|
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
Published today at: http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/ro...ityeasteng.pdf
Covers the London Liverpool Street to Cambridge/Stansted main line and London area branches. Quick highlights of proposals: * 12 car trains London to Cambridge and Stansted in 2012; 'longer' trains on the other routes * 10 to 15 minute reduction on London to Cambridge and Stansted journey times * extension of London Overground services from Stratford to Northumberland Park (or a shuttle service) * grade-separation of Coppermill Junction and four-tracking from there to Tottenham Hale * removal of many level crossings in the Lea Valley, both road and foot * 100mph ruling line speed * second tunnel on approach to Stansted Airport * signalling alterations to allow overnight services to/from Stansted Airport |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
In article
, () wrote: Published today at: http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/ro...ityeasteng.pdf Covers the London Liverpool Street to Cambridge/Stansted main line and London area branches. Quick highlights of proposals: * 12 car trains London to Cambridge and Stansted in 2012; 'longer' trains on the other routes They're going to have to get their skates on to build the Cambridge island platform then! * 10 to 15 minute reduction on London to Cambridge and Stansted journey times Welcome for sure. * extension of London Overground services from Stratford to Northumberland Park (or a shuttle service) * grade-separation of Coppermill Junction and four-tracking from there to Tottenham Hale But not North of there? * removal of many level crossings in the Lea Valley, both road and foot * 100mph ruling line speed * second tunnel on approach to Stansted Airport * signalling alterations to allow overnight services to/from Stansted Airport -- Colin Rosenstiel |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
Tom Anderson wrote:
Could it be that those stations serve areas where people don't commute to work in other parts of London, either working locally or, shock horror, not at all? That's about it. |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
Tom Anderson wrote:
I wonder why so many of the stations within London are so lightly used. It's not as if there are tube lines nearby which are attracting people away from them - although for quite a lot of the line, the main line and Southbury loop are quite close together, and would compete for passengers. I think the areas they serve are quite densely populated - see the long spike of yellow protruding into greener suburbs he snip Could it be that those stations serve areas where people don't commute to work in other parts of London, either working locally or, shock horror, not at all? That, and the service has effectively been subject to "closure by stealth". Prior to the massive disruption caused during the A406 improvements, the basic service pattern on the West Anglia Inners was, if memory serves: 2tph to Enfield Town 2tph to Cheshunt via Seven Sisters 2tph to Hertford East via Tottenham Hale 4tph to Chingford With the improvements to the A406, the entrance to Angel Road station (which SHOULD be convenient for Tesco Extra, IKEA, et al) was moved from the Angel Road Viaduct to Conduit Lane, some distance from the country end of the platforms. Access is now via a staircase, which goes under the road bridge, and then along a concrete "path" sandwiched between the Down Line and a Scrap Yard, before emerging onto the Country End ramp of the Down Platform. Passengers wishing to travel towards London then need to cross the line by means of the concrete footbridge. And the train "service" isn't much better: There are 16 Up and 14 Down services Monday to Friday, with no service at weekends and public holidays. Of these, only the first Up and first Down trains (at 05:57 and 06:19 from Angel Road, respectively) run to/from Liverpool Street, the rest start from/terminate at Stratford. There's a gap of nearly 6 hours in the middle of the day (09:50 to 15:47) where NO trains call at the station, and the last Up train is at 19:50 to Stratford, with the last Down train at 19:17 to Bishops Stortford. For a station in Travelcard Zone 4, that's *pathetic*. Cheers, Barry |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
On Mar 26, 10:55*pm, wrote:
