Should the Metropolitan Line be part of the London Underground network ?

[T163R]

Well the title says it all...should the Met still be part of the London Underground network ?
Well it only has a small portion underground (but that's another subject...), it reaches speeds up to 60 mph, it shares tracks with Chiltern Railways, it has fast/semi-fast and slow services (should we call these Express and Local services ?) and it goes quite far (forget the Piccadilly at Uxbridge, though...).

Well I think you got the point of my question, even though we all know it will stay in the LU network, what do you think about that ?

Cheers,

T-One-Six-Three-R

 

[LE Greys]

Yes, certainly. It interacts far too much with the Circle Line to do otherwise. I'd prefer that the section beyond Harrow was re-electrified with 25 kV, giving the Underground their first dual-system OHLE stock and giving Chiltern the opportunity to run electric trains to Aylesbury as well. At the other end, it will still interact with the Circle far too much. In theory, the Bakerloo would be a better candidate, because that does not interact with anything much except for the Euston d.c. lines. Not very likely, though, it would make LUL's stock procurement a unnecessarily complicated.

 

[T163R]

Well if you start from Baker Street ?
Metropolitan Line: Aldgate <> London Baker Street.

 

[trentside]

The problem of starting from Baker Street is that it would place undue pressure on the Circle and Hammersmith & City services - the Met running into the City provides extra capacity on the north of the Circle.

 

[T163R]

The problem of starting from Baker Street is that it would place undue pressure on the Circle and Hammersmith & City services - the Met running into the City provides extra capacity on the north of the Circle.

I said Aldgate <> Baker Street for the Met.

 

[trentside]

I said Aldgate <> Baker Street for the Met.

Yes, you did - sorry!

IIRC the Met currently has a 10 minute frequency through into the City (off-peak) so it wouldn't take too many trains to run. I still think that the loss of through Met services to the City would be a major downside for people living at the northern end of the Met.

What would you do with the Uxbridge branch services? There certainly isn't sufficient capacity on the Piccadilly to extend anymore services to Uxbridge and the Picc frequency of every 20 minutes west of Rayners Lane certainly isn't enough. There aren't enough platforms at Baker Street to terminate all Met services there as well as a service from the City.

 

[Greenback]

What sort of benefits would being outside LU bring, if any? What TOC would run the route?

 

[T163R]

What sort of benefits would being outside LU bring, if any? What TOC would run the route?

Chiltern Railways
They already run on the tracks that are shared with the Met.

 

[Greenback]

Chiltern Railways
They already run on the tracks that are shared with the Met.

OK, and what benefits would there be for users in taking the Met out of the LU system and into the NR system?

 

[Schnellzug]

OK, and what benefits would there be for users in taking the Met out of the LU system and into the NR system?

They might provide toilets on the trains (or even the stations) (a not insignificant factor when they have journey times of getting on for an hour or more to outlying places), for a start.
I think they ought to have done to it like they did with the East London Line, only merge it with, as was suggested, Chiltern (but with electric traction, e.g. some form of Electrostar).

 

[Greenback]

The East London Line had to be transferred in order to allow through services between NR south and north of the river.

There may be technical limitations on Chiltern units using Baker Street - as for toilets, many NR suburabn units don;t have them, so there's no guarantee!

 

[anthony263]

I personally think if chiltern do decide on electrification that the London Marylebone - Harrow on the hill - Amersham - Aylesbury vale should be the 1st considering it hasnt had as much work done compared to the rest of the chiltern network.

Chiltern could then order a fleet of 3 carriage class 377 emu's or something similar to work the displacing the class 165's to FGW or something, also perhaps some trains could be extended to Milton Keynes which could also provide some relief on services in Euston
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
No room at Baker street for anymore services

 

[Voyager 2093]

Just leave the MET as a London Underground service, it saves confusion, money and its practical, now who's with me . Also Chiltern don't get to chose whether they want their line electrified, they can dream up plans but isn't the final decision up to DFT?

 

[Greenback]

Just leave the MET as a London Underground service, it saves confusion, money and its practical, now who's with me . Also Chiltern don't get to chose whether they want their line electrified, they can dream up plans but isn't the final decision up to DFT?

Well, it's been part of LT for a long time, and I'm not aware of a huge campaign to move it to NR, whihc is why I asked if there were any benefits that mayve I hadn't thought of.

As no one has suggested any, I think I'll have to agree that leaving it as part of LU would be best!

 

[Mojo]

No it shouldn't. The LU way of operating is a much more sensible approach than Network Rail and Tocs. In addition there is a much larger political influence on the way the network is run.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

If anything I think the LUL should take over NR services to Aylesbury! I also feel the same about the Hayes branch and the Bakerloo line.

