Would a single London terminus be feasible?

[MarkyT]

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.

Yours is an 'airport' style solution. Perhaps a big station out there somewhere might suit a new major London airport development in the vicinity, but otherwise it's just a big parkway which does nothing positive for those travelling into central London, the major market. Even accepting that most people at existing termini get the tube or bus onwards to their final destination, this is usually a fairly short transfer, and coming from the St Albans area instead would add significant time for that 'local' transfer, now extended to 20 miles +, and think what a taxi would cost from there to the city! The advantage with rail is that given a few compromises you can squeeze rail terminals into dense urban areas, albeit once that denseness has developed around your terminal it can then become hemmed in, hampering further expansion.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

No. London's too big a capital city.

Next question/topic please!

I've already given my (ahem!) considered opinion, but if the OP's proposal were ever to be actively considered, where might such a single terminus be located.

Easy to imagine all the other London terminii being lumped together at some super site adjacent to Euston/St. Pancras/Kings Cross, but would such a location suit the majority of users?

There's a lot of quite intensively used London terminii elsewhere at present at the likes of Moorgate / Liverpool Street / Fenchurch Street / London Bridge / Cannon Street / Charing Cross / Waterloo / Victoria / Paddington and Marylebone.

 

[Irascible]

I've already given my (ahem!) considered opinion, but if the OP's proposal were ever to be actively considered, where might such a single terminus be located.

Easy to imagine all the other London terminii being lumped together at some super site adjacent to Euston/St. Pancras/Kings Cross, but would such a location suit the majority of users?

There's a lot of quite intensively used London terminii elsewhere at present at the likes of Moorgate / Liverpool Street / Fenchurch Street / London Bridge / Cannon Street / Charing Cross / Waterloo / Victoria / Paddington and Marylebone.

Built above the Thames would probably be the only useful place, with staggered sets of platforms I'm not sure there's enough room to fit anything big underground anymore, just look at the hassle Crossrail had trying to thread it's tunnels through.

 

[Bald Rick]

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?")

it doesn’t do that though.

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

London is fine with many terminals, thanks to the London Underground covering most terminals well.
You can to any except maybe Fenchurch Street and Mary-le-Bone in only one change from any other.

 

[Bald Rick]

London is fine with many terminals, thanks to the London Underground covering most terminals well.
You can to any except maybe Fenchurch Street and Mary-le-Bone in only one change from any other.

It’s even better than that. Because all of the termini except Marylebone, Waterloo and London Bridge are on the Circle line*, it’s a one ‘tube’ journey between most of them. And for those that need a change, almost all of them are available as a cross platform interchange somewhere. None need more than one change.

I think the only pairs that need a change of tube that isn’t cross platform are:

Victoria - Waterloo (which must be a niche move, given Clapham Junction)
Victoria - London Bridge (which, pedantically, are normally linked by a direct train)
Waterloo - Moorgate (which you wouldn’t do to change trains)
Waterloo - Liverpool St
Waterloo - Cannon St (you wouldn’t do)
London Bridge - Fenchurch St (a niche move given Jubilee to West Ham cuts the corner)
London Bridge - Liverpool St





* I regard Euston Square and Embankment stations as being part of the Euston / Charing Cross station ‘complexes’ respectively. Arguably Marylebone / Baker St is too.

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

It’s even better than that. Because all of the termini except Marylebone, Waterloo and London Bridge are on the Circle line*, it’s a one ‘tube’ journey between most of them. That’s excluding the principle that the first three are within a few minutes walk of a Circle line station. And for those that need a change, almost all of them are available as a cross platform interchange somewhere. None need more than one change.

I think the only pairs that need a change of tube that isn’t cross platform are:

Victoria - Waterloo (which must be a niche move, given Clapham Junction)
Victoria - London Bridge (which, pedantically, are normally linked by a direct train)
Waterloo - Moorgate (which you wouldn’t do to change trains)
Waterloo - Liverpool St
Waterloo - Cannon St (you wouldn’t do)
London Bridge - Fenchurch St (a niche move given Jubilee to West Ham cuts the corner)
London Bridge - Liverpool St

* I regard Euston Square and Embankment stations as being part of the Euston / Charing Cross station ‘complexes’ respectively. Arguably Marylebone / Baker St is too.

Fine analysis. London's rail set-up is awesome, it's almost as if the entire Circle Line is already one big terminal station.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

London is fine with many terminals, thanks to the London Underground covering most terminals well.
You can to any except maybe Fenchurch Street and Mary-le-Bone in only one change from any other.

