"Tom Anderson" wrote

Also, 12 Crossrail in the peak hour? I thought 16tph were going to
Shenfield?

The plan is 12 Shenfield and 12 Abbey Wood in the peak. Actually I think
there is a case for 16 Shenfield and 8 Abbey Wood in the high peak, though
there is a need for enough trains from West/Central London to Canary Wharf.
It might actually be possible, if enough high peak trains from Shenfield run
to Crossrail to do away with the Shenfield to Liverpool Street terminus
trains. Then on the approach to Liverpool Street the Electric Lines could
become the Mains, the Mains could take some Main Line trains, trains via
Tottenham Hale and Stratford, and, from Bethnal Green, some trains off the
West Anglia Lines, leaving the Suburban pair mainly for Enfield, Southbury,
and Chingford.

Peter

On Sun, 03 Apr 2011 19:26:05 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

Where things are a bit woolier are what happens west of Oxford Circus.
If relieving congestion was the priority, the route would echo the
Victoria line going southwest, as that's the most congested corridor on
the other side of Oxford Circus, and then take over some of the SWML
services into Waterloo, which are again highly congested. It's easy
enough to look at a map and see sensible stops along the way - Victoria,
Clapham Junction, perhaps Hyde Park Corner, perhaps somewhere along
Queenstown Road.

However, that route was rejected in favour of Paddington and points
west. I've never been able to find a really good justification for this;
the studies consistently indicate a higher benefit to the southwest
route. I suspect that it's been driven by a regeneration agenda, which
has induced a certain amount of fudging in the studies (eg IIRC, one
study costed the southwest route as going in tunnel all the way to
Wimbledon, when i don't think it needs to go much further than Clapham
Junction, making it look rather more expensive than it needed to).

At one stage in the Crossrail plans there was going to be a Richmond
branch. This was bitterly opposed by the locals, hence the large number of
trains planned to go no further west than Paddington.

Colin McKenzie


--
No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at the
population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as walking.
Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.

On Apr 3, 10:47*pm, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"Tom Anderson" wrote

Also, 12 Crossrail in the peak hour? I thought 16tph were going to
Shenfield?

The plan is 12 Shenfield and 12 Abbey Wood in the peak. Actually I think
there is a case for 16 Shenfield and 8 Abbey Wood in the high peak, though
there is a need for enough trains from West/Central London to Canary Wharf.
It might actually be possible, if enough high peak trains from Shenfield run
to Crossrail to do away with the Shenfield to Liverpool Street terminus
trains. Then on the approach to Liverpool Street the Electric Lines could
become the Mains, the Mains could take some Main Line trains, trains via
Tottenham Hale and Stratford, and, from Bethnal Green, some trains off the
West Anglia Lines, leaving the Suburban pair mainly for Enfield, Southbury,
and Chingford.

Peter

In another forum a very good idea was put forward for a chord between
the tunnel near Puddling Mill and the tunnel west of Canary Wharf.
Essentially, it lets you use the remainder of the tunnel capacity to
operate additional services over the other branch.

i.e. Peak, your 24tph core becomes 12tph core-Shenfield, 12tph core-
Abbey Wood, and 12tph Shenfield-Abbey Wood, giving 24tph on all
branches. Using the alternative mentioned above, that could become
16tph core-Shenfield, 8tph core-Abbey Wood, and 8tph Shenfield-Abbey
Wood, giving 24tph on the core, 24tph on the Shenfield branch, and
16tph on the Abbey Wood branch.

It also gives interesting options like WAML trains down to Abbey Wood
via Canary Wharf, greatly relieving the Jubilee at Stratford (perhaps
permitting an extension northwards somewhere). Perhaps even offering
the possibility of a station somewhere in Tower Hamlets, which might
be good for the area.

On Apr 3, 11:47*am, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
"Tom Anderson" wrote in message

rth.li...

Yes. I read the various east-west studies a few years ago, and the common
theme was congestion relief in the Essix [1] - City - Oxford Circus
corridor. The current plan won't do much for congestion east of Liverpool
Street, because it adds neither track nor trains (alright, it adds track
between Liverpool Street and Stratford - but is there any plan to use the
capacity released on the surface line?), but it should help enormously
between Stratford and Oxford Street.

