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

[JonathanH]

If the Maidenhead terminators go to Henley that means they’re unable to go to Reading in the peak which will probably cause some trouble

There is 6tph as far as Maidenhead in the evening peak.

 

[AndrewE]

The Elizabeth line was predominantly funded for and by Londoners.

Absolute rubbish. London City taxes and business rates come from very highly paid people taking my savings to the casino and gambling with them - taking a hefty cut whether they lose money or not. I have no choice about any of these aspects of how my savings are managed - or how much of the national taxation that I pay gets funnelled into Westminster council via the rates paid by parliament and the civil service offices.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 24 Jul 2023 ==

Old Oak Common is about 0.5 miles from Willesden Junction so you’d need some teleportation or huge track curvature and demolition to get that to work!

so? The walkways/travellators at Manchester airport and even at Birmingham International (to the conference centre) must be a lot more than 880 yards.

 

[SynthD]

Maybe some way should be found of properly utilising the shiny platform 5s at Hayes & Harlington and West Drayton.

I think they are dedicated to recovery, for when the Heathrow tunnels are closed.

 

[JonathanH]

I think they are dedicated to recovery, for when the Heathrow tunnels are closed.

A train used platform 5 at Hayes & Harlington this evening.

Realtime Trains | 9T11 1738 Shenfield to Heathrow Airport Terminal 5 | 24/07/2023

Real-time train running information for 9T11 1738 departure from Shenfield to Heathrow Airport Terminal 5 on 24/07/2023. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

Realtime Trains | 9W30 1920 Heathrow Airport Terminal 5 to Shenfield | 24/07/2023

Real-time train running information for 9W30 1920 departure from Heathrow Airport Terminal 5 to Shenfield on 24/07/2023. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

Keeping Hayes & Harlington and West Drayton free for such issues seems a good idea.

 

[Horizon22]

so? The walkways/travellators at Manchester airport and even at Birmingham International (to the conference centre) must be a lot more than 880 yards.

That’s all within the same owned structure. There’s a few industries, other railway lines and the Grand Union Canal to navigate, not to mention wrangling compulsory purchase orders.

 

[cle]

A train used platform 5 at Hayes & Harlington this evening.

Realtime Trains | 9T11 1738 Shenfield to Heathrow Airport Terminal 5 | 24/07/2023

Real-time train running information for 9T11 1738 departure from Shenfield to Heathrow Airport Terminal 5 on 24/07/2023. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

Realtime Trains | 9W30 1920 Heathrow Airport Terminal 5 to Shenfield | 24/07/2023

Real-time train running information for 9W30 1920 departure from Heathrow Airport Terminal 5 to Shenfield on 24/07/2023. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

Keeping Hayes & Harlington and West Drayton free for such issues seems a good idea.

Keeping two very similar platforms spare for what-ifs feels excessive caution. One could be used in regular practice (there are all the turnbacks at Westbourne Park - and future state will have 4 x OOC platforms to help in troubled times) - another could do some peak extras at minimum. They'd still be useful and available for contingencies. This route actually has many options for such things.

 

[Horizon22]

Keeping two very similar platforms spare for what-ifs feels excessive caution. One could be used in regular practice (there are all the turnbacks at Westbourne Park - and future state will have 4 x OOC platforms to help in troubled times) - another could do some peak extras at minimum. They'd still be useful and available for contingencies. This route actually has many options for such things.

But as has been said time and time again these are not the issue - the issue is the line capacity east of Airport Junction when you include freight. Having extra platforms is beneficial, for example any problem at Heathrow allows a diversionary backup. Contingency capacity should never be sniffed at.

 

[JSBark]

Building transport infrastructure in the green belt has always been allowed, hence Cobham Services etc.

Absolutely. And as the anti Green belt lobby fail to grasp, good transport links across the Green Built mean it doesn’t stifle growth / economic development. It enables it to be planned in sustainable locations.

 

[NSEWonderer]

They've started rolling out USB on trains starting with Unit 345003.
If it counts at an improvement on the service from some demands commuters have made.

 

[Mikey C]

I wonder how often such USB sockets (like the ones on the 710s) are used, as they're hardly convenient to use unless you have a VERY long lead and can take the seat next to them.

 

[JonathanH]

I wonder how often such USB sockets (like the ones on the 710s) are used, as they're hardly convenient to use unless you have a VERY long lead and can take the seat next to them.

The ones on a 710 don't produce very much current, to the extent they are almost useless. Hopefully the 345 ones are better.

 

[Horizon22]

The ones on a 710 don't produce very much current, to the extent they are almost useless. Hopefully the 345 ones are better.

Looks like you'd still need a very long lead, or be standing.

 

[ATS3]

It's time to extend the Elizabeth Line to Ebbsfleet and North Kent

All aboard the No-Brainer Express

takes.jamesomalley.co.uk

Thoughts?

 

[NSEWonderer]

It's time to extend the Elizabeth Line to Ebbsfleet and North Kent

All aboard the No-Brainer Express

takes.jamesomalley.co.uk

Thoughts?

Would take quite a bit of rebuilding, for example the Abbey Wood station as previously discussed would end up losing the lower half ticket hall which is in the way of the track at Platform 4 to name one of a few many issues.

 

[Mikey C]

Southeastern reinstating some of the removed trains in the timetable would be a much cheaper and quicker improvement.

 

[NSEWonderer]

Plus cheaper than making the Elizabeth line go to Ebbs with all its complications, I'd be thinking SE could manage one or two HS1 services from St Pancras to either Cannon Street or Charing Cross an hour via Woolwich Line thru either Lewisham or Greenwich. I'm sure even with its complications it would be more feasible.

