What if the Metropolitan line never became part of the Underground?

[NorthKent1989]

The Metropolitan avoided being grouped or absorbed into the Underground in 1923, but by 1933 it was finally absorbed into the tube network.

What would have happened had the Metropolitan line not become part of the tube system? Would it have eventually been made a part of British Railways? The routes to Brill and Verney Junction being kept open, or would the Great Central main line have closed?

 

[AM9]

The Metropolitan avoided being grouped or absorbed into the Underground in 1923, but by 1933 it was finally absorbed into the tube network.

What would have happened had the Metropolitan line not become part of the tube system? Would it have eventually been made a part of British Railways? The routes to Brill and Verney Junction being kept open, or would the Great Central main line have closed?

Well you would need to define what would happen the the District Line as well. Functionally they are interdependent.

 

[NorthKent1989]

Well you would need to define what would happen the the District Line as well. Functionally they are interdependent.

Wasn’t the District already “separate” from the Metropolitan by the 1920s? The District was part of UREL with the other lines, except the Metropolitan.

 

[etr221]

Well you would need to define what would happen the the District Line as well. Functionally they are interdependent.

But completely separate companies.

The Metropolitan District was part of 'the Combine' with (by 1923) all the tube railways, also the LGOC (buses). So probably indigestible by the big 4.

But the Metropolitan could have been - most likely into the LNER, given the Joint Line beyond Harrow. Assuming the London Transport/LPTB had still been formed in 1933, it is possible that the Met (or part of it) would have been incorporated into, or transferred, it somehow,either then or later - it is worthwhile remembering the extent to which the Met, and the rest of the Underground, interworked with the main lines. (Where the Underground was extended over the 'big 4' lines, the line remained in the ownership of whichever company). But anyhow, I imagine it would been incorporated into the LTE after 1948, with appropriate revesting of lines.

 

[JLH4AC]

I would think it would have become a part of British Railways London Midland or Eastern Region then Network Southeast. Realistically during the privatisation of British Rail the Metropolitan line would be transferred to the London Underground, if it did not it would become part of the North London Railways franchise. The Metropolitan line would be operated as an Underground line just one owned by a mainline railway company (Similar to the Waterloo & City line under BR.) The Great Northern & City Railway would be connected to the mainline and operated as part of the Great Northern route.

If the Aylesbury and Buckingham Railway was not closed during the 1930s/40s like it was our reality it would have been closed during the Beeching cuts. It is probable that Metropolitan services to Aylesbury would not be withdrawn.

 

[The exile]

I would think it would have become a part of British Railways Southern Region then Network Southeast. Realistically during the privatisation of British Rail the Metropolitan line would be transferred to the London Underground, if it did not it would become part of the North London Railways franchise. The metropolitan line would be operated as a tube line just one owned by a mainline railway company (Similar to the Waterloo & City line under BR.). The Great Northern & City Railway would be connected to the mainline and operated as part of the Great Northern route.

If the Aylesbury and Buckingham Railway was not closed during the 1930s/40s like it was our reality it would have been closed during the Beeching cuts.

Why on earth would it have become part of the Southern Region? That possibility seems only slightly more likely than being transferred to the Scottish or North Eastern Regions.

 

[Transilien]

Perhaps the Metropolitan Line would be cut back completely to Baker Street with Hammersmith and City/Circle trains becoming a part of the UREL.

 

[PeterC]

You have to remember that the Metropolitan included what became the Hammersmith & City and East London Lines as well as part of what us now the Jubilee and sharing the Circle Line.

If not consigned to the "too difficult" pile it would probably be partitioned. The fate of the Stanmore branch would be interesting

 

[Sad Sprinter]

Ah finally an imaginative thread!

I’ve thought about this before. Not too long ago I conceived an alternative 1928 grouping world where the Great Central is merged with the Great Western and the LSWR merged with the Midland. In this case, the Southern Railway, which by this point would be quite small, would be merged with the Metropolitan. I suppose it’s also possible the Greay Central, Metropolitan and Southern could be merged to create a true Manchester to Dover spine.

