daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Subways and Urban Transport

Subways and Urban Transport Metros, subways, light rail, trams, buses and other local transport systems



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old November 14th, 2008, 05:32 PM   #3001
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

tubeman, few Questiones

firstly, just a random thought that came into my head did they ever think of diverting the central between noting hill and marble arch to paddington and bayswater???

Lancaster Gate is so unbusy, it's not funny, and queensway and bayswater serve exactly the same area but aren't interchanges. It would also help speed up journeys to paddington, and would've negated part of crossrails mandate.

why is there such a big gap between st pauls and chancery lane, did they ever think of building a station for holborn viaduct??

DO you reckon it would be possible to build a proper interchange between kenton and northwick park to replace those stations??

One other question how many tracks run into each of the mainline stations into london and what are they used for (in terms of service)??

cheers Boss
bigbossman no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old November 14th, 2008, 06:31 PM   #3002
sotonsi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,563

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
firstly, just a random thought that came into my head did they ever think of diverting the central between noting hill and marble arch to paddington and bayswater???
was suggested to serve Paddington on the Central, by realigning it, in the 1949 plan, as a very low priority.
Quote:
why is there such a big gap between st pauls and chancery lane, did they ever think of building a station for holborn viaduct??
It would be impossible to build a station here - seemingly the CLR ruled it out (given Holborn Viaduct station is older than the CLR). The tunnels, in order to stay under the road, are rolling around each other, sometimes one on top of the other, sometimes side-by-side. A station there would be very difficult to built, even ignoring the new rules on things like flat, straight platforms.
Quote:
One other question how many tracks run into each of the mainline stations into london and what are they used for (in terms of service)??
This is approaches, not throat, for some of the termini
Waterloo 8 tracks - 4 on the via Putney route, 4 on the via Wimbledon route.
Victoria 8 tracks - 4 on the 'Brighton' side, 4 on the 'Chatham' side
Marylebone 2 tracks
Paddington 6 tracks (plus two LU tracks for the Hammersmith and City)
Euston 4 tracks (with the slows diverging a bit further north into DC and slow)
St Pancras 6 tracks - 4 merge into HS1 (2 domestic, 2 international), other 2 form MML fasts
Charing Cross 4 tracks - merge into two at Metropolitan Junction
Cannon Street 4 tracks - up, down and reversible into London Bridge (merge into 2 tracks at Borough Market Junction before becoming 3 again) and what is now a stock transfer line.
Fenchurch Street - 4 tracks, though merge into 2 near Tower Gateway, so really 2 tracks
Moorgate - 4 tracks - 2 on Thameslink and 2 on GN&C (and 2 platforms for each)
sotonsi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2008, 08:30 PM   #3003
sweek
Registered User
 
sweek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London NW1
Posts: 1,636
Likes (Received): 1

The Northern line these days is definitely not the worst anymore. I think it's really a reputation it got in the late eighties and early nineties. I take it to work every day from Camden Town to Waterloo, and barely ever have problems. My girlfriend uses the Hammersmith and City every day and it's absolutely awful.
sweek no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2008, 08:36 PM   #3004
trainrover
:-x
 
trainrover's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,787
Likes (Received): 738

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweek View Post
it got in the late eighties and early nineties
...in addition to the early-80s and late-70s.
__________________
.
hee hee
.
trainrover no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2008, 08:39 PM   #3005
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweek View Post
The Northern line these days is definitely not the worst anymore. I think it's really a reputation it got in the late eighties and early nineties. I take it to work every day from Camden Town to Waterloo, and barely ever have problems. My girlfriend uses the Hammersmith and City every day and it's absolutely awful.
Still had conductors and really ancient trains when i was a nipper, and that was in the mid nineties iirc, was a relic
bigbossman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2008, 08:41 PM   #3006
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotonsi View Post
was suggested to serve Paddington on the Central, by realigning it, in the 1949 plan, as a very low priority.It would be impossible to build a station here - seemingly the CLR ruled it out (given Holborn Viaduct station is older than the CLR). The tunnels, in order to stay under the road, are rolling around each other, sometimes one on top of the other, sometimes side-by-side. A station there would be very difficult to built, even ignoring the new rules on things like flat, straight platforms.This is approaches, not throat, for some of the termini
Waterloo 8 tracks - 4 on the via Putney route, 4 on the via Wimbledon route.
Victoria 8 tracks - 4 on the 'Brighton' side, 4 on the 'Chatham' side
Marylebone 2 tracks
Paddington 6 tracks (plus two LU tracks for the Hammersmith and City)
Euston 4 tracks (with the slows diverging a bit further north into DC and slow)
St Pancras 6 tracks - 4 merge into HS1 (2 domestic, 2 international), other 2 form MML fasts
Charing Cross 4 tracks - merge into two at Metropolitan Junction
Cannon Street 4 tracks - up, down and reversible into London Bridge (merge into 2 tracks at Borough Market Junction before becoming 3 again) and what is now a stock transfer line.
Fenchurch Street - 4 tracks, though merge into 2 near Tower Gateway, so really 2 tracks
Moorgate - 4 tracks - 2 on Thameslink and 2 on GN&C (and 2 platforms for each)
cheers tubeman junior, but you missed out london bridge, which is the one i really wanted to know.
bigbossman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2008, 09:20 PM   #3007
sotonsi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,563

