On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 13:50:18 +0100, "Ben Nunn"
wrote:

Unless I'm very much mistaken, it was Jonn Elledge
), in message
who said:

I agree the whole thing looks politically motivated, but in this case
I don't think that's really a bad thing. The eastern end of the
Thames really does need regenerating, and Canary Wharf could do with
another line to the centre of town as I believe the existing ones are
already pushing capacity.

Well the Jubilee Line is just a tad busy in the peaks!

What's more, the Shenfield line is one of
the busiest stretches of national rail in the London area (there are
12 trains per hour as far as Gidea Park in the peaks). I always felt
that Crossrail should effectively be a slightly larger-scale tube
line, rather than a way for long distance trains to cross London.

Well it is a hybrid service isn't it like the RER in Paris or S Bahn in
Germany. It combines longer distance trips with high frequency and
central area / cross conurbation access.

After all, does anyone really want to go from Southend to Reading?

Who knows? I strongly suspect that people in Southend would not object
to a direct service to Heathrow. I am also pretty sure that business in
the Thames Valley would have no objection whatsoever to being directly
linked to the Thames Gateway, Eurostar stations or Canary Wharf.

They should keep the central part of it as planned with all existing stops,
but use the services to form part of a much bigger plan.

Crossrail services should couple to existing trains either side of the
central area, allowing for fast intercity routes.
[snip]
Basically express intercity services,
but running /through/ London and stopping within.

I understand your proposition and in some ways support it. However there
are a few issues.

1. Intercity services are not the same as suburban or even regional
ones. Completely different timings, rolling stock performance and
design. Far more people with luggage who all want a seat. Not exactly
compatible with people cramming on at Tottenham Court Rd to get to
Ilford or the modern day equivalent - people from Coventry or
Wolverhampton cramming into Virgin West Coast or Cross Country services
to commute to Birmingham - absolute hell.

2. There is the issue of demand for such services. I could see merit in
services to Ipswich to Reading but possibly no further.

3. The capacity restrictions from having trains couple and decouple at
both ends of the tunnel would cause considerable issues about getting
24tph through the central tunnel section.

4. On a previous piece of work I had to explain in words of one
syllable to a consultant that it was not practical to run a Virgin
Trains diesel train through the north side of the Circle Line and then
impose ticketing and boarding restrictions at say Baker St and expect
London commuters wanting to get home to comply with them! I could see
similar issues in your proposal.

I think what could be better would be a properly structured set of Inter
City services running from terminal stations (which by rights should
have more capacity post Crossrail) but with strategic stops at Crossrail
interchanges. This provides the option for interchange to a whole range
of destinations and modes and could me made to work properly with some
signalling and platform investment at key locations.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!