How could Crossrail (Elizabeth Line) services be improved/extended?

[Jammy Dodger]

Moderator note: Split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...now-also-its-busiest-the-economist-uk.248698/

Increasing frequency over increasing train length is probably the easier/cheaper option. In terms of where these services could terminate (think I've mentioned all of them):

East:
- Likely no more capacity at Abbey Wood, 12tph at 2 platforms is already too much, potential extension to Dartford/Gravesend would help with this though
- More terminus services at Gidea Park, followed by pulling off into the CS (would be easier to do with enough staff than the Paddington terminus services due to the decreased frequencies)
- If using an Abbey Wood - type system, Shenfield could handle 10/12tph on it's own fine
- Bay platform at Ilford could be squeezed in if necessary
- Custom House west crossovers mean Custom House could be used if needed, although this would likely impact other service frequencies (almost certainly not happening, ever)

West:
- Old Oak Common will provide terminus capacity of all current 12tph Paddington termini (they will be moving), giving new capacity at Paddington/Westbourne Park CS
- Bring the bay platforms at Hayes and Harlington/West Drayton/Maidenhead (back?) into regular use
- Possibility for a 5th (bay) platform at Iver on the goods line
- Additional capacity at Reading could almost certainly be found - there's a total of 9 accessible platforms there!
- Send more services to Heathrow, possibly whilst taking away a HEX path or two (would also increase space on the fast lines into Paddington)

 

[PGAT]

Only 12tph can fit on the GWML so anything more will have to terminate at OOC as the line is currently at max capacity. Gidea Park could probably take 6tph terminating but this would create an unfair unbalance in service, so it’s more likely the uplift won’t come until the Dartford/Gravesend extension is complete.

 

[Jammy Dodger]

Only 12tph can fit on the GWML so anything more will have to terminate at OOC as the line is currently at max capacity. Gidea Park could probably take 6tph terminating but this would create an unfair unbalance in service, so it’s more likely the uplift won’t come until the Dartford/Gravesend extension is complete.

Surely turning the currently-being-installed ETCS L2 overlay into the primary signalling system to Reading would help with this, as well as having all GWR trains running fast from Reading to OOC?

I wouldn't hold out hope on the Dartford/Gravesend extension, latest estimates put the cost at >£3bn, and we all know how allergic the current govt is with infrastructure! TfL can't even get anything out for DLR to Thamesmead...

 

[PGAT]

The Elizabeth Line is a gold mine and a catalyst for new development so its not unlikely that the extension will happen

 

[ijmad]

Only 12tph can fit on the GWML so anything more will have to terminate at OOC as the line is currently at max capacity. Gidea Park could probably take 6tph terminating but this would create an unfair unbalance in service, so it’s more likely the uplift won’t come until the Dartford/Gravesend extension is complete.

Abbey Wood can reverse 15tph and did so for months during the peaks in the earliest stage of the Elizabeth Line opening, so a 15tph service should be possible there.

As for the Shenfield branch, certainly some of the early timetables featured a 16tph peak (12 to the core, 4 from Gidea Park to Liverpool Street high level), so 15tph might be possible there too.

Giving us a 30tph core service.

When OOC opens I believe the intention is to run everything to there under CBTC (or ETCS?) where there will be four platforms, two for through running and two for reversing. Even if only 12tph can run further West, so long as there is a good arrangement of crossovers and sidings there shouldn't be any issue terminating 18tph at OOC even if drivers have to start stepping back.

But of course, none of this helps with overcrowding beyond OOC.

Pure conjecture but I did wonder if the Elizabeth Line might be handed two of HeX's hourly paths on the fasts for the T5 services if the HeX is looking like a waste of money for BAA in a few years. But the problem is getting them on to the fasts, given there'd be a flat crossing somewhere. The ease of interchange from HeX to EL at OOC might open some possibilities, but it's still a struggle.

 

[Horizon22]

I believe that GWR has moved the Didcot Parkway service to the fast lines in the May timetable.

Does this mean Elizabeth Line is now the only passenger service on the reliefs?

Yes (well as far as Slough) with the exception of the very early morning GWR services and the sole Paddington - Greenford train.

