on the Victoria Line available for public use? It would also allow the withdrawal of the 476.Why would it? Just because they would mirror each other to an extent doesn't mean the 476 should be withdrawn. The 476 gets very busy from Euston/Kings Cross despite the overlap with the 73. The displaced passengers would just overcrowd the 73 which is already busy as it is. Also passengers should not be forced to use the tube when buses are available to provide an alternative means of transportation, one shouldn't act as a replacement for the other just because a bus route provides a similar connection to the tube/train, they both serve different purposes for the public and can always be modified to match demand. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 29, 2018 12:21:36 GMT
Fair point about the Vic, although I assumed the high frequency was a standardisation reflecting the busiest times ie the peaks. If it’s just as busy outside the peaks then it’s a success story for the line as people have taken advantage of the increased service levels to a level that isn’t reflected elsewhere. As for the W&C I guess it’s a similar story although there are better alternatives to make use of. The Waterloo & City line could be made more useful. There have been suggestions in the past to extend, with proposals to merge it with the Northern City line at Moorgate or the DLR at Bank. I think the line would be more useful by just adding one intermediate station between Waterloo and Bank. Platforms built on the line at Blackfriars, with interchange to the existing station. Provides a useful connection from the ThamesLink programme, as well as the Circle/District lines. As the W&C crosses the river, a new station could have entrances at both sides of the Thames like the existing Thameslink station does. Also, while not entirely related, the interchange at Bank/Monument seems an unusual choice of stations to link. Announcements encourage interchange from the Circle/District lines to other lines at Bank, but the time taken to transfer to most of these lines means it is sometimes easier to change elsewhere (e.g. Liverpool Street, Tower Hill/Gateway). However, Cannon Street Station is much closer to Bank than Monument is, especially with the Bank station entrance on Walbrook being less than a minute walk away from Cannon Street. A Cannon Street link to Bank would also provide an interchange between National Rail services at Cannon Street and Cen/Nor/W&C/DLR at Bank. The proposals to extend the Waterloo & City line have never got off the ground because of how incredibly difficult it would be to extend at either end but especially at Bank which is already a complex collection of lines which makes any extension pretty much a non starter. Even if you could connect it to the DLR, it would take considerable cost to do so. Let's not forget why it was built - it was built to transport people from the South West whose railway only went to Waterloo into the City and it still performs the same role today so it's still very useful in its short form. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on May 29, 2018 12:23:04 GMT
I wonder what the chances are of a station at Northumberland Park making the staff service on the Victoria Line available for public use? It would also allow the withdrawal of the 476.Why would it? Just because they would mirror each other to an extent doesn't mean the 476 should be withdrawn. The 476 gets very busy from Euston/Kings Cross despite the overlap with the 73. The displaced passengers would just overcrowd the 73 which is already busy as it is. Also passengers should not be forced to use the tube when buses are available to provide an alternative means of transportation, one shouldn't act as a replacement for the other just because a bus route provides a similar connection to the tube/train, they both serve different purposes for the public and can always be modified to match demand. We've been over this before, the only meaningful purpose the 476 has is the Northumberland Park bit and that would be redundant if a new Victoria Line station opened up there, the 341 would still serve Northumberland Park. What is the point in trying to flog a dead horse, if cuts need to be made this most pointless of routes would be a good place to start. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 29, 2018 13:09:48 GMT
I wonder what the chances are of a station at Northumberland Park making the staff service on the Victoria Line available for public use? It would also allow the withdrawal of the 476.Why would it? Just because they would mirror each other to an extent doesn't mean the 476 should be withdrawn. The 476 gets very busy from Euston/Kings Cross despite the overlap with the 73. The displaced passengers would just overcrowd the 73 which is already busy as it is. Also passengers should not be forced to use the tube when buses are available to provide an alternative means of transportation, one shouldn't act as a replacement for the other just because a bus route provides a similar connection to the tube/train, they both serve different purposes for the public and can always be modified to match demand. I agree - sadly like with other routes, people don't see the important role the route plays and it gets wrongfully deemed pointless. If the 476 was that pointless, it would of either never have existed or had been withdrawn years ago - I'd love to see the patronage figures for the route. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on May 29, 2018 13:19:54 GMT
