ideas for the 'DC' lines between Euston and Watford Junction

[PeterC]

But nobody wants that. It was mooted as a trial during engineering work a while ago and the complaints were massive.

It's crayonism of the highest order not taking into account what passengers actually want.

Did you ask everybody ? I certainly know people who found the service very useful. Maybe they are a minority but it wasn't "everybody".

 

[mmh]

Did you ask everybody ? I certainly know people who found the service very useful. Maybe they are a minority but it wasn't "everybody".

The number who would prefer it will be so vanishingly small that statistically it would be nobody. People want to go to Euston, not Stratford or any other unlikely place.

By removing the DC line from Euston you would also be breaking the connection for services to the Midlands and the North for many places where a double back via Euston is more convenient than a change at Watford.

 

[notverydeep]

I think if you wanted to standardise platform heights to deliver level boarding, you'd actually get a lot less objection if you lopped the Bakerloo back to Queen's Park and had dedicated platforms for each.

19.6% of the total passengers using either service to or from DC Lines stations north of Queen's Park use the LO services southwards towards (or from) Euston. The remaining 80.4% either use Bakerloo line trains throughout or interchange at Queen's Park to or from Bakerloo line destinations (from TfL's open data)...

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Re-model the Camden Road area to enable 'through running' of services from South Hampstead.

No more trains into Euston.

Quarter-hourly frequency from Harrow & Wealdstone (Bakerloo line to be quarter-hourly north of there, or more in peak), with some additional trains to Stonebridge Park.

South Hampstead > Central London passengers to use Swiss Cottage
Kilburn High Road > Central London passengers to use Kilburn Park
Primrose Hill to be used interchangeably with Chalk Farm

In theory, with 6-minutely frequency from Willesden Junction to Stratford some capacity would exist for the quarter-hourly service from Harrow & Wealdstone to Stratford (Platform 11/12). These trains could even be extended north to Meridian Water as a through London Crosslink-type routine.

I assume you are discounting freight services on the North London line ?

Running Willesden Junction Low Level to Stratford during the 1995 / 1996 closures of the Hampsted route at 30 min frequency was quite useful for a select number of passengers , and yes ideas were spun about a 30 min pattern Harrow + Wealdstone - Stratford (something that the Bakerloo line opposed vigorously) , so it was dropped.

 

[MarkyT]

... those who say third rail and OHLE on the same section of line is impossible.

Not impossible but nevertheless still highly undesirable as for safety reasons any area with 25kV OHLE must have all metalwork nearby earthed, including the return rail. This is totally against established lower voltage DC practice where both rails are insulated from earth and metalwork to limit opportunity for comparatively high traction current to pass via undesired paths through structures, stanchions, canopies, metal building frameworks, utility pipes etc and thus avoid the electrical corrosion effects that this will cause. At least on the Euston approaches, the DC trains are small and fairly infrequent, so draw and return quite low DC current compared to typical suburban operations south of the Thames.

 

[Ken H]

Why not scrap the 3rd rail between Euston and the station before Queens Park, and bung up 25kV. Do the same north of wherever you terminate the bakerloo.
Also dual electrify from Willesden Jct northwards and use the DC lines for freight between the locals.
You could even divert long distance trains down the 'DC' lines when the main lines are closed.

 

[MarkyT]

Why not scrap the 3rd rail between Euston and the station before Queens Park, and bung up 25kV. Do the same north of wherever you terminate the bakerloo.
Also dual electrify from Willesden Jct northwards and use the DC lines for freight between the locals.
You could even divert long distance trains down the 'DC' lines when the main lines are closed.

Although another general use pair on the Euston approaches might be very useful, I understand the round profile South Hampstead tunnels are rather tight for OHLE. I wonder if something based on roof mounted conductor rails might work though. The cl.710 trains being introduced to the DC lines are supposed to be dual voltage so that might allow the 3rd rail into Euston to be removed with a just a short dual equipped changeover section being retained around Camden Junctions and the power switch accomplished on the move.

 

[Viren]

Does anyone know if they are planning to speed up the DC line? I can understand the low top speed, since there may be track limitations, but the acceleration is so so slow (can barely even feel you are accelerating). It takes 52 minutes from Euston to Watford Junction on an overground train.

