|
|
Up |
|
|
  |
Author: Paul ScottPaul Scott Date: Apr 10, 2008 11:25
The Times has an article today about a disused tunnel under the 'nursery
end' which is due for development, and has been owned by a third party since
being sold by Railtrack 10 years ago. Apparently MCC only own the ground
over it.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/cricket/article3716497.ece
Were Railtrack really able to make a permanent decision back then that there
would be no further rail use? I guess 10 years ago another two platforms at
Marylebone weren't on the agenda either...
Paul
|
| |
|
| | 133 Comments |
|
  |
Author: Mark AnnandMark Annand Date: Apr 10, 2008 11:37
"The tunnel, which was part of the Marylebone to Aylesbury train line ..."
Cough.
|
| |
|
| | no comments |
|
  |
Author: m1ss_wh1tem1ss_wh1te Date: Apr 10, 2008 11:59
On 10 Apr, 19:37, Mark Annand invalid.zetnet.co.uk>
wrote:
>
> "The tunnel, which was part of the Marylebone to Aylesbury train line ..."
>
> Cough.
What was it for?
|
| |
| no comments |
|
  |
Author: Mr ThantMr Thant Date: Apr 10, 2008 12:10
On 10 Apr, 19:25, "Paul Scott" btinternet.com> wrote:
> Were Railtrack really able to make a permanent decision back then that there
> would be no further rail use? Â I guess 10 years ago another two platforms at
> Marylebone weren't on the agenda either...
|
| |
| no comments |
|
  |
Author: MortimerMortimer Date: Apr 10, 2008 12:21
> On 10 Apr, 19:37, Mark Annand invalid.zetnet.co.uk>
> wrote:
>>
>> "The tunnel, which was part of the Marylebone to Aylesbury train line
>> ..."
>>
>> Cough.
>
> What was it for?
Yes I'm not sure what Mark is objecting to, either. Maybe the use of "train
line" instead of "railway line". Or maybe the fact that the GCR line
originally went much further north than Aylesbury. Or maybe that there are
also trains which use those tunnels which go to destinations such as
Birmingham via the High Wycombe route.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
  |
Author: StimpyStimpy Date: Apr 10, 2008 12:31
On Thu, 10 Apr 2008 20:10:01 +0100, Mr Thant wrote
IIRC the Lords tunnel was never used - or am I mistaken?
|
| |
| no comments |
|
  |
Author: Stephen FurleyStephen Furley Date: Apr 10, 2008 12:35
On 10 Apr, 20:10, Mr Thant googlemail.com>
wrote:
> On 10 Apr, 19:25, "Paul Scott" btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> Were Railtrack really able to make a permanent decision back then that there
>> would be no further rail use? I guess 10 years ago another two platforms at
>> Marylebone weren't on the agenda either...
|
| Show full article (1.13Kb) |
| no comments |
|
  |
Author: Tom AndersonTom Anderson Date: Apr 10, 2008 13:15
On Thu, 10 Apr 2008, Mr Thant wrote:
> On 10 Apr, 19:25, "Paul Scott" btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> Were Railtrack really able to make a permanent decision back then that there
>> would be no further rail use?
>
> I can't see any use for them now - you'd need more platforms at
> Marylebone and a way of four tracking at least to Neasden.
Yes.
Completely random question, but where do the Chiltern and Metropolitan
alignments separate?
tom
--
Freedom, Beauty, Truth, and Love!
|
| |
| no comments |
|
  |
Author: MIGMIG Date: Apr 10, 2008 13:29
On Apr 10, 9:15Â pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Apr 2008, Mr Thant wrote:
>> On 10 Apr, 19:25, "Paul Scott" btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>>> Were Railtrack really able to make a permanent decision back then that there
>>> would be no further rail use?
>
>> I can't see any use for them now - you'd need more platforms at
>> Marylebone and a way of four tracking at least to Neasden.
>
> Yes.
>
> Completely random question, but where do the Chiltern and Metropolitan
> alignments separate?
As far as I can see, they emerge from tunnel under Lodge Road, then
cross the canal on separate, slightly diverging bridges, and then go
either side of buildings south of the canal.
So, roughly where they cross the canal.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
  |
|
|
  |
Author: AdrianAdrian Date: Apr 10, 2008 13:36
On Apr 10, 12:10Â pm, Mr Thant
googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 10 Apr, 19:25, "Paul Scott" btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> Were Railtrack really able to make a permanent decision back then that there
>> would be no further rail use? Â I guess 10 years ago another two platforms at
>> Marylebone weren't on the agenda either...
IIRC Two were double track tunnels and one was a triple track tunnel.
> One is obviously still in use, and the other two must have been for
> when there was a big freight operation at Marylebone.
>
There were once extensive freight facilities at Marylebone. These
included transshipment docks for the Regent's Canal. Most of the
freight depot is now part of a public housing subdivision.
|
| Show full article (1.29Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|