Why would it? Just because they would mirror each other to an extent doesn't mean the 476 should be withdrawn. The 476 gets very busy from Euston/Kings Cross despite the overlap with the 73. The displaced passengers would just overcrowd the 73 which is already busy as it is. Also passengers should not be forced to use the tube when buses are available to provide an alternative means of transportation, one shouldn't act as a replacement for the other just because a bus route provides a similar connection to the tube/train, they both serve different purposes for the public and can always be modified to match demand. I agree - sadly like with other routes, people don't see the important role the route plays and it gets wrongfully deemed pointless. If the 476 was that pointless, it would of either never have existed or had been withdrawn years ago - I'd love to see the patronage figures for the route. It has been pointed out numerous times on here how pointless the 476 is including by a former route 73 driver. Perhaps those that refuse to accept reality should have to pay for running near empty buses around? Reports like this make rather sobering reading: www.mayorwatch.co.uk/londons-bus-ridership-is-falling-three-times-faster-than-the-rest-of-englands/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-42622891 |
|
|
|
Post by sid on May 29, 2018 13:36:08 GMT
My suggestions for tube cuts, off peaks: Bakerloo:E&C - QPK every 5 minutes E&C - H&W every 20 minutes Provides a train every 10 minutes between QPK and H&W combined with LOROL. RR duties and spare trains required at QPK depot/SPK for contingency in case of LOROL disruption.Central:WER - EPP every 7-8 minutes EAB - HAI via NEP every 15 minutes EAB - WOO via HAI every 15 minutes NOA - LOU every 15 minutes Provides a train every 3 minutes between NOA and LES. WHC to be used for contingency only except early mornings/late evenings. To be monitored for possible future cut to 15tph (4 minute intervals in the central area post-Crossrail)Circle and H&C:Circle: Every 10 minutes H&C: Every 10 minutes HAM - BKG Frequencies as now despite upgradesDistrict:EAB - UPM every 10 minutes RMD - BKG every 10 minutes WIM - THL every 10 minutes WIM - ERD every 10 minutes Frequencies ultimately maintained but the service between BKG - UPM reduced. Also service pattern altered to make best use of ACT depot (Ealing branch trains chosen over Richmond branch for Upminster runs). Combined with circle line, maintains 24tph ‘via Victoria’ and 12 tph ‘via HSK’Jubilee:STA - STR every 10 minutes STA - NOG every 20 minutes WPK - STR every 10 minutes WIG - STR every 20 minutes Provides a train every 3 - 3.5 minutes between WIG - NOG. WHD to be used as contingency. The low ‘tph’ reversing at WIG and NOG allows for more generous turn time for drivers and aid recovery times. Weekend services may need to be more frequent at the busiest times, and enhanced modified services for Wembley and O2 eventsMetropolitan:ALD - UXB every 7-8 minutes ALD - C&L (alt to AME or CHE) every 15 minutes BST - WAT every 15 minutes I’ve retained service levels despite upgrade work, and retains a reversing platform at BST to aid contingency and service recoveryNorthern:MOR - EDG via BNK every 4 minutes KEN - HIB via CHX every 5 minutes FIC - MHE every 30 minutes I rarely use the Northern so this is a standard based on guess usage levelsPiccadilly:CFS - HT5 every 6 minutes CFS - RYL every 24 minutes CFS - HT4 every 12 minutes AGR - UXB every 24 minutes Provides a train every 3 minutes between AGR and ACT. It’s tough to know where to ‘cut’ services on the Picc due to the lack of viable reversing points on the northern end, and the requirement to service Heathrow. Suspending the Uxbridge section would cause too much public outrage so reducing the frequency slightly seems the better option.Victoria:BRI - WAC every 3 - 6 minutes BRI - SVS every 12 minutes Again it’s hard to find available cuts here due to the nature of the line. The upgrades allow for over 30 tph though, so these frequencies still represent cuts.W&C:Every 20 minutes I think if TfL want to make savings they switch off the electricity altogether on this between the peaks, however since it’s an alternative you may as well make it as unattractive as possible with trains and drivers on standby in case of disruption elsewhere. I’d at least end the Saturday service.I've not been up that way recently but I've often wondered if the Piccadilly Line needs to go to Uxbridge off peak? The Met service seems quite adequate and it's a simple same platform change at Rayners Lane. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2018 14:05:23 GMT
As a Met driver I personally would prefer that two new platforms be built south of the Rayners Lane Junction for Piccs to reverse and step free paths be built to connect with the Met on the existing platforms so that the Met can be COMPLETELY unimpeded. However this is the real world where apparently there is no money *sob sob* so I would respect a more realistic option of the Pic reversing at Rayners Lane at all times. However while Boris is MP at Hillingdon I can’t imagine a complete withdrawal for the branch happening anyway... add to that you still have people rejecting Met trains to wait for Piccs on eastbound platforms despite the woeful off peak frequency, mad as that sounds.
