|
|
| Re: 93 NEW PHOTOS of the London Underground and National Rail (Was: Cockfosters) (367931) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: 93 NEW PHOTOS of the London Underground and National Rail (Was: Cockfosters) |
|
|
Posted by Rail Blue on Thu Jan 11 13:16:47 2007, in response to Re: 93 NEW PHOTOS of the London Underground and National Rail (Was: Cockfosters), posted by Max Roberts on Thu Jan 11 09:33:37 2007. Southampton to Birmingham might not benefit, but Southampton to Nottingham or Peterborough would, and the focus of all services along one route would encourage finding ways of speeding up services on the Southampton line, reducing the time disadvantage even of Southampton to Birmingham.It certainly sounds like a totally weird scheme. I doubt very much could be done to improve service between Basingstoke and Clapham Junction - it's already relatively straight, level, fast, and sensibly laid-out. There are other precedents for keeping long distance inter-city services along certain trunk routes even when there is a time disadvantage because the major traffic flows are best catered for. Hence, West Sussex trains travel via East Croydon (or even worse, Hove and East Corydon) when via Sutton is more direct, and in theory should be much faster. Well there are the other issues there of: 1) there being a bazillion local trains between Dorking and Balham 2) certain parts of that line are very slow indeed (notably the Mitcham Junction area) The existing service to Horsham via Sutton takes 1h12. Ultimately removing the seven stops at Cheam, Ewell East, Ashtead, Box Hill & Westhumble, Holmwood, Ockley, and Warnham is unlikely to bring it down to the 53 mins of the route via East Croydon. I can check where the portals were located, but it would not surprise me if they were before Clapham Junction was reached in the south. That would be interesting. |
|
(There are no responses to this message.)
|
|