London’s newest train line is now also its busiest - The Economist, UK

[matt_world2004]

Well TfL Rail was running for a good 4 years on the GWML with barriers and such in place from a fairly early point, so not sure the impact will be so bad there.

Certainly more of an issue on Southeastern, however Abbey Wood figures already shot up ~50% before the Elizabeth line opened when the gateline was in place.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 May 2023 ==



Fairly close. Passenger numbers were initially exceeding expectations in the first 6 months, although they were revised down after Covid.

Barriers only started appearing at tfl rail stations in the west in May 2022

 

[Bald Rick]

I do find it quite stark comparing the Elizabeth Line (EL) to Thameslink (TL), they are indeed essentially the same thing (RER) but the EL is far more well-known, well-used, and simply useful for journeys for Londoners than TL, which is arguably designed for non-Londoners in Hertfordshire, Kent and Surrey to get into London. It's particularly woeful for South Londoners. It should be a quick, direct, high-capacity route, but poor connections to other lines and awful-30 min frequencies mean most people I know who live near the line don't even consider it an option and instead bus to the nearest tube. Such a waste. It feels like a wasted opportunity that TL wasn't made more EL like in its central sections.

A few things here.

1) EL and TL are both high capacity railways through their cores, and there the similarities end. They are not ‘essentially the same thing’ in other respects.

2) EL through central London is a brand new railway on a brand new railway, designed as such. TL is a 157 year old railway, heavily modified in so far as it could be without demolishing swathes if central London.

3) EL directly connects the top 4 traffic generating areas in the London area: The City, the West End, Canary Wharf and Heathrow. TL neatly avoids them, thanks to our Victorian forefathers not anticipating the economy a century and a half in the future. Important to remember that the ‘Central Activity Zone’ of London is much wider E-W than it is tall N-S.

4) Whilst the EL is a fabulous railway (for which I can claim a minuscule amount of credit), it being concentrated on one corridor west and two east focuses the benefits there. TL with a wider network in the south spreads the benefit. You might see a less frequent service, but the connectivity is much better. St Albans - Greenwich, Woolwich to Luton airport, West Hampstead to Gatwick, Stevenage to London Bridge, etc etc. (I’m claiming a slightly larger amount of credit for TL too).


One final thing, how would you have made TL more like the EL in the central sections? The linespeed is as high as it can be without new tunnels, the stations are long enough for 240m trains, and used by them (the EL has the long stations but not the trains), and the frequency is actually pretty good - effectively turn up and go St Pancras - Blackfriars / London Bridge.

 

[Mgameing123]

Given HS2 will be terminating at Old Oak Common for 5 years (or forever) and how many passengers the line is already carrying, I think at the very least TfL is going to need more rolling stock to take the line to 28 or 30tph. I also wonder how many more paths they could find in the western section where some of the overcrowding has been pretty bad.

They will also need to get the 10 car trains right away!

 

[Non Multi]

Barriers only started appearing at tfl rail stations in the west in May 2022

Only because they were still being refurbished or completely rebuilt.

Then again there is now a more metro like service running out to Reading and Shenfield, so maybe there are some local journeys outside of London that are now on rail rather then by car.

That's rather wishful thinking, certainly in the west. Why would folks swap their Benz/Beemer/Audi for a 345 when there's the mainly free-flowing M4 to drive along?
I'm afraid it's a different world beyond Greater London. EL journeys where I am are notable only for how quiet journeys are normally.

 

[matt_world2004]

Only because they were still being refurbished or completely rebuilt

Yes , but regardless of the reasons for a lack of barriers at the tfl rail stations their presence allows more accurate reporting of passenger numbers.

 

[Mgameing123]

The Thames Valley is going to be a huge winner soon once the full timetable is out. Because Maidenhead & Twyford are going to get faster trains to Paddington.

 

[J-2739]

3) EL directly connects the top 4 traffic generating areas in the London area: The City, the West End, Canary Wharf and Heathrow. TL neatly avoids them, thanks to our Victorian forefathers not anticipating the economy a century and a half in the future. Important to remember that the ‘Central Activity Zone’ of London is much wider E-W than it is tall N-S.

I guess you could also add Stratford to that list, as a maturing commercial and residential hub. And Old Oak Common is yet to come.

The future is very bright for the Elizabeth Line.

 

[Mgameing123]

I guess you could also add Stratford to that list, as a maturing commercial and residential hub. And Old Oak Common is yet to come.

The future is very bright for the Elizabeth Line.

You could say too bright.

 

[ChrisHogan]

The Thames Valley is going to be a huge winner soon once the full timetable is out. Because Maidenhead & Twyford are going to get faster trains to Paddington.

