Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
The gap between KX and Farringdon on the Met and Circle is I think a rather longer gap than most others on the line - in that area there has often been talk over the years of the usefulness of an intermediate station (though how easy it would be - with the tracks weaving round Thameslink's City Widened Lines along there, and what's built on top, and so on - is unclear). And it is an area which is getting busier for various reasons.
If there were to be the resources to build underground stations in parts of central London that are further from existing ones, Mount Pleasant would certainly be a candidate.
The gap between KX and Farringdon on the Met and Circle is I think a rather longer gap than most others on the line - in that area there has often been talk over the years of the usefulness of an intermediate station (though how easy it would be - with the tracks weaving round Thameslink's City Widened Lines along there, and what's built on top, and so on - is unclear). And it is an area which is getting busier for various reasons.
If there were to be the resources to build underground stations in parts of central London that are further from existing ones, Mount Pleasant would certainly be a candidate.
Sorry, perhaps my post wasn't sufficiently clear. I was replying to a post which implied that Aldwych was no longer required as TfL had Charing Cross. The latter is very definitely 1970s+...
I suspect that if a film company asked, or even speculatively with an eye on filming contracts, it would be very easy to make one of the two platforms at Charing Cross look 1930s / 1950s, and it's probably a lot cheaper to do that than to try to retain Aldwych as anything other than an empty station?
I suspect that if a film company asked, or even speculatively with an eye on filming contracts, it would be very easy to make one of the two platforms at Charing Cross look 1930s / 1950s, and it's probably a lot cheaper to do that than to try to retain Aldwych as anything other than an empty station?
Indeed, it's remarkable what set designers can do. Half of central Manchester was dressed as New York for a week, for the filming of about 30 seconds of exterior footage for Alfie. Lamp posts, road markings, street signs, the lot were all installed and then torn down straight after — and it was still cheaper to do all that than pay a fee to NYC to close a road for a few days!
That was in 2004, before photorealistic CGI was really available. Nowadays you don't even need a set at all, nor even a 'greenscreen' — The Mandalorian's exterior scenes were prety much all shot against a high-resolution room-scale computer display, which always knows where the camera is and thus the perspective is perfect. I had no idea that the actors were not just in a real-life desert canyon when I watched it for the first time!
That technology could easily be used to digitally recreate Aldwych on a soundstage in Elstree, and nobody would be any the wiser.
I suspect that if a film company asked, or even speculatively with an eye on filming contracts, it would be very easy to make one of the two platforms at Charing Cross look 1930s / 1950s, and it's probably a lot cheaper to do that than to try to retain Aldwych as anything other than an empty station?
I was thinking more do one up to look very old but leave the other in 1970s style - then they can cover film requests for either era at one easily accessible location - which is also still rail connected and they could bring in any era of tube sized stock as well...
I've been to both on Hidden London tours, (Disused) Charing Cross indeed looks more "70s" as-is whereas Aldwych now has no many different bits of design here and there its hard to say where it belongs. Anything can be achieved with enough work of course.
The BBC created a realistic station and tunnel set for the 1968 Doctor Who story, The Web of Fear, so with modern CGI and a bigger budget fil producers could easily create something bespoke if they don't need a "real" train running through it
I was thinking more do one up to look very old but leave the other in 1970s style - then they can cover film requests for either era at one easily accessible location - which is also still rail connected and they could bring in any era of tube sized stock as well...
Charing Cross has more to hide, Aldwych less it's very basic as there wasn't as much work done to it over the years..
Both have a role in filming in different ways, for Aldwych if they needed to they can build up or put together prefabricated mock up tube train on site with flanged rollers to stimulate a tube train.
----------
I remember watching an Anerican series where they used old subway trains in the New York transit museum with the production crew rocking the train to stimulate train motion and the motor noise added afterward.
I suspect that if a film company asked, or even speculatively with an eye on filming contracts, it would be very easy to make one of the two platforms at Charing Cross look 1930s / 1950s, and it's probably a lot cheaper to do that than to try to retain Aldwych as anything other than an empty station?
I remember watching an Anerican series where they used old subway trains in the New York transit museum with the production crew rocking the train to stimulate train motion and the motor noise added afterward.
Although I did not specify Mount Pleasant as the place within Clerkenwell that would be the optimal site for a new Underground station, this is the location that I had in mind. Of course I would expect all works to respect the mothballed (and now touristic) sections of Mail Rail so that Mail Rail could be reopened, if ever the bean counters saw fit - or were replaced with people who believe that Mail Rail is a valuable asset and extended it as required.
