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 January 9th, 2009, 11:14 AM   #3281
sweek
Registered User
 
sweek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London NW1
Posts: 1,636
Likes (Received): 1

Hi Tubeman, I was wondering if you have that screenshot from your new version of your book? Someone on another forum is asking for an accurate track diagram of the LU and I thought I'd plug your railway atlas 2nd edition.
sweek no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old January 9th, 2009, 11:28 AM   #3282
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Here you go... It's a jpeg so has lost a bit of colour and crispness:

[img]http://i36.************/2m5i3uw.jpg[/img]

...They'll have to wait 'til July for this edition, but can speed up the process by buying a copy of the first!
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 9th, 2009, 01:52 PM   #3283
sweek
Registered User
 
sweek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London NW1
Posts: 1,636
Likes (Received): 1

That looks fantastic, thanks again! Camden Road Midland would've been so useful for me if it had still existed, heh. I don't think a reopening campaign would do much good for it with Kentish Town station so close-by.
sweek no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 9th, 2009, 01:59 PM   #3284
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
I guess the route could be built as a continuation of Connaught Tunnel under the Royal Docks, as it's pointing south-east here... I dread to think how difficult it would be in engineering terms to do that though (build a new route off an existing tunnel with several millions of tons of water above)... The Connaught Tunnel is so shallow that ships passing between the Victoria and Albert Docks used to graze the tunnel lining with their hulls (hence the protracted closure and strengthening in the 1990's).

The alternative is to have Crossrail pass through the tunnel, rise, provide for a LCA stop, then quickly sink back into tunnel again and swing south to Woolwich, which would end up with a bizarre (and now doubt slow) route zig-zagging and rising and falling in quick succession.

I'f we're determined to serve Woolwich, I prefer my alignment along Greenwich Peninsula to Charlton: quicker, neater, cheaper.
it'd be a bit like the central in east london, up and down, in and out...

P.S. the map looks excellent btw
bigbossman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 9th, 2009, 04:22 PM   #3285
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

tubeman, i found out yesterday that the northern city line is 6 car capable, not 4 car... meaning it is surely ripe for a southward extension to canon street onto the southern network... however i think crossrails escalators cut out the southward route... surely with thameslink 3000 they can take the oppurtunity to realise the northern heights plan!!
bigbossman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 9th, 2009, 05:08 PM   #3286
Jang0
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 131
Likes (Received): 0

I never understood the point of the northern heights plan. Surely it would make the operations on the Northern far too complicated.

Wouldn't it be better to divert Cambridge (or similar) trains down through your new tunnel down to somewhere along the London Bridge lines to create a medium distance route via the city? It would also relieve the northern line through the city a bit too
Jang0 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 9th, 2009, 07:48 PM   #3287
Jang0
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 131
Likes (Received): 0

bigbossman - do you know what it is that restricts the number of cars on the tunnel to 6? is it the station lengths?

If it was, then I would be in favour of re-doing the stations at the same time, particularly since it would seem likely that the Moorgate stations would have to be lower, or on a different alignment anyway. I quite like the idea of joining at Cannon Street. It would cause chaos while they build it, but to have a Cannon Street-Bank station would be a pretty useful station, with links to Dartford, Hayes, Hertford etc. I guess you could perhaps still terminate some trains at the original Cannon Street station (you wouldn't need the entire width for these tunnels) in the event of issues/engineering work. Imagine trying to thread these new tunnels past all the others! Nightmare.
Jang0 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 9th, 2009, 07:50 PM   #3288
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jang0 View Post
I never understood the point of the northern heights plan. Surely it would make the operations on the Northern far too complicated.

Wouldn't it be better to divert Cambridge (or similar) trains down through your new tunnel down to somewhere along the London Bridge lines to create a medium distance route via the city? It would also relieve the northern line through the city a bit too
it was gonna be part of the northern in name only in reality, like the wimbleware branch of the district, it was completely grade separate.

The cambridge line trains are all going through thameslink when the programme is done... so they are going to London Bridge anyway, along with the trains from kings lynn and peterborough...
bigbossman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 9th, 2009, 07:55 PM   #3289
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jang0 View Post
bigbossman - do you know what it is that restricts the number of cars on the tunnel to 6? is it the station lengths?

If it was, then I would be in favour of re-doing the stations at the same time, particularly since it would seem likely that the Moorgate stations would have to be lower, or on a different alignment anyway. I quite like the idea of joining at Cannon Street. It would cause chaos while they build it, but to have a Cannon Street-Bank station would be a pretty useful station, with links to Dartford, Hayes, Hertford etc. I guess you could perhaps still terminate some trains at the original Cannon Street station (you wouldn't need the entire width for these tunnels) in the event of issues/engineering work. Imagine trying to thread these new tunnels past all the others! Nightmare.
Yeah i think so, extending underground platforms is costly, and 6 cars of the stock used on the northern city, are longer than 6 cars of D stock (used on the district) according to wiki... tubeman would know more than me about extending platforms though..

