Would a single London terminus be feasible?

[Jorge Da Silva]

The point of the thread is discussing a potential single London terminus station. Just merging Euston with the two down the road would surely be less complex than merging them all?!

Oh yeah agreed. Merging them all would never work well at all

 

[Western Sunset]

It'd put the kibosh on "Monopoly".

 

[coppercapped]

I wouldn't say the city is too big - look at Berlin Hbf. It's just that you couldn't do it without a lot of knocking stuff down.

Point of comparison...

Berlin, about 3.7 million people​

London, about 9 million people​

​

..with the provisos that the definition of the city limits vary, but as an order of magnitude check the difference is significant.

(And if we're going to get to the stage of knocking stuff down - I'm buying shares in demolition contractors!)

 

[Chester1]

Point of comparison...

Berlin, about 3.7 million people​

London, about 9 million people​

​

..with the provisos that the definition of the city limits vary, but as an order of magnitude check the difference is significant.

(And if we're going to get to the stage of knocking stuff down - I'm buying shares in demolition contractors!)

Berlin also has substantial space in the city centre thanks to "building clearance" 1939-45 and because of the Berlin Wall. Berlin Hbf is an area that was flattened during the war and next to the Berlin Wall.

 

[coppercapped]

Berlin also has substantial space in the city centre thanks to "building clearance" 1939-45 and because of the Berlin Wall. Berlin Hbf is an area that was flattened during the war and next to the Berlin Wall.

Yup! Know it well, I have relations living between Berlin and Potsdam and I'm always happy to visit.

 

[Bald Rick]

I would have extended Kings Cross eastwards, put HS1 in to the east of Kings Cross and HS2 where the current HS1 is, closed York Way as far as Goods Way and protected the land between Kings Cross and St Pancras from development for future expansion of the station complex, but this would have to occured before the redevelopment of the area.

demolishing lots of residential then.

Berlin also has substantial space in the city centre thanks to "building clearance" 1939-45 and because of the Berlin Wall. Berlin Hbf is an area that was flattened during the war and next to the Berlin Wall.

wasn’t the new north south line built along the line of the wall?

 

[Irascible]

Perhaps Euston could merge with Kings Cross and St Pancras; there'd still be plenty of disruption and buildings having to be bulldozed, but from a geographic perspective it seems more feasible than having all the stations merging into one, with only half a mile distance between Euston and St Pancras. This would be a new super station for most of the northern destinations, without interfering with the lines and services to the east, west and south.

You can merge the Paddington & Euston approaches if you don't mind demolishing OOC again, and a bit of the cemetary. Pay for it with live cameras watching the all-day scrimmage in the tube station!

 

[Chester1]

wasn’t the new north south line built along the line of the wall?

Only briefly. You can see the route of the wall overlayed on open street maps here:

https://berlinwallmap.info/map/

The land that Berlin Hbf is built on (and the Europa City quarter being built directly to its north) was directly next to the wall. It is partially built on the former site of Lehrter Bahnhof which was closed in the 50s. Lehrter Bahnhof became redundant due to pre wall limit on services from West Berlin. The area was extensively bombed during the war and was not significantly redeveloped during the cold war, id guess for security reasons. The planning of Berlin Hbf started in 1992 and it opened in 2006. In a normal city the land would have been fully redeveloped in the 50s or 60s. Its very central and next to German government department buildings (also built post reunification). There is no parallel with London!

 

[tbtc]

Good point; If intended to replace all, or even just most, of the current London termini, how big would 'London Central' have to be ? I would hazard a guess at, roughly, Absolutely Gigantic !

I don't know what the OP wants a London "Hbf" to look like - the two main options seem to be either...

...the place that several Thameslink-style lines all meet (so nothing would terminate in central London), a bit like a gigantic version of Oxford Circus on the Underground - i.e. maybe ten cross-city lines all pass through this one spot, which means that the lowest line would be close to the centre of the earth...