4 tracks for the terminus, 7 on the through bit (one with no platform at the moment that's a loop).
sotonsi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2008, 11:04 PM   #3008
Stuu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 166
Likes (Received): 44

This evening I went to Great Portland Street; the display said "Watford - Held", there wasn't a train in the platform.. I've seen them say delayed before, but never seen held. I'm wondering if there is a technical definition i.e. delayed is down to passengers or waiting for the train ahead, but held implies deliberately stopped rather than just waiting. thanks
Stuu no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 15th, 2008, 12:01 PM   #3009
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by jarbury View Post
I have a couple of questions:

1) What do you think is the worst Tube line and why?
2) What do you think is the best Tube line and why?
1) All except the Bakerloo
2) The Bakerloo

Seriously, I'd say if regarded in isolation the Circle is the worst. Most prone to cancellations due to ONA (Operator not available, i.e. too many off sick). Very quick to be cancelled in either direction if the District or Metropolitan / H&C Lines have operating problems. Unreliable stock so quite often cancelled due to defective or not enough good stock (Defective in service / defective in depot), when it is running stop-start journeys due to the numerous 'flat' junctions along the route. Most Circle Line users have learned to simply use the District / H&C / Met if they can't see a Circle train imminent.

This is largely because the operation of the Circle is shared with the H&C line, and as the latter exclusively serves several stations whereas the Circle does not then the H&C line gets preference for staff and rolling stock resources, i.e. the Circle is always cancelled due to ONA or not enough stock before the H&C is.

'Best' very much depends on what you want: the Bakerloo does actually have a good shout, ignoring the Waterloo & City which has limited opening hours and only serves 2 stations, the Bakerloo is statistically the most reliable. We run 22tph between Queen's Park and Elephant & Castle all day and have a little extra capacity, so aren't too crowded with it. Bloody hot in the summer and very dusty though, and there's a few torturous bends with pretty horrendous wheel screech / general noise. The service north of Queen's Park is nowhere near as good because we have a limited number of train paths allocated by Network Rail, and the NR assets aren't the most reliable nor are the ageing Class 313 LOROL trains, both of which often lead to delays / suspensions north of Queen's Park.

I'm guessing in a couple of years when the Victoria Line upgrade has fully bedded in, it'll be the most reliable and is certainly very quick, so I might give them our crown... But it will still be unbearbly hot and crowded (victim of its own success).
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 15th, 2008, 12:06 PM   #3010
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by jarbury View Post
An opinion really.... I guess the one that "works" best and worst from a regular user's perspective. I've heard lots of people say the Northern Line is definitely the worst.
The Northern always was the 'Misery Line', but a new timetable was introduced about a year ago which has simplified service patterns, and it's improved dramatically. It really can be as simple as a timetable change... About 7 years ago the District Line had an horrendous timetable (#126, for those who care!), and the service would run 30 minutes late on a good day, maybe 1 hour late once a week, and once a fortnight would go into complete meltdown (I've seen trains 3+ hours late on the District Line before)... It was eradicated with Timetable #127 (a handful of trains removed and extra time built into termini and extra running time), and it began running like clockwork overnight. It's amazing how much difference an extra minute's running time here and there and taking a couple of trains out of the equation can make.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 15th, 2008, 12:25 PM   #3011
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
tubeman, few Questiones

firstly, just a random thought that came into my head did they ever think of diverting the central between noting hill and marble arch to paddington and bayswater???

