Seems like the line has a great future ahead of it! Nice to see you made an appearance in the video!

thanks man!

if you think this is incoherent, imagine the absoulute state our DnD campaign is in rn 😭🤣🤣🤣 - Willow

​@TheTransportTrio Regarding DnD I shudder to think..! However, I do agree with you regarding certain overground options the weaver line should have remained as GE/Anglia suburban services until such time that they are incorporated into the next X-rail scheme, though don't hold your breath. As for the Romford - Upminster - Grays a light rail option similar to Croydon Tramlink would be far more appropriate, with some additional stops and passing loops a 10 minute service pattern is easily achievable. This would necessitate the constuction of a dive-under or fly-over at Upminster.

@@glenaetitmus2106 i'm usure on the feasibility of a light rail system to be honest, i thought about it a month or so ago but considering the bus service is decent, and instead a junction to connect the Romford - upminster line to the grays shuttle line just before upminster station would be a lot more feasible - the two lines barely get enough ridership with a half hourly service as it is, upgrade the service to every 15 mins with a figurative passing loop at ockendon/upminster and make the line part of c2c or greater anglia's network, and run 5 car 720s on it that would work decently well the problem with the idea of light rail is it would require a lot more infastructure, a whole new fleet of trains, and it would be completely disconnected and it would make it a sort of uncomfortable outlier in the area, if there were to be a proper havering area tram network, maybe extending to areas like shenfield, gidea park, ongar and so on, then yeah that would make sense, but as an isolated line in the greater national rail network it makes a lot more sense to just put a junction at upminster & connect it to the greater c2c network it would also allow for diversionary routes, if there is a problem or works between upminster and barking, c2c trains terminate at upminster, the addition of this junction could allow c2c to divert into Liverpool's street in the case of disruption, thus meaning people still get into london - willow

@TheTransportTrio It is for that very reason I mentioned Croydon Tramlink which for two thirds of its network runs on under used/disused BR lines. There were those who said that it wouldn't work, It was soon prouved how wrong they were. With at least eight additional stops between Romford and Grays with the potential of extending to Barkingside and Harold Wood would make for a far more efficient and quicker service than local busses stuck in traffic, no...!

@@glenaetitmus2106 i see i see, if that were to happen then i'd like to see it on a bit of a larger scale, to shenfield, ongar, maybe taking over the current vectare route 20 operations between Ongar and harlow via north weald and epping, connecting with the central line at Epping & the epping ongar railway at Ongar, north weald, and eventually epping/coopersale central connect route 20 is the bane of my existence rn, and on the heading into london front - maybe it goes all the way to loughton, waltham abbey/cross, even maybe running along the proposed route between waltham abbey and chingford there's a lot of possibilities & if there were to be a sort of north east london, Hertfordshire & essex light rail system, i'd like it to be on a much bigger scale than than the tramlink, more on a scale similar to that of the Manchester metrolink as that area, specifically the part where the red busses end is really not good for public transport & especially with it being so close to london, you'd expect good connectivity but there isn't, so a tram system covering that whole area would be great on the subject of trams, what's your thoughts on bringing trams back to central london, replacing some bus routes? - willow

holy moly!

@@antigod8385 Edinburgh Waverly!

we're planning on doing all the tube lines, and then we'll work our way through other systems like overground, DLR, and eventually crossrail too! so we'll definitely give crossrail a go, probably after the overground series! in terms of route, the hard part would be getting from reading to london while trying to stay as close to the line as possible, getting to shenfield is pretty easy as the epping ongar railway operates a bus from epping to shenfield via north weald and ongar, so we'd just have to do it on a weekend

@TheTransportTrio I think Maidenhead would be the biggest challenge. Windsor and Maidenhead has the second-worst bus network in England after Rutland. You could skip it by taking the X74 from Slough to High Wycombe, then the 850 from High Wycombe to Reading which goes pretty close to Twyford station.

Thank you! The idea came to me in the shower lol, it's something i love about busses is that unlike with trains where you can get some great landscape views, with busses you get to really get a feel for the local areas as you pass though them, it's really cool with london to see how the archatecure develops from small victorian worker's cottages to big grand buildings in the city centre! - Willow

what? 💀

Willow wears a mask for medical reasons outside of COVID, and was wearing a mask pre-covid too. She also just doesn't want her face on camera & online, which is fair - everyone is entitled to privacy - Ewan

we both repeat what we say because that's just how we talk - it's a form of verbal processing, we treat these videos like us just filming us having a normal conversation and so as conversations tend to do, we repeat ourselves at points. i am looking around because we are outside, in the dark, willow is a girl, and we both are autistic - it is not particularly safe to be walking around, staring at a screen and not the outside world - we are walking next to an active railway and do not want to trip and fall, and i am also looking out for willow. if you are asking why i am looking about while on the train, simple awnser is: peak time, both willow and i are vulnerable people and we need to be vigilant of our surroundings - like just the other day when i was asleep on the tube i woke up to willow being harrased by some bloke, so yes, we take this seriously. and i personally take offense to you calling me inept at focusing on the camera, i am just looking out for the safety of myself and my best friend in a public space, thank you. - ewan

Nope!

