|
Post by rif153 on May 14, 2020 20:29:20 GMT
I personaly think TFL services should only go as far out of Greater Lomdon as the M25 orbital towns. Whilst it would be foolish to suggest that TfL haven't done a good job of turning the GOBLIN, NLL and Watford DC services around, I don't want them to take over the South East. TfL are best at operating high capacity metro services like the tube and the overground. However, allowing TfL to operate Crossrail is exactly why I don't want them to take over anything too long distance as I think Crossrail has been underwhelming. Thameslink's ''tentacles'' span the South East providing long distance cross-London services from towns miles apart on either side of the capital; the Bedford-Brighton is a long established route but has been joined by other fantastic services like Peterborough-Horsham and Cambridge-Brighton as well as many others. The Thamesink programme hasn't got everything right by any stretch but what I would say is that its been an ambitious attempt to create these new links across the South East with its expansive network. The network synthesises long distance fast services with some shorter distance stopping services make it a mix of a metro and a longer distance service. I won't act like there aren't flaws with Thameslink because there are not least the 707s which whilst they may have plenty of capacity, toilets and power points despite their uncomfortable seats making them poor for long distance journeys (whenever I go on Thameslink I always sit in the rear first class section). The issue is that Crossrail feels largely like a ''glorified tube line'' to quote at route53 . As an Ealing resident, it would be wrong of me to act as if Crossrail is some terrible thing and this would be grossly inappropriate of me to do so as living close to Crossrail will give me plenty of handy connections with faster journeys to many destinations and alleviate the need to change in plenty of places. I'm glad Crossrail is coming but I do think the final route is a underwhelming one. As I previously mentioned, Thameslink's tentacles spread across the South East, linking a plethora of towns to each other. Meanwhile Crossrail's network isn't nearly as expansive. Crossrail has pretty much taken over stopping on the GWML and GEML whereas Thameslink took over both stopping and fast services at the same time but with a multitude of fast services. I wish Crossrail's network went further out of London - especially on the east - perhaps even expanding more with even more branches to ensure that a broader range of places have access to the core section of the railway. The Crossrail network could be improved if only it were treated less like a tube line with the 345s having some features like toilets and power points - many others on here have pointed out that they're a downgrade from the 387s, the extra capacity is no doubt needed in the Thames Valley but the Reading stoppers feel too metro-ised for somewhere a long distance away from London. This brings me to my concluding point. Thameslink synthesises mostly longer distance fast services with some stopping services, the trains have features to both facilitate longer and shorter distance services. Crossrail is largely a stopping service, on the east side its taken over a service which doesn't go far out of London and turned it into a metro which I think works but on the west side its taken over a longer distance stopping service which its turned into a metro and this doesn't work for this service, this is why I don't want TfL to take over the South East.
|
|
|
Post by route53 on May 15, 2020 10:02:22 GMT
I personaly think TFL services should only go as far out of Greater Lomdon as the M25 orbital towns. Whilst it would be foolish to suggest that TfL haven't done a good job of turning the GOBLIN, NLL and SLL around, I don't want them to take over the South East. TfL are best at operating high capacity metro services like the tube and the overground. However, allowing TfL to operate Crossrail is exactly why I don't want them to take over anything too long distance as I think Crossrail has been underwhelming. Thameslink's ''tentacles'' span the South East providing long distance cross-London services from towns miles apart on either side of the capital; the Bedford-Brighton is a long established route