Lots of freight though.

Increasing frequency over increasing train length is probably the easier/cheaper option. In terms of where these services could terminate (think I've mentioned all of them):

West:
- Old Oak Common will provide terminus capacity of all current 12tph Paddington termini (they will be moving), giving new capacity at Paddington/Westbourne Park CS

Fine.

- Bring the bay platforms at Hayes and Harlington/West Drayton/Maidenhead (back?) into regular use

No capacity on running lines, platform capacity isn't the issue

- Possibility for a 5th (bay) platform at Iver on the goods line

As above.

- Additional capacity at Reading could almost certainly be found - there's a total of 9 accessible platforms there!

Of which a great number are in use and again as above.

- Send more services to Heathrow, possibly whilst taking away a HEX path or two (would also increase space on the fast lines into Paddington)

In principle great, but you still need to find a route to the Main Lines from the Crossrail lines which would either involve slicing across the Paddington throat or booked passenger moves at somewhere like Acton West junction.

All the easy capacity has been squeezed out and we are now in 'marginal gains' territory where a limited increase will cost a lot.

 

[PGAT]

I believe the plan for OOC is to have one terminating platforms where trains reverse at the sidings (not the platforms) so that is not an issue. The issue with 15tph at Abbey Wood is that it's not very resilient and such a short turnaround time is VERY tight, especially for such long trains.

Also forgot to mention that there is 14tph to Gidea Park right now, but the extra 2tph go to Liverpool Street high level instead of Paddington.

 

[Peregrine 4903]

The Elizabeth Line is a gold mine and a catalyst for new development so its not unlikely that the extension will happen

No chance of Dartford extension happening for at least 10 years, probably 20. Or it may not even happen at all.

 

[NSEWonderer]

I seem to remember Thurrock councils wet dream of an extention

 

[matt_world2004]

No chance of Dartford extension happening for at least 10 years, probably 20. Or it may not even happen at all.

Especially as Disney on Swanscombe is not happening again

 

[NSEWonderer]

Especially as Disney on Swanscombe is not happening again

Turned out that was a copycat Disney theme park

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I wouldn't hold out hope on the Dartford/Gravesend extension, latest estimates put the cost at >£3bn, and we all know how allergic the current govt is with infrastructure! TfL can't even get anything out for DLR to Thamesmead...

Whaaaat? £3bn? That's like, 1/6 of the cost of building the Elizabeth line in the first place, and it's basically for laying new surface level track in an area where, for a lot of the way - especially between Abbey Wood and Dartford, the space for the track is already there, there aren't that many overbridges, and infrastructure - such as some of the bridges - have already been built wide enough for the new track. How has the estimated cost got so high?

 

[PTR 444]

With the Elizabeth Line more frequent and providing better connectivity than the Southeastern service via Greenwich, would it be feasible to terminate SE trains at Abbey Wood and give EL exclusive use of the line to Slade Green? While it would sever direct links between London’s South Bank and Belvedere/Erith, this would be made up for by those stations having a much higher frequency service to Central London, Heathrow and Gravesend.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Surely turning the currently-being-installed ETCS L2 overlay into the primary signalling system to Reading would help with this, as well as having all GWR trains running fast from Reading to OOC?

I wouldn't hold out hope on the Dartford/Gravesend extension, latest estimates put the cost at >£3bn, and we all know how allergic the current govt is with infrastructure! TfL can't even get anything out for DLR to Thamesmead...

And what about all the freight on the GWML relief lines? If you want a reliable service through the Crossrail centre section you can’t overfill the GWML relief lines, you need some robustness.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

With the Elizabeth Line more frequent and providing better connectivity than the Southeastern service via Greenwich, would it be feasible to terminate SE trains at Abbey Wood and give EL exclusive use of the line to Slade Green? While it would sever direct links between London’s South Bank and Belvedere/Erith, this would be made up for by those stations having a much higher frequency service to Central London, Heathrow and Gravesend.

