Recent content by mr_jrt

It's not just a matter of principle though - I was under the impression that modern safety standards say curved platforms are more dangerous than straight ones, and given how simple that would be to rectify (put it OOU for the duration as it's rarely used, realign the track and then build out...

As I always do when something new railway-related catches my attention, I went looking at the history of the local railways. From what I could see, platform 3 at Enfield Town wasn't originally a passenger platform, but appears to have become one at some point - looks like it originally was just...

Well yes, but given CR2 isn't looking like it's going to happen anytime soon, I meant more in terms of the non-CR2 end game, i.e. more akin to the more limited plans shown above. I am presuming the plan isn't to build this new loop through Ponders End station as that would probably be the most...

Does anybody know what the planned end goal currently is? For reference, it was once this: What we currently have appears to be the interim scheme. This loop at Ponders End doesn't appear to be part of the eventual end game, unless the loop is looping around a third line that hasn't been built...

Don't know if this sheds any more light on things... https://innovationcorridor.uk/assets/pdf/news/staying-in-the-loop!-a-brief-guide-to-enfield%E2%80%99s-latest-rail-enhancement-project.pdf

Oh, absolutely. In this specific example, laying out the open area between the GWML and HS2 so that you could fit a pair of platforms and the approach lines would fall into that remit in my mind, though. You're not actively building a pair of suspiciously platform-shaped raised areas and some...

If so, that would be quite a screw up. This country really needs to learn the meaning of passive provision. I suspect the next opportunity to rectify things would be when and if North Pole depot becomes life expired, as they could build another pair of platforms and shuffle things down.

Is the problem with Elstree tunnel curvature, the size of the tunnels, or both?

I mean, you make a good point about the NLX. You would think a bit of common sense would have prevailed and the authorities would have requested the change in advance of any of the new infrastructure opening to piggyback on it.

You'd think they would just automate it with swarms of high-altitude drones these days.

Not knowing the area at all, would there have been any value in going straight to 8 car platforms rather than six? In my neck of the woods 4 car units and multiples (8/12) seems to be the standard length. Up north is the standard unit length 3-car?

Easy solution for a mainline connection - borrow a TBM from HS2 and link the island to the mainland ;)

Whoops, I fell into the same trap as those renders! o_O I meant south, over the flyover, precisely because of the junction, and because that was the bit that is new build, so had the opportunity for any alterations.

Which way would any platform extensions for 8/12 car trains go? Presumably from the northern end? Given the viaduct works, would it have made sense to have built if nothing else, at least the foundations for them into the new structures?

I would have much preferred the grade separation and a Crossrail extension, but that was never the "Chiltern station" proposal, that was the Crossrail extension. The Chiltern station was to do away with the grade separation and thread a track or two between the relief lines and Wells house into...