Unfortunately that's the opposite of what needs to happen. The main two points of this video are: 710s are overall bad trains 710s do not suit operations along the Lea Valley 710s are not good for the lea valley, and Willow, as a local to them, absolutely hates them. And she is justified, they are terrible. 710s do not offer a net improvment on the rolling stock that came prior to them, A replacement train should be able to improve on these factors: capacity, ride quality, reliability, build quality, comfort, acceleration, aircon, toilets and charging points. 710s only improve on 2 and a half of those points, for all the other points, the 710s either straight up dont have it or they are a downgrade on what came before. Capacity: 710s somehow suffer from more overcrowding problems than the class 315s and 317s did, despite not having much of a ridership increase since their introduction ( Ride Quality: despite the older stock being built 40 years ago, the 710s are still very rough riding especially over points, whereas the 315s and 317s were as smooth as butter despite being older. 378s are also a lot smoother than 710s despite coming up to 20 years old now. Reliablilty: 710s are very unreliable units, with many technical issues and failiures a day leading to at least 2 peak time services a day being cancelled or short formed - considering the fact the 710s have big capacity issues too, this is unacceptable. Build quality: 710s are poorly built. No two ways around it, cheap materials and poor construction, they are falling apart internally and externally, and it has not even been 10 years - the expected lifespan of the 710s is 15 to 20 years - the previous rolling stock lasted 45 years and didn't show any signs of stopping reliability wise Comfort: With hard uncomfortable seats, and an inappropriate seating layout for the line, the 710s are already a downgrade on the previous stock that had nice comfortable padded seats & said seats were in an arrangement that suited the line Acceleration: 710s do improve on acceleration, but that's not much use if the train's gonna break down and get cancelled at clapton due to technical faults, like what happened to us in The TfL Fleet Reveiw video Aircon: 710s have aircon, when it decides to work, which is far more infrequent than it should be, but the addition of aircon is an improvement Toilets: there are no toilets on the 710s whereas the 317s did have toilets, not good TfL. Charging points: the addition of charging points is good... but there's only like what 20 per train? as they're located right in the gangways 710s are not approprite for the lea valley and all getting more 710s would do is not fix the fact that 710s and overall London Overground does not work with the Lea Valley. What we beleive should happen is, the lines should be handed back to Greater Anglia - the evidence to show this would be an improvement is the Hertford East line, which is a member of the Lea valley lines and is styalistically, operationally & architecturally very similar to the chingford line, due to them being in the same family of lines - and Greater Anglia's Class 720s suit the line so well. 720s are a net improvement on the 317s that operated the line prior & the only thing the 317s have them beat for is ride quality - everything else ths 720 either matches or exceeds the 317 in. The 720s suit the layout of the lines much better too, especially from a branchline perspective, the chingford line is a branch line, not a high intensity metro line & the 720s seating & the overall operations of Greater Anglia reflects this - again you have to look no further than the Hertford East line and see the improvement the 720s would bring. The extra car would add much needed capacity too. basically, yes 710s are very bad and do not suit the Lea Valley operations & all ordering new ones would do is cause more problems, the passangers don't like them - majority of Willow's friends who live in the area & are not rail enthusiasts say that the older trains & their layout was much better and that the Greater Anglia trains would suit the line better than the 710s. The message is clear - the passangers dont like them & think the line should be handed back to GA. - Ewan

@@TheTransportTrio Thanks for interesting feedback. I do appreciate on what you said and I totally agree with you. :)

You call it whatever you want mate. As much as the new names suck it seems weird to talk to a friend and say oh I'm on the goblin line, the Suffragette line now makes more sense....commuter wise.

Havering Line would of been a better option. As the small branch line is in the London Borough of Havering and Romford, Emerson Park and Upminster are all in the LB of Havering.

Was waiting for this comment lol.