I think current scenario where trains alternate between Rayners and Uxbridge works best as the reversers at Rayners get decent turnaround time considering the often late running the Picc experiences and late running Uxbridge trains have a viable option at Ruislip
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 29, 2018 14:05:36 GMT
Because shredding a network to pieces will of course make it all alright, not - sorry but I'd rather have a progressive network where all these supposedly empty 476's run about. The fact I've been many 476's during my travels and 90% have either been well stocked or full says it's doing ok. Cutting a network like you've been suggesting is regressive and would lead to further decline & problems. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on May 29, 2018 14:08:25 GMT
Because shredding a network to pieces will of course make it all alright, not - sorry but I'd rather have a progressive network where all these supposedly empty 476's run about. The fact I've been many 476's during my travels and 90% have either been well stocked or full says it's doing ok. Cutting a network like you've been suggesting is regressive and would lead to further decline & problems. Supply obviously needs to match demand. Any we'll just have to beg to differ on the subject. |
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on May 29, 2018 14:20:20 GMT
The Waterloo & City line could be made more useful. There have been suggestions in the past to extend, with proposals to merge it with the Northern City line at Moorgate or the DLR at Bank. I think the line would be more useful by just adding one intermediate station between Waterloo and Bank. Platforms built on the line at Blackfriars, with interchange to the existing station. Provides a useful connection from the ThamesLink programme, as well as the Circle/District lines. As the W&C crosses the river, a new station could have entrances at both sides of the Thames like the existing Thameslink station does. Also, while not entirely related, the interchange at Bank/Monument seems an unusual choice of stations to link. Announcements encourage interchange from the Circle/District lines to other lines at Bank, but the time taken to transfer to most of these lines means it is sometimes easier to change elsewhere (e.g. Liverpool Street, Tower Hill/Gateway). However, Cannon Street Station is much closer to Bank than Monument is, especially with the Bank station entrance on Walbrook being less than a minute walk away from Cannon Street. A Cannon Street link to Bank would also provide an interchange between National Rail services at Cannon Street and Cen/Nor/W&C/DLR at Bank. The proposals to extend the Waterloo & City line have never got off the ground because of how incredibly difficult it would be to extend at either end but especially at Bank which is already a complex collection of lines which makes any extension pretty much a non starter. Even if you could connect it to the DLR, it would take considerable cost to do so. Let's not forget why it was built - it was built to transport people from the South West whose railway only went to Waterloo into the City and it still performs the same role today so it's still very useful in its short form. I agree that the W&C Line should not be extended from its current termini due to difficulties involved. However an intermediate stop at Blackfriars would be incredibly useful, with entrances at both sides of the river like the existing Thameslink station has. Such as station would improve connectivity, with interchange to Thameslink and the Circle/District lines. With the new frequent ThamesLink service through Blackfriars and an expected increase in usage in the future, the W&C line could hugely improve connectivity to/from Thameslink services - by providing a quick link from the Thameslink route to major interchanges at Waterloo and Bank. Having frequently used the Thameslink station at Blackfriars, the site of the existing rail station is effective in serving a number of areas at once. A lot of the Riverside areas nearby are very popular with tourists, but they will tend to use further stations such as St Pauls, Southwark or Waterloo, simply because Thameslink is not promoted by TFL (e.g. not on the tube map). A W&C line station at Blackfriars could serve: - The area north of the river around the existing Circle/District station, around Ludgate Hill, Fleet Street and St Paul's.This would link Waterloo to the western parts of the City, particularly helpful for Waterloo commuters. - The 'Southbank' area around the Oxo Tower and Gabriel's Wharf. - The 'Bankside' area around Tate Modern and the Globe Theatre. |
|