Off the top of my head, I could imagine that being a reasonable 'poor man's' option for the extension, but it would still require some infrastructure work: Assuming we're only talking about extending the Elizabeth line to Dartford, not Ebbsfleet, you'd still need:

1. Some rebuilding of Abbey Wood station,
2. Sorting out the power supply between Abbey Wood and Dartford (either convert that track to OHL, or add 3rd rail capability to the EL trains - I dunno how feasible that is).
3. Rebuilding of Dartford station too to add new capacity there.
4. And possibly 4-tracking between Slade Green and Dartford, so that section of line could cope with the Elizabeth line trains as well as the SouthEastern Bexleyheath ones.
5. Building some extra Elizabeth line trains (unless you could cut back elsewhere? Perhaps return Maidenhead-Reading back to GWR?)

On the upside, you'd no longer really need the SouthEastern rounders, and if you then ran all Bexleyheath/Sidcup line trains to Dartford, you'd have a much better service with decent connectivity to the Elizabeth line on both of those routes.

 

[cle]

I agree that getting to Dartford as a first step would be an incremental plan.

Cull Southeastern services at Abbey Wood (rebuild, swap the bays, have three for SE?), you could use Plumstead too. Would maybe need a Blackheath service. Diesel access via a single through platform for freight?
Segregated pair of lines (AC) from Abbey Wood to Dartford (don't touch Slade Green but no access from Woolwich line) - run all CR trains there.

More intense/even services from Abbey Wood to Cannon St (8tph, 6 via Greenwich, 2 via Blackheath - could these two go to TL if needed in place of Rainham?)

 

[PGAT]

There’s no way Abbey Wood is being rebuilt again.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

There’s no way Abbey Wood is being rebuilt again.

I agree there's no way it's getting completely rebuilt. But they did (stupidly?) build the extra exit to Felixstowe Road so that it blocks one of the Elizabeth line tracks, and they presumably did so in the full knowledge that that entrance will have to be removed if the Elizabeth line gets extended, so I would assume that rebuilding to that extent has always been a possibility.

 

[dodecahedron67]

I believe Abbey Wood was built with provision for an XR extension eastbound, with only some minor work needed (looks like removing some parking and garages from a side street). The only way you'd "cull" the SE services would be to slew the running lines east of Abbey Wood to connect to the XR platforms and turn the SE platforms into a dead end island terminus, adding crossovers to allow for access to both platforms from the Plumstead end.
The issue with culling the SE services is the Rainham thameslink white elephant. You'd either have to re-route it through Bexleyheath/Sidcup or change its terminus to another South London metro line, as terminating it at Abbey Wood would be pointless. There's probably an argument to be made for running the Thameslink through the Sidcup line but ending at Dartford/Gravesend (TL depot at Gillingham issues ignored), as arguably that is now the worst connected bit of SE Metro land. A very big issue with the through running XR to Dartford is the need for a major rebuild of Dartford station in a relatively confined area due to the elevation above Dartford town and the viaducts.

If you're doing that, a theoretical timetable could be something like:

Crossrail
15(?)tph Dartford - Crossrail Core - Reading/Heathrow/Paddington/Old Oak Common XR

Greenwich Line
6tph Abbey Wood - Cannon St via Greenwich SE

Sidcup Line
2tph Gravesend - Victoria via Sidcup SE
2tph Rainham - Charing X via Sidcup SE
2tph Dartford - Luton via Sicup TL

Bexleyheath Line
2tph Gravesend - Cannon St via Bexleyheath SE
4tph Dartford - Charing X via Bexleyheath SE

(with 4tph Orpington - Cannon St SE + 2tph Sevenoaks - Charing X SE, provided Hayes got Bakerloo'd)
to give 6tph on all SE metro lines, with the caveat of Woolwich losing it's link to Lewisham - whilst a big issue with the original December 22 SE timetable, it really does ruin an otherwise lovely neat clockface 6tph timetable.