but has been joined by other fantastic services like Peterborough-Horsham and Cambridge-Brighton as well as many others. The Thamesink programme hasn't got everything right by any stretch but what I would say is that its been an ambitious attempt to create these new links across the South East with its expansive network. The network synthesises long distance fast services with some shorter distance stopping services make it a mix of a metro and a longer distance service. I won't act like there aren't flaws with Thameslink because there are not least the 707s which whilst they may have plenty of capacity, toilets and power points despite their uncomfortable seats making them poor for long distance journeys (whenever I go on Thameslink I always sit in the rear first class section). The issue is that Crossrail feels largely like a ''glorified tube line'' to quote at route53. As an Ealing resident, it would be wrong of me to act as if Crossrail is some terrible thing and this would be grossly inappropriate of me to do so as living close to Crossrail will give me plenty of handy connections with faster journeys to many destinations and alleviate the need to change in plenty of places. I'm glad Crossrail is coming but I do think the final route is a underwhelming one. As I previously mentioned, Thameslink's tentacles spread across the South East, linking a plethora of towns to each other. Meanwhile Crossrail's network isn't nearly as expansive. Crossrail has pretty much taken over stopping on the GWML and GEML whereas Thameslink took over both stopping and fast services at the same time but with a multitude of fast services. I wish Crossrail's network went further out of London - especially on the east - perhaps even expanding more with even more branches to ensure that a broader range of places have access to the core section of the railway. The Crossrail network could be improved if only it were treated less like a tube line with the 345s having some features like toilets and power points - many others on here have pointed out that they're a downgrade from the 387s, the extra capacity is no doubt needed in the Thames Valley but the Reading stoppers feel too metro-ised for somewhere a long distance away from London. This brings me to my concluding point. Thameslink synthesises mostly longer distance fast services with some stopping services, the trains have features to both facilitate longer and shorter distance services. Crossrail is largely a stopping service, on the east side its taken over a service which doesn't go far out of London and turned it into a metro which I think works but on the west side its taken over a longer distance stopping service which its turned into a metro and this doesn't work for this service, this is why I don't want TfL to take over the South East. Exactly I completely agree with you. Thameslink is far from perfect but the one thing it has gotten right is that it isn’t a TfL line and therefore it can go from Brighton to Bedford, Horsham to Cambridge etc. However I would still say that the Sutton loop and Catford line does need to be siphoned off to TfL as these are more metro than an interurban express system, The Rainham service will eventually be sped up I think, it needs to ignore the 6tph Suburbanites who demand all trains an hour to stop there at the expense of outer London passengers and call at key stations, that’s what Thameslink is good at and it should focus only on that. CrossRail in my opinion is a huge wasted opportunity, it could have been an east to west version of Thameslink, it could have ran from Banbury/Oxford/Aylesbury to Colchester/Southend/Medway instead all we’re getting is an express Central line in the core with all stops or semi slow services on its outer reaches
|
|
|
Post by Dillon95 on May 15, 2020 11:29:32 GMT
Thameslink should just be semi fast Brighton/Horsham/Maidstone East services to Bedford/Peterborough/Cambridge via Central London. The Sutton, Orpington and Sevenoaks metro stopping services should all just be assimilated by TFL and branded as London Overground.
Crossrail should have just been semi fast Reading to Southend and Medway Towns via Central London. Then Paddington to Slough/Heathrow and Liverpool Street to Shenfield/Dartford via Abbey Wood should have been seperate London Overground metro services.