Although what would happen to the Northern City line in any scenario where the Met didnt merge with LT? It would give more credence to the above poster’s suggestion the Met could merge with the LNER, which might facilitate the link between the LNER and Moorgate

 

[etr221]

You have to remember that the Metropolitan included what became the Hammersmith & City and East London Lines as well as part of what us now the Jubilee and sharing the Circle Line.

If not consigned to the "too difficult" pile it would probably be partitioned. The fate of the Stanmore branch would be interesting

The Stanmore (Met) branch only dates from the early 1930s. Whether, as part of one of big 4, it would have been built as it was, or rather differently, is another question...

 

[The exile]

Perhaps the Metropolitan Line would be cut back completely to Baker Street with Hammersmith and City/Circle trains becoming a part of the UREL.

I would have imagined that the demand of Chilterns residents for direct access to the City would have weighed quite strongly. After all, those pressures prevailed virtually everywhere else.

 

[JLH4AC]

Why on earth would it have become part of the Southern Region? That possibility seems only slightly more likely than being transferred to the Scottish or North Eastern Regions.

Honestly, I just misremembered the London–Aylesbury line as one of the lines around London to be transferred to Southern during the early rationalisation. Now I am recalling the correct dates for that particular rationalisation, it being part of the London Midland or Eastern region makes more sense for that time period.

 

[Transilien]

I would have imagined that the demand of Chilterns residents for direct access to the City would have weighed quite strongly. After all, those pressures prevailed virtually everywhere else.

The metropolitan service was peak times only from Baker Street to Aldgate until much more recently so it might not have been too much of a change from before.

 

[AM9]

But completely separate companies.

The Metropolitan District was part of 'the Combine' with (by 1923) all the tube railways, also the LGOC (buses). So probably indigestible by the big 4.

But the Metropolitan could have been - most likely into the LNER, given the Joint Line beyond Harrow. Assuming the London TransportLPTB had still been formed in 1933, it is possible that the Met (or part of it) would have been incorporated into, or transferred, it somehow,either then or later - it is worthwhile remembering the extent to which the Met, and the rest of the Underground, interworked with the main lines. (Where the Underground was extended over the 'big 4' lines, the line remained in the ownership of whichever company). But anyhow, I imagine it would been incorporated into the LTE after 1948, with appropriate revesting of lines.

I know that but the provision of underground services on what is now the Circle line effectively made them dependent on both the District Railway and Metropolitan Railway over their respective parts of the inner circle and the peripheral extensions of Hammersmith and East London lines.

 

[PGAT]

Relevant Jago Hazzard Video:

 

[randyrippley]

Surely the logical place for the Met lines would have been under the same management as the Watford DC lines and the North London line?
The question then would be whether the Met would be allowed to run down in the same way as the NLL was

 

[etr221]

I know that but the provision of underground services on what is now the Circle line effectively made them dependent on both the District Railway and Metropolitan Railway over their respective parts of the inner circle and the peripheral extensions of Hammersmith and East London lines.

The Circle line service was provided jointly the Met and the MDR, and this was written into their authorising acts: things changed over the years, but the basis was that all services one way round were Met, and the other a mix of Met and MDR (as the proportions of the Circle weren't equal). Both companies worked onto the East London (and, IIRC, were part owners of the ELR), other extensions off the circle were one or the other, often in conjunction with another company.

Relevant Jago Hazzard Video:

Jago's suggestion was a much earlier, in the 1860s, GWR takeover of the Met. I suspect if his scenario - of the GWR putting up money in exhange for a share (or all) had been seriouly proposed, the others involved (Midland, GNR, etc.) would have pushed for a share, and the Met would have become a multi-owner joint line... and the network developed rather differently.

Honestly, I just misremembered the London–Aylesbury line as one of the lines around London to be transferred to Southern during the early rationalisation. Now I am recalling the correct dates for that particular rationalisation, it being part of the London Midland region makes more sense for that time period.