This would give a split of 12tph/15tph Cannon St/Charing X once mainline services (6tph Charing X - Kent via Sevenoaks, 1tph Charing X - Maidstone via Swanley) were included, which would be very manageable at the London end, with the caveat of only the Bexleyheath line serving both Charing X and Cannon St, but hopefully the extension of Crossrail and the inclusion of Thameslink (for the City) on the Sidcup line would combat this.
Certainly from having commuted on the Sidcup/Grove Park lines for a large chunk of my life, the Cannon St trains never seem that busy outside of the peak, and there'd be capacity for an extra 2tph to Cannon St via Sidcup in the peak I believe).

 

[PGAT]

The most likely scenario is that the XR trains share tracks east of Abbey Wood and one of the platforms at Dartford are unofficially reserved for the Elizabeth Line and another for SouthEastern. Unless the extension to Gravesend/Ebbsfleet happens then you probably won’t get more than 6tph to Dartford.

 

[cle]

I believe Abbey Wood was built with provision for an XR extension eastbound, with only some minor work needed (looks like removing some parking and garages from a side street). The only way you'd "cull" the SE services would be to slew the running lines east of Abbey Wood to connect to the XR platforms and turn the SE platforms into a dead end island terminus, adding crossovers to allow for access to both platforms from the Plumstead end.
The issue with culling the SE services is the Rainham thameslink white elephant. You'd either have to re-route it through Bexleyheath/Sidcup or change its terminus to another South London metro line, as terminating it at Abbey Wood would be pointless. There's probably an argument to be made for running the Thameslink through the Sidcup line but ending at Dartford/Gravesend (TL depot at Gillingham issues ignored), as arguably that is now the worst connected bit of SE Metro land. A very big issue with the through running XR to Dartford is the need for a major rebuild of Dartford station in a relatively confined area due to the elevation above Dartford town and the viaducts.

If you're doing that, a theoretical timetable could be something like:

Crossrail
15(?)tph Dartford - Crossrail Core - Reading/Heathrow/Paddington/Old Oak Common XR

Greenwich Line
6tph Abbey Wood - Cannon St via Greenwich SE

Sidcup Line
2tph Gravesend - Victoria via Sidcup SE
2tph Rainham - Charing X via Sidcup SE
2tph Dartford - Luton via Sicup TL

Bexleyheath Line
2tph Gravesend - Cannon St via Bexleyheath SE
4tph Dartford - Charing X via Bexleyheath SE

(with 4tph Orpington - Cannon St SE + 2tph Sevenoaks - Charing X SE, provided Hayes got Bakerloo'd)
to give 6tph on all SE metro lines, with the caveat of Woolwich losing it's link to Lewisham - whilst a big issue with the original December 22 SE timetable, it really does ruin an otherwise lovely neat clockface 6tph timetable.

This would give a split of 12tph/15tph Cannon St/Charing X once mainline services (6tph Charing X - Kent via Sevenoaks, 1tph Charing X - Maidstone via Swanley) were included, which would be very manageable at the London end, with the caveat of only the Bexleyheath line serving both Charing X and Cannon St, but hopefully the extension of Crossrail and the inclusion of Thameslink (for the City) on the Sidcup line would combat this.
Certainly from having commuted on the Sidcup/Grove Park lines for a large chunk of my life, the Cannon St trains never seem that busy outside of the peak, and there'd be capacity for an extra 2tph to Cannon St via Sidcup in the peak I believe).

A lot of this makes sense but to clarify two quick things:
- What are you doing with the 4tph Hayes paths? 2 are Lewisham/slow, and 2 are fasts.
- You're having nothing run through the Blackheath-Charlton tunnel? I suggested Rainham TL for that. It could even be 12 car. I'd rather that go back to the normal TL range though (Epsom is mentioned often) - and it revert to even service to Cannon St.

In which case, for the Blackheath-Charlton route, maybe a Abbey Wood-Victoria 2tph? Victoria-Lewisham was always touted as 4tph, maybe one day, with Hayes mentioned as well as the Sidcup change. It's not dissimilar to the Millennium Dome Vic-Plumstead service!