...or everything terminating like a giant "roundhouse", where the buffer stops of each line are spread out in a giant circle?

Either way sounds like a logistical nightmare - e.g. what would the minimum connection time be, given that you might have a half mile walk or to travel down escalators that far? How many platforms would you need with a roundhouse? Imagine the station announcements if you had one with a hundred platforms! Or the size of the Wetherspoons... (in fact a station with ten different levels reminds me of the trip to the toilets in some of their pubs)

St Pancras and Kings Cross are pretty much merged already, being next door to each other. How much closer do you need them to be?

Well, exactly!

We have people on here complaining that the walk from Euston to St Pancras will be too far for HS2-HS1 interchange (or the walk from Curzon Street to New Street in Birmingham) yet often the same people demand that we split services in central Leicester/ Nottingham/ Sheffield between multiple stations - the walk from Euston to St Pancras is no worse than the walk between services at a mega-station would be

Not only is the city much smaller, but it has a much less developed hinterland ( for historical reasons). Berlin’s position in the 1990s was unique - a sudden return to “normality” with 50 years to catch up on, inadequate infrastructure for outer suburban and intercity rail and the money and political will to do something about it. Even so, it wasn’t universally popular - as the return of limited IC services to Zoo testifies!

Interesting points - I suppose the "federal" nature of Germany plus the fact that there "Germany" wasn't one big country until essentially Victorian times means that it would never be in the same league as London/ Paris (Berlin is a perfectly nice place, don't get me wrong, but it's not a mega-city that has dominated a large country for hundreds of years - which is a strength that Germany has - I wish the UK had the kind of sensible devolution that Germany manages without so much reliance upon just one place). However, the obsession that some people seem to have with trying to superimpose something that works in Berlin onto the completely different London... meh

 

[Bald Rick]

Only briefly. You can see the route of the wall overlayed on open street maps here:

https://berlinwallmap.info/map/

The land that Berlin Hbf is built on (and the Europa City quarter being built directly to its north) was directly next to the wall. It is partially built on the former site of Lehrter Bahnhof which was closed in the 50s. Lehrter Bahnhof became redundant due to pre wall limit on services from West Berlin. The area was extensively bombed during the war and was not significantly redeveloped during the cold war, id guess for security reasons. The planning of Berlin Hbf started in 1992 and it opened in 2006. In a normal city the land would have been fully redeveloped in the 50s or 60s. Its very central and next to German government department buildings (also built post reunification). There is no parallel with London!

Very interesting, thanks

 

[MarkyT]

Only briefly. You can see the route of the wall overlayed on open street maps here:

https://berlinwallmap.info/map/

The land that Berlin Hbf is built on (and the Europa City quarter being built directly to its north) was directly next to the wall. It is partially built on the former site of Lehrter Bahnhof which was closed in the 50s. Lehrter Bahnhof became redundant due to pre wall limit on services from West Berlin. The area was extensively bombed during the war and was not significantly redeveloped during the cold war, id guess for security reasons. The planning of Berlin Hbf started in 1992 and it opened in 2006. In a normal city the land would have been fully redeveloped in the 50s or 60s. Its very central and next to German government department buildings (also built post reunification). There is no parallel with London!

Berlin Hauptbahnhof's north-south link is fairly short in terms of completely new alignment construction, linking the northern former surface Lehrter Bhf approaches you describe to those of the of Anhalter Bhf and Potsdammer Platz Bhf in the south, which were also cut off from the East German DR network while the wall existed. The new tunnelled section is just over 3.5km (2.25 miles) between the north and south portals. I suspect if such a flattened unused area had existed in any other undivided major western city after WW2, it would likely have had a massive surface/elevated multilane highway and spaghetti-style junction complex constructed through it during the 1960s or 70s. The B96 Tiergarten Spreebogen road tunnel was constructed around the same time as the rail link, roughly following the same corridor.

 

[plugwash]

So there are lots of downsides and the question is - what real benefit is there? You can't possibly have a direct train from everywhere to everywhere. People would often still need to change trains if they were crossing London.