From https://uktransport.fandom.com/wiki/British_Rail_Class_710 : "Since then the planned procurement has been increased to 45 four-car EMUs, with the additional 6 units intended for the Watford DC Line. The intention is that the five-car Template:BRC trains currently used on the Watford route will be cascaded back to the North London and East London Lines to allow for strengthened services". If they are eventually planning to replace all the class 378 trains on the DC line with the new class 710 trains, would that enable them to increase all the train acceleration times and therefore reduce journey times? Especially considering the class 710 trains weigh 182 tonnes (5 car according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_710) and the old class 378 weighs 212.8 tonnes (5 car according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Rail_Class_378)

Would free up some capacity on WCML as well, since Northwestern railway could reduce the number of trains stopping at Wembley Central, Harrow and Wealdstone, and Bushey, as people could use the overground to get to Watford Junction or Euston quickly and then transfer there. They have already gone a step in this direction by making the overground 4tph instead of 3tph previously (Reducing wait times on the platform).

I currently go from Bushey to Euston and Euston to Bushey every day using Northwestern railway. I then get an overground train to Carpenders Park. If they could speed up the acceleration and deceleration using the new trains by 17% in the next few years (The new trains are 17% lighter, so track wear and stress would be the same) then I would just use the overground trains the entire way instead as it would be a similar speed and would avoid the transfer.

 

[Railwaysceptic]

Very fair point - and Broad Street died to fund the rebuilt Liverpool Street - with the services redirected to Stratford and beyond.

We did look at Tring to Liverpool St via the Navarino Road curve in 1996 - 1997 , but it proved too difficult as it would have split the AC London market.

Please forgive my ignorance and incomprehension, but can you explain about splitting "the AC London market" and would that problem still obtain today?

In my more crayonistic moments I sometimes imagine trains from Barking to Gospel Oak being extended to Richmond and the vacated paths from Gospel Oak to Stratford being taken up by trains emanating from Willesden Junction's low level bay platform or points further north.

 

[The Planner]

Why not scrap the 3rd rail between Euston and the station before Queens Park, and bung up 25kV. Do the same north of wherever you terminate the bakerloo.
Also dual electrify from Willesden Jct northwards and use the DC lines for freight between the locals.
You could even divert long distance trains down the 'DC' lines when the main lines are closed.

Only in one direction, you can't access the DC's from the up and freight would end up on the fasts.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Please forgive my ignorance and incomprehension, but can you explain about splitting "the AC London market" and would that problem still obtain today?

In my more crayonistic moments I sometimes imagine trains from Barking to Gospel Oak being extended to Richmond and the vacated paths from Gospel Oak to Stratford being taken up by trains emanating from Willesden Junction's low level bay platform or points further north.

Splitting the AC market referred to the "choice" of Euston or Liverpool Street - which from loading estimates would have possibly overloaded the residual services to Euston with LV trains maybe under performing , and not all trains wold have had a dual terminals option. The vast number of passengers then , wanted Euston for the convenience of everything starting / going there. The service offer from LV would probably have been no more than 2 trains an hour , and there were issues about how late the service would have gone on for into the evening , and not at weekends. Worth a look . but not practical.

Regarding the DC , I would suggest line speed improvements north of Harrow - south of there the route is very congested and limited signalling - issues of depot trains in and out of Stonebridge Park , and a fairly tenuous formation as the line was squeezed in from 1915 onwards and had to twist and turn to get from the down to the up side at Wembley Central , pick it's way past Willesden TMD and so on. 45 mph max I reckon - whereas you ought to get some 60 mph north of Harrow to Bushey Viaduct.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Splitting the AC market referred to the "choice" of Euston or Liverpool Street - which from loading estimates would have possibly overloaded the residual services to Euston with LV trains maybe under performing , and not all trains wold have had a dual terminals option. The vast number of passengers then , wanted Euston for the convenience of everything starting / going there. The service offer from LV would probably have been no more than 2 trains an hour , and there were issues about how late the service would have gone on for into the evening , and not at weekends. Worth a look . but not practical.

Just like Tring onto Crossrail, despite being easier for a few working in the city that wouldn't have been popular. One terminus is easier.

 

[PeterC]

Just to be really radical - why not just leave it alone?

 

[swt_passenger]

Just to be really radical - why not just leave it alone?