I am aware of the proposed subsurface station between Farringdon and Kings Cross but how feasible would it be? Especially with the Widened Lines /
Thameslink trains running so close on one side? Oh and also, how long would the disruption to services be whilst the route (both lines - subsurface and TL) are closed for the major earthworks?
When I visited Mail Rail my walk from Kings Cross station to Mount Pleasant took longer than just the suggested '5 - 10 minutes'!
Yes I am being a crayonista, but not wholly ... London Transport wanted to extend the Piccadilly line from Aldwych to Waterloo and they even got the necessary legal powers to build this. I suppose that Parliament will have imposed a time limit for the works to be completed (its happened elsewhere with other extensions) and that therefore these powers will have now lapsed.
My thinking process has always been along the theme of having an inner city subterranean rail link which would have cost much time, money and effort to build just sitting there not being used,,, so what could be done to make productive use of it?
The Waterloo idea comes from it always having been a London Transport desire and the Clerkenwell idea coming from this area being unserved and wanting to see how to remedy this.
The idea of then going on to Victoria comes from when I've tried to make that very journey, having travelled to Waterloo via the Waterloo & City Line and then visiting the former Ian Allan bookshop. I ended up going by bus - it seemed to take ages (probably would have been quicker to go by train, changing at Embankment) . It seemed (still seems) crazy that such important London terminus stations do not have a proper railway link. I understand about how (when it was built) it was decided that the Metropolitan District Railway could not serve Waterloo station - because Waterloo station was south of the river (Thames). Btw, my journey did not pass through Clapham Junction and at no time did I ever consider taking a train that way. Train fares on the Southern are noticeably higher than other routes.
Although it would make sense to include a connection with the Waterloo and City line I would only expect this to be used for empty stock transfers and to end the use of the crane. The already existing link with the Piccadilly line at Holborn would also be retained, but again only for empty stock transfers.
I did not advocate a fully Circle service because there are already good enough connections between the Kings Cross / St Pancras / Euston area and Paddington. But I have thought about 'beyond Victoria'.
One option would be to end here!
Another would be to go to Marylebone via Marble Arch, another would be to Paddington, with the platforms directly linked to Paddington at its northern end and Lancaster Gate at its southern end. In theory it would be nice to see this routed via Kensington Gore / Royal Albert Hall, as this is another area that London's existing railways do not serve. But the large amount of parkland here suggests that there would not be sufficient passengers to justify a station, whilst nearby South Kensington is just crying out for greater capacity - and has at least one station tunnel that is already built - but not used! In some ways going to South Kensington would help relieve the overcrowded central London portion of the Piccadilly line, something that Crossrail won't do.
(The self-inflicted injuries causing the overcrowding of the suburban north London Piccadilly line in the Wood Green area are outside the scope of this plan - all I will say is that I see this as a direct result of the idiotic closure of two perfectly good rail services via Noel Park & Wood Green and Muswell Hill.)
Another option would be to revisit a WW2 plan for tube trains to Yeading, which would make this a very different type of service. But its also unlikely to become a reality - if only because the bean counters will moan about it possibly abstracting passengers from Crossrail line 1. As we know, the proposed tramway along the same alignment also failed...
As someone living and working in the middle of London for decades, who moves round the centre by a mix of walking, cycling and buses, I'd say the delays to buses are not primarily on account of "20 mph zones and road space reallocation". Rather, it's primarily the continued existence of private cars and increasing numbers of mini-cabs in the centre - almost all of both need kicking out, then the buses would move faster. There are other notable factors in the decreasing usefulness of bus travel too - the significant cuts in bus services in recent years, meaning longer waiting times, and the closure of the back platforms on the "new Routemaster" buses (when they were open for hop-on/hop-off journeys, I could often move around the centre 30% faster).
Back on topic - is it suggested that the two fantasy suggestions of re-purposing Holborn-Aldwych as part of a shuttle from north-of-KX, via StP and Farringdon and Clerkenwell [and why not Mount Pleasant for good measure?], to Temple and Waterloo, and of a direct Waterloo-Victoria link, could all be one big happy crayonista loop? Maybe with the Drain linked in as a branch of it too?
