London Euston - London Overground Platforms

[swt_passenger]

Notwithstanding it being an obvious solution, a Mayoral response to a question in the Assembly a few months back (er.. 12m as it turns out) stated categorically that TfL have no plans to divert the DC line service away from Euston, even during the rebuild.

Haven't had any success finding a link to the original yet though...

Later:

Euston London Overground service (1)

Navin Shah (15-Jul-2015)
Do you have an aspiration for Watford Junction LO trains continuing to run indefinitely into Euston station, rather than being diverted at Primrose Hill (and/or Willesden Junction) on to the North London Line?

Would any Primrose Hill diversion likely require a financial contribution towards four-tracking the short section of two-track North London Line west of Camden Road station?

The Mayor (15-Jul-2015)

There is no current proposal for London Overground services originating at Watford to be diverted from Euston towards Stratford.

Analysis by TfL suggests that there is greater demand for journeys towards Euston than Stratford. Those who wish to travel towards Stratford can do so with a straightforward interchange at Willesden Junction.


https://questions.london.gov.uk/QuestionSearch/searchclient/

 

[NSE]

The old classic is to come up with a way of removing the freight from the NLL and the solution becomes obvious: Utilise the 4 track alignment of the NLL to have the northern pair as AC from Stratford to Willesden via Hampstead Heath, and the southern pair as a DC extension of the ELL from Highbury and Islington to Watford Junction.

I may be missing something, so please explain if I'm wrong, but where is 'the 4 track alignment'? From where the ELL pulls alongside the NLL just after Dalston to where it sort of sprawls a bit beyond Highbury and Islington I know the alignment is there, but from there to where the lines begin to break up as you arrive at Willesden Junction, I can't see any '4 track alignment'?. I mean through Camden and Kentish its a pretty tight two track viaduct and the tunnel after Hampstead Heath is the same. Wouldn't it be an nightmare to try and make it four track?

 

[swt_passenger]

I may be missing something, so please explain if I'm wrong, but where is 'the 4 track alignment'? From where the ELL pulls alongside the NLL just after Dalston to where it sort of sprawls a bit beyond Highbury and Islington I know the alignment is there, but from there to where the lines begin to break up as you arrive at Willesden Junction, I can't see any '4 track alignment'?. I mean through Camden and Kentish its a pretty tight two track viaduct and the tunnel after Hampstead Heath is the same. Wouldn't it be an nightmare to try and make it four track?

This regularly re-hashed proposal is only to extend the existing four tracks from just east of Camden Rd through the station and as far as the junction where the lines split just west of Camden Rd. Hence removing a two track pinch point.

They would still run as two independent pairs from there to Willesden Jn, where the two routes would still be separate and on different levels as now.

It isn't as complicated to do as you perhaps think, but AIUI there are no plans to do the necessary bridge work at Camden Rd, which would need some local demolition.

 

[NSE]

This regularly re-hashed proposal is only to extend the existing four tracks from just east of Camden Rd through the station and as far as the junction where the lines split just west of Camden Rd. Hence removing a two track pinch point.

They would still run as two independent pairs from there to Willesden Jn, where the two routes would still be separate and on different levels as now.

It isn't as complicated to do as you perhaps think, but AIUI there are no plans to do the necessary bridge work at Camden Rd, which would need some local demolition.

Oh I get you, so the DC lines would be running to Primrose Hill and onto the NLL there. I thought you'd meant leaving the DC lines at Willesden and up on the NLL there. Oh yeah, that makes lots more sense. Tricky to do round Camden Road, but much easier to achieve.

 

[DerekC]

The old classic is to come up with a way of removing the freight from the NLL .

Any ideas as to how to do this bit?

 

[mr_jrt]

Any ideas as to how to do this bit?

If I had those answers I'd be a very rich man.

Best I can offer is a chord connecting the GEML to the northbound GOBlin so all the freight east of Stratford can use it (the freight already on the Goblin would stay on it in this scenario), but it would then still have to share with the NLL between Gospel Oak and Willesden. It would however free up paths on the stretch of line between Dalston and Stratford, abet with the ELL using the southern 2 platforms at Camden Rd. you would have nowhere to turn back the proposed Camden-Stratford NLL service that would use them, so short of somehow adding a 3rd NLL platform at Gospel Oak to turn the service I don't see how you could maximise the released NLL paths. You certainly wouldn't manage to fit a 5th platform at Camden Rd, surely?

This proposal obviously impacts the GOBLin's ability to serve passengers, so really it just kicks the issue a bit down the road rather than dealing with it properly.

Other rail options are basically either a simple freight tunnel under London (Ripple Lane to Wembley, perhaps?) or an orbital line around London (the fabled rail M25?)

EDIT:

Was thinking about this earlier. What might be easier would be to widen the formation slightly west of Gospel Oak and to stick in a turnback siding between the running lines - you wouldn't need the extra platform then, abet you'll pay a penalty for having to turf everyone out before entering it. Problem there then becomes the fact you'd have to move Gospel Oak junction further west as well.

 

[Mutant Lemming]

Any ideas as to how to do this bit?

Wouldn't re-opening the Oxford-Cambridge East/West link help - a little ?

...or re-opening some of those little cross mainline linking branches

St.Albans - Hatfield, Hatfield- Hertford, Staines - West Drayton

Leighton Buzzard - Luton - Welwyn GC would have been a useful freight line had they not thought buses suited part of it better.