Kings Cross/St. Pancras to Waterloo is a bit of a pain, as there are several options with different pros/cons such as cross-platform changes, crowding etc. If you're heading for SW suburban land there's the Vauxhall option but longer-distance services don't call there.

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

Kings Cross/St. Pancras to Waterloo is a bit of a pain, as there are several options with different pros/cons such as cross-platform changes, crowding etc. If you're heading for SW suburban land there's the Vauxhall option but longer-distance services don't call there.

Maybe the Waterloo and City Line should be extended the extra mile to King's Cross?
It is indeed a bit awkward for anyone in say Yorkshire to get to Hastings.

 

[plugwash]

You can to any except maybe Fenchurch Street and Mary-le-Bone in only one change from any other.

Well Fenchurch street doesn't have a tube station of it's own at all, it's shown on the map with a dotted line to tower hill.

If we count tower hill as the tube station for fenchurch street, I think all the London terminals can be done with at most two tube legs, even with the current closure of the northern line bank branch, even if we don't count Euston Square as part of Euston and even if we don't use thameslink.

The list of london terminals (according to NRE) is

Blackfriers*, Cannon St*, Charing cross, Euston, Fenchurch St*, Kings Cross*, Liverpool St*, London Bridge, Marlybone, Moorgate*, Paddington*,St Pancras*, Victoria*, Waterloo

Those I have marked with a * are on the circle line (as above counting tower hill as the tube station for Fenchurch St) so are directly connected. All the others are within one tube journey of the circle line.

So that leaves the following combinations, which I have manually checked are possible in at most two tube legs.

Charing Cross - Euston : Northern line
Charing Cross - London Bridge: Northern followed by Jubilee.
Charing Cross - Marlybone: Bakerloo
Charing Cross - Waterloo: Bakerloo or Northern
Euston - London Birdge : Normally the bank branch of the Northern line, but that is closed right now. so Northern followed by Jubilee
Euston - Marlybone : Victoria followed by Bakerloo
Euston - Waterloo: Northern line.
Longon bridge - Marlybone: Jubilee followed by Bakerloo
Waterloo - Marlybone: Bakerloo.

Kings Cross/St. Pancras to Waterloo is a bit of a pain, as there are several options with different pros/cons such as cross-platform changes, crowding etc. If you're heading for SW suburban land there's the Vauxhall option but longer-distance services don't call there.

Agreed, that link has always seemed conspicuous by it's absence to me.

One workaround if you are coming from places like Letchworth or Cambridge is to take Thameslink all the way to London bridge. From Leeds, Sheffield etc crosscountry routes can become an option, but if you are doing something like Peterbough to Salisbury then you are probablly going to have to change twice in London.

 

[swt_passenger]

It is indeed a bit awkward for anyone in say Yorkshire to get to Hastings.

As King Harold once found. As interchange across London was a bit difficult he coined the phrase, “the King’s Cross”

(I wonder if his return was refundable?)

 

[Bald Rick]

Kings Cross/St. Pancras to Waterloo is a bit of a pain, as there are several options with different pros/cons such as cross-platform changes, crowding etc. If you're heading for SW suburban land there's the Vauxhall option but longer-distance services don't call there.

It’s really rather straightforward: Victoria + Bakerloo, with cross platform at Oxford Circus. I used to do it regularly (if it was raining). Passengers using Thameslink services north of Kings Cross / St Pancras have the option of direct train to Blackfriars and a 15 minute walk.

It is indeed a bit awkward for anyone in say Yorkshire to get to Hastings.

One tube: Northern from Kings Cross / St Pancras to London Bridge. (Accepting that the Northern is temporarily closed at present).

 

[181]

I regard Euston Square and Embankment stations as being part of the Euston / Charing Cross station ‘complexes’ respectively.

Yes, although Euston Square could do with an entrance/exit at the eastern end.

it's almost as if the entire Circle Line is already one big terminal station.

It is a bit circuitous for some journeys, though. (This is not an argument that there should be a single main London station).

Kings Cross/St. Pancras to Waterloo is a bit of a pain

It’s really rather straightforward: Victoria + Bakerloo, with cross platform at Oxford Circus.

Maybe the Waterloo and City Line should be extended the extra mile to King's Cross?