On canon street, as far as i am aware it is four tracks from London bridge, so two tracks could be dedicated to service a through line.

Definately muswell hill and crouch end need trains, and thameslink 3000 provides the capacity to do so...
bigbossman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 9th, 2009, 08:06 PM   #3290
Jang0
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 131
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
The cambridge line trains are all going through thameslink when the programme is done... so they are going to London Bridge anyway, along with the trains from kings lynn and peterborough...
Personally I would have no problem sending the Cambridge line trains through this new route anyway because it would be more direct and you can just fill up the Thameslink tunnel with more trains from other places.
Jang0 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 9th, 2009, 08:11 PM   #3291
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jang0 View Post
Personally I would have no problem sending the Cambridge line trains through this new route anyway because it would be more direct and you can just fill up the Thameslink tunnel with more trains from other places.
there aren't that many destinations north of London it can go, almost all the commuter services on the ECML are going to thameslink, also it isn't more direct

thameslink= finsbury park-st pancras-farringdon-city-blackfriars-london bridge
northern city= finsbury park-drayton park- highbury and islington-essex road- old street-moorgate-canon street-london bridge

Northern city line is perfect for a metro imho not for long distance cross london commuter service
bigbossman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 9th, 2009, 08:48 PM   #3292
Jang0
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 131
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
there aren't that many destinations north of London it can go, almost all the commuter services on the ECML are going to thameslink, also it isn't more direct

thameslink= finsbury park-st pancras-farringdon-city-blackfriars-london bridge
northern city= finsbury park-drayton park- highbury and islington-essex road- old street-moorgate-canon street-london bridge

Northern city line is perfect for a metro imho not for long distance cross london commuter service
If you look on a map, you'll see that the Kings Cross/St Pancras diversion is quite a way off to the west, whereas Cannon Street - Moorgate is more on the direct path.

The difficulty I would have with the Northern City line being a Metro, is that the Northern already goes from Old Street - London Bridge, so you would definitely want to add some value that the Northern can't.

So, as I understand your proposal, you'd take Muswell Hill and Crouch End in the North. Where would you go in the South?
Jang0 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 9th, 2009, 08:55 PM   #3293
bigbossman
Registered User
 
bigbossman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South East London
Posts: 3,408
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jang0 View Post
If you look on a map, you'll see that the Kings Cross/St Pancras diversion is quite a way off to the west, whereas Cannon Street - Moorgate is more on the direct path.

The difficulty I would have with the Northern City line being a Metro, is that the Northern already goes from Old Street - London Bridge, so you would definitely want to add some value that the Northern can't.

So, as I understand your proposal, you'd take Muswell Hill and Crouch End in the North. Where would you go in the South?
after thameslink 3000 there would be 5 roads into london bridge

3 tracks- south london line
2- south eastern surburban (via dept and lewisham)
2- kent main line
2- brighton main line
2- brighton main line (stopping)

so take over one of those roads (except the BML which should be for thameslink and only thameslink), preferably Brighton main line stopping to Sutton, then run all ELL via the south london line to Clapham junction... all trains to Crystal palace could run through to east croydon... would likely be totally grade separated too... thats what i'd do anyway!

Oh yeah and just because it's a shorter distance on the map doesn't mean it's quicker. most people would take going around the m25 to taking their chances and cutting through London, there are less stations going via kings cross/st pancras... it serves kings cross/pancras... and it can operate using 12 car trains without extending subterranean stations in tunnels!

Last edited by bigbossman; January 9th, 2009 at 09:09 PM.
bigbossman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 9th, 2009, 09:05 PM   #3294
ajw373
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,249
Likes (Received): 48

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeman View Post
Here you go... It's a jpeg so has lost a bit of colour and crispness:


...They'll have to wait 'til July for this edition, but can speed up the process by buying a copy of the first!
It is probably covered elswhere but how does one buy/order a copy?
ajw373 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 9th, 2009, 11:38 PM   #3295
sotonsi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,563

