Abbey line departure boards and signalling diagram

[Dai Corner]

This concerns the plan to reduce service frequency on the line. I doubt a public official would say that. Presumably based on an email from Abfly.

I suspect the poster has more authoritative sources than Abfly.

 

[zwk500]

@RailEnable What is your actual goal? At the moment this appears to be some kind of bizarre power struggle between you and Abfly on behalf of your parents for the title of 'defender of the faith Abbey Line'.

Do you have a stated aim for ALPA, with definable and measurable goals?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Posted 22 July : It is anticipated that HCC/DfT may announce in September a consultation on closing the Abbey line.

Anticipated by whom? Evidence?

Personally I would reduce it to hourly including the peak, I still see strength in a "same all day" Takt, and it is what I would want were it my local line, even though I do use my phone to check for delays before travelling.

 

[Andrew S]

What a storm in a teacup.

 

[RailEnable]

Some reasons for opposing the planned reduction in service frequency https://railenable.com/oxcambpart4/oxcambpart4.php#reduction

 

[Bald Rick]

Some reasons for opposing the planned reduction in service frequency https://railenable.com/oxcambpart4/oxcambpart4.php#reduction

For the second time, it is not a ‘proposal’. The changed timetable is confirmed, written, and about to be published.

Re your new line from St Albans to Hatfield. It appears to go through one, possibly two nature reserves, a golf course, and the built up areas of both London Colney and Hatfield where there is no obvious route without significant demolition. How exactly do you propose to gain permission for this?

 

[RailEnable]

Some years ago a request was made for an official journey time from Watford Junction to St Albans Abbey non-stop. The official answer was 11 minutes. There are 5 intermediate stations on the line and the journey time for a stopping service is 16 minutes. Whilst the time saved by not calling at an intermediate station will vary, the average is 1 minute per station.
Does anyone have a proposal for a more frequent service using just one train?

For the second time, it is not a ‘proposal’. The changed timetable is confirmed, written, and about to be published.

You already have my response.

Re your new line from St Albans to Hatfield. It appears to go through one, possibly two nature reserves, a golf course, and the built up areas of both London Colney and Hatfield where there is no obvious route without significant demolition.

A new line from St Albans Abbey to Hatfield via London Colney is feasible. The new line would join the ECML south of Hatfield.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Speaking as an ex Operations Manager for the line (1996 - 1999) , I do wonder what the benefit for the travelling public /community would be in a non stop 11 min journey from the Abbey to Watford Junction. It sort of defeats the purpose of a line as a community railway.

I think I have said it before , but in the good days the line carried around a 1000 passengers a day - not now I regret - and there is significant free riding. Ergo the the economics are such that if you cannot justify the costs and OPEX of a loop at Bricket Wood , I find it difficult to imagine justifying a new build to Hatfield via London Colney , let alone the "joining the ECML south of Hatfield" as if that was a simple matter of just installing a set of points and that will be OK. OPEX yet comes into mind......

 

[The Planner]

You already have my response.

Doesn't make any difference, the timetable is done.

 

[Energy]

A new line from St Albans Abbey to Hatfield via London Colney is feasible. The new line would join the ECML south of Hatfield.

Some digging online and the line did exist at some point and is now the Alban way cycling route. There was a petition to bring back the railway, it had 34 signatures...

 

[London Trains]

Another way to add capacity but still only using one unit could be to run to St Albans and back and then a short circuit from Watford Junction to Garston and back every hour (since this only takes 5 mins each way).

Watford North and Garston are the two busiest stations on the line (excluding the end stations), and this is apparent on a map since they are within Watford and surrounded by housing.

A timetable could work like this (shift times within the hour for better connections at WFJ):

WFJ 00
STA 16

STA 20
WFJ 36

WFJ 40
GAR 45

GAR 51
WFJ 56

This means Watford North and Garston would have an exact 40/20 interval service to Watford Junction. If there was any disruption then one Garston circuit could be cancelled to get back to a normal service.

 

[mr_jrt]

Another way to add capacity but still only using one unit could be to run to St Albans and back and then a short circuit from Watford Junction to Garston and back every hour (since this only takes 5 mins each way).

Watford North and Garston are the two busiest stations on the line (excluding the end stations), and this is apparent on a map since they are within Watford and surrounded by housing.

A timetable could work like this (shift times within the hour for better connections at WFJ):

WFJ 00
STA 16

STA 20
WFJ 36

WFJ 40
GAR 45

GAR 51
WFJ 56

This means Watford North and Garston would have an exact 40/20 interval service to Watford Junction. If there was any disruption then one Garston circuit could be cancelled to get back to a normal service.