Yes, the Oxford Circus route is quite straightforward. I'd vote for extending the W&C to Liverpool Street, as that's a more awkward journey from Waterloo (although the Jubilee line to Stratford is now an alternative for some journeys)

 

[Bevan Price]

The time to consider an "All London" central station would have been the early 1830s. But it hit an almost immediate problem. The London civic authorities did not want railways from the north to go further south than Euston Road.

Since then, any idea of such a station would be impossibly expensive.

 

[Bald Rick]

Yes, although Euston Square could do with an entrance/exit at the eastern end.

It is getting one.

Yes, the Oxford Circus route is quite straightforward. I'd vote for extending the W&C to Liverpool Street, as that's a more awkward journey from Waterloo (although the Jubilee line to Stratford is now an alternative for some journeys)

Extending the W&C at the Bank end isn’t possible.

 

[philosopher]

Yes, although Euston Square could do with an entrance/exit at the eastern end.

It is a bit circuitous for some journeys, though. (This is not an argument that there should be a single main London station).




Yes, the Oxford Circus route is quite straightforward. I'd vote for extending the W&C to Liverpool Street, as that's a more awkward journey from Waterloo (although the Jubilee line to Stratford is now an alternative for some journeys)

If arriving at Waterloo, instead of going to Liverpool Street you can either get the Jubilee Line to Stratford if wanting a Great Eastern service or get on the Bakerloo Line to Oxford Circus and then the Victoria Line to Tottenham Hale if you want a West Anglia service.

 

[Irascible]

The time to consider an "All London" central station would have been the early 1830s. But it hit an almost immediate problem. The London civic authorities did not want railways from the north to go further south than Euston Road.

Since then, any idea of such a station would be impossibly expensive.

You could distribute it across the entire west end with elevated track/platforms, perhaps - then you wouldn't need numbers for all these platforms, you could just give street names. Junctions might be a bit awkward...

Slightly more seriously as it seems we're drifting that way, if only the Northern City went a stop further to Bank...

 

[SwindonBert]

If this does happen, please can I chair the planning enquiry. I've no experience in doing this, but have about 10 - 12 years until I retire & this will be a job which will not report before then, so can sit and listen to everyone who is affected and then hand over the report writing to someone else whilst I enjoy my retirement.

 

[BayPaul]

An interesting way to think about this is what would you do if starting completely from scratch today, rather than with the existing lines and stations.

I would imagine a number of differences from the existing network :

• A larger bore 'underground' network covering pretty much all inner surburban services within the M25, so effectively making the dense network of services South of the River LUL rather than mainline services
• A Thameslink type network covering the whole of the southeast, out to around a Birmingham radius. This would work well for avoiding large terminals, but also distributing passengers well around London, with each line having multiple Faringdon like stations, so many passengers are in walking range, or an easy change of their destination. Like Thameslink you would have all trains stopping everywhere through Central London, and then have four tracks beyond the city to allow fast and slow trains.
• High speed lines for intercity journeys. At the London end you could probably get away with 4 lines - HS1, one roughly following the MML to Leeds then the ECML northwards, HS2, and one roughly following the GWML, though obviously all would need additional branches.

The high speed lines could potentially all terminate at a single London Central Station. Given it would only have long distance services, I would imagine it would be around 30 platforms which isn't too ridiculous. You would no doubt also have Stratford /OOC style stations on each line to help distribute the flows

 

[Falcon1200]

I regard Euston Square and Embankment stations as being part of the Euston / Charing Cross station ‘complexes’ respectively.

Yes, although Euston Square could do with an entrance/exit at the eastern end.

Euston-Euston Square is fine if you are able-bodied, don't have much luggage and it's not pouring with rain ! But, as I found on Monday, it is not quite as simple with an elderly person and heavy luggage..... It is strange that the entrance to Euston Square is at the 'wrong' end for Euston, presumably there is a historical reason for this, but will this not be addressed as part of the HS2 work ?

BTW I considered making a Euston-Paddington journey via Overground to Queens Park (or Willesden Jc to avoid using stairs) and the Bakerloo Line, which could be step-free and entirely under cover, however I'm unsure how this would be charged ?

 

[stuu]

Euston square is being linked directly to Euston as part of the HS2 works.

For getting from Euston to Paddington step free, if you aren't in a hurry (which going to Willesden would imply), the 205 bus is the most straightforward option

 

[Alex365Dash]

London Bridge - Liverpool St

This one will actually be solved with the opening of the Elizabeth line. (At least once the Northern line via Bank is open again.)