There will still be residual services on the slow lines to/from Liverpool St
in the peaks, *Crossrail doesn't replacement all of the existing service, so
the total number of trains into Liverpool St (ie high and low level
conbined) should be somewhat greater than now.
The Network Rail 2nd gen RUS for London and the SE covers the subject, and
suggests that 8 current services are removed in the high peak hour to make
room for the 12 Crossrail.

IMHO, it would be better to move entire service groups over to
Crossrail. Passengers will still pass thru Liverpool Street.

There are also some loosely worded plans to make more use of the West Anglia
routes into Liverpool St. *Ideally the trains from the Lea Valley into
Stratford would be increased and run through to the terminus, but they are
on the wrong side of the mainlines.

Paul S

On Apr 3, 3:49*pm, Jamie Thompson wrote:
On Apr 3, 10:47*pm, "Peter Masson" wrote:





"Tom Anderson" wrote

Also, 12 Crossrail in the peak hour? I thought 16tph were going to
Shenfield?

The plan is 12 Shenfield and 12 Abbey Wood in the peak. Actually I think
there is a case for 16 Shenfield and 8 Abbey Wood in the high peak, though
there is a need for enough trains from West/Central London to Canary Wharf.
It might actually be possible, if enough high peak trains from Shenfield run
to Crossrail to do away with the Shenfield to Liverpool Street terminus
trains. Then on the approach to Liverpool Street the Electric Lines could
become the Mains, the Mains could take some Main Line trains, trains via
Tottenham Hale and Stratford, and, from Bethnal Green, some trains off the
West Anglia Lines, leaving the Suburban pair mainly for Enfield, Southbury,
and Chingford.

Peter

In another forum a very good idea was put forward for a chord between
the tunnel near Puddling Mill and the tunnel west of Canary Wharf.
Essentially, it lets you use the remainder of the tunnel capacity to
operate additional services over the other branch.

i.e. Peak, your 24tph core becomes 12tph core-Shenfield, 12tph core-
Abbey Wood, and 12tph Shenfield-Abbey Wood, giving 24tph on all
branches. Using the alternative mentioned above, that could become
16tph core-Shenfield, 8tph core-Abbey Wood, and 8tph Shenfield-Abbey
Wood, giving 24tph on the core, 24tph on the Shenfield branch, and
16tph on the Abbey Wood branch.

It also gives interesting options like WAML trains down to Abbey Wood
via Canary Wharf, greatly relieving the Jubilee at Stratford (perhaps
permitting an extension northwards somewhere). Perhaps even offering
the possibility of a station somewhere in Tower Hamlets, which might
be good for the area.

Does the Jubulee Line need relief?

On Apr 3, 11:26*am, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Sun, 3 Apr 2011, 1506 wrote:
On Mar 28, 10:57 am, Robin9 wrote:

In my opinion a properly extended Chelsea/Hackney line would be far more
beneficial to London than Crossrail.

Maybe, but the perceived need, and it is a real one, is relief of the
Central Line.

Yes. I read the various east-west studies a few years ago, and the common
theme was congestion relief in the Essix [1] - City - Oxford Circus
corridor. The current plan won't do much for congestion east of Liverpool
Street, because it adds neither track nor trains (alright, it adds track
between Liverpool Street and Stratford - but is there any plan to use the
capacity released on the surface line?), but it should help enormously
between Stratford and Oxford Street.

But, if not Southwest, the route has to go somewhere.

Where things are a bit woolier are what happens west of Oxford Circus. If
relieving congestion was the priority, the route would echo the Victoria
line going southwest, as that's the most congested corridor on the other
side of Oxford Circus, and then take over some of the SWML services into
Waterloo, which are again highly congested. It's easy enough to look at a
map and see sensible stops along the way - Victoria, Clapham Junction,
perhaps Hyde Park Corner, perhaps somewhere along Queenstown Road.

However, that route was rejected in favour of Paddington and points west.
I've never been able to find a really good justification for this; the
studies consistently indicate a higher benefit to the southwest route. I
suspect that it's been driven by a regeneration agenda, which has induced
a certain amount of fudging in the studies (eg IIRC, one study costed the
southwest route as going in tunnel all the way to Wimbledon, when i don't
think it needs to go much further than Clapham Junction, making it look
rather more expensive than it needed to).