@MichaelSebastianTodd see here's the thing - it's all very well getting new trains to replace older trains that need replacing, our problem comes with the fact the 710s are just not very good the reliability is terrible, with minimum 2 peak time trains a day being cancelled or short formed due to faults, they somehow have less capacity than the previous stock, the ride quality is again somehow poorer than the 315s and 317s, and the quality of the build is worse, great they’re faster and have aircon but that’s no use if the trains been cancelled because its had reliability issues or because they’re literally falling apart - plus the main point of this video is that london Overground does not suit the type of lines that the lea valley are - high intensity metro style trains that somehow have worse capacity than the previous trains do not suit the very separated/isolated branchline feel of the lines, this is proven by the fact that 2 of the 5 lea valley lines are operated with greater anglia’s class 720s and they do a much better job and suit the lines a lot better than 710s i'm local to the chingford line and i know many people (99%) of which are not rail enthusiasts like me, who say the old trains were better and that the line would be better with greater anglia’s trains - i do not personally know someone who actually likes the 710s and thinks they are an improvement on the 315s and 317s the 710s were built to replace 2 car DMUs on the goblin, not 4 car capacity gods and as a local to the chingford line i can also say these trains have been the bane of my existence - i have been late for doctor’s appointments and exams due to issues with the 710s, issues that should not be persisting why can’t we have new trains that actually improve on the old stock in ways that matter - capacity, ride quality, reliability, build quality, comfort, acceleration, aircon, toilets and charging points right now we have trains that have improved on 2 and a quarter of those points, those being speed, aircon, and charging points but they’re limited the other 6 points they have been a downgrade on and that’s even without taking into account the inappropriate seating layout for the line whereas the previous stock succeeded in 5 and a half of those points (317s had toilets) give the lea valley back to GA and put 720s on the line and a lot of these issues will be fixed - willow

hey there! we think Greater Anglia should run it, they run 2 out of the 5 lea valley lines and after just going on the Hertford East member of the lea valley lines, we can confirm Greater Anglia 720s and overall Greater Anglia suits the line better - Willow

​@TheTransportTrio now that I think about it actually greater angila does sound a lot more suitable, and the 720s overall are better then 710s!

First off, thank you for the comment and the perspective :) while both of us are young and fit, we are not very fast walkers - Ewan has medical conditions which limits his speed, and Willow suffers from the curse of short legs, also while a direct connection to the mainline would be great, unfortunately it's not even a direct connection, and they could've used the disused platform 6 at Wolverhampton - the main point of the video is was it worth it? £50 million is a lot of money, and as mentioned in the video, other extensions such as the Trafford Centre extension in Manchester, which is 3 miles longer, has 6 new stations, double track, an entirely new viaduct (which is not cheap), a park and ride, and overhead wires for the entire line, had a lower mean cost than the Wolverhampton extension of the Midland metro. The Trafford Centre extension had a cost of £350 million - if we take 0.4 (the length of the Wolverhampton extention (miles)) and times it by 8.5 you get 3.4 (the length of the Trafford Centre extension (miles)) then take the 50 million it cost and times that by 8.5 you get £425 million, and the Wolverhampton extension had much less infrastructure requirements too, like not needing overhead wires, and the actual stations being a lot smaller and less resource intensive to build and maintain, so overall we’ve come to the conclusion that for an extension as minimal as the Wolverhampton extension of the West Midlands Metro - the £50 million price tag is not warranted. - Ewan

@@TheTransportTrio Thanks for the reply Ewan. Using your numbers, Wolverhampton cost about 20% more per mile than Trafford. However, you have to remember that Trafford was finished in 2020 and since then, we have had the pandemic and Ukraine war which created massive inflation in building materials and labour costs so allowing for this, I would say the construction costs are broadly similar. £50 million does seem a lot of money but transport infrastructure always seems very expensive at the time it is built. If lots of people use it for decades to come however, it starts to look like better value for money so I guess we will have to look at the impact of the extension on passenger numbers to judge that. I should have said in my first reply that I enjoyed the video and your other content so please keep going!

@@dooniskea yeah if it's being used that's great and that's a net positive, and the pandemic and other factors definitely played a role in it being so expensive, but it was supposed to be finished at around the same time as the Trafford Centre extension, but obviously it got delayed and went massively overbudget - but it's still quite the antithesis of what a light rail project should be, light rail should be cheap, easy, and cost effective, whereas the Wolverhampton extention is more in the price range of a heavy rail project for something as small as a 720 meter extension anyway, thanks for the comment & feedback! it's always appreciated & we hope you continue to enjoy our content! - willow

hey there! yeah to be totally honest, as mentioned at the beginning of the video we were filming it the day of upload & we were filming another video just after that one so when it came to editing and uploading i had a total of half an hour over a costa hot chocolate 💀 so something like the video being shot the wrong way round sorta just slipped my mind there lol, apologies for that while it's great the extension is being used, to us the maths just doesn't make it seem worth it - The Trafford Centre extension in Manchester had a cost of £350 million, if we take 0.4 and times it by 8.5 you get 3.4, then take the 50 million it cost and times that by 8.5 you get £425 million, and the Wolverhampton extension had much less infrastructure requirements too, like not needing overhead wires, and the actual stations being a lot smaller and less resource intensive to build and maintain, so overall we’ve come to the conclusion that for an extension as minimal as the Wolverhampton extension of the West Midlands Metro - the £50 million price tag is not warranted - Willow

I make it £60,000 a metre. And the trams sit in traffic at the lights due to Wolverhampton UTC not altering the timings. Would have been far better to extend it to dudley street or to Bentley bridge. Imagine if TfWM bought tram trains instead and what could have been.