 

[The Planner]

E-W only helps Southampton traffic really. The only other way of dealing with it is to actually do a proper job on F2N and even then you are still going to need to run freight across north London.

 

[PeterC]

or an orbital line around London (the fabled rail M25?)

Which would, in my view, make more sense for freight than for passenger. Sadly a 50 mph freight line just isn't sexy enough to warrent consideration.

 

[HSTEd]

Where does the freight using the NLL actually go to?
That dictates what kind of solution is feasible - if it was all heading to the WCML for example you could always route it north along the GEML and then in the direction of the breckland line.

 

[edwin_m]

Where does the freight using the NLL actually go to?
That dictates what kind of solution is feasible - if it was all heading to the WCML for example you could always route it north along the GEML and then in the direction of the breckland line.

Mostly between the East Anglia ports and the Midlands via the WCML. The Felixstowe-Nuneaton upgrade has allowed some of it to be diverted but not all, as it doesn't have enough capacity and isn't electrified.

There is also some freight from Thames Gateway which has no alternative to the NLL, west of Gospel Oak at least. If it went out along the GEML it would either need somewhere to run round in the Stratford area (nowhere to do that for a 775m train) or would have to do a grand tour of NE London blocking various other lines in the process, before it ended up facing in the other direction.

 

[The Planner]

Which would, in my view, make more sense for freight than for passenger. Sadly a 50 mph freight line just isn't sexy enough to warrent consideration.

Would need to be 75mph for Class 4 trains and you are correct, it is worth buttons unless the freight you take off either allows a lot more passenger trains or speeds them up. In the case of the second, its unlikely as you dont tend to timetable them infront of passenger trains.

 

[HSTEd]

What about a single track rail M-25 that runs only in a clockwise or anti clockwise direction.

 

[infobleep]

Would need to be 75mph for Class 4 trains and you are correct, it is worth buttons unless the freight you take off either allows a lot more passenger trains or speeds them up. In the case of the second, its unlikely as you dont tend to timetable them infront of passenger trains.

I've been known to be delayed due to freight trains arriving late through Harrow, which why one would t want one scheduled in front of a passenger service.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[The Planner]

You can do it in front of stoppers but even then it only really works if the stops are fairly close together.

 

[hwl]

Any ideas as to how to do this bit?

Electrify Goblin and upgrade line speeds (esp the 20/30mph bits) to improve passenger timings which slows down the following freight less and possibly allows 2 freights behind a passenger service (at 15min intervals) along Goblin...

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Electrify Goblin and upgrade line speeds (esp the 20/30mph bits) to improve passenger timings which slows down the following freight less and possibly allows 2 freights behind a passenger service (at 15min intervals) along Goblin...

Have a guess where that is...

 

[A0]

Wouldn't re-opening the Oxford-Cambridge East/West link help - a little ?

...or re-opening some of those little cross mainline linking branches

St.Albans - Hatfield, Hatfield- Hertford, Staines - West Drayton

Leighton Buzzard - Luton - Welwyn GC would have been a useful freight line had they not thought buses suited part of it better.

None of those would help removing freight from the NLL, not least because they'd simply be causing problems elsewhere on the network.

You've already got capacity constraints on the ECML (in part but not exclusively due to the Welwyn viaduct), the West Anglia mainline to Hertford / Harlow/Bishops Stortford is pretty much at capacity and is predominantly twin track.

EWR will make little difference for the same reasons.

The Luton line from WGC - Luton was never very busy - there simply isn't the traffic demand for that one.

Good luck with Hertford - Welwyn - Hatfield - St Albans - that's never going to happen. Too much of the trackbed has gone to even think about making those viable.

 

[Class 170101]

There is also some freight from Thamesport which has no alternative to the NLL, west of Gospel Oak at least.

Do you mean Thames Gateway?

Thamesport is on the southern bank of the Thames.

 

[edwin_m]

Do you mean Thames Gateway?

Thamesport is on the southern bank of the Thames.

Yes, thanks for correction. Post edited.

 

[mr_jrt]

If we are adamant that the lines through London are at capacity, then the only answer to Thames Gateway freight that doesn't involve a tunnel is to go in the opposite direction, but whatever combination of new lines and chords you conceive, this freight will have to run on the very busy (and largely two-tracked) GEML via Ipswich.

Perhaps you could argue that a strategic freight link might improve the business case of Sudbury to Shelford via Haverhill (which would then let you run via Cambridge), but you would still need to get said freight to a new chord at Marks Tey, which would require either a new freight reversal and some grade separation at Upminster and Romford (and I really don't think there's room!), or a new link from Pitsea to the Southend/Southminster branch and another chord north of Shenfield (though if you wanted to avoid the bottleneck at Chelmsford, you would have to do something drastic like (re)build a link from Woodham Ferrers to Witham).

All a very long way around just to avoid London, but would free up WCML capacity too, if indeed that's where they're headed. I suspect a deep tunnel to Wembley would probably make more sense, as that would then give access via the (currently quiet) Dudding Hill links to the MML, GWML as well as the WCML.

Thinking about it, if only there was a high speed tunnel between Dagenham and St. Pancras...you could build another to OOC/Willesden and the freight could just sail through