I agree that the rise of the Uber style of mini-cab has caused an increase in congestion, although the mere fact that these private hire vehicles survive financially suggests that London's existing public transports are not meeting everyone's transport needs. I dislike the idea of simply banning private cars, it makes me think of authoritarian police states, for instance I understand that the Nazis banned private cars in Paris after invading the city. I used to know someone who lived in St Johns Wood who voluntarily gave up his car because by the time he paid all the taxes, insurance and parking fees it was cheaper to use taxis the few times that he actually needed 'door to door' travel. I would like to see financial incentives for people to do likewise.
It should really be preserved, but no one cares about the “silver” era, which has essentially slipped away into history. For anyone who grew up in the 70s, 80s or 90s this is how they will remember the system, and certainly not by the 38 stock which had largely gone by then.
Even if there wasn’t the issue of Covid, the museum depot at Acton is short of space. But it does seem rather wasteful to bin off 3229, as having spent the best part of 25 years below ground it should be in pretty good condition structurally.
I went to school on the Northern line in the 1970s and travelled on both 1938 & 1972 tube stock trains. Happy memories! I wish it were possible for a museum railway to take this train and fit batteries so that it could be travelled in.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Yes, CGI has really come of age in recent years. Its amazing what can be done, although in the old days the adopted solution was to build a replica film set, eg: House of Commons for films depicting the interior of the HoC. I think everyone here will have heard about how the pop music group ABBA is using CGI to make themselves look umpteen years younger than they now are - but what is really significant is that they are doing it in 'real time'. When does CGI become 'too much' - at least with feature films one 'sort of' expects some of what is seen to be CGI, how would we know if it started being used where its not expected, eg the TV news?
Anyway, it would be great to see the surviving portion of a 1909 Piccadilly line gate end tube car that is at the LT Museum Acton Depot used as a basis for a CGI film simulating riding one of these carriages along the Piccadilly line... perhaps on a journey from Aldwych to Enfield West (sic), as at one time there were a few through trains that made this type of journey.
Although I did not specify Mount Pleasant as the place within Clerkenwell that would be the optimal site for a new Underground station, this is the location that I had in mind. Of course I would expect all works to respect the mothballed (and now touristic) sections of Mail Rail so that Mail Rail could be reopened, if ever the bean counters saw fit - or were replaced with people who believe that Mail Rail is a valuable asset and extended it as required.
I am aware of the proposed subsurface station between Farringdon and Kings Cross but how feasible would it be? Especially with the Widened Lines /
Thameslink trains running so close on one side? Oh and also, how long would the disruption to services be whilst the route (both lines - subsurface and TL) are closed for the major earthworks?
When I visited Mail Rail my walk from Kings Cross station to Mount Pleasant took longer than just the suggested '5 - 10 minutes'!
Yes I am being a crayonista, but not wholly ... London Transport wanted to extend the Piccadilly line from Aldwych to Waterloo and they even got the necessary legal powers to build this. I suppose that Parliament will have imposed a time limit for the works to be completed (its happened elsewhere with other extensions) and that therefore these powers will have now lapsed.
My thinking process has always been along the theme of having an inner city subterranean rail link which would have cost much time, money and effort to build just sitting there not being used,,, so what could be done to make productive use of it?
The Waterloo idea comes from it always having been a London Transport desire and the Clerkenwell idea coming from this area being unserved and wanting to see how to remedy this.
The idea of then going on to Victoria comes from when I've tried to make that very journey, having travelled to Waterloo via the Waterloo & City Line and then visiting the former Ian Allan bookshop. I ended up going by bus - it seemed to take ages (probably would have been quicker to go by train, changing at Embankment) . It seemed (still seems) crazy that such important London terminus stations do not have a proper railway link. I understand about how (when it was built) it was decided that the Metropolitan District Railway could not serve Waterloo station - because Waterloo station was south of the river (Thames). Btw, my journey did not pass through Clapham Junction and at no time did I ever consider taking a train that way. Train fares on the Southern are noticeably higher than other routes.
Although it would make sense to include a connection with the Waterloo and City line I would only expect this to be used for empty stock transfers and to end the use of the crane. The already existing link with the Piccadilly line at Holborn would also be retained, but again only for empty stock transfers.
I did not advocate a fully Circle service because there are already good enough connections between the Kings Cross / St Pancras / Euston area and Paddington. But I have thought about 'beyond Victoria'.
One option would be to end here!