|
|
|
Post by route53 on May 15, 2020 12:01:15 GMT
Thameslink should just be semi fast Brighton/Horsham/Maidstone East services to Bedford/Peterborough/Cambridge via Central London. The Sutton, Orpington and Sevenoaks metro stopping services should all just be assimilated by TFL and branded as London Overground. Crossrail should have just been semi fast Reading to Southend and Medway Towns via Central London. Then Paddington to Slough/Heathrow and Liverpool Street to Shenfield/Dartford via Abbey Wood should have been seperate London Overground metro services. I don’t mind Medway being served by Thameslink, but after London Bridge it should call only at Deptford, Greenwich, Woolwich Arsenal, Abbey Wood, Dartford, Greenhithe, Gravesend and then all stations. I think for the Sutton/Sevenoaks/Orpington to St. Albans/Welwyn Garden City should be TfL ran, Sutton trains terminate at Blackfriars with the Catford line continuing through the core to St. Albans and Welwyn Garden City
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on May 15, 2020 12:20:08 GMT
Whilst it would be foolish to suggest that TfL haven't done a good job of turning the GOBLIN, NLL and SLL around, I don't want them to take over the South East. TfL are best at operating high capacity metro services like the tube and the overground. However, allowing TfL to operate Crossrail is exactly why I don't want them to take over anything too long distance as I think Crossrail has been underwhelming. Thameslink's ''tentacles'' span the South East providing long distance cross-London services from towns miles apart on either side of the capital; the Bedford-Brighton is a long established route but has been joined by other fantastic services like Peterborough-Horsham and Cambridge-Brighton as well as many others. The Thamesink programme hasn't got everything right by any stretch but what I would say is that its been an ambitious attempt to create these new links across the South East with its expansive network. The network synthesises long distance fast services with some shorter distance stopping services make it a mix of a metro and a longer distance service. I won't act like there aren't flaws with Thameslink because there are not least the 707s which whilst they may have plenty of capacity, toilets and power points despite their uncomfortable seats making them poor for long distance journeys (whenever I go on Thameslink I always sit in the rear first class section). The issue is that Crossrail feels largely like a ''glorified tube line'' to quote at route53. As an Ealing resident, it would be wrong of me to act as if Crossrail is some terrible thing and this would be grossly inappropriate of me to do so as living close to Crossrail will give me plenty of handy connections with faster journeys to many destinations and alleviate the need to change in plenty of places. I'm glad Crossrail is coming but I do think the final route is a underwhelming one. As I previously mentioned, Thameslink's tentacles spread across the South East, linking a plethora of towns to each other. Meanwhile Crossrail's network isn't nearly as expansive. Crossrail has pretty much taken over stopping on the GWML and GEML whereas Thameslink took over both stopping and fast services at the same time but with a multitude of fast services. I wish Crossrail's network went further out of London - especially on the east - perhaps even expanding more with even more branches to ensure that a broader range of places have access to the core section of the railway. The Crossrail network could be improved if only it were treated less like a tube line with the 345s having some features like toilets and power points - many others on here have pointed out that they're a downgrade from the 387s, the extra capacity is no doubt needed in the Thames Valley but the Reading stoppers feel too metro-ised for somewhere a long distance away from London. This brings me to my concluding point. Thameslink synthesises mostly longer distance fast services with some stopping services, the trains have features to both facilitate longer and shorter distance services. Crossrail is largely a stopping service, on the east side its taken over a service which doesn't go far out of London and turned it into a metro which I think works but on the west side its taken over a longer distance stopping service which its turned into a metro and this doesn't work for this service, this is why I don't want TfL to take over the South East. Exactly I completely agree with you. Thameslink is far from perfect but the one thing it has gotten right is that it isn’t a TfL line and therefore it can go from Brighton to Bedford, Horsham to Cambridge etc. However I would still say that the Sutton loop and Catford line does need to be siphoned off to TfL as these are more metro than an interurban express system, The Rainham service will eventually be sped up I think, it needs to ignore the 6tph Suburbanites who demand all trains an hour to stop there at the expense of outer London passengers and call at key stations, that’s what Thameslink is good at and it should focus only on that. CrossRail in my opinion is a huge wasted opportunity, it could have been an east to west version of Thameslink, it could have ran from Banbury/Oxford/Aylesbury to Colchester/Southend/Medway instead all we’re getting is an express Central line in the core with all stops or semi slow services on its outer reaches Interesting idea for Crossrail to be an east-west Thameslink. Could also serve Basingstoke, Newbury or Rainham (kent). However, I think the problem with Thameslink is that the core section is very useful for shorter journeys within inner or central London, or added onto a journey using TFL services. This type of demand requires different layout/seating/capacity/etc on the trains compared to passengers travelling to somewhere like Cambridge. Plus despite the potential of the core section, Thameslink is not shown in most TFL publicity, so many passengers would not think to use it - and as such, the Thameslink core can be far less busy, including at peak times, than some tube lines that provide similar links. I think the best solution would