Metropolitan Line Extension (MLX/Croxley Rail Link)

[Bald Rick]

good point, and it is a shovel ready project, but still can't see it happening though.

More ready than most, but I wouldn’t say shovel ready. Since it has been officially cancelled, I’m not sure what the status of the TWA is, not if all the land has been retained (or even purchased).

 

[kwrail]

I realise that TFL doesn't have any money, and that the Metropolitan Line extension is not going to happen any time soon. Especially in the current climate. But does anyone understand how the estimate for the extension ended up at £284 million? For 3.5 miles of track, where apart from the viaduct at Croxley the trackbed already existed, and only two new stations were required. I assume that additional rolling stock was factored into the total, but it does seem a lot.

 

[Nym]

Because it's a TfL Managed project in this country...
£100m to do the work, and £174m of governance.

 

[Mikey C]

The new stock has already been bought and entered service too, so we end up with the unfortunate situation where the Met has additional trains for an extension that has been cancelled, whereas the Northern has no new trains for an extension (Battersea) that is going ahead.

 

[AlbertBeale]

They could do worse than elect the young, dynamic LibDem, Luisa Porritt.

And a lot better too...

I admit she's not as bad as Siobhan Benita, who had been due to be the LibDem candidate for Mayor until the election was delayed; I met the latter when she stood as an independent mayoral candidate back in 2012 (she came to promote herself at a meeting I was involved in), and she was seriously unimpressive (at least for any positive reasons). I don't have direct experience of Luisa Porritt, but I live in Camden (where she's a councillor) - and follow local issues quite closely - and I haven't noticed either her or the Camden LibDems arouse my interest lately...

Putting together considerations of policy and competence, I have no enthuisasm for any of the 3 main party candidates for London Mayor. (The Green Party one on the other hand... is a bit more sensible.) If I wasn't already ill-disposed towards the Tory candidate, his ill-informed remarks about the Met's Watford Extension [actually, diversion of course, not extension...], as reported here, would have done for him anyway.

 

[philthetube]

Putting together considerations of policy and competence, I have no enthuisasm for any of the 3 main party candidates for London Mayor. (The Green Party one on the other hand... is a bit more sensible.) If I wasn't already ill-disposed towards the Tory candidate, his ill-informed remarks about the Met's Watford Extension [actually, diversion of course, not extension...], as reported here, would have done for him anyway.

to be fair, it would be both

 

[AlbertBeale]

to be fair, it would be both

Sorry - talking of Tory candidates sometimes makes it hard for me to be fair...!

 

[philthetube]

Sorry - talking of Tory candidates sometimes makes it hard for me to be fair...!

like

 

[rebmcr]

I have no enthuisasm for any of the 3 main party candidates for London Mayor. (The Green Party one on the other hand... is a bit more sensible.)

Have they dropped the ridiculous idea to merge zones 2-6 into one massive Zone 2?

 

[Triumph]

The new stock has already been bought and entered service too, so we end up with the unfortunate situation where the Met has additional trains for an extension that has been cancelled, whereas the Northern has no new trains for an extension (Battersea) that is going ahead.

The same thing happened in the 1960's when the Met had enough A stock built to run to Aylesbury, which did'nt happen and left them with a lot of spare stock.

 

[Dstock7080]

The same thing happened in the 1960's when the Met had enough A stock built to run to Aylesbury, which did'nt happen and left them with a lot of spare stock.

Electrification to Aylesbury was never proposed.
Additional A Stock were ordered to replace older trains on Uxbridge services and to standardise fleet

 

[Railwaysceptic]

And it's not really in the purvew of the London government to encourage shopping in Watford. The real benefit of the scheme was to greatly improve access to Watford from places like Amersham and Aylesbury which are not in London . . .

. . . The deal Boris Johnson did for TfL was terrible. Not only did it place London taxpayers on the line for a significant amount of the cost . Most of Watford councils contribution was inkinded through land deals that were overvalued together with a requirement that fare box revenue went to watford council for stations on the metropolitan line extension until Watford councils contribution was related.