Yes, good idea. The suggestions that come round about once every 6 months about diverting via Primrose Hill, with nearly every poster thinking it’s his original idea , ought to be rationed if not banned. AIUI the NLL frequency of around 10 tph is now the maximum that can be achieved along with existing freight paths between Stratford and Gospel Oak. TfL have stated publicly they don’t consider leaving Euston is a good idea.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, good idea. The suggestions that come round about once every 6 months about diverting via Primrose Hill, with nearly every poster thinking it’s his original idea , ought to be rationed if not banned.

Particularly as TfL actually did this quite recently (within the last 10 years) during a relatively long period of engineering works, which they also considered to be a convenient opportunity for a trial run, and it was an abject failure - people simply did not want it.

In the end demand from the WCML to Stratford is extremely low (what would you want to go there for? Don't say "Westfield" as there's already an hourly Southern service to the other one), and if you really want to go there you can change at Willesden, or go into Euston, wander over to St Pancras and use HS1.

 

[Dr_Paul]

No (which is a kick in the proverbials for those who say third rail and OHLE on the same section of line is impossible). Nor is platform usage - LNR use 10 and very occasionally 9. Without some heavy building work it couldn't really be - it has to get from one side of the formation to the middle (though there are some flyovers on the Euston approach).

Maybe there's some future use for the infamous now disused 'Rat Hole' dive-under? Or, to be serious, a new one taking the DC lines further towards Euston on a formation separate from the fast and slow main lines, from the tunnel mouth at the top of Camden Bank to just north of the station throat. Would this be possible?

 

[mr_jrt]

Diverting through Primrose Hill is a good idea, just not in isolation, for the reasons previously mentioned.

First and foremost, Willesden Junction needs it's mainline platforms back. That then means passengers wanting Euston from north of there on the DC can change to the AC services there. That then leaves you with the stations between there and Euston to consider. A link to Chalk Farm Northern Line at Primrose Hill should cover that market just adequately in most cases, but taking each station more individually: Kensal Green and Queens Park will both a) have the Bakerloo into the centre, and b) are reasonable contraflow to WJ. Kilburn High Rd. is such a short walk from Kilburn Park that the same applies. South Hampstead is a short bus ride from Euston if that's actually the desired destination. ...but I reiterate, the primary link would need to be via Primrose Hill/Chalk Farm.

So yeah, mainline platforms at Willesden Junction and a proper rebuild of Primrose Hill with a proper subway link to Chalk Farm make diverting the DC away from Euston viable, IMHO.

 

[Dr_Paul]

Diverting through Primrose Hill is a good idea, just not in isolation, for the reasons previously mentioned. First and foremost, Willesden Junction needs it's mainline platforms back. That then means passengers wanting Euston from north of there on the DC can change to the AC services there. That then leaves you with the stations between there and Euston to consider. A link to Chalk Farm Northern Line at Primrose Hill should cover that market just adequately in most cases, but taking each station more individually: Kensal Green and Queens Park will both a) have the Bakerloo into the centre, and b) are reasonable contraflow to WJ. Kilburn High Rd. is such a short walk from Kilburn Park that the same applies. South Hampstead is a short bus ride from Euston if that's actually the desired destination. ...but I reiterate, the primary link would need to be via Primrose Hill/Chalk Farm. So yeah, mainline platforms at Willesden Junction and a proper rebuild of Primrose Hill with a proper subway link to Chalk Farm make diverting the DC away from Euston viable, IMHO.

I foresee a problem here in that rush-hour DC services are pretty crowded in and out of Euston, and so having passengers for DC stations change at Willesden will in the evening make the semi-fast AC services even more crowded, and in the morning lead to bother if the AC services are full when they arrive there and passengers from the DC stations north of Willesden can't therefore board.

If I'm reading the post correctly, it's suggested that Euston-bound passengers at Kensal Green and Queens Park would travel down to Willesden Junction and then catch an up AC service -- that's my understanding of 'reasonable contraflow to WJ' -- I don't think that would be very convenient or popular. Maybe I've misinterpreted this.

I agree broadly about the need for a Watford DC service straight through to Camden Road and the reopening of Primrose Hill, and for a convenient link at Primrose Hill with Chalk Farm. However, I also feel that there should still be a DC service to Euston, even if it is reduced somewhat in frequency. Perhaps one answer might be using the bays at Willesden Junction, although that will require them to be lengthened. Is that feasible?

 

[JonathanH]

Perhaps one answer might be using the bays at Willesden Junction, although that will require them to be lengthened. Is that feasible?