probably be for services from Brighton, Peterborough or Bedford to terminate at London terminal stations, and use rolling stock that is more suitable for longer distances than the 700s. The Thameslink core, and similar Crossrail routes, would be more suited to a TFL service. I think this should be modelled on Paris's RER network, providing a semi-fast service in London, and extending to destinations beyond the M25, to serve airports and some key commuter towns - terminating at distances such as Guildford, Luton or High Wycombe. These can then use higher-capacity metro style trains, such as the 345s, providing direct connections to multiple stops through central London - some key stations would continue to also offer a faster service to a terminal station calling at fewer stations, such as GWR's Didcot-Paddington route alongside the Elizabeth line to Reading. I think remaining TFL services (Tube/Overground/DLR) should remain inside the M25 though as much as possible. The Metropolitan line probably goes too far out for a tube service, and perhaps could either become a Crossrail route, or with stations beyond Northwood or Rickmansworth transferring to Chiltern. The Central line to Epping is perhaps questionable too for the tube network.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on May 15, 2020 14:27:31 GMT
Whilst it would be foolish to suggest that TfL haven't done a good job of turning the GOBLIN, NLL and SLL around, I don't want them to take over the South East. TfL are best at operating high capacity metro services like the tube and the overground. However, allowing TfL to operate Crossrail is exactly why I don't want them to take over anything too long distance as I think Crossrail has been underwhelming. Thameslink's ''tentacles'' span the South East providing long distance cross-London services from towns miles apart on either side of the capital; the Bedford-Brighton is a long established route but has been joined by other fantastic services like Peterborough-Horsham and Cambridge-Brighton as well as many others. The Thamesink programme hasn't got everything right by any stretch but what I would say is that its been an ambitious attempt to create these new links across the South East with its expansive network. The network synthesises long distance fast services with some shorter distance stopping services make it a mix of a metro and a longer distance service. I won't act like there aren't flaws with Thameslink because there are not least the 707s which whilst they may have plenty of capacity, toilets and power points despite their uncomfortable seats making them poor for long distance journeys (whenever I go on Thameslink I always sit in the rear first class section). The issue is that Crossrail feels largely like a ''glorified tube line'' to quote at route53 . As an Ealing resident, it would be wrong of me to act as if Crossrail is some terrible thing and this would be grossly inappropriate of me to do so as living close to Crossrail will give me plenty of handy connections with faster journeys to many destinations and alleviate the need to change in plenty of places. I'm glad Crossrail is coming but I do think the final route is a underwhelming one. As I previously mentioned, Thameslink's tentacles spread across the South East, linking a plethora of towns to each other. Meanwhile Crossrail's network isn't nearly as expansive. Crossrail has pretty much taken over stopping on the GWML and GEML whereas Thameslink took over both stopping and fast services at the same time but with a multitude of fast services. I wish Crossrail's network went further out of London - especially on the east - perhaps even expanding more with even more branches to ensure that a broader range of places have access to the core section of the railway. The Crossrail network could be improved if only it were treated less like a tube line with the 345s having some features like toilets and power points - many others on here have pointed out that they're a downgrade from the 387s, the extra capacity is no doubt needed in the Thames Valley but the Reading stoppers feel too metro-ised for somewhere a long distance away from London. This brings me to my concluding point. Thameslink synthesises mostly longer distance fast services with some stopping services, the trains have features to both facilitate longer and shorter distance services. Crossrail is largely a stopping service, on the east side its taken over a service which doesn't go far out of London and turned it into a metro which I think works but on the west side its taken over a longer distance stopping service which its turned into a metro and this doesn't work for this service, this is why I don't want TfL to take over the South East. Exactly I completely agree with you. Thameslink is far from perfect but the one thing it has gotten right is that it isn’t a TfL line and therefore it can go from Brighton to Bedford, Horsham to Cambridge etc. However I would still say that the Sutton loop and Catford line does need to be siphoned off to TfL as these are more metro than an interurban express system, The Rainham service will eventually be sped up I think, it needs to ignore the 6tph Suburbanites who demand all trains an hour to stop there at the expense of outer London passengers and call at key stations, that’s what Thameslink is good at and it should focus only on that. CrossRail in my opinion is a huge wasted opportunity, it could have been an east to west version of Thameslink, it could have ran from Banbury/Oxford/Aylesbury to Colchester/Southend/Medway instead all we’re getting is an express Central line in the core with all stops or semi slow services on its outer reaches I agree Crossrail is a missed opportunity for a long cross London railway when all its really doing is just giving us a stopping service. Even with the proposed Crossrail 2 route, TfL don't seem to have learnt any lessons as the proposed Crossrail 2 is just taking over stopping services and is more or less confined to the Greater London area, ending the service at Broxbourne to the north just sums this up, when I think it would make far more sense for it to go to Stanstead.