Changing trains once is preferable to changing trains 2-3 times, which is the status quo with crossing London.

Sill I agree the mega-station is wildly impractical,

 

[Bald Rick]

Changing trains once is preferable to changing trains 2-3 times, which is the status quo with crossing London.

Sill I agree the mega-station is wildly impractical,

Agreed, but well over 95% of people travelling by train to London are not crossing it. So while it might be easier (and that’s arguable) for the 5%, it would be more difficult for a significant portion of the 95% who find them selves in the wrong part of London.

 

[Falcon1200]

Although, perhaps, should Crossrail not have run via Euston/Kings X too ?

That would have overloaded Crossrail.

I was thinking more that Crossrail should have run past Euston and Kings X, for interchange purposes, rather than to take trains off those routes - Unless you meant overloaded in terms of passenger numbers instead of train services @Bald Rick ? A single station could have been similar to that at Moorgate/Liverpool St, serving Euston and Kings X/St Pancras, while also providing a traffic and weather-free route between them. But it's too late now !

 

[JonathanH]

A single station could have been similar to that at Moorgate/Liverpool St, serving Euston and Kings X/St Pancras, while also providing a traffic and weather-free route between them.

The route of Crossrail 2 does that, many many years from now, except that it doesn't because there isn't room for the interchange between the stations to be on the unpaid side of the station.

The priority for Crossrail 1 was to relieve the Central Line, not the north side of the subsurface lines.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The route of Crossrail 2 does that, many many years from now, except that it doesn't because there isn't room for the interchange between the stations to be on the unpaid side of the station.

You could of course provide that for anyone with an Oyster or contactless card (or whatever is used by then) by not charging them anything if they just went between the two and took no more than a certain amount of time to do so.

 

[JonathanH]

You could of course provide that for anyone with an Oyster or contactless card (or whatever is used by then) by not charging them anything if they just went between the two and took no more than a certain amount of time to do so.

Yes, particularly since Euston and St Pancras and Euston and Kings Cross are out of station interchange already in the system and almost all relevant journeys will be on PAYG in the next few years.

 

[Bald Rick]

Unless you meant overloaded in terms of passenger numbers instead of train services @Bald Rick ?

yes, I meant passenger numbers On the trains.

 

[JohnElliott]

You can merge the Paddington & Euston approaches if you don't mind demolishing OOC again, and a bit of the cemetary. Pay for it with live cameras watching the all-day scrimmage in the tube station!

That was the original intention when Euston was built IIRC - LNWR station on the east side of the site, GWR on the west, with the station buildings between them.

 

[camflyer]

Good point; If intended to replace all, or even just most, of the current London termini, how big would 'London Central' have to be ? I would hazard a guess at, roughly, Absolutely Gigantic !

We do have a kind of 'super terminal' at Kings X/St Pancras, with our one international route, two main line routes, a cross-London national rail route, and multiple Underground lines, and Euston (with, one day, HS2) is not far away either. Although, perhaps, should Crossrail not have run via Euston/Kings X too ? IMHO it is a pity that the GWR went for Paddington instead of running alongside the LNWR from Old Oak and terminating adjacent to Euston. But we are where we are.

If Crossrail 2 is ever built then it will effectively make Euston-StPancras-KingsX into a single mega station with several airport style terminals ("London North?")

OOC will become the western megastation ("London West"?)

Future services could use Stratford to expand that into an eastern hub.

Rebuild Clapham Junction and you have a London South hub.

 

[MarkyT]

If Crossrail 2 is ever built then it will effectively make Euston-StPancras-KingsX into a single mega station with several airport style terminals ("London North?")

OOC will become the western megastation ("London West"?)

Future services could use Stratford to expand that into an eastern hub.

Rebuild Clapham Junction and you have a London South hub.