I can't comment on how feasible that is, but on the surface that sort of creativity is brilliant. Bravo.

 

[The Planner]

Another way to add capacity but still only using one unit could be to run to St Albans and back and then a short circuit from Watford Junction to Garston and back every hour (since this only takes 5 mins each way).

Watford North and Garston are the two busiest stations on the line (excluding the end stations), and this is apparent on a map since they are within Watford and surrounded by housing.

A timetable could work like this (shift times within the hour for better connections at WFJ):

WFJ 00
STA 16

STA 20
WFJ 36

WFJ 40
GAR 45

GAR 51
WFJ 56

This means Watford North and Garston would have an exact 40/20 interval service to Watford Junction. If there was any disruption then one Garston circuit could be cancelled to get back to a normal service.

I would still tweak it, even if it breaks the perception of the perfect interval. You want the longer turnaround at either St Albans or Watford after the longer run for resilience, not Garston.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Why ? - but an idea I suppose. Neither seem to be amazing commercial oppertunites , but fair play for innovative thinking.

Had a very pleasant driver .w who on shutting down the last arrival at WFJ one night, had some drunks who asked about the next train to Garston , a DOO special was arranged. No further comment.

 

[Birmingham]

WFJ 00
STA 16

I didn't know it now only took 16 minutes from Watford Junction to Stafford [STA]!

 

[Richardr]

Some digging online and the line did exist at some point and is now the Alban way cycling route. There was a petition to bring back the railway, it had 34 signatures...

It's not via London Colney, as the original poster was suggesting.

The Alban Way is perfectly walkable these days, albeit with the odd road crossing, a narrowing at one point in St Albans by a housing estate, and going through the middle of a newish housing estate in Hatfield - doable walking or on bike, but requires some destruction for a train.

 

[Energy]

It's not via London Colney, as the original poster was suggesting.

The Alban Way is perfectly walkable these days, albeit with the odd road crossing, a narrowing at one point in St Albans by a housing estate, and going through the middle of a newish housing estate in Hatfield - doable walking or on bike, but requires some destruction for a train.

I'm aware that the path goes a different way, thanks for the description of the path. How popular is the footpath?

 

[RailEnable]

The former St Albans to Hatfield single-track line i.e. via Smallford is now the much-appreciated Alban Way used for walking and cycling.

Hertford Civic Society proposes its reopening as a dual track tramway. The main link on the HCS home page https://www.hertfordcivicsociety.org.uk/ is to
https://www.hertfordcivicsociety.org.uk/media/other/38458/344-346_TAUT1609_HertsOrbital.pdf

For those who are interested, here is the RailEnable published response
https://railenable.com/oxcambpart4/oxcambpart4.php#hertnotrams
The text awaits an update : there are more obstacles to upgrading the Abbey line from single track to dual track than I have listed.

------------------------

For those who are interested, further details on the Hertsrail proposals are available from the RailEnable home page, specifically the Oxford to Cambridge project https://railenable.com/ and from Ox - Camb part 3 starting here https://railenable.com/oxcambherts/oxcambpart3.php#albanway also Ox-Camb part 4, link as earlier, through to the end. However, put together, that is a quite a lot of reading.

------------------------
I wasn't aware of the petition.

 

[Bald Rick]

You already have my response.

I do. Pretending it could still be reversed is, I’m afraid, a false hope. Better to accept the reality.

A new line from St Albans Abbey to Hatfield via London Colney is feasible. The new line would join the ECML south of Hatfield.

How do you define feasible? What environmental investigations have been done? Ground investigations? Alignment investigation, with an outline track design that doesn’t break the laws of physics? Timetabling development? Who has signed all of these off as ‘feasible’? Could you perhaps provide a link to a report from a reputable consultancy who has done this work?

And you didn’t answer my question. How do you expect to gain permission for a line that bulldozes it’s way through the built up areas of London Colney and Hatfield?

It's not via London Colney, as the original poster was suggesting.

The Alban Way is perfectly walkable these days, albeit with the odd road crossing, a narrowing at one point in St Albans by a housing estate, and going through the middle of a newish housing estate in Hatfield - doable walking or on bike, but requires some destruction for a train.

‘Some‘ destruction?
It goes right through 3 residential areas in St Albans, all of which would require demolition in part (look up Orient Way, Hansell Gardens, and Coach Mews on Google Maps.

at Hatfield, it runs through some houses to the west of the A1(M) (demolition required) then also has the A1(M) in the way, which took the formation just south of the Galleria. Then the Galleria itself is in the way, demolition required. Then through a densely populated residential area of Hatfield, which would require extensive demolition, and also rather annoy several hundred more people who instead of having a bike track the other side of the fence would have a railway.

