2.5 month closure of Watford DC Lines to Euston

On Jul 1, 8:40 pm, wensleyd...@pacersplace.org.uk (Neil Williams)
wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 11:42:21 -0700 (PDT), MIG
>
> <googles...@doreenbird.co.uk> wrote:
> >A similar distance all-stations service runs to Shenfield, without the
> >same apparent impression of being grotty and slow, but of course it
> >includes long trains on AC that can go faster than 30 mph.
>
> Yet the 508s can go faster than that on DC - 70mph, as I recall - and
> the normal operating speed on Merseyrail is, I think, 50.
>
> There is no good reason why the DC lines need to be such a poor
> relation to Merseyrail.  If they weren't, more people might choose to
> use them.

Maybe it's down to the power supply and then, given that there's no
point, not maintaining them for higher speeds.

On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 10:08:01 +0100, <trains@davidhwild.me.uk> wrote:

>In article <4869c0a4.297922066@news.>,
> Neil Williams <wensleydale@pacersplace.org.uk> wrote:
>> >Useable platform length is 6 coaches for the DC lines
>
>> All of it? If so, why do they never run 6 given the overcrowding?
>> There is no shortage of 508s...
>I believe that there is a power limitation north of Harrow which prevents
>the regular use of 6 car trains.
>
According to several crew at the time of their imposition on the DC
line a fully-loaded 6-coach 313 (and presumably 508) tended to trip
the breakers in any DC line substation; the actual cause was possibly
2 or more doing it at the same time in the same SS's area.

On Jul 1, 5:32 am, "Peter Masson" <peter.mass...@> wrote:
> <jonnyboy...@> wrote
>
>
>
> > As for Chris Tolley's comment: "... and thus give people the
> > opportunity of picking up the Victoria Line
> > at Highbury and Islington...", a basic knowledge of London geography
> > would tell you that H&I is 3 miles to the east of South Hampstead -
> > hardly convenient!
>
> If the long-term plan to divert the DC away from Euston ever resurfaces
> there would seem to be a case for reopening Primrose Hill and building an
> intercahnge with Chalk Farm.
>
> Peter

I have always thought that would be a good move. Although DC would no
longer run to Euston, Euston would still be accessible with one easy
change. I say easy because the Northorn Line is close to the surface
at that point and the Primrose Hill platforms are not far away.

Adrian

On 2 Jul, 18:15, 1506 <adrian_auerhud...m> wrote:
>
> I have always thought that would be a good move.  Although DC would no
> longer run to Euston, Euston would still be accessible with one easy
> change.  I say easy because the Northorn Line is close to the surface
> at that point and the Primrose Hill platforms are not far away.
>
> Adrian

... and have you tried getting on the Northern Line at peak time at
Chalk Farm?!?! There is a perfectly good transport link between
Kilburn High Road, South Hampstead, Chalk Farm and Camden Town in the
31 bus. Why replicate this route with a rail service?

These are not just lines on a map... there are people following those
lines trying to get around London to go about their daily lives. Why
should the hundreds of people who use each and every train to and from
Euston (from stations far further north than just Kilburn High Road)
lose a vital service, even for 2.5 months??

On 29 Jun, 22:03, Charles Ellson <char...@ellson.> wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 09:53:25 GMT, Chris  Tolley <cj...@supanet.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >jonnyboy...@ wrote:
>
> >> Instead of inconveniencing just the NLL travellers and bending over
> >> backwards to provide shuttle trains, replacement buses for that part
> >> of NLL that will be closed, London Overground in their wisdom have
> >> decided to divert ALL the Watford DC line trains from Euston to
> >> Stratford via Primrose Hill and Camden Road.
>
> >... and thus give people the opportunity of picking up the Victoria Line
> >at Highbury and Islington, which for a good number of them would either
> >be what they would do at Euston anyway or else will get them to Euston
> >so they can carry on in whichever direction they were going.
>
> >Trains from Harrow & Wealdstone will presumably still be going to
> >Euston.
>
> A fat lot of use for the passengers travelling from stations south
> thereof.