And Slough a big loser. No fast trains to Reading and beyond. No non-stop trains to Paddington in the morning peak or from Paddington in the evening peak. Standing end-to-end from Tottenham Court Road to West Drayton in the evening peak on unsuitable 345 units.

 

[Mgameing123]

And Slough a big loser. No fast trains to Reading and beyond. No non-stop trains to Paddington in the morning peak or from Paddington in the evening peak. Standing end-to-end from Tottenham Court Road to West Drayton in the evening peak on unsuitable 345 units.

Oh god thats reminds me. I had to once take the Lizzie Line back to Maidenhead and it was jam packed until Slough. Thankfully it only stopped at Ealing Broadway & West Drayton along the way to Slough.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 May 2023 ==

And Slough a big loser. No fast trains to Reading and beyond. No non-stop trains to Paddington in the morning peak or from Paddington in the evening peak. Standing end-to-end from Tottenham Court Road to West Drayton in the evening peak on unsuitable 345 units.

But yeah Slough residents will have a rough time in the peak hours. On the good side though there will still be 6 trains per hour from Paddington to Slough.

 

[PGAT]

So that totals 12tph from Ealing Broadway to Paddington. I always thought the max capacity was 10tph

 

[telstarbox]

Thameslink is hugely useful even at 30 minute frequencies - lots of the routes which connect into it are at 30 minutes as well. One change from most of South London, Kent and Sussex to Luton Airport and Cambridge is more attractive than two changes (which could include an Underground faff too).

 

[MarkWi72]

I stayed at Cricklewood in October, and I thought the TL was fantastic. 15 minutes or so to Blackfriars. Also ran quite late on the Saturday evening.

 

[matt_world2004]

Wouldn't ETCS allow for slightly higher frequencies on the GWML as there would be tighter headways and faster acceleration , although it would have to apply to all trains on the reliefs including freight.

Maybe moving away from a fixed timetable base system to more of a headway based one would allow freight to operate and a higher frequency Elizabeth line service. But it would cause low frequency stations to get a inconsistent service pattern

 

[Benjwri]

Wouldn't ETCS allow for slightly higher frequencies on the GWML as there would be tighter headways and faster acceleration , although it would have to apply to all trains on the reliefs including freight.

The benefits of ETCS were overstated in the past, it only really benefits places like the core where all trains follow the same stopping pattern.

 

[Horizon22]

A few things here.

1) EL and TL are both high capacity railways through their cores, and there the similarities end. They are not ‘essentially the same thing’ in other respects.

2) EL through central London is a brand new railway on a brand new railway, designed as such. TL is a 157 year old railway, heavily modified in so far as it could be without demolishing swathes if central London.

3) EL directly connects the top 4 traffic generating areas in the London area: The City, the West End, Canary Wharf and Heathrow. TL neatly avoids them, thanks to our Victorian forefathers not anticipating the economy a century and a half in the future. Important to remember that the ‘Central Activity Zone’ of London is much wider E-W than it is tall N-S.

True, although I’d say “City Thameslink” is a close as you can get to the first one!

 

[Mikey C]

3) EL directly connects the top 4 traffic generating areas in the London area: The City, the West End, Canary Wharf and Heathrow. TL neatly avoids them, thanks to our Victorian forefathers not anticipating the economy a century and a half in the future. Important to remember that the ‘Central Activity Zone’ of London is much wider E-W than it is tall N-S.

TL serves the western part of the City with Farringdon, City TL and Blackfriars. It also serves the fast growing Kings Cross area including St Pancras International for the Eurostar. Plus 2 major airports.

So the two networks both have their core strength.

 

[zwk500]

Wouldn't ETCS allow for slightly higher frequencies on the GWML as there would be tighter headways and faster acceleration , although it would have to apply to all trains on the reliefs including freight.

ETCS would have a practical limit of about 90 seconds headway, and the current GW headway is 2 minutes. Freight would probably stay at the current headway for freight as its already longer than the shortest block. ETCS does nothing to make trains accelerate faster on its own, you need ATO for that.

Maybe moving away from a fixed timetable base system to more of a headway based one would allow freight to operate and a higher frequency Elizabeth line service. But it would cause low frequency stations to get a inconsistent service pattern

How is a headway based timetable different to the timetable we have now? Especially on the GW, trains are minimum headway apart.

 

[Snow1964]

How is a headway based timetable different to the timetable we have now? Especially on the GW, trains are minimum headway apart.

The big difference is if you have split block sections in platforms, so another train can approach as previous one is leaving.

If the platform and its approach is one signalling section doesn't make lot of difference because the platform with longest dwell (and thus longest time for train clear the section) tends to determine the maximum capacity of the route.

 

[zwk500]

The big difference is if you have split block sections in platforms, so another train can approach as previous one is leaving.

