On Mar 31, 6:13*pm, Jamie Thompson wrote:
On Mar 31, 3:59*pm, 77002 wrote:

There is probably room for both. *My preference would be to see
Crossrail serve the slow AC stations on the WCML. *The Amersham and
Aylesbury route would work well as a branch of Thameslink. *The
Metropolitan would run the "slow" service to Watford, leaving the
fasts for Thameslink. *Chiltern could then focus on providing the
stopping service to Birmingham, while HS2 provides the fast service.

The problem with anything on the scale of Crossrail is that it's
tendrils reach out and touch so many other areas/idea/projects.

Considering my advocacy of the CR1-Chiltern option, I'm also a
proponent of the CR3 idea of Euston-Waterloo, with the southern
branches being the obvious ones from Clapham Junction, but the
northern ones being the WCML slows and via a short tunnel to Neasden,
the "fast" lines on the Chiltern/Met (inc. those between HotH and
Rickmansworth). Marylebone then only has to serve mainline services,
giving it all the capacity it'll need for some time, the removal of
Met fast services becomes viable as you'll end up with CR3 serving the
route, giving these under-supplied lines a much more suitable service.

Interesting options.

For Crossrail 3, I favor a much earlier option. There was a plan to
parallel the Northern Line with a limited stop main line gauge tube.
It was to follow the Charing Cross branch. Indeed some of the station
boxes were built and functioned as world war two bunkers.

At the southern, such a Crossrail could part from the Northern Line
at South Wimbledon and head over to Raynes Park. From there it could
supplement LSWR suburban services.

One of the big gaps in London's transportation system is the lack of a
direct rail link between Waterloo and Kings Cross Saint Pancras. I
believe CR3 could usefully continue beyond Euston to Kings Cross.
Although I am not sure where CR3 could proceed from there. :-)