There is zero point skipping stations as you will just catch the previous train up.
That is true. I had assumed that maybe some passengers would want to head directly into the city but I do see it probably wouldn’t work. My main idea was maybe for a few PNER services a day but I guess that wouldn’t work particularly well.
The great thing about the London terminal stations, at least in theory, is that people have time to wait, and board trains, without being rushed. That isn't the same for commuter trains, where passengers don't tend to have the same needs.
yeah. I should have mentioned more that they would maybe add an extra platform at Blackfriars, I should have mentioned that in the post. Still probably not a great idea.
Yeah, with the current layout you can’t turn round from the north at Blackfriars (unless you use the bi-di, blocking the line in the other direction and causing chaos), and a new platform wouldn’t be easy…
Yeah, its probably best left with Thameslink trains only.
You’ve also forgotten, (or overlooked), that there’s no overhead power past City Thameslink, so your proposed trains cannot actually get to Blackfriars. (I’m assuming nobody would seriously want to use a bimode on diesel between a couple of stations a few hundred yards apart.)
Would be interesting to see what it would make of the incline though.
This is one of them - I think City Thameslink-Blackfriars is about 1 in 30?
Not through the Thameslink tunnel.
Not quite the same thing, but back in the dim and distant past the LNWR ran a 'City to City' service from Wolverhampton, Birmingham and Coventry into Broad Street. IIRC there was even an on-train secretary provided at one point so that passengers could work while they travelled.
The good old days of direct Reading to Brighton services, via Kensington Olympia!
With the way it gets sometimes I wouldn’t mind that!!
Ooh, that sounds interesting? Do you know anywhere I might be able to find information on that.
A little from David Turner here on the typist service:
davidturnerrailway.wordpress.com
A very interesting read. Thank you!A little from David Turner here on the typist service:
Working City to City: The LNWR’s on-train typist service of 1910
I am sure from the very earliest days of the railways passengers must have done work on the train. It is, some might say, a tradition of the travelling businessperson. However, the declining cost a…
The typist doesn't seem to have lasted terribly long. The train itself was one of the lesser casualties of WW1.
Or indeed Ramsgate, Canterbury and Dover.
Yes the problem with those sidings is a train from the north would have to reverse in City Thameslink to access/depart from them. Even if this were not an issue there is also the problem that an Intercity service needs time to be checked clear before going into a turnback siding, time which doesn't exist in the core. If Farringdon had at least 1 additional platform this would be addressed, but there is of course no room for this.
If only someone had constructed two main-line tracks from Farringdon to say, Moorgate, next to the Metropolitan line tracks, to allow trains from St Pancras to go there!
Good point, however I think as well as the platform length issue, the core would struggle even more if a flat junction that retained use existed there.