Charing Cross - London Bridge: Northern followed by Jubilee.

In reality, anyone who wishes to take this journey will probably end up on Southeastern.

 

[camflyer]

it doesn’t do that though.

Doesn't it? Crossrail 2 maps have a station called "Euston St Pancras". StP and KX are already effectively joined so having a CR2 station between Euston and StP would bring all three stations together with CR2, HS2, several mainlines and Tube services

Euston St Pancras - The Crossrail 2 Station You Didn't Know About

But will it actually happen?

londonist.com

 

[Bald Rick]

Doesn't it? Crossrail 2 maps have a station called "Euston St Pancras". StP and KX are already effectively joined so having a CR2 station between Euston and StP would bring all three stations together with CR2, HS2, several mainlines and Tube services

Euston St Pancras - The Crossrail 2 Station You Didn't Know About

But will it actually happen?

londonist.com

it joins Euston and St Pancras, and only via two ticket barriers. It would not link to any part of the existing KXSP underground station.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The high speed lines could potentially all terminate at a single London Central Station. Given it would only have long distance services, I would imagine it would be around 30 platforms which isn't too ridiculous. You would no doubt also have Stratford /OOC style stations on each line to help distribute the flows

The key to making such a station viable, in so much as it would ever be viable, would be it being a through station, not a terminus.

The problem, though, is that with London being in the bottom right hand corner there is a limit to the number of places that exist that you could usefully send InterCity services south to.

 

[SargeNpton]

The key to making such a station viable, in so much as it would ever be viable, would be it being a through station, not a terminus.

The problem, though, is that with London being in the bottom right hand corner there is a limit to the number of places that exist that you could usefully send InterCity services south to.

They all head out on HS1 to Ramsgate - lots of people want to go to Ramsgate.

 

[XAM2175]

The problem, though, is that with London being in the bottom right hand corner there is a limit to the number of places that exist that you could usefully send InterCity services south to.

It's a bit like Zurich in that regard, with west-east IC services running through to either Romanshorn or St. Gallen. Brighton is the most obvious equivalent for an other-side-of-London terminus in that spirit.

Or there's the Geneva approach, which would just be to build a mega-terminus at Gatwick.

Obviously both entail the need for additional capacity on the lines to those places, unless you replace existing services with the through-running ICs - but this creates the risk of importing disruption.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's a bit like Zurich in that regard, with west-east IC services running through to either Romanshorn or St. Gallen. Brighton is the most obvious equivalent for an other-side-of-London terminus in that spirit.

Or there's the Geneva approach, which would just be to build a mega-terminus at Gatwick.

Obviously both entail the need for additional capacity on the lines to those places, unless you replace existing services with the through-running ICs - but this creates the risk of importing disruption.

I suppose the other option (seeing as this thread is crayonista anyway) is you don't look purely north-south, but instead it partly curves around under London, so you could run e.g. through ECML-GWML services via the City, the West End and Paddington, which might actually be useful through services given how much employment there is in Reading and the Thames Valley.

Having done that for the ICs, you could definitely connect commuter route to commuter route (e.g. LNR services connected to Southern services) - that's just Thameslink all over.

That of course isn't one London Hbf, but more like a better designed Castlefield.

 

[BayPaul]

I suppose the other option (seeing as this thread is crayonista anyway) is you don't look purely north-south, but instead it partly curves around under London, so you could run e.g. through ECML-GWML services via the City, the West End and Paddington, which might actually be useful through services given how much employment there is in Reading and the Thames Valley.

Having done that for the ICs, you could definitely connect commuter route to commuter route (e.g. LNR services connected to Southern services) - that's just Thameslink all over.

That of course isn't one London Hbf, but more like a better designed Castlefield.

I don't think it would really make sense to cross-link intercity services, unlike with shorter distance services you don't really gain much, and there would be far too much importing of delays. Sending them through to Brighton as is always suggested just means clogging up the Brighton Mainline with entirely unsuitable stock.
If you were desperate to avoid building a massive central London terminus, you'd probably terminate them at a depot in Clapham, Croydon or Stratford, with a tunnelled line effectively for ECS movements (though you'd probably let passengers remain on), and so just have a few departing platforms, and a few arriving platforms in your main station(s), which would then be able to be far more central than Euston - probably more like Charing Cross.

 

[Irascible]

Make it a roundabout - trains just run through it back to where they came from.