|
|
Post by danrodson on Mar 29, 2012 5:15:32 GMT
Hi.
It is my dream to see all of the London Underground Lines to go from Zones 5/6 on one side through to Zone 1 and then Zones 5/6 on a different side. The line that violates this the most is the two stop Waterloo & City Line so I devised an extension North and Southwest I just want to know peoples comments improvements etc. This is based on the Chelney Line having already been built, and it would be re-gauged like the Central Line etc. The stops in brackets I am not sure about as either they may not make sense or they are stations which would have to be built, and please note I am brand new to this so please do not be too harsh thank you:
Enfield Town Bush Hill Park Edmonton Green Silver Street White Hart Lane Bruce Grove Seven Sisters Stamford Hill Stoke Newington Rectory Road Hackney Downs London Fields Cambridge Heath Bethnal Green (Shoreditch High Street) Aldgate East Aldgate Bank Waterloo (Vauxhall) Pimlico (Ranleigh Gardens) Chelsea Kings Road Fulham Broadway (Parsons Green) (Fulham) Barnes North Chiswick Richmond (Petersham Meadows / Richmond Park) (Ham Common) (Richmond Road) Kingston Surbiton Tolworth Chessington
|
|
|
|
Post by routemaster on Apr 3, 2012 13:13:02 GMT
I always thought about the Waterloo and City line going Bank, Waterloo and then north under the Thames to connect with the old Adlwych line to Holborn, it could also be extended from Holborn to Euston, taking strain off the Northern line and becoming in a way the Northern Express line.
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 811
|
Post by castlebar on Apr 3, 2012 13:40:55 GMT
So from Bank to Euston but via Waterloo and then Aldwych - Holborn. Right.
And you think that it will take pressure off the Northern? I wonder why nobody thought of this before?? I must question as to whether it would be deemed to be an "Express" Line.
You've created about 80% of a circle, so why not make it a complete one? (but don't quote me, you can take all the credit)
|
|
|
|
Post by routemaster on Apr 3, 2012 13:54:44 GMT
So from Bank to Euston but via Waterloo and then Aldwych - Holborn. Right. And you think that it will take pressure off the Northern? I wonder why nobody thought of this before?? I must question as to whether it would be deemed to be an "Express" Line. You've created about 80% of a circle, so why not make it a complete one? (but don't quote me, you can take all the credit) That was on my mind, I didn't want to scare off the accountants ;D with the line doing a complete circle, stopping at Kings Cross, Moorgate then back to Bank. The tunnels do extend a little way beyond Bank, one side does have the travalator in the way though. By having a line going from Waterloo to Aldwych, Holborn and then maybe to Euston how can that not reduce traffic on the Northern line City branch? I have heard and read about various tube line proposals, old and new, but I have never heard anything about extending the line a short way from Waterloo to Aldwych. The idea of it being an express line, goes back to 1930s when the LPTB started digging tunnels down at Clapham/Stockwell and near Tottenhan Court Rd/Goodge Street for an express Northern line.
|
|
|
|
Post by routemaster on Apr 3, 2012 16:40:54 GMT
Interesting.
In my opinion regarding the routing of a new underground line in that direction, it would be desirable to have Victoria Coach Station served directly by the tube. The Waterloo and City line connecting with Victoria Railway Station first and then to a new station just east of the/next to the Coach Station and interchange with the Circle and District lines, then heading west to the Kings Road.
|
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Apr 3, 2012 17:38:36 GMT
All of these schemes would require a reversal (or a spiral!) at Waterloo, given the existing orientation of the W&C platforms there.
However, an independant shuttle to Holborn from one platform, with the Bank service using the other, might be an idea. It might be worth building the connection anyway, for stock transfers, (Waterloo-Aldwych can't be much longer than the Euston-Kings Cross connection between Northern and Piccadilly lines)
|
|
gantshill
How much to carry on to Perivale?
Posts: 301
|
Post by gantshill on Apr 5, 2012 15:38:32 GMT
I have heard and read about various tube line proposals, old and new, but I have never heard anything about extending the line a short way from Waterloo to Aldwych. I first read of the proposal to extend the Aldwych Branch to Waterloo in the first edition of Rails Through the Clay. There is now a whole book about the Aldwych Branch, which contains more information about that proposal. I regret that it never happened, although a three station short shuttle might not have been easy for passengers who might end up changing at both ends.
|
|
|
|
Post by melikepie on Apr 5, 2012 16:14:39 GMT
I'm glad this proposal finally isn't one connecting the Northern City Line to the W&C. I think the service from North of London is a good one, connecting to the City without changing (and making interchange with Liverpool Street, Fenchurch Street and London Bridge a lot easier this way.
