Search results

Good point although in NATO phonetics it's Bravo for B! Still given our single sample size of 'Delta', could well be what they're using here for the line names to work out possible colours, signage, and branding guidelines.

More likely just using Greek letters as the placeholders.

According to the June 2023 commissioners report, this doesn't seem to be about raising the frequency in the core at all, just extending services to OOC:

Well I couldn't think of anything else :D

There are thousands of 'software based' signalling systems deployed on thousands of railways around the world, the majority of them do not suffer from daily reliability problems.

"London Terminals" and "London Thameslink" aren't exactly specific destinations

That's exactly what's happening, the current national government believe rail services should pay for themselves and make a profit, whereas the London government believes rail is a public service that is a means to generate economic activity and persuade people out of their polluting cars.

Abbey Wood can reverse 15tph and did so for months during the peaks in the earliest stage of the Elizabeth Line opening, so a 15tph service should be possible there. As for the Shenfield branch, certainly some of the early timetables featured a 16tph peak (12 to the core, 4 from Gidea Park to...

I believe that GWR has moved the Didcot Parkway service to the fast lines in the May timetable. Does this mean Elizabeth Line is now the only passenger service on the reliefs?

This was discussed earlier in the thread - all (or most) the stations on the GEML and GWML would need further platform extensions, as would Heathrow, which is underground directly below an active airport. Would be eye-wateringly expensive and disruptive.

The Gidea Park to Liverpool St rush direction services don't actually need to be 345s. But this is only a couple of trains.

I was more thinking about whether the Abbey Wood to Maidenhead/Readings could be lengthened, but I'm sure the residents of Ealing wouldn't enjoy having their stations bulldozed yet again. Historically it seems to me that TfL have almost always gone for frequency uplift first , lengthening later...

The biggest problem would be Heathrow, where the platforms are only long enough for 9 cars, but I believe I've also read that 11 cars would foul some of the crossovers in the area. This would be extremely expensive to fix as it's obviously underground, but also under the airport's runways...

Given HS2 will be terminating at Old Oak Common for 5 years (or forever) and how many passengers the line is already carrying, I think at the very least TfL is going to need more rolling stock to take the line to 28 or 30tph. I also wonder how many more paths they could find in the western...

Obviously I don't know for sure, but it could either be some snags they're resolving, or something to do with the oversite development.

I saw TfL were describing one such incident as a 'casualty on the track' recently and wondered if that was a change in official wording, as they always used to use 'person under a train'.

I wonder how the Chiswick NIMBYs will feel about the additional crossing closures on Bollo Lane

Happens on the SSR though doesn't it? H&Cs occasionally turn into Circles or Districts and vice versa.

I would separate and name the DLR routes too. The category/mode is obviously Light Rail, so that's a fourth.

Sounds good to me