As Crossrail is in all likelihood going to be a regional link, as
opposed to an intercity one, are there any reasons why it could not
run double deck trains similar to those is Paris?

"Chetoph" wrote in message
m...
As Crossrail is in all likelihood going to be a regional link, as
opposed to an intercity one, are there any reasons why it could not
run double deck trains similar to those is Paris?

Simple one. Gauge. Crossrail is *not* an entirely new railway, nor is it
proposed to operate on dedicated tracks. At the extremities it will be using
existing Network Rail lines, with all the problems of bridge heights,
trackbed widths etc.

If Crossrail was an entirely new construction, using dedicated track, then
your suggestion would make good sense.

"Chetoph" wrote in message m...
As Crossrail is in all likelihood going to be a regional link, as
opposed to an intercity one, are there any reasons why it could not
run double deck trains similar to those is Paris?

Presumably the tunnel(s) would need a larger diameter, and would
cost proportionately more to dig, if the trains were double deck.

Crossrail have already stated that the trains will be twice as long as a
"normal" tube train.


Robin

"Robin Cox" wrote in message
...

Crossrail have already stated that the trains will be twice as long as a
"normal" tube train.

Although they will, inevitably, have to comply with platform lengths on the
overground sections of Network Rail (such as the suburban stations from
Stratford to Shenfield).

Jack Taylor wrote:
"Robin Cox" wrote in message
...

Crossrail have already stated that the trains will be twice as long as a
"normal" tube train.


Although they will, inevitably, have to comply with platform lengths on the
overground sections of Network Rail (such as the suburban stations from
Stratford to Shenfield).

Won't they just extend the platforms as necessary? Given the cost of the
project, I'd hate to see them run shorter trains than the system can
take just because existing platforms are too short.


--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7

Dave Arquati wrote:
Jack Taylor wrote:
"Robin Cox" wrote in message
...

Crossrail have already stated that the trains will be twice as long
as a "normal" tube train.


Although they will, inevitably, have to comply with platform lengths
on the overground sections of Network Rail (such as the suburban
stations from Stratford to Shenfield).

Won't they just extend the platforms as necessary? Given the cost of
the project, I'd hate to see them run shorter trains than the system
can take just because existing platforms are too short.

They do indeed plan to extend existing platforms where necessary to
accomodate 10-car Crossrail trains, according to
http://www.crossrail.co.uk/consultation.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

"Richard J." wrote in
:

Dave Arquati wrote:
Jack Taylor wrote:
"Robin Cox" wrote in message
...

Crossrail have already stated that the trains will be twice as long
as a "normal" tube train.


Although they will, inevitably, have to comply with platform lengths
on the overground sections of Network Rail (such as the suburban
stations from Stratford to Shenfield).

Won't they just extend the platforms as necessary? Given the cost of
the project, I'd hate to see them run shorter trains than the system
can take just because existing platforms are too short.

They do indeed plan to extend existing platforms where necessary to
accomodate 10-car Crossrail trains, according to
http://www.crossrail.co.uk/consultation.

Er, Why 10-cars? Designing the in-tunnel stations for anything less than
12 cars would be madness. I could understand leaving the out-tunnel
stations at eight cars (as present on the suburban GE) to save money and
get the project off the ground, or extend to 12 cars, but 10? This
requires almost as much work for half the benefit!

Chetoph wrote:

As Crossrail is in all likelihood going to be a regional link, as
opposed to an intercity one, are there any reasons why it could not
run double deck trains similar to those is Paris?

London Regional Metro (the private sector consortium with plans to build
a more commercially viable version of Crossrail) includes the provision
for double decker trains in its plans.

Your question implies that double deck trains are better for regional
services than intercity ones, but the reverse is the case because of the
extra time the trains would take to load and unload.

I met with some people from LRM and asked why they thought it was worth
the extra expense of bigger tunnels when double deck trains would
require longer station dwell times. I was told that the tunnels required
for double deck trains aren't much bigger than for normal trains, and
aren't much costlier (the running tunnels are a relatively small
component of the cost anyway). Furthermore CTRL completion would make
some large TBMs available. There were no plans for double decker trains
initially, but they thought it made sense to keep the option open to
introduce them if Crossrail gets too crowded after several decades.
Meanwhile, the bigger tunnels would at least provide an aerodynamic
advantage.

--
Aidan Stanger

"Aidan Stanger" schreef in bericht
...
Chetoph wrote:

As Crossrail is in all likelihood going to be a regional link, as
opposed to an intercity one, are there any reasons why it could not
run double deck trains similar to those is Paris?

London Regional Metro (the private sector consortium with plans to build
a more commercially viable version of Crossrail) includes the provision
for double decker trains in its plans.

Your question implies that double deck trains are better for regional
services than intercity ones, but the reverse is the case because of the
extra time the trains would take to load and unload.

I met with some people from LRM and asked why they thought it was worth
the extra expense of bigger tunnels when double deck trains would
require longer station dwell times. I was told that the tunnels required
for double deck trains aren't much bigger than for normal trains, and
aren't much costlier (the running tunnels are a relatively small
component of the cost anyway). Furthermore CTRL completion would make
some large TBMs available. There were no plans for double decker trains
initially, but they thought it made sense to keep the option open to
introduce them if Crossrail gets too crowded after several decades.
Meanwhile, the bigger tunnels would at least provide an aerodynamic
advantage.

Here in the Netherlands, we have doubledecker trains for almost 20 years
now. I guess that the train services in the higly urbanised and densily
populated western part of the country ("Randstad Holland") is somewhat
comparable with Greater London.
Increased loading/unloading times are not considered to be a problem here.
Most doubledeckers have wide doors that allow three people to pass through
them at the same time. However, those carriages have been tested on the
München S-Bahn and the Germans considered the flow of people to slow. Maybe
because Bavarians are much wider than Dutchman...
The trains have been build to fit in the usual Continental profile. The
comfort doesn't suffer too much, especially in the newest trains that are
used in Intercity services.
I guess using doubledecker trains is way cheaper than making trains (and
platforms) longer of running more trains.

greetings,
hgrm

--
Aidan Stanger

"Han Monsees" wrote in message
news
The trains have been build to fit in the usual Continental profile. The
comfort doesn't suffer too much, especially in the newest trains that are
used in Intercity services.
I guess using doubledecker trains is way cheaper than making trains (and
platforms) longer of running more trains.

The problem is that Crossrail is *not* planned to operate on entirely
purpose-built infrastructure. The only new construction will be the tunnels
across Central London. Therefore any stock built for the system must be
built to the existing British loading gauge (in exactly the same way that
the Eurostar stock has been). Conversion of, for example, the section of the
Great Eastern main line between Stratford and Shenfield (one of the eastern
limbs of Crossrail) to Continental loading gauge would be astronomical in
cost.

Running double-deck trains within the existing British loading gauge has
already been proven to be a failure. Two four-car double-deck trains were
built by the Southern Railway and used on the Dartford suburban lines until
the early 1970s. They were *extremely* cramped and unpleasant to travel in,
even for passengers in the 1940s. Bear in mind that the average Briton has
increased in height and girth significantly in the last sixty years and the
idea is a non-starter.