If the platform and its approach is one signalling section doesn't make lot of difference because the platform with longest dwell (and thus longest time for train clear the section) tends to determine the maximum capacity of the route.

But that's a signalling design thing and is just a shorter headway. The trains today are minimum headway apart for the signalling they run under. So I'm struggling to see how today's timetable is not a headway based one.

 

[Snow1964]

But that's a signalling design thing and is just a shorter headway. The trains today are minimum headway apart for the signalling they run under. So I'm struggling to see how today's timetable is not a headway based one.

On a pure headway timetable wouldn't have selected trains skipping stations, because they would all operate to same headway, so skipping would be all or none, not some.

In practice often get a batch of trains operating as flights on a headway basis within the overall timetable. But that doesn't make it a 100% headway timetable. Probably best not to try and apply the definitions as timetable is mix of both

 

[Horizon22]

Wouldn't ETCS allow for slightly higher frequencies on the GWML as there would be tighter headways and faster acceleration , although it would have to apply to all trains on the reliefs including freight.

Maybe moving away from a fixed timetable base system to more of a headway based one would allow freight to operate and a higher frequency Elizabeth line service. But it would cause low frequency stations to get a inconsistent service pattern

A headway based one would is effectively what is in operation (slots every 5 minutes)

On a pure headway timetable wouldn't have selected trains skipping stations, because they would all operate to same headway, so skipping would be all or none, not some.

In practice often get a batch of trains operating as flights on a headway basis within the overall timetable. But that doesn't make it a 100% headway timetable. Probably best not to try and apply the definitions as timetable is mix of both

Yes this would probably give you a marginal impact, although as alluded to above, we’re still not talking about much additional headway.

You’d be adding on about 5-6 minutes of time for people west of West Drayton by running all stops, for what is already a lengthy journey.

 

[SynthD]

I wonder if the plans for 15tph beyond OOC were detailed in the proposals, or handwaved away with ETCS and hopes for compliant freight companies.

 

[Jammy Dodger]

With usage and capacity already at remarkable levels, and the expectation that each HS2 service to terminate at OOC - possibly up to 6tph once Hansacre/Phase 2A is complete (whichever is first) - may need an additional EL service through the core, and the need for capacity increases sooner than expected, where will the additional trains come from? While Alstom is till making Aventra's, where will they get the capacity for more 345's before the HS2 contract is needed to start (add in the fact that they are also the most likely option for replacing Southeastern's Networkers). I was under the impression Aventra manufacture would stop when HS2 manufacture starts, or am I wrong with this?

If not, who would be able to produce inter-compatible EMU's to supplement 345's? To my knowledge there are no other trains in manufacture that could plug the gap...

If both of these come true, we may be at an impasse in terms of additional capacity (which looks like it will be needed by the end of the decade)...

 

[ijmad]

With usage and capacity already at remarkable levels, and the expectation that each HS2 service to terminate at OOC - possibly up to 6tph once Hansacre/Phase 2A is complete (whichever is first) - may need an additional EL service through the core, and the need for capacity increases sooner than expected, where will the additional trains come from? While Alstom is till making Aventra's, where will they get the capacity for more 345's before the HS2 contract is needed to start (add in the fact that they are also the most likely option for replacing Southeastern's Networkers). I was under the impression Aventra manufacture would stop when HS2 manufacture starts, or am I wrong with this?

If not, who would be able to produce inter-compatible EMU's to supplement 345's? To my knowledge there are no other trains in manufacture that could plug the gap...

If both of these come true, we may be at an impasse in terms of additional capacity (which looks like it will be needed by the end of the decade)...

The Gidea Park to Liverpool St rush direction services don't actually need to be 345s. But this is only a couple of trains.

 

[Mgameing123]

The Gidea Park to Liverpool St rush direction services don't actually need to be 345s. But this is only a couple of trains.

Greater Anglia could run the services for TFL.

 

[Horizon22]

Greater Anglia could run the services for TFL.

They run all stops, solely on the Electric lines so it would be odd to have anything other than Elizabeth line services operating.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Apparently, TfL may (or want to) lengthen the 345's from 9 to 11 coaches which explains how busy it is. Although this could be to do with HS2.

And where are you getting this from?

Also, do the core stations even allow for that? Mind you, with Selective Door Operation in use on the 345s, it may not matter.

 

[jdp30]

And where are you getting this from?

Also, do the core stations even allow for that? Mind you, with Selective Door Operation in use on the 345s, it may not matter.

The newly built core stations have provision for 11 coaches IIRC. The sidings/depots on the other hand....

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

The newly built core stations have provision for 11 coaches IIRC. The sidings/depots on the other hand....

All of that hassle lengthening them from 7 coaches. The thought of it all over again to get them to 11 is exhausting just to think about.