Another would be to go to Marylebone via Marble Arch, another would be to Paddington, with the platforms directly linked to Paddington at its northern end and Lancaster Gate at its southern end. In theory it would be nice to see this routed via Kensington Gore / Royal Albert Hall, as this is another area that London's existing railways do not serve. But the large amount of parkland here suggests that there would not be sufficient passengers to justify a station, whilst nearby South Kensington is just crying out for greater capacity - and has at least one station tunnel that is already built - but not used! In some ways going to South Kensington would help relieve the overcrowded central London portion of the Piccadilly line, something that Crossrail won't do.
(The self-inflicted injuries causing the overcrowding of the suburban north London Piccadilly line in the Wood Green area are outside the scope of this plan - all I will say is that I see this as a direct result of the idiotic closure of two perfectly good rail services via Noel Park & Wood Green and Muswell Hill.)
Another option would be to revisit a WW2 plan for tube trains to Yeading, which would make this a very different type of service. But its also unlikely to become a reality - if only because the bean counters will moan about it possibly abstracting passengers from Crossrail line 1. As we know, the proposed tramway along the same alignment also failed...
I agree that the rise of the Uber style of mini-cab has caused an increase in congestion, although the mere fact that these private hire vehicles survive financially suggests that London's existing public transports are not meeting everyone's transport needs. I dislike the idea of simply banning private cars, it makes me think of authoritarian police states, for instance I understand that the Nazis banned private cars in Paris after invading the city. I used to know someone who lived in St Johns Wood who voluntarily gave up his car because by the time he paid all the taxes, insurance and parking fees it was cheaper to use taxis the few times that he actually needed 'door to door' travel. I would like to see financial incentives for people to do likewise.
I went to school on the Northern line in the 1970s and travelled on both 1938 & 1972 tube stock trains. Happy memories! I wish it were possible for a museum railway to take this train and fit batteries so that it could be travelled in.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Yes, CGI has really come of age in recent years. Its amazing what can be done, although in the old days the adopted solution was to build a replica film set, eg: House of Commons for films depicting the interior of the HoC. I think everyone here will have heard about how the pop music group ABBA is using CGI to make themselves look umpteen years younger than they now are - but what is really significant is that they are doing it in 'real time'. When does CGI become 'too much' - at least with feature films one 'sort of' expects some of what is seen to be CGI, how would we know if it started being used where its not expected, eg the TV news?
Anyway, it would be great to see the surviving portion of a 1909 Piccadilly line gate end tube car that is at the LT Museum Acton Depot used as a basis for a CGI film simulating riding one of these carriages along the Piccadilly line... perhaps on a journey from Aldwych to Enfield West (sic), as at one time there were a few through trains that made this type of journey.
I believe that l may have made the 5-10 minute walk comment BUT that was about Farringdon to Clerkenwell/Mount Pleasant. Having lived in Islington since 1990 l am well aware that Kings Cross and Angel are further.
I agree that the rise of the Uber style of mini-cab has caused an increase in congestion, although the mere fact that these private hire vehicles survive financially suggests that London's existing public transports are not meeting everyone's transport needs.
Uber is a massive loss-maker. The investors who fund it are banking on it eliminating the competition, at which point prices will rise dramatically, and we will all find out exactly which needs actually were being met all along!
Uber is a massive loss-maker. The investors who fund it are banking on it eliminating the competition, at which point prices will rise dramatically, and we will all find out exactly which needs actually were being met all along!
That certainly seems to be the game plan. However the barriers to entry in the private hire vehicle market are low, so it's likely competition will prevent Uber establishing a monopoly and gouging their customers. It's quite probable that the plan is actually for the initial investors to sucker later ones, then cash out before the house of cards (cars?) collapses.
Yes I am being a crayonista, but not wholly ... London Transport wanted to extend the Piccadilly line from Aldwych to Waterloo and they even got the necessary legal powers to build this. I suppose that Parliament will have imposed a time limit for the works to be completed (its happened elsewhere with other extensions) and that therefore these powers will have now lapsed.
My thinking process has always been along the theme of having an inner city subterranean rail link which would have cost much time, money and effort to build just sitting there not being used,,, so what could be done to make productive use of it?
Sometimes you are just throwing good money after bad effectively. The tunnel is short, not up to modern standards, has two stations that would need total rebuilding, and doesn't really go anywhere that is needed. Much better to just leave it unused - perhaps a future generation will have a good use for it.