Lancaster Gate is so unbusy, it's not funny, and queensway and bayswater serve exactly the same area but aren't interchanges. It would also help speed up journeys to paddington, and would've negated part of crossrails mandate.

why is there such a big gap between st pauls and chancery lane, did they ever think of building a station for holborn viaduct??

DO you reckon it would be possible to build a proper interchange between kenton and northwick park to replace those stations??

One other question how many tracks run into each of the mainline stations into london and what are they used for (in terms of service)??

cheers Boss
Regarding diverting the Central Line, I've never heard it proposed, but I think it's actually a really good idea... You're right about Lancaster Gate being a ghost station... I'd propose only diverting between Marble Arch and Queensway however to minimise the cost of it... I don't think it would serve much purpose having a District / Circle / Central interchange at Bayswater when with the diversion just to Paddington the same interchange would be available at Paddington and Notting Hill gate. I'd also debate whether Bayswater could cope with all of the traffic for Whiteley's and a pretty populous area passing through its small concourse... probably better to keep the Bayswater / Queensway split. The redundant tunnel through Lancaster Gate could be used for reversing or stabling sidings I suppose. It would certainly greatly benefit Paddington station (although might be more unwelcome crowding on the Central Line?).

Regarding a Holborn Viaduct station on the Central, I'm not aware of it having been proposed and I agree this does seem a little strange, it would have been of great benefit as Holborn Viaduct terminus had no Tube station closeby and was still a fair hike from the heart of The City. It would still be useful as a City Thameslink interchange, but obviously it goes without saying that adding a station to an existing Tube line would be grotesquely expensive (hence it was dismissed for Shoreditch High Street / Bishopsgate to interchange with the ELLE).

Regarding Kenton / Northwick Park, it would be perfectly possible, I'm sure... I don't know how much use it would be though? Certainly worth a study.

...And you final question has been answered already!
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 15th, 2008, 12:41 PM   #3012
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Close...

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotonsi View Post
Victoria 8 tracks - 4 on the 'Brighton' side, 4 on the 'Chatham' side Actually 9, it's 5 on the Brighton side

Euston 4 tracks (with the slows diverging a bit further north into DC and slow) It's 6, or at least 5... 6 tracks pass through Park Street Tunnels but one accesses carriage sidings, through the site of the former Chalk Farm station there's 5 running lines, widening back to 6 at Camden Junction

St Pancras 6 tracks - 4 merge into HS1 (2 domestic, 2 international), other 2 form MML fasts I'd argue 5... a bit messy as the junctions between MML and HS1 are immediately north of the station... There are 3 running lines out of the MML portion, widening to 4 where the Thameslink / FCC tunnel emerges (resulting in 6 tracks through Camden Road tunnel). I'd regard the HS1 as being 2, as the Gifford Street portal is so close to the station.

Fenchurch Street - 4 tracks, though merge into 2 near Tower Gateway, so really 2 tracks I'd sooner say 4... The junction is closer to Shadwell station so represents a reasonable stretch of quadruple track
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 15th, 2008, 12:47 PM   #3013
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuu View Post
This evening I went to Great Portland Street; the display said "Watford - Held", there wasn't a train in the platform.. I've seen them say delayed before, but never seen held. I'm wondering if there is a technical definition i.e. delayed is down to passengers or waiting for the train ahead, but held implies deliberately stopped rather than just waiting. thanks
Hmmm not too sure which criteria they use, but I'd suggest that this is used when a train is held in a platform for whatever reason to prevent an erroneous time display... The time in minutes is purely governed by the distance, so if a train is held at the previous station for whatever reason it would be incorrect to display '2 mins' until it actually started moving toward GPS, otherwise the '2 mins' could be more like 5 resulting in much tutting and rustling of newspapers (knowing Met Line customers!).