 

[SS4]

No, leave it wit LU. They're actually rather competent compared to NR!

 

[MidnightFlyer]

If the line north of Amersham was converted, it would free up precious DMUs for strenghtening / cascadation (is that a word?).

 

[anthony263]

If the line north of Amersham was converted, it would free up precious DMUs for strenghtening / cascadation (is that a word?).

I suppose you could or electrify it all between Marylebone & Alyesbury and let chiltern run it using emu's i know there have been proposals as part of the east-west rail to extend the aylesbury trains to milton Keynes, of course someone has also proposed to run a services between Aylesbury & Watford

 

[LE Greys]

I suppose you could or electrify it all between Marylebone & Alyesbury and let chiltern run it using emu's i know there have been proposals as part of the east-west rail to extend the aylesbury trains to milton Keynes, of course someone has also proposed to run a services between Aylesbury & Watford

Now that makes sense. I'd make it an all-Chiltern scheme covering High Wycombe as well, with the line to Aynho Junction being covered if the GW suburban scheme ever extends towards Birmingham. The Met would get something resembling 378s, but with through-gangways, and be allowed to extend to Aylesbury, changing to a.c. at Harrow. Chiltern would extend onwards towards Quainton Road and Verney Junction ¿Buckingham Parkway?, with Milton Keynes being the ultimate target. Chiltern's 165s could then go somewhere else, with the 168s later being cascaded as well. Loading gauge restrictions may present problems, though.

 

[Mutant Lemming]

I think the staff on the Met may have a few issues about being transferred to a company with inferior pay and conditions.

 

[Metrailway]

My proposal would be extending the Met to Aylesbury, and extending existing Chiltern Aylesbury services to Buckingham. There would be Milton Keynes services to Marylebone via High Wycombe so it links the three main Buckinghamshire centres together. There would be a local Buckingham - Milton Keynes service as well.

I would electrify all of the Chiltern lines at 25kV AC, and convert the existing Metropolitan line north of Harrow from 750V DC to 25kV AC. The Varsity line between Oxford and Bletchley would be reinstated, with a branch to Buckingham, and be electrified at 25kV AC. I would also add a passing loop at Little Kimble.

The Croxley Rail link would also be built, and I would divert 2tph of Watford Jnt services to go via Rickmansworth and the North Curve, to allow good connections for Bucks passengers. To allow this, I would rebuild Rickmansworth to a 4 platform station, with 2 through lines and 2 south facing bays.

Due to extending the line to Aylesbury and change of electrification type, the new Met stock would need to be duel voltage, and have a 'mainline' interior, with traverse seating, and be capable of 90mph. However, it would still need LU characteristics such as 3 to 4 sets of doors, better braking/acceleration, and <18m cars to allow it to operate intense services south of Harrow.

You can tell I have too much time on my hands

Proposed service pattern below:

 

[Aictos]

Leave the Met as it is but I wouldn't mind 378s being used with 2+2 seating.

 

[T163R]

Interesting views, here guys

 

[tom1649]

Keep the Met with LU, say no to further privatisation!

 

[Greenback]

Keep the Met with LU, say no to further privatisation!

Yes, I still can't see any real benefits for existing Met users in transferring it to Chiltern or anyone else!

 

[jopsuk]

If it was to go to "mainline" type stock LO would be more likley than Chiltern.

If the conductor rail enegrisation was changed from of Baker Street to be like the Bakerloo/Watford DC, would 378s into the Baker Street terminus platforms be physcially possible? What would the longest formation of 20m carriages that could fit?

(I'm sure have heard tale of mark 2s, possibly Gat Ex stock, going on a tour round the circle?)

 

[Cherry_Picker]

This is highly unlikely to ever happen, is it? Baker Street is full. Marylebone is full. Chiltern wouldnt take over the met if all the money from ticket sales goes to TFL, the passengers on the met wouldnt like losing their through services to the square mile, there would have to be major political upheaval. It would create infinitely more problems than it would solve.

 

[anthony263]

I personally agree with keeping the met as it is, i do think however that money needs to be spent on the line between Harrow on the Hill and amersham though, so that ride quality and line speeds can be increased. If the proposal i have suggested went ahead, new class 378 style emu's could be ordered for the route running in pairs which could provides some extra capacity during the peaks

 

[tom1649]

I personally agree with keeping the met as it is, i do think however that money needs to be spent on the line between Harrow on the Hill and amersham though, so that ride quality and line speeds can be increased. If the proposal i have suggested went ahead, new class 378 style emu's could be ordered for the route running in pairs which could provides some extra capacity during the peaks

What would you do with all the surplus S stock trains?