The idea of then going on to Victoria comes from when I've tried to make that very journey, having travelled to Waterloo via the Waterloo & City Line and then visiting the former Ian Allan bookshop. I ended up going by bus - it seemed to take ages (probably would have been quicker to go by train, changing at Embankment) . It seemed (still seems) crazy that such important London terminus stations do not have a proper railway link. I understand about how (when it was built) it was decided that the Metropolitan District Railway could not serve Waterloo station - because Waterloo station was south of the river (Thames). Btw, my journey did not pass through Clapham Junction and at no time did I ever consider taking a train that way. Train fares on the Southern are noticeably higher than other routes.
My point about Clapham was not that you'd travel from Waterloo to Victoria via Clapham, but rather that if you were on a train arriving in Waterloo but needed to get to Victoria (or vice versa) you would normally just change at Clapham, rather than coming all the way into the terminus (accepting that some fast trains into Waterloo don't call at Clapham). This means that as important rail termini there is rarely any need to get from one to the other. As districts of London, there may well be a desire to get between them, but there are plenty of single-change routes on the underground already (Jubilee to Westminster then District to Victoria would be my default) so I don't think that a direct route is really needed.
Sometimes you are just throwing good money after bad effectively. The tunnel is short, not up to modern standards, has two stations that would need total rebuilding, and doesn't really go anywhere that is needed. Much better to just leave it unused - perhaps a future generation will have a good use for it.
My point about Clapham was not that you'd travel from Waterloo to Victoria via Clapham, but rather that if you were on a train arriving in Waterloo but needed to get to Victoria (or vice versa) you would normally just change at Clapham, rather than coming all the way into the terminus (accepting that some fast trains into Waterloo don't call at Clapham). This means that as important rail termini there is rarely any need to get from one to the other. As districts of London, there may well be a desire to get between them, but there are plenty of single-change routes on the underground already (Jubilee to Westminster then District to Victoria would be my default) so I don't think that a direct route is really needed.
Its a lovely station ... ideal for a weekend ramble trying to find one's way around (top tip, take a packed lunch), although from what I've heard that very long straight Lower Access Tunnel which links the Bakerloo line platforms with the southbound Northern line platform will still be shorter than some Crossrail line 1 interchange passageways.
Its a lovely station ... ideal for a weekend ramble trying to find one's way around (top tip, take a packed lunch), although from what I've heard that very long straight Lower Access Tunnel which links the Bakerloo line platforms with the southbound Northern line platform will still be shorter than some Crossrail line 1 interchange passageways.
Certainly - a picnic is in order. I've just about learnt to navigate it by instinct now, having first gone there on the Underground with my father as a kid in the '50s. It's a steep learning curve. There are some lovely counter-intuitive zig-zag moves needed, aided by the placing of some of the signage.
NB - even the new connections from the deep lines to the northern ticket hall at Kings Cross will pale in comparison with some of the Crossrail interchanges, by the look of it.
Its a lovely station ... ideal for a weekend ramble trying to find one's way around (top tip, take a packed lunch), although from what I've heard that very long straight Lower Access Tunnel which links the Bakerloo line platforms with the southbound Northern line platform will still be shorter than some Crossrail line 1 interchange passageways.
I used Embankment for years and know it pretty well. The fact that whenever there's work (e.g. on escalators) routes change also make life more interesting.
If anyone is interested, the Aldwych unit was moved away last night / this morning and is being taken to Ealing Common depot, from where it will eventually be removed by road, so if anyone wants to see it maybe get yourself there sharpish.
It’s being followed by a 1973 stock train just in case of any issues.
If anyone is interested, the Aldwych unit was moved away last night / this morning and is being taken to Ealing Common depot, from where it will eventually be removed by road, so if anyone wants to see it maybe get yourself there sharpish.
It’s being followed by a 1973 stock train just in case of any issues.
If anyone is interested, the Aldwych unit was moved away last night / this morning and is being taken to Ealing Common depot, from where it will eventually be removed by road, so if anyone wants to see it maybe get yourself there sharpish.
It’s being followed by a 1973 stock train just in case of any issues.
It was static, the tour of Aldwych involved going down a long flight of stairs to the platform and tye train itself was opened up for us to walk around and it had retro adverts on the roof panels.
*edit to add just seen the reply above, thought you were commenting on my tour.
It was static, the tour of Aldwych involved going down a long flight of stairs to the platform and tye train itself was opened up for us to walk around and it had retro adverts on the roof panels.
*edit to add just seen the reply above, thought you were commenting on my tour.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