|
|
|
Post by route53 on May 15, 2020 15:37:22 GMT
Exactly I completely agree with you. Thameslink is far from perfect but the one thing it has gotten right is that it isn’t a TfL line and therefore it can go from Brighton to Bedford, Horsham to Cambridge etc. However I would still say that the Sutton loop and Catford line does need to be siphoned off to TfL as these are more metro than an interurban express system, The Rainham service will eventually be sped up I think, it needs to ignore the 6tph Suburbanites who demand all trains an hour to stop there at the expense of outer London passengers and call at key stations, that’s what Thameslink is good at and it should focus only on that. CrossRail in my opinion is a huge wasted opportunity, it could have been an east to west version of Thameslink, it could have ran from Banbury/Oxford/Aylesbury to Colchester/Southend/Medway instead all we’re getting is an express Central line in the core with all stops or semi slow services on its outer reaches I agree Crossrail is a missed opportunity for a long cross London railway when all its really doing is just giving us a stopping service. Even with the proposed Crossrail 2 route, TfL don't seem to have learnt any lessons as the proposed Crossrail 2 is just taking over stopping services and is more or less confined to the Greater London area, ending the service at Broxbourne to the north just sums this up, when I think it would make far more sense for it to go to Stanstead. CrossRail 2 was planned out as a tube line to be fair, many years ago as the Chelney (Chelsea to Hackney) Line but since the 2000s Chelney looks like it’ll end up taking over The South West and North East London suburban lines, so it’ll be a mix of main line and metro by the time it’s built, when really it should either be a cross London tube line ie Clapham Junction to Epping/Ongar to aid the Victoria line or again it should be made to Thameslink standards; ie Basingstoke to Stansted Airport and Cambridge.
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on May 15, 2020 22:57:53 GMT
Exactly I completely agree with you. Thameslink is far from perfect but the one thing it has gotten right is that it isn’t a TfL line and therefore it can go from Brighton to Bedford, Horsham to Cambridge etc. However I would still say that the Sutton loop and Catford line does need to be siphoned off to TfL as these are more metro than an interurban express system, The Rainham service will eventually be sped up I think, it needs to ignore the 6tph Suburbanites who demand all trains an hour to stop there at the expense of outer London passengers and call at key stations, that’s what Thameslink is good at and it should focus only on that. CrossRail in my opinion is a huge wasted opportunity, it could have been an east to west version of Thameslink, it could have ran from Banbury/Oxford/Aylesbury to Colchester/Southend/Medway instead all we’re getting is an express Central line in the core with all stops or semi slow services on its outer reaches I agree Crossrail is a missed opportunity for a long cross London railway when all its really doing is just giving us a stopping service. Even with the proposed Crossrail 2 route, TfL don't seem to have learnt any lessons as the proposed Crossrail 2 is just taking over stopping services and is more or less confined to the Greater London area, ending the service at Broxbourne to the north just sums this up, when I think it would make far more sense for it to go to Stanstead. With Crossrail1 going as far as Reading, Crossrail 2 could perhaps extend to Stansted and also take over the Hertford East branch, and in the other direction could continue to Woking and Guildford.