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
there aren't that many destinations north of London it can go, almost all the commuter services on the ECML are going to thameslink, also it isn't more direct

thameslink= finsbury park-st pancras-farringdon-city-blackfriars-london bridge
northern city= finsbury park-drayton park- highbury and islington-essex road- old street-moorgate-canon street-london bridge
more stops doesn't equal less direct. I'd also point out that the Thameslink route will be 12-car, and the GN&C is 6-car, and would need massive works between Old Street and south of London Bridge (the northern gets in the way south of Moorgate, so you have to get under/level with it north of there). It's definitely a line on the map jobby - it's not worth the cost, but it looks like it'll be easy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
it was gonna be part of the northern in name only in reality, like the wimbleware branch of the district, it was completely grade separate.
I think you mean segregated, rather than grade-separated. However you'd be wrong to some extent. Service pattern planned for the GN&C was Bushey Heath-Moorgate, High Barnet-Moorgate, Finsbury Park-Moorgate. The Northern line would conflict with the Bushey Heath branch in Finchley, and would also have trains to High Barnet. I guess that is like the Wimbleware, but isn't segregated. Then again, the GN&C wasn't planned to merge back in with the Bank branch, causing a mess - which is something!
Quote:
The cambridge line trains are all going through thameslink when the programme is done... so they are going to London Bridge anyway, along with the trains from kings lynn and peterborough...
I think they are playing with this. Peterborough and Letchworth still look on, but to meet demand on the Midland side, the balance has changed. Kings Lynn is removed, and Cambridge line trains are not all going to Thameslink - some of them still will, but not all of them, and there'd probably be some Cambridge - Kings Cross suburban trains as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
after thameslink 3000 there would be 5 roads into london bridge

3 tracks- south london line
2- south eastern surburban (via dept and lewisham)
2- kent main line
2- brighton main line
2- brighton main line (stopping)
other than the shoddy use of the word 'road' (which would mean track, not line), we've discussed this - while those 3 tracks originally came from the South London Line, they don't go there.

What you have is a very complex system. The best tracks to take would be the 2 South London ones, and serve Sutton, Crystal Palace and West Croydon via Norwood. Also frees up more terminal space for the 4 BML tracks (the odd one left of the 11 is for the SErn network, IIRC - look back a few pages if you want, when I followed all the tracks through the area).
Quote:
Oh yeah and just because it's a shorter distance on the map doesn't mean it's quicker. most people would take going around the m25 to taking their chances and cutting through London, there are less stations going via kings cross/st pancras... it serves kings cross/pancras... and it can operate using 12 car trains without extending subterranean stations in tunnels!
Indeed, what matters is speed limit and obstacles. While the obsticles will be removed, the speed limit will remain quite low on Thameslink, then again, the GN&C probably doesn't fare much better.
sotonsi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2009, 12:14 AM   #3296
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
more stops doesn't equal less direct. I'd also point out that the Thameslink route will be 12-car, and the GN&C is 6-car, and would need massive works between Old Street and south of London Bridge (the northern gets in the way south of Moorgate, so you have to get under/level with it north of there). It's definitely a line on the map jobby - it's not worth the cost, but it looks like it'll be easy.
i said all that in my post which you quoted

yes it will be impossible because of crossrail without resiting moorgate platforms... and it is possible before crossrail, it has been planned many times but was always foiled becuase of Bank not the northern, for me the problem is getting under the central west of bank and then getting back up to canon street, that's how i'd do it anyway, gradients likely similar to thameslink north of blackfriars...

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotonsi View Post
I think you mean segregated, rather than grade-separated. However you'd be wrong to some extent. Service pattern planned for the GN&C was Bushey Heath-Moorgate, High Barnet-Moorgate, Finsbury Park-Moorgate. The Northern line would conflict with the Bushey Heath branch in Finchley, and would also have trains to High Barnet. I guess that is like the Wimbleware, but isn't segregated. Then again, the GN&C wasn't planned to merge back in with the Bank branch, causing a mess - which is something!I think they are playing with this.
i quite clearly meant separate, and it was quite clearly a typing error, as i was likening it to the wimbleware where the lines are separate but together... however it could "easily" have been grade separated, a junction after finchley central and both line serve their branches, after all it would've been quadruple track from the tunnel portals to finchley central

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotonsi View Post
Peterborough and Letchworth still look on, but to meet demand on the Midland side, the balance has changed. Kings Lynn is removed, and Cambridge line trains are not all going to Thameslink - some of them still will, but not all of them, and there'd probably be some Cambridge - Kings Cross suburban trains as well.
I hope the plan to run the stansted express into st pancras via goblin comes back on the cards (would add more weight to the goblin electrification case), and they 4 track the lea valley line, then in theory some of the kings lynns and cambridge's could be diverted into st pancras, i dunno what track capacity is like @ the MML part but by all accounts it isn't as congested as at other terminals

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotonsi View Post
other than the shoddy use of the word 'road' (which would mean track, not line), we've discussed this -
never discussed that with you, but thanks for the correction oh great one...