London (Marylebone)-Aylesbury (at least that part which wasn't LT), and the rest of the GW&GCJt, changed regions over the years under BR, originally Eastern and Western (for ex-LNER and GWR lines), arrangements changed several times before it all ended up as part of the LMR

 

[JLH4AC]

London (Marylebone)-Aylesbury (at least that part which wasn't LT), and the rest of the GW&GCJt, changed regions over the years under BR, originally Eastern and Western (for ex-LNER and GWR lines), arrangements changed several times before it all ended up as part of the LMR

It could be possible that the Metropolitan line would be repeatedly transferred between the regions like the London -Aylesbury line did in reality yet it is also possible that due to it being an Underground line that just happens to be assigned to one of the regions it is left with whatever region (Which would likely be Eastern region based on the Widened Lines in real world being assigned to the Eastern region and the Met terminating at the Eastern region terminals, and or London Midland due to the Met interchanging with the London Midland terminals, and mainly serving North-East/central London and Hertfordshire.) it was first assigned to in-till sectorisation.

 

[Ken H]

Maybe an independant Metropolitan Rlwy would have run an early 'Thameslink'. Aylesbury - Baker St - Farringdon, Ludgate Hill - Blackfriars, then out onto the Southern. I think this was an actual service at one time.

You could run it from Manchester to Paris as Watkin envisaged!

 

[NorthKent1989]

Ah finally an imaginative thread!

I’ve thought about this before. Not too long ago I conceived an alternative 1928 grouping world where the Great Central is merged with the Great Western and the LSWR merged with the Midland. In this case, the Southern Railway, which by this point would be quite small, would be merged with the Metropolitan. I suppose it’s also possible the Greay Central, Metropolitan and Southern could be merged to create a true Manchester to Dover spine.

Although what would happen to the Northern City line in any scenario where the Met didnt merge with LT? It would give more credence to the above poster’s suggestion the Met could merge with the LNER, which might facilitate the link between the LNER and Moorgate

Thank you.

The Met line interests me and I’m surprised no one has started a thread like this before.

Maybe an independant Metropolitan Rlwy would have run an early 'Thameslink'. Aylesbury - Baker St - Farringdon, Ludgate Hill - Blackfriars, then out onto the Southern. I think this was an actual service at one time.

You could run it from Manchester to Paris as Watkin envisaged!

The Met was in many ways the very first mainline cross London service, albeit there was never ever a New Cross to Aylesbury service.

Had the Met line remained a mainline I could see it eventually running services to destinations south of the River, either via the ELL or todays Thameslink route.

I know the Met had ambitions to extend to Oxford in the early 1900s so this might’ve eventually happened.

Another scenario would be all Met line trains would be cut back to Baker Street and merged with Chiltern

 

[JLH4AC]

Maybe an independant Metropolitan Rlwy would have run an early 'Thameslink'. Aylesbury - Baker St - Farringdon, Ludgate Hill - Blackfriars, then out onto the Southern. I think this was an actual service at one time.

You could run it from Manchester to Paris as Watkin envisaged!

Snow Hill Tunnel was owned by LC&DR and services through it were operated by the mainline companies. For the Met to run a Thameslink like service they would need the agreement of LC&DR/Southern As the line through the tunnel is unelectrified it would be another location where they need to stage steam locomotives to haul their trains.

Watkin's plans for the Channel tunnel were blocked by parliament in the interests of national security, concerns that were not likely to go away in-till post-WW2.

 

[Blackpool boy]

The metropolitan service was peak times only from Baker Street to Aldgate until much more recently so it might not have been too much of a change from before.

And those are exactly the times that people would want to get from mentroland to the city on one train only

 

[Dr_Paul]

Perhaps an independent Metropolitan Railway would have become merged into the Great Central and become the GC's London suburban line, with services terminating at Aylesbury or more probably Amersham. The Bakerloo line would not have been extended north of Baker Street, or perhaps extended along a different route, remaining underground until the outer suburbs (we could discuss elsewhere what routes it might have taken). The Met line would have been all stations, with some semi-fasts, from Harrow on the Hill, and unlikely to have been quadrupled except perhaps at key stations to allow semi-fasts to overtake stoppers. The Chesham and Watford branches would have been electrified. The branch to Stanmore would have been built, as might others as well. As the Met's Uxbridge line had already been electrified, the line to Aylesbury (or Amersham) would have been electrified. The Met's services beyond Aylesbury would be come part of the GC's network. With the run-down of the GC from the 1950s, perhaps the GC Suburban Network (or whatever it might have been called) would have been transferred from BR to London Transport.