Perhaps they should stop the faster trains at Queens Park (at least in
the peak)

On Jul 12, 2:58 pm, Paul Weaver <use...@isorox.co.uk> wrote:
> On 29 Jun, 22:03, Charles Ellson <char...@ellson.> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 09:53:25 GMT, Chris  Tolley <cj...@supanet.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > >jonnyboy...@ wrote:
>
> > >> Instead of inconveniencing just the NLL travellers and bending over
> > >> backwards to provide shuttle trains, replacement buses for that part
> > >> of NLL that will be closed, London Overground in their wisdom have
> > >> decided to divert ALL the Watford DC line trains from Euston to
> > >> Stratford via Primrose Hill and Camden Road.
>
> > >... and thus give people the opportunity of picking up the Victoria Line
> > >at Highbury and Islington, which for a good number of them would either
> > >be what they would do at Euston anyway or else will get them to Euston
> > >so they can carry on in whichever direction they were going.
>
> > >Trains from Harrow & Wealdstone will presumably still be going to
> > >Euston.
>
> > A fat lot of use for the passengers travelling from stations south
> > thereof.
>
> Perhaps they should stop the faster trains at Queens Park (at least in
> the peak)-

I've been suggesting that for ages, but apparently it would cause
total chaos.

On 12 Jul, 22:05, Charles Ellson <char...@ellson.> wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 11:11:40 -0700 (PDT), MIG
>
>
>
> <googles...@doreenbird.co.uk> wrote:
> >On Jul 12, 2:58 pm, Paul Weaver <use...@isorox.co.uk> wrote:
> >> On 29 Jun, 22:03, Charles Ellson <char...@ellson.> wrote:
> >> > On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 09:53:25 GMT, Chris  Tolley <cj...@supanet.com>
> >> > wrote:
>
> >> > >jonnyboy...@ wrote:
>
> >> > >> Instead of inconveniencing just the NLL travellers and bending over
> >> > >> backwards to provide shuttle trains, replacement buses for that part
> >> > >> of NLL that will be closed, London Overground in their wisdom have
> >> > >> decided to divert ALL the Watford DC line trains from Euston to
> >> > >> Stratford via Primrose Hill and Camden Road.
>
> >> > >... and thus give people the opportunity of picking up the Victoria Line
> >> > >at Highbury and Islington, which for a good number of them would either
> >> > >be what they would do at Euston anyway or else will get them to Euston
> >> > >so they can carry on in whichever direction they were going.
>
> >> > >Trains from Harrow & Wealdstone will presumably still be going to
> >> > >Euston.
>
> >> > A fat lot of use for the passengers travelling from stations south
> >> > thereof.
>
> >> Perhaps they should stop the faster trains at Queens Park (at least in
> >> the peak)-
>
> >I've been suggesting that for ages, but apparently it would cause
> >total chaos.
>
> A few minutes standing at Queens Park in the morning rush hour will
> probably also give that impression. The slow lines were IME always
> fairly busy at that point, not just with passenger services but also
> with ECS movements between Willesden/Wembley and Euston. Had there
> been room to expand sideways and put slow platforms on loops then it
> might work but that would probably be more easily done in the vicinity
> of Kilburn Park station if money was no object.

Probably be easier at Willesden IMHO.