Weren't they already extended to take a five car - e.g. this one and trains shunting off the Hampstead Heath route.

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/L67215/2019/10/07/advanced

 

[Bletchleyite]

I agree broadly about the need for a Watford DC service straight through to Camden Road and the reopening of Primrose Hill

Why? I really cannot see what this would achieve for significant cost and disadvantage to present users.

I do support the addition of mainline platforms at Willesden Jn (served by any train that presently serves Harrow and Wealdstone, possibly with some H&W stops removed), but that would more be to allow LNR passengers to interchange onto LO.

 

[Railwaysceptic]

Particularly as TfL actually did this quite recently (within the last 10 years) during a relatively long period of engineering works, which they also considered to be a convenient opportunity for a trial run, and it was an abject failure - people simply did not want it.

When was this? A few years ago when platforms on the North London Line were being lengthened to cater for five coach trains, there were several weekends when trains ran from Stratford to Willesden Junction's bay platform via Primrose Hill. That does not constitute a proper test of potential demand. Are you thinking of something else?

 

[VT 390]

I do support the addition of mainline platforms at Willesden Jn (served by any train that presently serves Harrow and Wealdstone, possibly with some H&W stops removed), but that would more be to allow LNR passengers to interchange onto LO.

Unless LNWR can introduce more services in the future is there really enougth capacity on there services to serve Willesden as well, as currently the only services which serve Harrow & Wealdstone are the Tring stoppers which whenever I have used them are quite full.

 

[mr_jrt]

Fair points, all. Personally I would envision everything on the slow lines stopping at Willesden J., so it wouldn't just be the Tring services, it would be the Bletchleys, the MKs, and the Northamptons. That's a lot of capacity heading into Euston for LO passengers to utilise. I take the point about the contraflow not being popular, it's either that though or they a) take the Bakerloo to Baker St and change for Euston Sq., or b) Regent's Park and walk, or c) Take LO to Chalk Farm and change to the Northern Line.

Plus the usual post-HS2 caveats. Some of those Northamptons and/or MKs may end up on the fast lines post HS2, freeing up paths on the slows for more Trings.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Unless LNWR can introduce more services in the future is there really enougth capacity on there services to serve Willesden as well, as currently the only services which serve Harrow & Wealdstone are the Tring stoppers which whenever I have used them are quite full.

It wouldn't be to provide for travel between Willesden and London (so it could be pick up/set down only) but rather better connectivity for those travelling between the south WCML and the WLL/NLL etc. In particular it might possibly allow consideration of withdrawal of the WCML Southern services, as interchange onto LO would be far easier and more frequent.

 

[Bletchleyite]

When was this? A few years ago when platforms on the North London Line were being lengthened to cater for five coach trains, there were several weekends when trains ran from Stratford to Willesden Junction's bay platform. That does constitute a proper test of potential demand. Are you thinking of something else?

I genuinely can't remember, but I'm certain that in recent years there was a period when the service was operated as Watford Junction to (I think) Stratford (or somewhere over that way) due to engineering works. No services operated into Euston.

 

[JonathanH]

In particular it might possibly allow consideration of withdrawal of the WCML Southern services, as interchange onto LO would be far easier and more frequent.

Rather depends on whether all the passengers on the 8-car Southern West London services can be accommodated on the 5-car LO services, both off the West Coast route and changing at Clapham Junction. I suspect they might not. Willesden Junction High Level might be a bit tricky to make 8-car even if you build a mainline station beneath.

People complain when their established travel patterns are disrupted.

 

[Bald Rick]

I genuinely can't remember, but I'm certain that in recent years there was a period when the service was operated as Watford Junction to (I think) Stratford (or somewhere over that way) due to engineering works. No services operated into Euston.

It was done for at least a year back in 1999/2000 for the Euston remodelling. And presumably on the various blockades for Hampstead Tunnel rebuilding.

 

[Railwaysceptic]

It was done for at least a year back in 1999/2000 for the Euston remodelling. And presumably on the various blockades for Hampstead Tunnel rebuilding.

That's nineteen or twenty years ago. We're talking about an experiment/trial run in the past ten years.

 

[The Planner]

No one was interested in it when the bottom end of the WCML was closed for work in the last year or so.

 

[PeterC]

Reopening Primrose Hill would take some pressure of Camden Town, especially if renamed Camden Lock but, much as my inner crayonista would love to see it served, not even that is going to justify it.