Published today at:http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/ro...ityeasteng.pdf Covers the London Liverpool Street to Cambridge/Stansted main line and London area branches. Quick highlights of proposals: * 12 car trains London to Cambridge and Stansted in 2012; 'longer' trains on the other routes It would help enormously if National Express ran existing trains to the advertised length. Having had the grave misfortune to use the Chingford Line in last Friday's PM peak when only 4 rather than 8 cars turned up I now understand why people get so upset at such antics. The other issue here is whether these longer trains will be in use all the time or just at peak times. While it is undoubtedly popular to relieve overcrowding at peak times having new additional resources sitting around doing nothing is not such good value for money. * 10 to 15 minute reduction on London to Cambridge and Stansted journey times Lovely for people catching planes or who live in the bordering counties. Not much use to anyone else. * extension of London Overground services from Stratford to Northumberland Park (or a shuttle service) Not at all sure what that is supposed to achieve. While I would love to see a service restored at places like Lea Bridge there is no talk here about the obvious link which is the Coppermill Curve to the Chingford Line - the alignment is still there and it would be a marginal additional to any grade separation works. It would also allow far better local services to be created if coupled with plans to add extra stations. I think a shuttle service would be far better than extending the NLL from Richmond. That strikes me as making the line extremely long and prone to even more delays as it would interface with yet another set of lines. A frequent local shuttle would probably be better but they need to be inventive with stations and interchanges - e.g. would they sort out Angel Road given its promixity to IKEA or would they contemplate a Ferry Lane station to give interchange on to GOBLIN but perhaps only with local line platforms on the 4 track section? A station near Ruckholt Road in Leyton to the north of the Olympics site would also be a good idea. The Chingford Line could easily have 3 extra stations (Forest Road, Winchester Road / North Circ, Chingford Hatch) added to improve its coverage. In another post the issue was identified about local rail line usage. Service frequencies are relatively poor via both Seven Sisters and Tottenham Hale for stopping services. You only need to look at the massive overcrowding all day, every day on the 192 bus to see that something is amiss in terms of real demand and how the modes work or more pertienently don't work. The Tottenham - Edmonton - Enfield corridor has extremely high bus frequencies and very high demand and yet I'm sure rail could cover a decent share of that market far more efficiently if only services and fares were more affordable. * grade-separation of Coppermill Junction and four-tracking from there to Tottenham Hale I am very surprised by this. I fail to see how they can get 4 tracks in the alignment immediately south of Tottenham Hale. You have Ferry Lane estate on one side and industrial and residential units including the retail park on the other. Unless the tracks are going to be on top of one another then it's going to be a very controversial move to cut a big swathe through there. I'd also question whether Tottenham Hale can be expanded to 4 tracks itself given the massive Hale Village redevelopment that is under construction now. They do seem rather fixated on how "low demand" at the inner stations would drag down the business case for other improvements. Quite why Stansted Airport needs 6 trains an hour I do not know. I also think a 15 minute inner suburban station is the bare minimum acceptable standard - rail services would be much more acceptable if they could run every 10 mins. I doubt there would be any issues about demand levels at places like Brimsdown etc if trains ran that frequently. They also need to think about stations to better serve developments like Enfield Island Village. * removal of many level crossings in the Lea Valley, both road and foot Well I can see why they wish to do this but that is not going to be an easy task with some of the road crossing in the Brimsdown - Edmonton area. Not a lot of space to either dig under or bridge over the rail lines. * 100mph ruling line speed * second tunnel on approach to Stansted Airport * signalling alterations to allow overnight services to/from Stansted Airport Anyone understand why signalling alterations are required for overnight services? The document is a reasonable start but it is completely lacking in imagination when it comes to required service levels and the opportunities for radical service developments to serve people in London. It's a given that they want to shuttle the outer area commuters in as fast as possible but I fail to see why scope for decent improvements within London should be sacrificed as part of the scheme. -- Paul Corfield via Google |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
In message
, at 02:34:55 on Fri, 27 Mar 2009, plcd1 remarked: * 10 to 15 minute reduction on London to Cambridge and Stansted journey times Lovely for people catching planes or who live in the bordering counties. Not much use to anyone else. If it relieves some of the pressure from Cambridge - Kings Cross, it'll be useful. -- Roland Perry |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