 

[cactustwirly]

Off the top of my head, I could imagine that being a reasonable 'poor man's' option for the extension, but it would still require some infrastructure work: Assuming we're only talking about extending the Elizabeth line to Dartford, not Ebbsfleet, you'd still need:

1. Some rebuilding of Abbey Wood station,
2. Sorting out the power supply between Abbey Wood and Dartford (either convert that track to OHL, or add 3rd rail capability to the EL trains - I dunno how feasible that is).
3. Rebuilding of Dartford station too to add new capacity there.
4. And possibly 4-tracking between Slade Green and Dartford, so that section of line could cope with the Elizabeth line trains as well as the SouthEastern Bexleyheath ones.
5. Building some extra Elizabeth line trains (unless you could cut back elsewhere? Perhaps return Maidenhead-Reading back to GWR?)

On the upside, you'd no longer really need the SouthEastern rounders, and if you then ran all Bexleyheath/Sidcup line trains to Dartford, you'd have a much better service with decent connectivity to the Elizabeth line on both of those routes.

Returning Maidenhead to Reading to GWR isn't happening unless they take 2tph of Crossrail paths

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 May 2023 ==

Surely turning the currently-being-installed ETCS L2 overlay into the primary signalling system to Reading would help with this, as well as having all GWR trains running fast from Reading to OOC?

I wouldn't hold out hope on the Dartford/Gravesend extension, latest estimates put the cost at >£3bn, and we all know how allergic the current govt is with infrastructure! TfL can't even get anything out for DLR to Thamesmead...

You still need fast services stopping at Slough and Maidenhead

 

[dodecahedron67]

A lot of this makes sense but to clarify two quick things:
- What are you doing with the 4tph Hayes paths? 2 are Lewisham/slow, and 2 are fasts.
- You're having nothing run through the Blackheath-Charlton tunnel? I suggested Rainham TL for that. It could even be 12 car. I'd rather that go back to the normal TL range though (Epsom is mentioned often) - and it revert to even service to Cannon St.

In which case, for the Blackheath-Charlton route, maybe a Abbey Wood-Victoria 2tph? Victoria-Lewisham was always touted as 4tph, maybe one day, with Hayes mentioned as well as the Sidcup change. It's not dissimilar to the Millennium Dome Vic-Plumstead service!

4tph Hayes paths - 2tph to an extra 2tph Orpington - Cannon St (but avoiding Lewisham), 2tph to unused, spare off-peak paths. Not a lot that can actually be done with them afaik, as they'd be the two Charing X paths, which are the most complex to do anything with as the two track Orpington - Sevenoaks restricts anything more going to the Kent Weald, and the need for a flat crossing or an extra Lewisham path to route them to any of the metro lines might mean they're just best left spare.

Nothing through the Blackheath - Charlton tunnel is indeed a suggestion here. I think that having every route as 6tph + XR so frequent and all the way to Dartford might negate this loss, especially if fares could be charged so that there was no multi-mode penalty to using the DLR from Greenwich to Lewisham*. As I said in my original post, it's a spanner in the works that, by existing, ruins the possibility to have a lovely even 6tph clockface on all routes, as you'd either be left with 8tph Abbey Wood (overkill with >12tph XR) if keeping 6tph through Greenwich, or with only 4tph unevenly spaced through Greenwich and 8tph through Blackheath, which is probably the lesser of two evils, but this makes reliability of paths at the flat at Lewisham an issue if you have 10tph already (6 Bexleyheath, 2 Sidcup, 2 Sevenoaks)

I like the idea of a 2tph Abbey Wood - Victoria as the potential solution to this though.

*Getting really in depth here, using the half frequency method a theoretical journey from Abbey Wood to Lewisham would be 35 minutes direct at 2tph (20 + [30/2] {Journey time + half frequency}) vs 30 minutes via Greenwich at 6tph + DLR frequency (19 + 5 + 4 + 2 [Journey time + half frequency at 6tph + DLR journey + half minimum DLR frequency]). I know people don't like changing, but it's notable that it's not actually that much slower...

 

[Peregrine 4903]

I agree that getting to Dartford as a first step would be an incremental plan.

Cull Southeastern services at Abbey Wood (rebuild, swap the bays, have three for SE?), you could use Plumstead too. Would maybe need a Blackheath service. Diesel access via a single through platform for freight?
Segregated pair of lines (AC) from Abbey Wood to Dartford (don't touch Slade Green but no access from Woolwich line) - run all CR trains there.