There is a case for a link from Old Oak Common to the WCML slow AC
pair. Taking over the Western branches of the Central Line would be
another option. But, if it were cut back to White Cite, what would
replace Ruislip Depot?

Still, if we do eventually get Crossrail 2 / Chelsea-Hackney, then that
will presumably go in that general direction.

Chelney is a line that is always going to be built sometime in the
future.

On Sun, 3 Apr 2011 22:45:17 -0700 (PDT), 1506
wrote:
Does the Jubulee Line need relief?

Have you *seen* how busy it gets at Canary Wharf in the peaks?

Neil

--
Neil Williams, Milton Keynes, UK

"1506" wrote in message


Does the Jubulee Line need relief?

Try getting on a westbound Jubilee train at Southwark in the evening
peak -- train after train arrives completely full, with no spaces at all
to board.

"1506" wrote in message
...
On Apr 3, 11:47 am, "Paul Scott"
wrote:

There will still be residual services on the slow lines to/from Liverpool
St
in the peaks, Crossrail doesn't replace all of the existing service, so
the total number of trains into Liverpool St (ie high and low level
conbined) should be somewhat greater than now.
The Network Rail 2nd gen RUS for London and the SE covers the subject,
and
suggests that 8 current services are removed in the high peak hour to
make
room for the 12 Crossrail.

IMHO, it would be better to move entire service groups over to
Crossrail. Passengers will still pass thru Liverpool Street.

You can't do that if you haven't the capacity. There is only space on
Crossrail for 12 tph off the GE slows, and the future timetable has a peak
service of 6tph running from Gidea Park into Liverpool St (HL) as well.

This as shown in the Crossrail Track Access Option Schedule 2 - on NR's
website.

Paul S

1506 wrote:

On Apr 3, 3:49*pm, Jamie Thompson wrote:
On Apr 3, 10:47*pm, "Peter Masson" wrote:





"Tom Anderson" wrote

Also, 12 Crossrail in the peak hour? I thought 16tph were going to
Shenfield?

The plan is 12 Shenfield and 12 Abbey Wood in the peak. Actually I think
there is a case for 16 Shenfield and 8 Abbey Wood in the high peak, though
there is a need for enough trains from West/Central London to Canary Wharf.
It might actually be possible, if enough high peak trains from Shenfield run
to Crossrail to do away with the Shenfield to Liverpool Street terminus
trains. Then on the approach to Liverpool Street the Electric Lines could
become the Mains, the Mains could take some Main Line trains, trains via
Tottenham Hale and Stratford, and, from Bethnal Green, some trains off the
West Anglia Lines, leaving the Suburban pair mainly for Enfield, Southbury,
and Chingford.

Peter

In another forum a very good idea was put forward for a chord between
the tunnel near Puddling Mill and the tunnel west of Canary Wharf.
Essentially, it lets you use the remainder of the tunnel capacity to
operate additional services over the other branch.

i.e. Peak, your 24tph core becomes 12tph core-Shenfield, 12tph core-
Abbey Wood, and 12tph Shenfield-Abbey Wood, giving 24tph on all
branches. Using the alternative mentioned above, that could become
16tph core-Shenfield, 8tph core-Abbey Wood, and 8tph Shenfield-Abbey
Wood, giving 24tph on the core, 24tph on the Shenfield branch, and
16tph on the Abbey Wood branch.

It also gives interesting options like WAML trains down to Abbey Wood
via Canary Wharf, greatly relieving the Jubilee at Stratford (perhaps
permitting an extension northwards somewhere). Perhaps even offering
the possibility of a station somewhere in Tower Hamlets, which might
be good for the area.

Does the Jubulee Line need relief?

A few months ago, I passed through Canada Water station in the second
half of the evening peak. As the JL trains were crowded, I decided to
eat my sandwich on a station bench, and then catch a train afterwards. I
waited 45 minutes for one that wasn't absolutely wedged. I think that
when one did come in, it had turned back short of Stratford.

--
..sig down for maintenance