"plcd1" wrote Anyone understand why signalling alterations are required for overnight services? Presumably bidirectional signalling, to make single line working practicable while the other line is under maintenance. Peter |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
wrote in message ... In article , () wrote: Published today at: http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/ro...ityeasteng.pdf Covers the London Liverpool Street to Cambridge/Stansted main line and London area branches. Quick highlights of proposals: * 12 car trains London to Cambridge and Stansted in 2012; 'longer' trains on the other routes They're going to have to get their skates on to build the Cambridge island platform then! * 10 to 15 minute reduction on London to Cambridge and Stansted journey times Welcome for sure. * extension of London Overground services from Stratford to Northumberland Park (or a shuttle service) * grade-separation of Coppermill Junction and four-tracking from there to Tottenham Hale But not North of there? The paper does explain why. tim |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
"plcd1" wrote in message ... On Mar 26, 10:55 pm, wrote: Published today at:http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/ro...ityeasteng.pdf They do seem rather fixated on how "low demand" at the inner stations would drag down the business case for other improvements. Quite why Stansted Airport needs 6 trains an hour I do not know. Because the current trains are running full. STN has just received permission to increase its passengers by 50%. ISTM that if this number is achieved, it is reasonable to expect a 50% increase in rail passengers to the airport. tim |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
In message , at 10:05:13 on Fri, 27
Mar 2009, tim..... remarked: They do seem rather fixated on how "low demand" at the inner stations would drag down the business case for other improvements. Quite why Stansted Airport needs 6 trains an hour I do not know. Because the current trains are running full. And a train can only take the passengers for about four planes. With the latter landing or taking off every two minutes, do the math. -- Roland Perry |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
"Peter Masson" wrote in message ... "plcd1" wrote Anyone understand why signalling alterations are required for overnight services? Presumably bidirectional signalling, to make single line working practicable while the other line is under maintenance. Nice idea, except that HSE rules don't allow such operations. tim |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
"tim....." wrote
"Peter Masson" wrote Presumably bidirectional signalling, to make single line working practicable while the other line is under maintenance. Nice idea, except that HSE rules don't allow such operations. No such rule applies between Northallerton and Newcastle, where late-night passenger trains regularly run 'wrong line' under SIMBIDS. |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:05:13 on Fri, 27 Mar 2009, tim..... remarked: They do seem rather fixated on how "low demand" at the inner stations would drag down the business case for other improvements. Quite why Stansted Airport needs 6 trains an hour I do not know. Because the current trains are running full. And a train can only take the passengers for about four planes. With the latter landing or taking off every two minutes, do the math. Three and three-quarter trains per hour could carry everyone? |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
In message , at 11:37:44 on Fri, 27
Mar 2009, John Rowland remarked: And a train can only take the passengers for about four planes. With the latter landing or taking off every two minutes, do the math. Three and three-quarter trains per hour could carry everyone? Now add the expected 50% increase. -- Roland Perry |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 11:37:44 on Fri, 27 Mar 2009, John Rowland remarked: And a train can only take the passengers for about four planes. With the latter landing or taking off every two minutes, do the math. Three and three-quarter trains per hour could carry everyone? Now add the expected 50% increase. Since the M11, A120 and the trains from Stansted to Cambridge carry a fair number of people, I would think there would still be enough room. |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
On 27 Mar, 09:34, plcd1 wrote:
I am very surprised by this. I fail to see how they can get 4 tracks in the alignment immediately south of Tottenham Hale. You have Ferry Lane estate on one side and industrial and residential units including the retail park on the other. The line used to be have more tracks on its east side and most of the alignment is untouched. Have a look on Google Maps and there's space for four tracking most of the way to Zone 6, with only a few obstacles. The area south of Tottenham Hale is clear with the exception of the bridge under the Goblin, where the second span has been half-inched by a new road, which would obviously need to be dealt with. U |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