Correct

More that the DfT should find the majority of the project and strengthen the business case for the project by running Chiltern services from the Amersham direction to Watford

Absolutely. No-one in London would complain if this mooted extension was financed by Hertfordshire Council!

 

[D365]

I’ve read that the additional S8 unit is being/will be utilised in the post-upgrade timetable.

 

[Dstock7080]

I’ve read that the additional S8 unit is being/will be utilised in the post-upgrade timetable.

There wasn’t an additional S8 as production had already finished.
An extra S7 (21567/68) was ordered and an S7+1 train already running on the MET was kept.

 

[D365]

There wasn’t an additional S8 as production had already finished.
An extra S7 (21567/68) was ordered and an S7+1 train already running on the MET was kept.

Apologies, said S7+1 is the unit that I was inferring.

 

[kwrail]

So effectively TFL get an extra unit at no expense. The project was canned with very little work actually done, other than clearing the permanent way and some service realignment in Croxley. But the project managed to spend £130million before being stopped. Architects and design plans would have consumed a fair amount. But S7s are around £8-10million each.

So where did all the money go?

 

[mr_jrt]

There were some utility diversions in Croxley to prepare for the viaduct, but otherwise yes, British waste at its finest. Made all the more galling by the ludicrous sums now being thrown around on waste and we've missed yet another major opportunity for want of squabbling over a few million pounds.

 

[stuu]

There's also a new bridge over nothing near the hospital

 

[rebmcr]

So effectively TFL get an extra unit at no expense.

Errr... TfL paid for an extra unit that is no longer essential.

 

[D365]

Errr... TfL paid for an extra unit that is no longer essential.

But they do/did have plans for it in the post-upgrade timetable.

 

[bluegoblin7]

But they do/did have plans for it in the post-upgrade timetable.

I don't recall there being any plans for it as part of timetable uplifts; in the immediate future it will rotate around the SSR as a cover train for S stock going for overhaul (currently it remains on the Met which has a handful of long term OOS units).

 

[Mikey C]

But they do/did have plans for it in the post-upgrade timetable.

They'll obviously use it, but clearly don't need it, as otherwise there wouldn't be enough stock for a post-upgrade uplift AND the Watford Junction extension

 

[DavyCrocket]

I don't recall there being any plans for it as part of timetable uplifts; in the immediate future it will rotate around the SSR as a cover train for S stock going for overhaul (currently it remains on the Met which has a handful of long term OOS units).

They did add the station cells to the radio network. LOL

 

[bluegoblin7]

They did add the station cells to the radio network. LOL

Not the actual cells, just channels that the cells could be allocated to. It was done as part of a wider tranche of changes to Connect, and was some logical joined up thinking. Similarly, Watford Junction CIS codes (and announcements) were provided on the S stock as part of another update - it's still possible to put trains 'up' as a Watford Junction.

 

[THC]

The Met line’s Croxley rail link may be resurected

The government is to be asked to reconsider funding the dormant Croxley Rail link extension to the Metropolitan line in Watford, as part of its plans to support

www.ianvisits.co.uk

The government is to be asked to reconsider funding the dormant Croxley Rail link extension to the Metropolitan line in Watford, as part of its plans to support “shovel ready” projects. The railway extension was cancelled in 2016 after costs soared and the Mayor of London was unwilling to pick up the additional costs of a project that was still uncertain what the final bill would come to...

A long shot, but one never knows...

THC

 

[philthetube]

this must be painful for Boris, firmly stuck on both sides of the fence.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

Electrification to Aylesbury was never proposed.
Additional A Stock were ordered to replace older trains on Uxbridge services and to standardise fleet

Was it not? I read that from Amersham to Aylesbury the platforms are long enough to take A-Stock trains.

 

[urbophile]

Shovel ready or oven ready? Same (non) thing as far as BJ is concerned.

 

[bengley]

Was it not? I read that from Amersham to Aylesbury the platforms are long enough to take A-Stock trains.

They can take 6 car 165s so should have been good for 8 car A Stock

 

[edwin_m]

Shovel ready or oven ready? Same (non) thing as far as BJ is concerned.

When he says something is oven ready I get an image of the books about to be cooked.