Talk:Northern line/Archive 2

Northern Line in Merseyrail

This page should really be renamed to "Northern Line (London Underground)" or similar, to avoid confusion with the Merseyrail Northern Line. Unfortunately, I lack the expertise or courage to take on such a task... --me_and 10:15, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

Given the age of *the* Northern Line and the previous lack of previous knowledge of any 'Northern Line' on Merseyrail, and the number of links in each case, then it is clear that the current page should stay exactly where it is but a Northern Line (disambiguation) page linked to with an onward link to Northern Line (Merseyrail) should that line be sufficiently notable to have an article to itself in addition to the one about Merseyrail. It certainly should not be renamed / moved. --Vamp:Willow 10:40, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'll try and write something for a Northern Line (Merseyrail) page when I get a chance. --me_and 15:00, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

Separation of Northern Line?

I recall hearing of plans at one time to separate the Northern Line into two lines on the LU diagram, as happened to the Metropolitan with the creation of the Hammersmith & City line (and arguably the Jubilee line). It's not hard to imagine how this might be carried out, and it would make navigation easier, at least for tourists. And, of course, it would make sense to have the southernmost Underground line be called, say, the City & South London line rather than the Northern line. Can anyone provide details about when or if this was considered, if so how seriously was it taken, and did or will anything come of it? --ProhibitOnions 11:41, July 27, 2005 (UTC)

I think it was proposed and discounted on the basis that too many people would need to change trains at Camden Town and that station does not have the capacity. MRSC 15:56, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Looks like it's going to happen after all, at least according to the 2025 plan. I hope TfL reintroduces the "City & South" name for one of the branches. ProhibitOnions ^(T) 00:05, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

or, perhaps, call the Morden branch the Southern line :) :p  — MapsMan [ talk | cont ] — 21:37, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I've put the statement about this back in with some tweaking. AlisonW couldn't find the discussion of it because after TfL reorganised their site, someone here updated the reference but linked to the wrong document. --82.45.163.4 23:10, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

What really happens at Camden Town?

Talking of northern line branches, does the strip diagram on this page reflect reality just south of Camden? I mean does it really merge into a middle bit between (A), or do the tracks cross above/below each other (B)?

A)|     |    B)|     |
  |\   /|      |\   /|
  | \ / |      | \ / |
  |  |  |      |  \  |
  |  |  |      | / \ |
  | / \ |      |/   \|
  |/   \|      |     |
  |     |     

...and how can we know for sure? Also I guess the same pattern of junctions repeats above/below for the northbound/southbound tracks. Confusing.

Would be good to illustrate the Camden Town tube station article with a zoomed in diagram showing this.

-- Harry Wood (talk) 13:20, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

The actual routing is more complicated than both of those and uses multiple step junctions to enable trains from each northern branch to reach each central section and vice versa. The original junction built by the Charing Cross, Euston & Hampstead Railway only had to cater for trains coming from the northern branch to the single Charing Cross branch but it was modified in the early 1920s to provide a link for the city & South London Railway between Camden Town and Euston. See here and here for diagrams. --DavidCane (talk) 13:32, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

There is a limit to what the little pictograms can do (sadly!) but no, the crossovers don't touch. it is possible to run non-competing services in both directions at all times. --AlisonW (talk) 13:35, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Aha! Just as I thought. That diagram certainly shows the junctions more clearly. Thanks. So that settles the argument I was having with my girlfriend! As I say, it would be good to have something like that on the Camden Town tube station article. Presumably that image is copyrighted though -- Harry Wood (talk) 14:12, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Fake Buildings

Sorry if this sounds foolish but I heard some while ago that a certain part of the london subway - not sure which line, may even be gone now - was made in such a way that they couldn't have real buildings up anymore so they built fakes to either side of the road. I don't know much more about this but if it's true can you give me the name? Chooserr

No, it doesn't sound foolish at all. It's 23 and 24 Leinster Gardens, London W2.

Try this Google search: link

Or this map: link

Or these pages:

http://www.nyclondon.com/blog/

http://www.urban75.org/london/leinster.html

http://www.londonist.com/archives/2005/07/londonist_loves_10.php

Actually we are in the wrong Talk page here as it's NOT the Northern line. Because of the Tube's interestingly complex history you will see this line listed - for example in the above articles - as various different ones. This is more about the services that run over it than about the line per se, but I will leave all that to someone else to worry about! :) 138.37.199.199 08:14, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Well thank you, and Sorry if I used the wrong talk page :)...I just didn't know where it was. But thank you again, I'll check out the links now. - Chooserr

see Leinster Gardens  — MapsMan [ talk | cont ] — 21:44, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Mistake in map

The "Geographically accurate path of the Northern Line" is different from the "Zone 1" and "Zone 2" maps at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/London_Underground_geographic_maps - the two branches (West End, City) take different routes between Euston and Camden Town stations. Occultations 11:36, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Indeed the map you refer to is inaccurate and should not be refered to as a "geographically accurate" map. The Charing X branch which contains Mornington crescent station actually runs to the east of the Bank branch in reality. I will change the title of this map (again). Deckchair (talk) 09:46, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Although I agree with you re Mornington Crescent et al, the map is a "geographically accurate map of the stations on the Northern line" and, indeed, were it not geographically accurate in some manner there would be no point in having it here at all! Given that few people will be content with the gallery thumbnail it should be noted that the click-through image page makes it distinctly clear that the route between stations is interpolated and may be inaccurate. --AlisonW (talk) 10:17, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

The change of description from "Geographically accurate path of the Northern line" to "Geographically accurate map of the stations on the Northern line" seems to be a much better solution. Good stuff. Deckchair (talk) 11:31, 18 January 2008 (UTC)