Your proposal has reminded me of another idea which I had when I was younger which I'll start in a new thread
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 3,624
|
Post by Ben on Apr 6, 2012 9:32:55 GMT
I like your idea, Dan, of a push to Aldgate East. I would make a subtle change though, by diverging just before Bank with new platforms, following Lombard St and Fenchurch St with a stop at Fenchurch Street NR Station, and at a station between Aldgate and Aldgate East serving both.
norbitonflyer:
That sounds like a really sensible idea. A benefit would be that a common short fleet could be introduced for the Holborn and Bank shuttles, removing the need for the Pic to keep a small fleet of short trains. It would require a new scissors to the north of Waterloo station to negate reversal via the depot. One wonders whether some kind of link to the Bakerloo might be of use aswell to enable engineers or works trains from the south end of the Bakerloo (and its very lengthy extension) to gain access via the Pic to the rest of the system in traffic hours (the Jubilee link being only available outside of traffic hours - potentially a difficult thing if 24 hour service is to come in with the Evos)?
|
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Apr 6, 2012 9:49:21 GMT
When King's College was rebuilt they offered to make provision for an interchange with Temple at Aldwych which was rejected by LT. This would have allowed Aldwych to stay open without the lifts. The extension to Waterloo as originally intended would be useful but a link to the W&C is so impractical.
|
|
|
|
Post by mappman1000 on Apr 21, 2012 10:30:56 GMT
Why wouldn't the Waterloo & City be extended south - east from Waterloo through Borough - Walworth - Peckham Rye alignment. Although the Bakerloo has better scope for that sort of extenstion. I feel the W&C does what it needs to do (Ferry people between Waterloo and the City, as the name suggests), people here are just coming up with ideas for the sake of it...
|
|
|
|
Post by harrow19london on Apr 30, 2012 11:37:38 GMT
^^^I just think its location and alignment could be put to great use connecting areas of London that currently lack and could use tube connections. This could all be done while still maintaining a good link from Waterloo to the City.
Anyhow, my ideal extension includes a station at Blackfriars. Even though it offers no benefit at the moment, I just felt like putting it down for its Thameslink connection, and also because the line already passes directly underneath. Though of course it can be removed from the plans if it really isnt feasible. But who knows, with new suburban destinations on the line, Blackfriars might at some point become a valid option.
North from Bank, the line would go to:
Fenchurch Street (with direct connections to Tower Hill and Tower Gateway) Aldgate (actually between and with direct connections to Aldgate and Aldgate East) Shoreditch High Street (connection to London Overground and Central Line) Weaver's District (at junction of Queensbridge Road and Hackney Road, named after local ward - nice reference to history) South Hackney (connection to London Fields Station, but new name actually represents area - located between LF station and junction of Mare Street and Well Street) Hackney Central (between and with connections to Hackney Central And Hackney Downs stations)
The line would then split. One branch would head north, emerge above ground, and take over the line to Chingford:
Clapton Walthamstow St James Street Wathamstow Central Wood Street Highams Park Chingford
The other branch would head north, emerge above ground and head to Enfield Town:
Rectory Road Stoke Newington Stamford Hill Seven Sisters Bruce Grove White Hart Lane Silver Street Edmonton Green (take over the branch to Enfield Town) Bush Hill Park Enfield Town
South from Waterloo, the line would head for:
Lambeth Palace (under roundabout where Lambeth Bridge, Lambeth Road, Albert Embankment and Lambeth Palace Road meet) Vauxhall Nine Elms Battersea (the top two stations would take the place of the Northern Line extension stations from Kennington, which I think should go to Camberwell, Dulwich and Croydon) Clapham Junction (about time this interchange gets a tube link!) (emerge above ground) Wandsworth Town Putney Barnes
The line would then split at the Hounslow loop, one branch going to:
Barnes Bridge Chiswick Kew Bridge Brentford Syon Lane Isleworth Hounslow
The other would go to:
Mortlake North Sheen Richmond St Margarets Twickenham Whitton
The two branches would then recombine, heading on to:
Feltham (dive back underground) Heathrow Terminal 4 Heathrow Terminals 1, 2 & 3 Heathrow Terminal 5
This route would at last give Clapham Junction and the London Borough of Hackney actual and useful tube links into Central London. Fenchurch Street station also gets a service, meaning all Central termini now have tube access. More areas of South London now have the tube too.
The Heathrow section would supplement and offer an alternative to the Piccadilly Line's West End service by providing a link to the City and the South Bank. It may however face dire competition from the faster Crossrail service, in which case the line would simply enhance local employment by improving access for potential employees from more of the surrounding area. The direct connections between each terminal (unlike before where there'd only be branches and transfers) means travelling from one terminal to another by train/tube is now a lot simpler. However, if going to Heathrow is not feasible, a terminus somewhere in South London may be better.
Boring from Bank and Waterloo would be largely impossible, as either end of the terminating tunnels are travelators, passage ways and other obstaces. New, deeper tunnels and station platforms would need to be constructed underneath each.
Bear in mind, some of you may find this route a little bit bollocks! This is largely revision procrastination, but I still think this route is worth considering - excellent connections, and a lot of first times (Hackney, Clapham Juntion, Fenchurch Street etc etc).
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 811
|
Post by castlebar on Apr 30, 2012 12:26:52 GMT
"Bear in mind, some of you may find this route a little bit bollocks!"
Not at all!!
Not just "a little bit", but "absolute and complete"!!
|
|
|
|
Post by mappman1000 on Apr 30, 2012 20:04:51 GMT
Bank - Fenchurch Street - Aldgate - Shoreditch High Street alignment is a bit twisty and turny!
|
|
|
|
Post by revupminster on Apr 30, 2012 20:21:37 GMT
The most likely scenario for the line is platform doors and unmanned trains.
|
|