On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 16:28:01 -0700 (PDT), Jamie Thompson
<jamierocks@> wrote:

>On 12 Jul, 22:05, Charles Ellson <char...@ellson.> wrote:
>> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 11:11:40 -0700 (PDT), MIG
>>
>>
>>
>> <googles...@doreenbird.co.uk> wrote:
>> >On Jul 12, 2:58 pm, Paul Weaver <use...@isorox.co.uk> wrote:
>> >> On 29 Jun, 22:03, Charles Ellson <char...@ellson.> wrote:
>> >> > On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 09:53:25 GMT, Chris  Tolley <cj...@supanet.com>
>> >> > wrote:
>>
>> >> > >jonnyboy...@ wrote:
>>
>> >> > >> Instead of inconveniencing just the NLL travellers and bending over
>> >> > >> backwards to provide shuttle trains, replacement buses for that part
>> >> > >> of NLL that will be closed, London Overground in their wisdom have
>> >> > >> decided to divert ALL the Watford DC line trains from Euston to
>> >> > >> Stratford via Primrose Hill and Camden Road.
>>
>> >> > >... and thus give people the opportunity of picking up the Victoria Line
>> >> > >at Highbury and Islington, which for a good number of them would either
>> >> > >be what they would do at Euston anyway or else will get them to Euston
>> >> > >so they can carry on in whichever direction they were going.
>>
>> >> > >Trains from Harrow & Wealdstone will presumably still be going to
>> >> > >Euston.
>>
>> >> > A fat lot of use for the passengers travelling from stations south
>> >> > thereof.
>>
>> >> Perhaps they should stop the faster trains at Queens Park (at least in
>> >> the peak)-
>>
>> >I've been suggesting that for ages, but apparently it would cause
>> >total chaos.
>>
>> A few minutes standing at Queens Park in the morning rush hour will
>> probably also give that impression. The slow lines were IME always
>> fairly busy at that point, not just with passenger services but also
>> with ECS movements between Willesden/Wembley and Euston. Had there
>> been room to expand sideways and put slow platforms on loops then it
>> might work but that would probably be more easily done in the vicinity
>> of Kilburn Park station if money was no object.
>
>Probably be easier at Willesden IMHO.
>
Possibly not, that would involve two extra stops on the DC line and a
longer walk between platforms with the added time making staying on
the train until Euston probably more attractive. Anyway, they
flattened Willesden main line because it was allegedly too close to
Euston to stop the trains with the (in 1965) newer and faster electric
services.

> Possibly not, that would involve two extra stops on the DC line and a
> longer walk between platforms with the added time making staying on
> the train until Euston probably more attractive.

If the DC doesn't serve Euston any more, it's a moot point ;)

> Anyway, they flattened Willesden main line because it was allegedly
> too close to Euston to stop the trains with the (in 1965) newer and
> faster electric services.

That's the first I've ever heard of that. I've always heard it was a
bit of a (as much a noticeable thing like demolishing stuff at that
scale could be) mistake. Besides, if Willesden Junction is too close,
then what about Queen's Park?

On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 04:47:19 -0700 (PDT), Jamie Thompson
<jamierocks@> wrote:

>> Possibly not, that would involve two extra stops on the DC line and a
>> longer walk between platforms with the added time making staying on
>> the train until Euston probably more attractive.
>
>If the DC doesn't serve Euston any more, it's a moot point ;)
>
>> Anyway, they flattened Willesden main line because it was allegedly
>> too close to Euston to stop the trains with the (in 1965) newer and
>> faster electric services.
>
>That's the first I've ever heard of that. I've always heard it was a
>bit of a (as much a noticeable thing like demolishing stuff at that
>scale could be) mistake. Besides, if Willesden Junction is too close,
>then what about Queen's Park?
>
That's where Paul Weaver and MIG sent us off down this path earlier on
with :-

>> Perhaps they should stop the faster trains at Queens Park (at least in
>> the peak)-
>
>I've been suggesting that for ages, but apparently it would cause
>total chaos.

As well as the "too close to Euston" element there is also the matter
of any additional stops having a knock-on effect on following trains.
With stopping at Queens Park being plan A (failed) and putting in
platforms on passing loops in a sensible position being plan B
(failed) then plan C might be a main line to DC line connection
somewhere in the vicinity of Kensal Green allowing suitable (in terms
of service or electrical equipment) trains from the north to reach
London via the DC line or (I think there's enough room to install one)
terminate and use a reversing siding south of Queens Park.