 

[PGAT]

St Pancras to Cannon Street? That would require a reversal at Gravesend

 

[NSEWonderer]

St Pancras to Cannon Street? That would require a reversal at Gravesend

Yeh basically asking for a split at Gravesend with one half going on to Cannon Street or Cross and the other to Faversham or Rainham

 

[zwk500]

It's time to extend the Elizabeth Line to Ebbsfleet and North Kent

All aboard the No-Brainer Express

takes.jamesomalley.co.uk

Thoughts?

Would be nice if money was no object, but unfortunately the budget didn't stretch far enough to put Crossrail in between the North Kent tracks at Abbey Wood (Plumstead sidings may also have had a hand in that) and so you'd need a flat junction, which introduces a massive performance risk at a very, very bad place in the network. You'd also have to thread the paths through to Dartford and build an extra link/terminating infrastructure in the Northfleet/Ebbsfleet area (terminating at Dartford is the long-term option AIUI). I personally think extension of at least some of the Abbey Wood services to Dartford eventually would be very sensible, but in the shorter term upping the North Kent circulars and improving north-south bus (/light-rail) links from Southeast London to Abbey Wood/Woolwich would be a better all-round improvement.

St Pancras to Cannon Street? That would require a reversal at Gravesend

Unless you went the long way round via Ashford

 

[cle]

The first step should be reverting to an even 6tph/10 min service via Greenwich. And find another spot for the Rainham on TL - Epsom semi-fast seems a popular vote for this.

As for future state, it feels like Dartford is the logical place to aim for. Would need its own island platform most likely.

Two options - four tracks east of Abbey Wood or truncate the Greenwich line there - but note that it would need (maybe?) to also turn 2tph via Blackheath if that line is to survive.

But eventually it should take over some existing paths beyond Dartford and free up extra loopers or Dartford local terminators, to increase inner frequency. \\

If the Bakerloo went to Hayes, there might even be more paths to play within future out of LB, although of course two Hayes are fast line and no doubt would serve precious Sevenoaks immediately.

 

[Basil Jet]

I notice that a surface alignment from Dartford to the corner of Bluewater Shopping Centre and Darent Valley Hospital looks like it could be contracted with no demolition.. but it might be hilly enough to need a tunnel.

 

[Horizon22]

There is passive provision to extend to Dartford, even if requires knocking through the lower concourse at Abbey Wood.

Not happening this decade at least I’d expect though.

 

[NorthKent1989]

Southeastern reinstating some of the removed trains in the timetable would be a much cheaper and quicker improvement.

Yep, and maybe have more Gravesend/Gillingham trains run via Abbey Wood as Liz Line feeders.

 

[cle]

Could another cheapo solve be an east-facing bay at Abbey Wood, to feed. It could run another 2-4tph to Dartford and beyond - or it could take over some services which could be reallocated. I.e. the Rainham 2tph. And have Abbey Wood as an intermediate terminus.

 

[zwk500]

There is passive provision to extend to Dartford, even if requires knocking through the lower concourse at Abbey Wood.

Not happening this decade at least I’d expect though.

If it requires knocking through something it isn't really passive provision is it?

 

[NSEWonderer]

The track at platform 3 imo could be used as a single working thru Abbey Wood station and then onto a two track provision just after the station towards Dartford, the track there already is being used as a temp train stabling siding for some later service or faulty trains.

Abbey Wood could still remain the main terminus of the Elizabeth Line but just have a less frequent thru service I.e Dartford to Heathrow Terminal 4 and a Dartford to Reading service, vice versa.

 

[zwk500]

The track at platform 3 imo could be used as a single working thru Abbey Wood station and then onto a two track provision just after the station towards Dartford, the track there already is being used as a temp train stabling siding for some later service or faulty trains.

Abbey Wood could still remain the main terminus of the Elizabeth Line but just have a less frequent thru service I.e Dartford to Heathrow Terminal 4 and a Dartford to Reading service, vice versa.

Introducing a single line section into the passenger service, even for just 2tph each way to Dartford (although it'd more likely be 4tph each way) is a wonderful way to absolutely sink the performance figures for the core. Oh, and you'd need to make sure there wasn't an Abbey Wood turnback using the single platform when the Dartford trains needed it, and AIUI you'd need to resignal/redesign the protection for the transfer track to allow passenger use.

 

[NSEWonderer]

All true, but I'm sure allowances of sorts could always be made if it ever(ofc highly doubtful) came to realisation.

 

[MPW]

The main aims of any significant project in the area should be:
1. Better transport/connections for Thamesmead area
2. Better local connections for dartford, blue water, ebbs fleet "garden city" to gravesend. These areas, along with medway, have large sprawls nowhere near a station.
3. Rail connection across Thames (longer term I guess)

All with the ultimate aim of driving greater housing density in growing area, and more importantly modal shift away from cars in area overrun currently.

I don't think extending EL to Dartford along existing tracks achieves any of that, and would compete for the same (non-existent) resources. Though it would like nice to have the purple go further east

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Sep 2023 ==

The main aims of any significant project in the area should be:
1. Better transport/connections for Thamesmead area
2. Better local connections for dartford, blue water, ebbs fleet "garden city" to gravesend. These areas, along with medway, have large sprawls nowhere near a station.
3. Rail connection across Thames (longer term I guess)

All with the ultimate aim of driving greater housing density in growing area, and more importantly modal shift away from cars in area overrun currently.

I don't think extending EL to Dartford along existing tracks achieves any of that, and would compete for the same (non-existent) resources. Though it would like nice to have the purple go further east

And pretty unrelated so apologies for mentioning, but close LCY! No one wants to live under a flight path, so why build so much new housing directly under one!? Can't believe only greens have suggested it.

 

[Thirteen]

I'm surprised it's taken them this long to put USB ports on the 345s although with USB C becoming more prevalent, they'll probably be replaced in the next year or two.