Quote:
Originally Posted by sotonsi View Post
while those 3 tracks originally came from the South London Line, they don't go there. What you have is a very complex system. The best tracks to take would be the 2 South London ones, and serve Sutton, Crystal Palace and West Croydon via Norwood. Also frees up more terminal space for the 4 BML tracks (the odd one left of the 11 is for the SErn network, IIRC - look back a few pages if you want, when I followed all the tracks through the area).
Indeed, what matters is speed limit and obstacles. While the obsticles will be removed, the speed limit will remain quite low on Thameslink, then again, the GN&C probably doesn't fare much better.
i'd still go for the BML slows, but none of this matters anyway

i don't know why you feel the need to analyse my posts, but go ahead...
bigbossman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2009, 01:01 AM   #3297
sotonsi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,563

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbossman View Post
yes it will be impossible because of crossrail without resiting moorgate platforms... and it is possible before crossrail, it has been planned many times but was always foiled becuase of Bank not the northern, for me the problem is getting under the central west of bank and then getting back up to canon street, that's how i'd do it anyway, gradients likely similar to thameslink north of blackfriars...
or like Portlock Hill :P The problem is getting under the Central, and the Thames, when the Northern is too close to them. The Northern is a big problem here, though the vaults make it more difficult.
Quote:
i quite clearly meant separate, and it was quite clearly a typing error,
one where you add a whole word in? That's not a typo, that's a disengaged-braino. Seperate is also the wrong word - the Wimbleware is a good analogy, seperate isn't.
Quote:
then in theory some of the kings lynns and cambridge's could be diverted into st pancras, i dunno what track capacity is like @ the MML part but by all accounts it isn't as congested as at other terminals
It's very congested, it just gives the impression of not being due to all the HS1 platforms. The MML is also very crowded and will grow. Goblin from the Liverpool St-Cambridge route is a good idea, but it would be slow.
Quote:
never discussed that with you
err, in this thread you asked Tubeman for the data of where the London Bridge tracks go, and I challenged that his data was the case nowadays (it is definitely the original system) - I never said I had discussed with you, but it's very strange of you not to read a response to a question you asked. Instead, despite the effort I put in, looking through my Quail, you ignore it, and when you get corrected, you get all uptight because you refused to take the final answer given in the first place (probably because I wrote it). As they say on usenet, plonk.
sotonsi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2009, 01:44 AM   #3298
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
or like Portlock Hill :P The problem is getting under the Central, and the Thames, when the Northern is too close to them. The Northern is a big problem here, though the vaults make it more difficult.one where you add a whole word in? That's not a typo, that's a disengaged-braino. Seperate is also the wrong word - the Wimbleware is a good analogy, seperate isn't.
Separate as in, separate service or route if you will...

Quote:
in this thread you asked Tubeman for the data of where the London Bridge tracks go, and I challenged that his data was the case nowadays (it is definitely the original system) - never said I had discussed with you, but it's very strange of you not to read a response to a question you asked. Instead, despite the effort I put in, looking through my Quail, you ignore it, and when you get corrected, you get all uptight because you refused to take the final answer given in the first place (probably because I wrote it). As they say on usenet, plonk.
i was referring to your "correction", you made as if we had discussed that...
bigbossman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2009, 10:39 AM   #3299
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweek View Post
That looks fantastic, thanks again! Camden Road Midland would've been so useful for me if it had still existed, heh. I don't think a reopening campaign would do much good for it with Kentish Town station so close-by.
I think there might be scope for altering the Thameslink stopping patterns and have a 'very slow' service out as far as perhaps Elstree in addition to the current Luton / slow and Bedford / fast services.

Camden Road is a good candidate to re-open, as would be Finchley Road (creating a better interchange than West Hampstead)... The Elstree & Borehamwood trains could stop at all the stations and allow the Luton trains to skip the likes of Kentish Town, W.Hampstead and Cricklewood. Hopefully there's the capacity for this.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2009, 10:43 AM   #3300
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, i found out yesterday that the northern city line is 6 car capable, not 4 car... meaning it is surely ripe for a southward extension to canon street onto the southern network... however i think crossrails escalators cut out the southward route... surely with thameslink 3000 they can take the oppurtunity to realise the northern heights plan!!
It's still academic at the Notworkers on the Southeastern region are in 4-car units I think, so unless a dedicated stock was built in 3-car sets the capacity still wouldn't be able to be used (i.e. because they can only run in multiples of 4 cars). I'd not heard about the GN&CR being able to accommodate 6 cars before, perhaps it's 6 'short' Tube cars but not 6 mainline EMU cars? Certainly the current stock (313?) look like they have very short cars by NR standards, and they run in 4 car sets.
Tubeman 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 08:36 AM.


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