More intense/even services from Abbey Wood to Cannon St (8tph, 6 via Greenwich, 2 via Blackheath - could these two go to TL if needed in place of Rainham?)

Everyone is forgetting about freight. Absolutely zero chance this happens. This is an objectively awful idea.

 

[PGAT]

Everyone is forgetting about freight. Absolutely zero chance this happens. This is an objectively awful idea.

Not to mention it alienates anyone east of Abbey Wood who want to get to London Bridge / Lewisham

 

[D365]

Surely turning the currently-being-installed ETCS L2 overlay into the primary signalling system to Reading would help with this, as well as having all GWR trains running fast from Reading to OOC?

ETCS Level 2 won't unlock new train paths on its own.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Not to mention it alienates anyone east of Abbey Wood who want to get to London Bridge / Lewisham

They don't exactly have a good service to London Bridge/Lewisham at the moment, with gaps of not far off 20 minutes at times in trains to/from London Bridge. Not only that, but if you're going from Abbey Wood to London Bridge and OK walking for a few minutes, it's probably already quicker to take the Elizabeth line to Canary Wharf and change to the Jubilee, rather than use the direct SouthEastern train. So I can't see that many people at Belvedere/Erith/Slade Green being too upset if their intermittent SouthEastern service was replaced by an Elizabeth line train every 7-8 minutes (with an option to change to SouthEastern at Abbey Wood). I think this is a case where the people who benefit would vastly outnumber the people who lose out.

I think the problem with trying to run both Elizabeth line AND SouthEastern beyond Abbey Wood is that there just isn't enough demand to support that many trains, and I can't see that changing even allowing for the new housing that's being planned there.

 

[BluePenguin]

It needs to be extended to Gravesend or another more useful destination than Abbey Wood for connections.

Changing at Dartford and sometimes Gravesend is annoying when the Crossrail service literally runs on the same line but stops 20 minutes short

Considering the service runs all the way to Reading on the western side, I don’t understand why it could not at least run to Dartford on the eastern side

 

[JonathanH]

It needs to be extended to Gravesend or another more useful destination than Abbey Wood for connections.

It also needs to run reliably in the central section.

Considering the service runs all the way to Reading on the western side, I don’t understand why it could not at least run to Dartford on the eastern side

I think some people are starting to consider that a mistake, a compromise that only exists because there aren't enough tracks between Westbourne Park and West Drayton to segregate the Elizabeth Line services from other traffic.

 

[LLivery]

Dartford should be part of Greater London (as should Epsom, Staines, Watford etc.), if it was, it'd probably be a GLA strategic opportunity area for redevelopment and Liz Line would key for it - Dartford is only as far out as Romford/Hornchurch. No politician is brave enough to support the expansion of Gtr. London further, but I digress...

Expensive option:

Dartford should certainly have fast trains and is a victim of not being on a main line. If we were to extend Crossrail to Dartford or Gravesend, I think the 4 tracks should be in place and perhaps controversially, Crossrail should run fast to Dartford, with Thameslink scrapped and all Southeastern Dartford lines back at 4-8tph. Crossrail then extends to Gravesend on the current tracks, shared with 4tph Southeastern (2tph each Bexleyheath & Sidcup).

If it helps SE capacity and punctuality, I would consider scrapping rounders, making Dartford a *Zone 6* interchange hub, and rebuilding Dartford station with enough platforms to do so (have a local regen project as part of it). Then, **real crayonista** extend the Goblin from Barking Riverside to Thamesmead, Abbey Wood and Bexleyheath to silence a lack of SE connectivity concerns.

In the West I would, rather than the large expensive Southern access project that'll happen once millennials are long buried, extend Crossrail from Heathrow 5 to Staines. Wouldn't cost peanuts, but it'd certainly be worthwhile. So if you could get more Liz Line on the GWML, I would send them there.

But considering OOC is coming, Royal Kensington & TfL want a station at Kensal Canalside, and City Airport also wants (should have) a station, how much can we really have without train lengthening and doing what Île-de-France is doing by needing RER E??