|
|
|
Post by route53 on May 22, 2020 13:42:42 GMT
I even think Thameslink could be extended to Leicester and Corby, a fair few commuters to London live up there
|
|
|
Post by YY13VKP on May 22, 2020 14:18:19 GMT
I even think Thameslink could be extended to Leicester and Corby, a fair few commuters to London live up there Leicester would be a bit too far out, and is well served by EMR but Corby’s certainly a possibility since it’s just south of Peterborough. I recall seeing a photo of a Class 319 many years ago, think it was circa 2005/6 with the destination blind set for Corby but haven’t seen it for ages, so perhaps back then Thameslink were considering an extension to Corby in the future. I don’t believe that electrification will reach Leicester for some years yet but Corby is currently in the process of having overhead wires installed so that Class 360’s cascaded from Greater Anglia can operate there
|
|
|
Post by kmkcheng on May 22, 2020 15:06:03 GMT
I think remaining TFL services (Tube/Overground/DLR) should remain inside the M25 though as much as possible. The Metropolitan line probably goes too far out for a tube service, and perhaps could either become a Crossrail route, or with stations beyond Northwood or Rickmansworth transferring to Chiltern. The Central line to Epping is perhaps questionable too for the tube network. Whilst the metropolitan line section beyond Northwood/Rickmansworth transferring to chiltern is possible, I think it will be very detrimental to those areas and potentially the rest of the chiltern network. Will the metropolitan services be replaced by extra chiltern services which will be shorter in length? If extra chiltern services are provided, that could take away paths from the Birmingham main line. Being part of a crossrail route would be a better solution although Neasden junction could be a problem without any grade separation to potentially connect it to Old Oak hub station. With regards to Epping, what would you suggest replace it or would you abandon this section? It’s not linked to any main railway line so a completely new link would have to be built to keep a service running to Epping, all for the sake of a small number of stations that’s outside London
|
|
|
Post by route53 on May 22, 2020 16:01:33 GMT
I even think Thameslink could be extended to Leicester and Corby, a fair few commuters to London live up there Leicester would be a bit too far out, and is well served by EMR but Corby’s certainly a possibility since it’s just south of Peterborough. I recall seeing a photo of a Class 319 many years ago, think it was circa 2005/6 with the destination blind set for Corby but haven’t seen it for ages, so perhaps back then Thameslink were considering an extension to Corby in the future. I don’t believe that electrification will reach Leicester for some years yet but Corby is currently in the process of having overhead wires installed so that Class 360’s cascaded from Greater Anglia can operate there Leicester is roughly the same distance as Peterborough, Leicester is also now deemed “commutable” to London which I find odd, but it does depend on when that stretch of line is electrified. Interesting about the class 319 having the Corby as a potential destination, I think there is scope for an extension to Corby
|
|
|
Post by snowman on May 22, 2020 17:05:40 GMT
Leicester would be a bit too far out, and is well served by EMR but Corby’s certainly a possibility since it’s just south of Peterborough. I recall seeing a photo of a Class 319 many years ago, think it was circa 2005/6 with the destination blind set for Corby but haven’t seen it for ages, so perhaps back then Thameslink were considering an extension to Corby in the future. I don’t believe that electrification will reach Leicester for some years yet but Corby is currently in the process of having overhead wires installed so that Class 360’s cascaded from Greater Anglia can operate there Leicester is roughly the same distance as Peterborough, Leicester is also now deemed “commutable” to London which I find odd, but it does depend on when that stretch of line is electrified. Interesting about the class 319 having the Corby as a potential destination, I think there is scope for an extension to Corby Many years ago (probably late 1980s) there was Open day at Wimbledon Park depot and a 319 was in there, someone had scrolled the blinds to Milton Ernest (which is few miles north of Bedford), but I don't think it was ever built, so may well have had Corby as well For the record, Corby electrification is being completed for December 2020 electric service. Grayling (when he was Transport Secretary) stopped the Midland Mainline electrification, but a short section to Market Harborough has since been added again (to be ready 2022), but more because a large National Grid feeder station (at Breybrooke) is on the extra section. i think an extra platform may have been added at Market Harborough, there has been works extending the station. However it is more likely to be served by East Midlands new class 810s (bi-modes with 24.5m carriages unlike the 26m versions, due to rebuilt St Pancras not having 275-300m mainline length platforms)