My back of an envelope estimate is that to rebuild the Alban way as a railway, you would need to buy somewhere in the region of 3-500 residential properties, a few dozen commercial properties, and compensate another couple of hundred.

As a further point, the line was only ever single track. Making it double track would bring additional costs, something in the region of £50m - £100m per mile would seem to be a fair estimate.

There is zero chance of the Alban way ever being reinstated as a public railway.

I'm aware that the path goes a different way, thanks for the description of the path. How popular is the footpath?

Very. Used by thousands of people a day, including hundreds of school children to get access to their schools, of which there are four bordering the line in St Albans alone, two of which use the line as a means of access to the school itself.

 

[RailEnable]

And you didn’t answer my question. How do you expect to gain permission for a line that bulldozes it’s way through the built up areas of London Colney and Hatfield?

The impression created does not seem to be accurate.
There do not seem to be any showstoppers for a St Albans to Hatfield line via London Colney.
Route options and development by public authorities.


Some notes in preparation for a public engagement (consultation) as a continuation of HERT so far.

Hertsrail step 1 https://railenable.com/herts/indexherts.php . Cost-minimised passing loop at How Wood or vicinity. Therefore failure of the bid for a passing loop at Bricket Wood does not matter.

There is no feasible tramway proposal, so HERT will not be trams.

 

[Bald Rick]

The impression created does not seem to be accurate.
There do not seem to be any showstoppers for a St Albans to Hatfield line via London Colney.
Route options and development by public authorities.

As you don’t seem to want to answer the question, I’ll answer it for you, as a resident of this area.

There isn’t a technically feasible route that serves London Colney and on to Hatfield without demolishing property. Go and have a walk / cycle round there for yourself.

By all means draw some lines on a map, and post it to prove me wrong. But even on cursory investigation you will find houses, quarries, nature reserves, schools, North Mymms Park, retail parks and industrial estates (big ones) in the way.

 

[zwk500]

Hertsrail step 1 https://railenable.com/herts/indexherts.php . Cost-minimised passing loop at How Wood or vicinity. Therefore failure of the bid for a passing loop at Bricket Wood does not matter.

I almost feel bad for feeding this fire, given that you clearly are not prepared to engage with the people who do (or have done) this for a living. But why does the failure of the business case for a loop at one location not matter at all to the business case for a loop in another location?

 

[Bald Rick]

I almost feel bad for feeding this fire, given that you clearly are not prepared to engage with the people who do (or have done) this for a living. But why does the failure of the business case for a loop at one location not matter at all to the business case for a loop in another location?

Well, quite. There is also the small matter that a loop at Bricket Wood could be built entirely within the footprint of existing railway property, whereas a loop at How Wood, err, couldn’t. Which means an application for an Order under the Transport & Works Act, which makes it several million pounds more expensive.

In case I didn’t mention it upthread, the business case for the loop at Bricket Wood to double the frequency was appalling.

 

[The Planner]

I do like this type of thread where well reasoned questions and answers are completely swerved.

 

[zwk500]

I do like this type of thread where well reasoned questions and answers are completely swerved.

It's particularly amusing that no less than 4 current or former rail industry professionals have attempted to engage with this, yet the OP only repeats their proposals without regard for the questions asked.

 

[bingleybong]

It's particularly amusing that no less than 4 current or former rail industry professionals have attempted to engage with this, yet the OP only repeats their proposals without regard for the questions asked.

Indeed, this thread really needs a better title (St Albans area ideas or something) as much of the disscussion is really interesting and I at least only clicked on it more or less by chance. I grew up in St Albans and explored the Hatfield line before the Alban Way was created and given how bitty and blocked the trackbed was by the 1980s it is pretty amazing how good the present path is, I used it to commute in the late 80s and it was pretty poor for cycling then compared to today. It has to be far more useful as a path than it ever was as a railway, it is a great pity more suburban closed lines were not converted this way.

I have long wondered if St Albans - Watford would be better as a guided busway extended to the town centres at both ends as neither station is convenient (I used to commute to Watford for about a year and the line was pretty much useless to me due to this). It looks however that this is impractical from what others have said, since tram conversion has also been shown to be uneconomic (in a fantasy word extending a tram up Holywell Hill to the centre of St Albans would be great but in reality a nonsense) then keeping it as it is seems best.

I cannot see the objection to the service going hourly - the improved connections must make up for the slight loss in capacity and off peak I cannot imagine it is busy in any case.

As for closing it there are far worse basket cases that might go before this does.

 

[RailEnable]

I have no objection to criticism when I can get a handle on it.

 

[The Planner]

I have no objection to criticism when I can get a handle on it.

I think the issue is that you are swerving questions and responses.