David Jackman wrote:
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 20:12:38 +0000, Dave Arquati wrote:

Fresh off the press - to prevent performance pollution from SET,
Crossrail will share no track with SET on its Isle of Dogs branch and
will terminate at a new cross-platform interchange at Abbey Wood.

http://www.crossrail.co.uk/pages/pro...announced.html

That's a rather neat way of cutting scheme costs now while leaving open
the door for a separately funded extension through to Ebbsfleet at some
far off point in the future. Something tells me this is the first of
many such announcements to ensure the financial problems are resolved.

That's a sensible decision (though it doesn't go far enough). There's no
great advantage to linking the West End, City and Wharf with Ebbsfleet.

True, but the biggest cost is the tunnel which is very difficult to reduce
without killing off the scheme (remove Canary Wharf and you lose any
funding from that source that might have been available, remove either of
the other legs (Paddington-Liverpool Street/Liverpool Street-Stratford) and
there really isn't a lot of point).

On the contrary, removing Canary Wharf would be the most sensible thing
they could do! The funding is available from Canary Wharf wouldn't go
anywhere near covering the enormous costs of that branch, and passenger
capacity to Canary Wharf could easily be provided with boats (which
could become quite popular if they accepted travelcards) and with a few
minor improvements to the bus network.

In the long term, I'd like to see another Crossrail line linking the
Canary Wharf area with Kings Cross, Woolwich (and possibly Abbey Wood)
and Southend via Tilbury (running alongside the DLR to Gallions Reach,
then taking over its Dagenham branch. But there are other lines, such as
Crossrail 2, that should take priority. Making half a service to Canary
Wharf part of Crossrail 1, with no provision for improvement, will only
serve to deter future investment.