In message , at 11:57:47 on Fri, 27
Mar 2009, John Rowland remarked: And a train can only take the passengers for about four planes. With the latter landing or taking off every two minutes, do the math. Three and three-quarter trains per hour could carry everyone? Now add the expected 50% increase. Since the M11, A120 and the trains from Stansted to Cambridge carry a fair number of people, I would think there would still be enough room. Apparently the trains are full at the moment, so the approximations we are discussing nevertheless have some "pinch points" that need relief. -- Roland Perry |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 11:57:47 on Fri, 27 Mar 2009, John Rowland remarked: And a train can only take the passengers for about four planes. With the latter landing or taking off every two minutes, do the math. Three and three-quarter trains per hour could carry everyone? Now add the expected 50% increase. Since the M11, A120 and the trains from Stansted to Cambridge carry a fair number of people, I would think there would still be enough room. Apparently the trains are full at the moment, so the approximations we are discussing nevertheless have some "pinch points" that need relief. As soon as the stasi have finished arresting all the train spotters and plane spotters, 4tph will be sufficient... |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
"John Salmon" wrote in message ... "tim....." wrote "Peter Masson" wrote Presumably bidirectional signalling, to make single line working practicable while the other line is under maintenance. Nice idea, except that HSE rules don't allow such operations. No such rule applies between Northallerton and Newcastle, where late-night passenger trains regularly run 'wrong line' under SIMBIDS. I was referring to the bit about working on an adjacent line. tim |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
"tim....." wrote in message
... "John Salmon" wrote in message ... "tim....." wrote "Peter Masson" wrote Presumably bidirectional signalling, to make single line working practicable while the other line is under maintenance. Nice idea, except that HSE rules don't allow such operations. No such rule applies between Northallerton and Newcastle, where late-night passenger trains regularly run 'wrong line' under SIMBIDS. I was referring to the bit about working on an adjacent line. Which is exactly what happens on the ECML. Also, there was recently (January) a two-week block of one track between Totnes and Plymouth for relaying, whilst trains continued to run on the other track. I repeat, there is NO overall prohibition of this practice. |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
On Mar 27, 7:26*pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
I will take a look but I do cross over the line at least twice every day at Tottenham Hale and I have specifically checked when going past on GOBLIN and it looks extremely tight. Go and stand on the southbound platform at Tottenham Hale and you'll notice there's a massive gap between the back wall of the platform and the boundary fence. I think the bridge carrying Ferry Lane is also wide enough. How on earth they'd construct extra platforms at Tottenham hale for all 4 tracks without half demolishing the tube station, bus station and car park I don't know. By building them on the east side. U |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 13:27:04 -0700 (PDT), Mr Thant
wrote: On Mar 27, 7:26*pm, Paul Corfield wrote: I will take a look but I do cross over the line at least twice every day at Tottenham Hale and I have specifically checked when going past on GOBLIN and it looks extremely tight. Go and stand on the southbound platform at Tottenham Hale and you'll notice there's a massive gap between the back wall of the platform and the boundary fence. I think the bridge carrying Ferry Lane is also wide enough. But hasn't the Ferry Lane estate just south of the bridge pinched some of the old alignment? |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
On Mar 28, 11:04*am, Uncle Toby wrote:
On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 13:27:04 -0700 (PDT), Mr Thant wrote: On Mar 27, 7:26*pm, Paul Corfield wrote: I will take a look but I do cross over the line at least twice every day at Tottenham Hale and I have specifically checked when going past on GOBLIN and it looks extremely tight. Go and stand on the southbound platform at Tottenham Hale and you'll notice there's a massive gap between the back wall of the platform and the boundary fence. I think the bridge carrying Ferry Lane is also wide enough. But hasn't the Ferry Lane estate just south of the bridge pinched some of the old alignment? I think that Jarrow Road has nicked the trackbed under the GOBLIN line bridge, but otherwise the trackbed is still available, there is a short tarmaced bit under the Ferry Lane bridge, but it doesn't look like it is used for vehicles. . I would hope that Network Rail was made sure that there is sufficient space for any needed platforms at Tottenham Hale when other developments have been agreed. See the satelite view he http://maps.google.co.uk/? ie=UTF8&ll=51.58803,-0.059776&spn=0.00222,0.003401&t=h&z=18 |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
Paul Corfield wrote:
Well I've spent a few minutes with Google Maps and I'll agree with Mr Thant that there is more space than I imagined there was. Back in the pre-Google Maps era I explored the area IRL and came to the conclusion that the only "structure" (which does not include the flat surface of Jarrow Road) preventing 4 tracking from Coppermill Junction to Broxbourne junction is the Eleanor Cross Road bridge. While it isn't entirely surprising that the new bridge carrying Leeside Road over the railway was built *long* enough to allow four tracks, amazingly the new bridge to carry the railway over Mollison Avenue was built *wide* enough for four tracks - I can't see how the COBA worked out for that one, with no prospect of quadrupling in the air at the time. |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
On Mar 28, 4:57*pm, "John Rowland"
wrote: Back in the pre-Google Maps era I explored the area IRL and came to the conclusion that the only "structure" (which does not include the flat surface of Jarrow Road) On closer inspection the bridge carrying the Goblin has a redundant 3rd span on the west side where the west-to-north curve used to be. So there's enough space for four tracks without touching Jarrow Road or doing any bridge works. amazingly the new bridge to carry the railway over Mollison Avenue was built *wide* enough for four tracks - I can't see how the COBA worked out for that one, with no prospect of quadrupling in the air at the time. If it was paid for out of the road's budget, the only cost to BR (I assume it was that era) was that of a stern letter. U |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
On Mar 27, 7:26*pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
Much of the scheme looks like a great big sop to somehow cope with demand for air travel as a result of the government's cockeyed aviation policy. *Not sure that is quite the right way to be framing rail policy. Indeed. There's an obsession with emissions (NOx and CO2) from surface access to airports, but a total head in the sand approach to the real problem of aviation's environmental impact, set to worsen under this government's 'predict and provide' policy. |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
On Sat, 28 Mar 2009, Paul Corfield wrote:
I've just realised that was a north to east curve off the Lea Valley line to the Chingford Line Yup, this was called the Coppermill Curve. so my demands have now increased to having a curve to both the north and south at Coppermill Junction ;-) That would allow all sorts of interesting services if it was coupled with what can be run via South Tottenham and then the Enfield Town line. Chingford - Enfield by train anyone? I suspect that might be quite popular. Really? With who? tom -- The future will accost us with boob-slapping ferocity. -- H. G. Wells |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
On Fri, 27 Mar 2009, plcd1 wrote:
On Mar 26, 10:55*pm, wrote: Published today at:http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/ro...ityeasteng.pdf * extension of London Overground services from Stratford to Northumberland Park (or a shuttle service) Not at all sure what that is supposed to achieve. While I would love to see a service restored at places like Lea Bridge there is no talk here about the obvious link which is the Coppermill Curve to the Chingford Line - the alignment is still there and it would be a marginal additional to any grade separation works. It would be physically entirely separate from the grade separation works: the report talks about grade separating the junction on the north side of the complex, whereas restoring the Coppermill Curve would involve the tracks to the east and south. I'm not saying it's not a good idea, just that it's a bit mendacious to try and sell it as a cheap addition to something that's going to be done anyway. It would also allow far better local services to be created if coupled with plans to add extra stations. I think a shuttle service would be far better than extending the NLL from Richmond. That strikes me as making the line extremely long and prone to even more delays as it would interface with yet another set of