I think this is the right future plan for long distance terminals in and around London, with trains stopping at more than one of these where their routes allow it, or one and a separate more central terminus as appropriate. Had the mid 19th century Farringdon plan gone ahead, it would have run out of capacity very quickly, hence plunging the surrounding areas into a permanent building site for decades as successive expansions took place. Either that or many trains would have had to terminate somewhere else.

 

[MattRat]

Even if it could be built, politics would get in the way. It would make getting through London easier (any changes would be in that station), and I don't think politicians want that.

 

[JonathanH]

It would make getting through London easier (any changes would be in that station), and I don't think politicians want that.

Huh? Politicians want whatever will get them votes. Wasting taxpayer money isn't popular.

 

[plugwash]

Yes, particularly since Euston and St Pancras and Euston and Kings Cross are out of station interchange already in the system and almost all relevant journeys will be on PAYG in the next few years.

What kind of Journeys are people typically making when they interchange from Euston to Kings cross/St pancras?

I'd have thought EWR (assuming it ever gets finished) would suck up much of the more local traffic that would previously have made such interchanges, leaving Euston to Kings cross/St pancras interchanges mostly the preserve of long distance passengers (HS2 has no interchange with EWR and while the WCML does have an interchange it's at a station where at least at the moment long distance trains don't generally stop).
.

 

[stuu]

No, as has already been pointed out, it's enormously impractical, as well as being a single point of failure - half the country's rail network grinds to a halt if the fire alarm goes off

Paris has 4.5 crossrail-type lines and has closed as many central termini as London (one)

 

[Philip]

Thinking a bit more out of the box in relation to this idea, perhaps a parkway terminus station built in the open space somewhere between Kings Langley and St Albans and close to the M1 would be better, to cater for all trains from the WCML, MML and GNR? A new faster and higher frequency tube line dug in conjunction with the new station would then either run into central London, or if there's not enough space then it could join existing the existing Northern, Piccadilly and Metropolitan tube lines at various junctions across North London.

New lines feeding into the new parkway station to branch off from WCML west of Hemel Hempstead/Boxmoor; MML between St Albans and Harpenden and from GNR near Welwyn...

 

[stuu]

Thinking a bit more out of the box in relation to this idea, perhaps a parkway terminus station built in the open space somewhere between Kings Langley and St Albans and close to the M1 would be better, to cater for all trains from the WCML, MML and GNR? A new faster and higher frequency tube line dug in conjunction with the new station would then either run into central London, or if there's not enough space then it could join existing the existing Northern, Piccadilly and Metropolitan tube lines at various junctions across North London.

New lines feeding into the new parkway station to branch off from WCML west of Hemel Hempstead/Boxmoor; MML between St Albans and Harpenden and from GNR near Welwyn...

Why?

 

[Philip]

Why?

Well I'm guessing the point of this initial idea of the thread is to reduce track congestion on overground lines in London, and to create a London 'hub' from long distance origins. My idea above would be a different way of going about it, without having to knock a lot of buildings down.

 

[MarkyT]

What kind of Journeys are people typically making when they interchange from Euston to Kings cross/St pancras?

I'd have thought EWR (assuming it ever gets finished) would suck up much of the more local traffic that would previously have made such interchanges, leaving Euston to Kings cross/St pancras interchanges mostly the preserve of long distance passengers (HS2 has no interchange with EWR and while the WCML does have an interchange it's at a station where at least at the moment long distance trains don't generally stop).
.

I think the link is attractive primarily for WCML to Kent HS1 domestics as well as Continental services, and to Thameslink, for Southern destinations mainly in south London and surrounding Home Counties. Some who come in on MML to St Pancras today with their easy Thameslink interchange will have that replaced by a short walk from Euston, once the fastest East Midlands services are diverted to HS2. Also possibly some ECML destinations eventually, depending on what final solution is settled on for speeds improvements from Leeds and the North East.

 

[MattRat]

Huh? Politicians want whatever will get them votes. Wasting taxpayer money isn't popular.

I'm saying even I'm a world where it wasn't expensive, politics would still get in the way.