Norwich in 90 - Could a half-hourly 90 minute operate?

[Tobbes]

@Bald Rick - can I just check on whether / how you could increase terminal capacity at Liverpool St? I presume that removing the taxi rank next to platform 10 could produce another - or a pair of platforms? Are any LST terminators expected to be diverted onto CR2? Any other thoughts?

 

[VT 390]

@Bald Rick - can I just check on whether / how you could increase terminal capacity at Liverpool St? I presume that removing the taxi rank next to platform 10 could produce another - or a pair of platforms? Are any LST terminators expected to be diverted onto CR2? Any other thoughts?

Some of the services from the Tottenham Hale direction will go to CrossRail 2 but I don't know if these are existing services rerouted or new services.

 

[Bald Rick]

@Bald Rick - can I just check on whether / how you could increase terminal capacity at Liverpool St? I presume that removing the taxi rank next to platform 10 could produce another - or a pair of platforms? Are any LST terminators expected to be diverted onto CR2? Any other thoughts?

Well in theory if you shifted all the offices, taxi rank, and a load of retail you could have another platform or two. Trouble is you couldn’t get any trains to them. Both the GEML and WAML are effectively full on the approaches.

Some of the services from the Tottenham Hale direction will go to CrossRail 2 but I don't know if these are existing services rerouted or new services.

If Crossrail 2 happens, and it gets to Broxbourne, then that releases 2 peak paths an hour into Liverpool St on the WA side. Although I should imagine there’s a lot of options about which WA destinations could make use of them. Cambridge and Enfield Town would be my top 2.

 

[Tobbes]

Well in theory if you shifted all the offices, taxi rank, and a load of retail you could have another platform or two. Trouble is you couldn’t get any trains to them. Both the GEML and WAML are effectively full on the approaches.

That is rather a problem - so how do we increase capacity on the approaches? I don't see room for much more infrastructure, so is this an ECTS2 Magic point?

If Crossrail 2 happens, and it gets to Broxbourne, then that releases 2 peak paths an hour into Liverpool St on the WA side. Although I should imagine there’s a lot of options about which WA destinations could make use of them. Cambridge and Enfield Town would be my top 2.

Which begs a whole series of questions about WAML service provision going forwards....

 

[Bald Rick]

That is rather a problem - so how do we increase capacity on the approaches? I don't see room for much more infrastructure, so is this an ECTS2 Magic point?

Which begs a whole series of questions about WAML service provision going forwards....

ETCS Level 2 does nothing for capacity. Yes trains can run closer together, but it doesn’t help with junction conflicts, station dwells, etc which are the key determinants of capacity on busy urban railways. Level crossings are also a constraint which is a particular issue in Anglia.

ATO does help, but only at the margins. Consistency of driving can squeeze perhaps 10% extra capacity out, more if it’s a simple railway with short trains (eg Victoria line).


WAML service provision is basically going to be the same until someone decides to fund the construction of additional tracks. The timetable is optimised to balance journey times, frequency, and station calls from all points on the route. If you try to improve any element, e.g. journey times from Stansted, or extra calls in Enfield, or more trains from Hertford, someone loses out in journey time / frequency terms. It’s not BR anymore, and no-one (politically) is willing to see any significant ‘losers’.

 

[Tobbes]

ETCS Level 2 does nothing for capacity. Yes trains can run closer together, but it doesn’t help with junction conflicts, station dwells, etc which are the key determinants of capacity on busy urban railways. Level crossings are also a constraint which is a particular issue in Anglia.

ATO does help, but only at the margins. Consistency of driving can squeeze perhaps 10% extra capacity out, more if it’s a simple railway with short trains (eg Victoria line).

Fascinating as ever to the undereducated, @Bald Rick - I'm most grateful for your patience. So by the sounds of it GEML to Colchester and beyond isn't going to change bar some epic investment to get another pair of tracks from Liverpool Street to Colchester, more or less. And though this is easier to see once near to the M25, I just don't see how you do it between Romford and Liverpool Street without a tunnel - which then opens up the possibility of a new alignment in the gap between Chelmsford and Braintree rejoining the existing line south of Marks Tey. (Such an alignment could also open up a more direct route to Stansted via Great Dunmow (or possibly even Braintree, removing the Braintree services from the existing route), taking the Stansted services off the WAML to everyone's benefit).

WAML service provision is basically going to be the same until someone decides to fund the construction of additional tracks.

CR2 and four-tracking the Lea Valley provides some of this uplift at the London end, but how much further north does four tracking need to go?

The timetable is optimised to balance journey times, frequency, and station calls from all points on the route. If you try to improve any element, e.g. journey times from Stansted, or extra calls in Enfield, or more trains from Hertford, someone loses out in journey time / frequency terms. It’s not BR anymore, and no-one (politically) is willing to see any significant ‘losers’.

With the irony that "privatisation" was supposed to take the politics out of it all.... ho hum...

 

[Adrian1980uk]

Has anyone thought of ways to remove frieght from the line to open up more paths, not sure how much of it is for London (makes no sense to go any other way) and how much is for other areas which could go via Ely if more paths were opened up that way / east west rail. Not going to be a game changer but could help