lines. That's a good point. I think the Lea Valley line offers quite a bit of recovery capacity to buffer performance pollution coming from either direction, particularly if the stop at Stratford is made nice and long. Although then you might have problems with platform capacity - i'm not sure which platforms a through service would use. A frequent local shuttle would probably be better but they need to be inventive with stations and interchanges - e.g. would they sort out Angel Road given its promixity to IKEA or would they contemplate a Ferry Lane station to give interchange on to GOBLIN but perhaps only with local line platforms on the 4 track section? A station near Ruckholt Road in Leyton to the north of the Olympics site would also be a good idea. The Chingford Line could easily have 3 extra stations (Forest Road, Winchester Road / North Circ, Chingford Hatch) added to improve its coverage. You're a hair's breadth away from mentioning your idea of running the DLR up to Chingford now, i can tell :). tom -- The future will accost us with boob-slapping ferocity. -- H. G. Wells |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
On Mon, 30 Mar 2009, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Sat, 28 Mar 2009, Paul Corfield wrote: I've just realised that was a north to east curve off the Lea Valley line to the Chingford Line Yup, this was called the Coppermill Curve. Sorry, complete reading failure there. That's the exact opposite of the Coppermill Curve! tom -- The future will accost us with boob-slapping ferocity. -- H. G. Wells |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 01:43:00 +0100, Tom Anderson wrote:
I've just realised that was a north to east curve off the Lea Valley line to the Chingford Line Yup, this was called the Coppermill Curve. Sorry, complete reading failure there. That's the exact opposite of the Coppermill Curve! It was the Hall Farm Curve, if you want to look it up (there was a campaign a year or two back to reopen it in time for the Olympics - one proposal was for all Chingford trains to (permanently) run via Stratford, freeing capacity on the main West Anglia line). |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
On Tue, 31 Mar 2009, asdf wrote:
On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 01:43:00 +0100, Tom Anderson wrote: I've just realised that was a north to east curve off the Lea Valley line to the Chingford Line Yup, this was called the Coppermill Curve. Sorry, complete reading failure there. That's the exact opposite of the Coppermill Curve! It was the Hall Farm Curve, if you want to look it up (there was a campaign a year or two back to reopen it in time for the Olympics - one proposal was for all Chingford trains to (permanently) run via Stratford, freeing capacity on the main West Anglia line). Oh yes, using all that spare capacity on the GEML ... tom -- People don't want nice. People want London. -- Al |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
On Mar 31, 10:44*pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Tue, 31 Mar 2009, asdf wrote: On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 01:43:00 +0100, Tom Anderson wrote: I've just realised that was a north to east curve off the Lea Valley line to the Chingford Line Yup, this was called the Coppermill Curve. Sorry, complete reading failure there. That's the exact opposite of the Coppermill Curve! It was the Hall Farm Curve, if you want to look it up (there was a campaign a year or two back to reopen it in time for the Olympics - one proposal was for all Chingford trains to (permanently) run via Stratford, freeing capacity on the main West Anglia line). Oh yes, using all that spare capacity on the GEML ... There must be capacity (not necessarily spare) on the GEML as some trains on the fast lines to/from the Hackney Downs route cross to/from the Main lines at Bethnal Green East Junction. Rearrangement of the services would allow these paths to be used to/from Stratford and onto the Lea Bridge route instead. |
West Anglia Main Line Progress Report - DfT
On Mar 31, 10:44 pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Tue, 31 Mar 2009, asdf wrote: On Mon, 30 Mar 2009 01:43:00 +0100, Tom Anderson wrote: I've just realised that was a north to east curve off the Lea Valley line to the Chingford Line Yup, this was called the Coppermill Curve. Sorry, complete reading failure there. That's the exact opposite of the Coppermill Curve! It was the Hall Farm Curve, if you want to look it up (there was a campaign a year or two back to reopen it in time for the Olympics - one proposal was for all Chingford trains to (permanently) run via Stratford, freeing capacity on the main West Anglia line). Oh yes, using all that spare capacity on the GEML ... ....created by Crossrail... |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 01:08 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk