|
|
| Re: London news (63430) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: London news |
|
|
Posted by David Fairthorne on Mon Mar 14 13:58:38 2005, in response to Re: London news, posted by Max Roberts on Mon Mar 14 13:17:22 2005. there is a risk that a tram with on-street running would be a shambles. Thats why they were got rid of to begin with.You are probably right. The same argument applies to the proposed west London tram route along the Uxbridge Road. We won't see anything at all with Crossrail and ELX clogging up the planning process, The downsized Crossrail is terribly expensive for what it is, and they still haven't figured out who will pay for it. My feeling is that the ELL extension money could have been better spent, but it's probably too late now. Then there's Thameslink 2000, which is still in the pipeline; there's supposed to be another public inquiry soon. I have my doubts about that plan too, because I don't see the need for 24 tph through the Thames link, and I doubt if it's practical to run so many relatively infrequent and long distance services via that route. So what would be worthwhile? I suggest: South: An underground extension into south central London, starting in the direction of Streatham. Southeast: Construction of the missing platform 7 at London Bridge (replacing platform 8), allowing all trains to stop there. Southwest: Platform extensions on the suburban lines from Waterloo, allowing 10 or 12 car trains to run. Canary Wharf could perhaps be served by extending the Metropolitan line from Aldgate, as Rail Blue has suggested. |
|
|
|