Newer Works & Re-jigging

Do let me know what you think of my pie-in-the-sky plans

Is it April 1st already??

I like all your ideas so far and think theyre sensible. The Bakerloo though, I would change slightly to branch at Queens Park, make a stop at Old Oak High Speed (west side of it), then junction at North Acton and take over the Ruislip Branch.

In addition, (and in order to keep Castlebar sweet ) take one of the Ealing lines, push to West Ealing then up to Greenford via the Castle Bar route. From Greenford perhaps a limited service onwards to Ruislip Gardens, via Ruislip curve, thence to Uxbridge.

Here's a hybrid of 1 and 4: Extend the Jubilee along the local lines west of Wembley Park, taking over the Uxbridge branch--with off peak trains alternating between Uxbridge and Rayners as the western termini; and peak alternate Uxbridge, Ruislip, and Rayners at that end. The District could run all the way to Uxbridge--with no short workings as the Picc does now; and the Picc could serve Ealing Broadway.

Ben @ 1.19 "In addition, (and in order to keep Castlebar sweet ) take one of the Ealing lines, push to West Ealing then up to Greenford via the Castle Bar route. From Greenford perhaps a limited service onwards to Ruislip Gardens, via Ruislip curve, thence to Uxbridge".



Ben, this, (NOT pushing west from Ealing Broadway, [not wanted, nor practical due to crossrail] but proper use of a pax link from Ruislip Gdns to Hillingdon and Uxbridge), isn't to "keep me sweet". It's something that local people and local councils are campaigning for. It is something that should have been done many years ago, but 'men in suits' are finding reasons to prevent it rather than doing something positive, and find how to make it happen. This idea isn't to please me, but to take the misery away from those who are forced to drive on the A40 because of the power wielded by the self-important who are seemingly determined to prevent it, only because they don't live there. They didn't think of it, so therefore anyone else's idea must be a bad idea.

I think they are frightened that it would be so successful, having prevented it for so long, their own existence would come under the microscope. Bring it on!!

Thanks Ben

This isn't "Can't do, won't do", but "Can't be bothered to look into as l don't live there"

This should be a Central Line divert with no Piccs beyond Ruislip or Rayners. But there is deliberate obstruction for some reason. Concrete thinking still rules in the wrong places, - Nobody ever got shot at for keeping their head below the parapet.

Thanks for humouring my suggestions.

Castlebar: It’s not April 1st yet but it is the RIPAS board so why not eh?

Causton: I would limit my Jubilee to HOTH, using both platforms 4&5 for to allow X-platform interchange in either direction (with a reversing siding beyond the platforms if there is sufficient space before the Uxbridge dive-under). The remaining Mets can all run via platforms 3 and 6, partifularly with signally improvements and simplified stopping patterns north and south of HOTH.

Ben & Alfie – I would take the Bakerloo-West Ruislip option, particularly if (staying in the land of fantasy) we could make an arrangement at QP allowing the Ruislip branch to diverge before the DC and the Harrow & Wealdstone branch converge. This might then create enough space to run a 4tph+ DC service from Watford to New Cross. Could this work with ATO on the Bakerloo?

Alfie – The Central would completely take the Richmond branch with an interchange station at Turnham Green. My District would run 12tph Upminster-Wimbledon, 6tph Tower Hill-Rayners and 6tph Edgware Rd-Uxbridge or vice-versa.

Ruislip – Good idea but don’t you think Uxbridge pax (effectively half of the off-peak Met service) would miss the faster connection to Central London? And how would you make good use of those 8tph Met to Uxbridge displaced by the Jub?

V52gc – 12tph instead of 18tph Heathrow might be acceptable but I’d make the pattern 6tph-T4&123, 6tph-Northfields, 6tph-T123&5 and 6tph-Ealing Braodway. In the peaks (and with ATO) there would be an extra 6tph to Ealing Broadway giving 30tph total on the Picc.

DrOne: There is a reversing siding beyond the platforms... If any infrastructure were required, a scissors crossing between the east and west slow just to the east of Harrow's platforms allowing late running trains to avoid the siding. Not to mention Jub accesss to the slow north of Wembley! Course the problem now would be what to do with Stanmore platform 3; becomes a bit of a white elephant.
I'm sure it was mentioned on here or somewhere that as an alternative it was considered very early on if sending some Jubilees over the Met slow to Harrow/Rayners would be viable. It was felt not for a whole host of small reasons iIrc, which combined made it look less attractive.

Alfie: Yes Greenford is tricky for anything; seemingly so. The last 19m of the Central line platforms are on a gradient that stays constant until on the flyover so I wonder if the platforms could be lengthened that side by ~20m? Haven't found a gradient diagram for the shuttle platform though so this might be totally unacceptable.

Failing that, it all gets a bit tricky, especially if a connection were required between the lines. It would require some imaginative use of the land to the north and west of the station. Thankfully the NNML was 4 track in the vicinity, and there was a temporary siding between the Central's tracks to the west. Assuming HS2 will take two tracks, that leaves one for an emergency NR line if required, and one more that could connect to the southbound shuttle east of the station and the eastbound Central to the west With a new platform to the north at a lower level.

Ruislip: I would be very much against that idea!! Being as it makes all services from Uxbridge ultra slow into London. Look at the stink thats quite rightly being kicked up about the Amersham slows now. Running a District+Jub service instead of a Met+Pic would add 5 stations on each route respectively.

DrOne: Isn't 12tph what Heathrow has at the moment? For how busy it is a couple more tph surely wouldnt go amiss if possible? 18tph total could be split 6 to T4, 6 to T1235, and another 6 to 1235 non-stopping South Ealing-Boston Manor.

Finally wrt to signalling; I'd have bitten the bullet, as NYCS have done, and developed a standard ATO system and specification for progressive roll out across the entire network. I doubt now that LUL will ever have one standard for the future, which will in the long term cost more.