Did the 'Watford - held' change into anything else?
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 15th, 2008, 12:47 PM   #3014
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
cheers tubeman junior, but you missed out london bridge, which is the one i really wanted to know.
11, the British record for any terminus!
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 15th, 2008, 01:33 PM   #3015
Stuu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 166
Likes (Received): 44

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeman View Post
Hmmm not too sure which criteria they use, but I'd suggest that this is used when a train is held in a platform for whatever reason to prevent an erroneous time display... The time in minutes is purely governed by the distance, so if a train is held at the previous station for whatever reason it would be incorrect to display '2 mins' until it actually started moving toward GPS, otherwise the '2 mins' could be more like 5 resulting in much tutting and rustling of newspapers (knowing Met Line customers!).

Did the 'Watford - held' change into anything else?
Thanks, I've seen them say delayed, or say 2 mins constantly for 5 mins, just not the use of held. It also had a scrolling message underneath saying "times will be updated when more information becomes available" (I think, words to that effect anyway). I've never seen that message before either. After a couple of minutes it changed to Watford 1 min
Stuu no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 15th, 2008, 02:01 PM   #3016
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

Why are there odd amount of tracks running into victoria and London bridge?? is it so in the peaks more trains can run with the grain??

Also if there are 11 tracks into london bridge from 6 lines, why has it taken them till now to realise all the capacity problems are due to tracks crossing each other? or is it not that simple.
bigbossman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 15th, 2008, 02:08 PM   #3017
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeman View Post
Regarding diverting the Central Line, I've never heard it proposed, but I think it's actually a really good idea... You're right about Lancaster Gate being a ghost station... I'd propose only diverting between Marble Arch and Queensway however to minimise the cost of it... I don't think it would serve much purpose having a District / Circle / Central interchange at Bayswater when with the diversion just to Paddington the same interchange would be available at Paddington and Notting Hill gate. I'd also debate whether Bayswater could cope with all of the traffic for Whiteley's and a pretty populous area passing through its small concourse... probably better to keep the Bayswater / Queensway split. The redundant tunnel through Lancaster Gate could be used for reversing or stabling sidings I suppose. It would certainly greatly benefit Paddington station (although might be more unwelcome crowding on the Central Line?).

Regarding a Holborn Viaduct station on the Central, I'm not aware of it having been proposed and I agree this does seem a little strange, it would have been of great benefit as Holborn Viaduct terminus had no Tube station closeby and was still a fair hike from the heart of The City. It would still be useful as a City Thameslink interchange, but obviously it goes without saying that adding a station to an existing Tube line would be grotesquely expensive (hence it was dismissed for Shoreditch High Street / Bishopsgate to interchange with the ELLE).

Regarding Kenton / Northwick Park, it would be perfectly possible, I'm sure... I don't know how much use it would be though? Certainly worth a study.

...And you final question has been answered already!

the reason why i thought paddington and bayswater because wouldn't the curve be really sharp if it was just paddington??

Also i agee it would overcrowd the line, but wouldn't it be a boon for office development around paddington meaning more people from the west would work there as its now easy to get to.

on kenton/northwick park, i was thinking that because it makes sense that if a line crosses it should be an interchange, there are too many lines in NW and W london that cross without providing changing facilites imho
bigbossman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 15th, 2008, 02:25 PM   #3018
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
the reason why i thought paddington and bayswater because wouldn't the curve be really sharp if it was just paddington??
No, not at all... Looking at the A to Z it could be achieved with reasonably gentle curves, obviously I'd have the Central line at Paddington to the south of the existing formation (i.e. escalator bank sloping down southwards from the LU concourse) to minimise this.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 15th, 2008, 04:27 PM   #3019
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
Why are there odd amount of tracks running into victoria and London bridge?? is it so in the peaks more trains can run with the grain??

Also if there are 11 tracks into london bridge from 6 lines, why has it taken them till now to realise all the capacity problems are due to tracks crossing each other? or is it not that simple.
Unusually the entire South London Line route from Victoria to London Bridge was built with 3 tracks, still intact in places (Victoria to Clapham High Street), but for a lot of the route the space vacated by the middle track allowed for new island platforms at Queen's Road, Peckham Rye and South Bermondsey. The 'extra' third track was retined for the approaches to the two termini because it serves as a relief road, leading to the odd number of tracks on both approaches.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 15th, 2008, 11:52 PM   #3020
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

tubeman, was @ mile end today and i personally think that as a station it embodies what i feel a truely integrated underground station should be, and is probably my favourite, what are your opinions of it?

and what is your favourite/most hated stations?
bigbossman no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
london, railways, tube

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 02:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium