Recent content by mr_jrt

If you left the Neasden platforms as they are, I wonder if you could knock the siding/headshunt north of the platform though under the road as a new running line, which would then give you your cross platform dual island layout. Alternatively, shift the Chiltern lines south, and have the same...

You know, I read this the other day, and largely agreed, I think it would be nice, but won't happen. But you know what, this is a forum of intelligent reasonably-informed people, so why not ask the questions and have a discussion? :) ...but for once in my life, I'll be good and do so in the...

From: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/west-london-orbital-consultation.307477/post-7960948 You know, I read this the other day, and largely agreed, I think it would be nice, but won't happen. But you know what, this is a forum of intelligent reasonably-informed people, so why not ask the...

Indeed. If you want West Hampstead from most of the line, there's always the existing LO Richmond-Stratford service, though the interchange at OOC will need to be good. Serving Cricklewood on its own given the existing Thameslink service provision was never going to wash its face in a MVP...

Surely that's no different to a day shift worker having to buy a peak single to get to work and an off-peak single to get home? Arguably paying key workers better would be the ideal solution there? As for the earlier point about simplification being worse...I don't see it as a necessary...

I appreciate it's a bit glib, but my personal opinion is that the railway serves a valuable-but-difficult-to-quantify social benefit, so the obsession over revenue is problematic, to say the least. With that in mind, my proposal is simple. Ideally, reduce off-peak fares to the railcard...

Hard agree, but I can see how it was an easy thing to cut to reduce costs. It would be horrendously disruptive, but it could presumably be added at a later date by reconfiguring the southernmost turnback into a through line to permit the other lines to be taken OOU whilst the flyover was...

An older design had the three turnbacks extending up the NNML corridor under a flyover for the up Crossrail line, with two of them intended for linking to the WCML via the Dudding Hill line. The flyover was removed when the link was cancelled. You can see one of the designs (abet a low-res...

I suspect I already know the answer to this (TfL want you using contactless, even though it doesn't play nice with more complex situations), but figured I'd ask here anyway for confirmation and to vent a bit. :) The other day I made a trip from Brighton to Watford to meet some friends, with an...

Another MML candidate I'd like to throw in would be Burton Latimer. It's quite a gap between Kettering and Wellingborough, it's a four-track electrified section, and has the EMR connect service already running over it.

Recalled having this discussion in the past, and have the info (with links to maps) in my old post: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/great-western-electrification-progress.83452/page-184#post-3103125

Thank goodness for that.

..and here's my concept from an even older one, 10 years ago! https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/new-oxford-station-design-concepts.124180/page-2#post-2487694 &tldr; I proposed abolishing the through roads and using the space to get 6 through platforms and possibly even 2-3 bays.

Oh, thank jeebus, at last, some movement. The reception along there is shockingly bad, made all the worse by, at most, only half the Thameslink trains actually having their wifi installed.

I like to imagine that there would now be a LO service branching south at Victoria Park, heading south through Poplar, running down into a tunnel at Mudchute, and popping back up in Greenwich Park and running to Clapham Junction. :)