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on May 22, 2020 21:29:35 GMT
I think remaining TFL services (Tube/Overground/DLR) should remain inside the M25 though as much as possible. The Metropolitan line probably goes too far out for a tube service, and perhaps could either become a Crossrail route, or with stations beyond Northwood or Rickmansworth transferring to Chiltern. The Central line to Epping is perhaps questionable too for the tube network. Whilst the metropolitan line section beyond Northwood/Rickmansworth transferring to chiltern is possible, I think it will be very detrimental to those areas and potentially the rest of the chiltern network. Will the metropolitan services be replaced by extra chiltern services which will be shorter in length? If extra chiltern services are provided, that could take away paths from the Birmingham main line. Being part of a crossrail route would be a better solution although Neasden junction could be a problem without any grade separation to potentially connect it to Old Oak hub station. With regards to Epping, what would you suggest replace it or would you abandon this section? It’s not linked to any main railway line so a completely new link would have to be built to keep a service running to Epping, all for the sake of a small number of stations that’s outside London Agree entirely. I think having fast and slow Met Line services alongside Chiltern services are fine as this provides plenty of capacity and choice for travellers. The fact is that the fast services are very useful for getting commuters into zone 1 quickly as are the fast Chiltern services. Having the stopping trains allows people who want to go to other intermediate stations are very useful. I also don't see the benefit of introducing Chiltern services on the outer end of the Met Line as it would slow down the journeys of those wishing to travel to Buckinghamshire. I'm a huge fan of a Crossrail branch out to Buckinghamshire (always frustrates me that one had been proposed in the past www.youtube.com/watch?v=KY_ag15vNFc) and perhaps some sort of branch up to Aylesbury via Amersham would be a good idea though incredibly expensive to construct a new rail link branching off from Old Oak Common though I've always thought that if only there were a signalling upgrade between Paddington and Old Oak Common, then the Paddington terminators could be extended to destinations on the Chiltern Railways network such as Banbury, Oxford via Bicester and Aylesbury. I believe there were plans for the Chelsea-Hackney line to take over the outer end of the Central Line out to Epping but seeing as this plan for the line has long since been ditched, I see no reason to meddle with the existing network, after all, siphoning off the outer bit of the line for a separate service would be the worst of all worlds.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on May 22, 2020 21:31:13 GMT
Leicester is roughly the same distance as Peterborough, Leicester is also now deemed “commutable” to London which I find odd, but it does depend on when that stretch of line is electrified. Interesting about the class 319 having the Corby as a potential destination, I think there is scope for an extension to Corby Many years ago (probably late 1980s) there was Open day at Wimbledon Park depot and a 319 was in there, someone had scrolled the blinds to Milton Ernest (which is few miles north of Bedford), but I don't think it was ever built, so may well have had Corby as well For the record, Corby electrification is being completed for December 2020 electric service. Grayling (when he was Transport Secretary) stopped the Midland Mainline electrification, but a short section to Market Harborough has since been added again (to be ready 2022), but more because a large National Grid feeder station (at Breybrooke) is on the extra section. i think an extra platform may have been added at Market Harborough, there has been works extending the station. However it is more likely to be served by East Midlands new class 810s (bi-modes with 24.5m carriages unlike the 26m versions, due to rebuilt St Pancras not having 275-300m mainline length platforms) Aren't there plans for the current East Mids franchise to trial hydrogen trains for the intercity routes? Not sure whether these would be purely hydrogen or bi modal and use the overhead wires from St Pancras to Market Harborough.
|
|