4 ms·
vidarh 18 hours ago | parent | context | flag | on: What Transport for London can learn about us from ... >> The problem for your case is that there are not en
by pasc1878 3y ago
vidarh 18 hours ago | parent | context | flag | on: What Transport for London can learn about us from ...
>> The problem for your case is that there are not enough train paths to add a new train,
>I can find no indications that the lines in question are anywhere near capacity. Even if they were, adding new track to create such an arc around London would be far cheaper than continuing the crazy efforts add capacity in the centre.
The limit is where does the train go on a Guilford to Croydon run - there is no room in Croydon for it to turn round - see London Overground neededing to create a third line in West Croydon.
>> The speed of the services also matter as the Clapham Junction to Guilford direct train is significantly than the Clapham Junction to Guildford via Epsom.
> It sounds like you've misunderstood me. Clapham Junction to Guildford via Epsom is certainly not what I was arguing for. That'd entirely defeat the point of connecting towns outside or on the edges of London while bypassing the overloaded central routes and stations. If you're already on the South Western Mainline I fully agree it makes no sense to go off it before you can get directly onto the line to Guildford.
No you have misunderstood me - because the CJ->G journey is over straighter tracks it can run faster than on slow lines elsewhere and mis out stops.
The main point is that time on a railway is not only determined by track miles but also type of track and other trains on the tracks.
>> due both to track speed and number of stops.
>As pointed out, on the line I actually talked about, track speed is sufficient, though not great. But gradually upgrading tracks on a relatively lightly loaded line is also a lot easier and cheaper than building new lines - the point was not to avoid the need for upgrades, but that it is possible to start a service without having to build entirely new lines.
For upgrading costs see both East coast mainline and Great Western - which is why HS2 is not an upgrade of the West Coast Mainline.
The speed between CJ->G is not really due to better tracks it is due to having 4 tracks so fast trains can overtake slow ones. Now there is no way to put 4 tracks in Croydon to Epsom and I suspect to Effingham Junction there are houses backing on to the line, many bridges etc.
Timing on railways in not just down to direct lines but you have to plan Southern Region as a whole.
I also think Croydon to Guildford would never be sustainable - there are many other places that need upgrading first. Especially as the link is already reasonable - the speed up would not be sufficient.
- vidarh 3y ago> The limit is where does the train go on a Guilford to Croydon run - there is no room in Croydon for it to turn round - see London Overground neededing to create a third line in West Croydon. Trains already follow the entire route, which is sufficient proof that this problem is solvable. Croydon doesn't need to be the first/final stop - that's entirely besides the point. Indeed, this specific journey doesn't need to be viable - that too is entirely besides the point. > No you have misunderstood me - because the CJ->G journey is over straighter tracks it can run faster than on slow lines elsewhere and mis out stops. The main point is that time on a railway is not only determined by track miles but also type of track and other trains on the tracks. That's fine but irrelevant. As I've pointed out, journey times for the individual legs of the route are fast enough to make it viable. And there is no need for it to be able to run faster to miss out stops. It'd be a nice bonus to be able to, but it's not needed for the argument I've made at all. > I also think Croydon to Guildford would never be sustainable - there are many other places that need upgrading first. It certainly isn't sustainable. That is exactly the point I was making: Planning based on what is sustainable is entirely backwards thinking when optimising transport. You need to plan based on what you can make sustainable as part of driving larger changes. And again, the specific journey is irrelevant. Not the point. > Especially as the link is already reasonable - the speed up would not be sufficient. ... but this is just not true. The link is not reasonable. That was my starting point: The existing connection is enough of a hassle that it stopped my former boss moving his company to Guildford because half his staff would leave if he did. I was one of the one who would have quit over that. Had there been direct trains from Croydon that were were regular enough and direct I'd have been fine. Even without trains going any faster or skipping any stations based on existing travel times on existing trains between Croydon and Epsom and Epsom and Guildford.