Improving rail links to Watford

[Tetchytyke]

Is there a Watford stations group for ticketing purposes? If there isn't, it feels a bit like there should be - then most tickets that are currently to either station could be to the group.

There isn't, because tickets from London to Watford High Street are markedly cheaper than from London to Watford Junction. If we're in fantasy world there's no reason why they couldn't be merged into one station group but, in reality, nobody is going to sign off on the revenue hit.

I think another thing which could help would be including the fare from Watford Junction to Watford High Street in tickets to Watford Junction, although I don't know how effective that would be.

Watford High Street isn't particularly convenient for the shops either. I could reliably do the walk from Junction to the Caffe Nero on the High Street in 10 minutes, 15 if Mrs Tyke had properly raided John Lewis (RIP). There was always the bus (included on my season ticket) if it was pouring it down. Transfer time at Junction + journey time + walking time up from High Street is unlikely to be any quicker.

That's fair, although I think almost all of Hemel's population's to the northeast of the WCML, which doesn't help make eastern Hemel to Watford by train attractive.

That's always going to be the issue because of the way Hemel has expanded. A bus to the station from Grovehill/Woodhall Farm/Adeyfield and then a train to Watford is always going to be slow. But most of the rest of Hemel isn't actually too far from either Hemel station or Apsley, the latter is certainly within walking distance from Bennetts End and Nash Mills.

As part of the forthcoming Local Government reorganisation merge Three Rivers and Watford

Hell no. 20 years on and it's still an extremely sore point that Hemel lost its hospital, with everything transferring to Watford. I can't see a world in which merging everything else into Watford would benefit anyone.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Jan 2025 ==

Suspect some snobbery. But maybe Watford/TR could merge

Hemel got stiffed in 2006 when it lost all its hospital services- A&E, maternity, the lot- to Watford. It's still a sore subject there. Not helped by the fact that Watford General is such a stratospheric pain in the arse to get to.

I'd fully expect any proposal to merge Three Rivers and Watford would be treated with extreme caution.

As for the Abbey Line, turning it into a guided busway is probably the best thing that could happen to it. I know it's almost sacrilege to say this on a railway forum, but still. Imagine how nice it would be for the buses to have their own dedicated bus lane right into the centre of Watford rather than sitting for approximately eleventy billion years in the traffic jams in Garston.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

5 - don't agree. I think the ideal is investment for a loop and an even 2tph shuttle, self-contained still. If integrated with anything, I'd merge it with an even 2tph to Clapham Junction, and make it LO - given the platforms/lines in question - but very risky.

The problem with merging the Abbey Line at Watford with anything that continues into London is all the conflicting moves you'd introduce at Watford Junction. You'd basically need a complete rebuild of that part of the station, probably with a flyover to get the trains from St Albans onto the correct WCML lines. And that seems a huge cost for a somewhat limited benefit. If the money was available to do that, I'd prefer to spend it linking to the MML at the St Albans end (which admittedly may cost somewhat more but would give orders of magnitude greater benefit).

 

[Bald Rick]

2. Next up on my list would be to extend the Euston-Tring trains to Milton Keynes (or maybe Northampton), giving much better links between Watford and Milton Keynes, with connections to the North there.
3. Then I'd look at a passing loop to allow the Abbey line to go half-hourly
4. Next - and now we're into the serious money - sort out rerouting the Metropolitan line to Watford Junction, along with providing a Watford-Aylesbury service.

2) No paths for the Tring terminators to go north.
3) You could, just, get half hourly on the Abbey line with some relatively low cost interventions and skip stopping every other train (eg omitting either Park St or How Wood)

5. Convert the Abbey Line to a tram with a turn up and go service (4-6tph) and extend on street from Watford Junction to Watford High Street and from Sopwell to St Albans City.

4-6tph implies some big bucks for multiple passing loops and all that goes with it. An extension from the Abbey station (which isn’t Sopwell) to the City station would be a hundred million, easily.

There simply isnt the market for journeys between central(ish) Watford to central(ish) St Albans, and not much market in between either. The development is all along the road; the railway is too far from that.

That is why the two houses opposite the Met station are different (newer) than the rest

Four houses!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Jan 2025 ==

There isn't, because tickets from London to Watford High Street are markedly cheaper than from London to Watford Junction. If we're in fantasy world there's no reason why they couldn't be merged into one station group but, in reality, nobody is going to sign off on the revenue hit.

Or a big revenue gain

If the money was available to do that, I'd prefer to spend it linking to the MML at the St Albans end (which admittedly may cost somewhat more but would give orders of magnitude greater benefit).

Genuinely, I cant think of what beenfit there woudl be linking the Abbey Line to the MML, not least because there are no spare paths on the MML!

 

[Mgameing123]

Given the Abbey line is just hourly, for much of the hour it is quicker to get a bus the whole way.

Every 40 minutes*

 

[778]

As for the Abbey Line, turning it into a guided busway is probably the best thing that could happen to it. I know it's almost sacrilege to say this on a railway forum, but still. Imagine how nice it would be for the buses to have their own dedicated bus lane right into the centre of Watford rather than sitting for approximately eleventy billion years in the traffic jams in Garston.

I don't think replacing electric trains with diesel buses would be a good idea. Also the formation is not wide enough for 2 buses.

 

[Tetchytyke]

I don't think replacing electric trains with diesel buses would be a good idea.

The buses between St Albans and Watford are very busy. The railway isn’t.

 

[Bald Rick]

Every 40 minutes*

Look at the timetable.
Every hour for most of the day; reduces to 44-46 minutes Mon-Friday 0600-0900 and 1600-1900 (roughly), where there are 4 trains in the three hours rather than three.

Being a regular user of the line, usually at peak times, I can confirm that the total number of people on each train would usually fit on one double decker bus.

 

[A S Leib]

Being a regular user of the line, usually at peak times, I can confirm that the total number of people on each train would usually fit on one double decker bus.

St. Albans Abbey had 160,000 passengers in 2019-20 (down around a quarter since then), which works out at around 26 per serviced hour on average. Watford High Street works out at ~190 passengers per hour between the first and last train each day, or 24 passengers per train in each direction (so ~136 trains per day).

 

[778]

The buses between St Albans and Watford are very busy. The railway isn’t.

The buses would still get stuck in congestion when they leave the busway at Watford Junction and St Albans. Also the formation is not wide enough for a 2 lane busway like Luton-Dunstable and Cambridge-St Ives.

 

[AlastairFraser]

The buses would still get stuck in congestion when they leave the busway at Watford Junction and St Albans. Also the formation is not wide enough for a 2 lane busway like Luton-Dunstable and Cambridge-St Ives.

A tram with decent segregation off the former railway alignment may work though.

 

[Bald Rick]

The buses would still get stuck in congestion when they leave the busway at Watford Junction and St Albans. Also the formation is not wide enough for a 2 lane busway like Luton-Dunstable and Cambridge-St Ives.

A busway is bonkers. Leaving aside the cost (which would be astronomical) it would be no use, because as I said above the Abbey line is largely not near the intermediate traffic generators, whereas the existing bus is, and lots of people use the bus for shorter intermediate trips (eg to the Leisure Centre, Asda, Chiswell Green, etc). The bus also has much better distribution in St Albans, Watford and beyond.

To be completely frank, the Abbey branch loses a lot of money just in the train operating costs (staffing, rolling stock, power), so providing a half hourly frequency all day by providing a loop and another unit in circuit would simply double the loss, even if revenue doubled.

The only chance of an improved frequency is to do something quite radical - I‘ve done the rough sums in an idle spare time moment. Essentially trains with better acceleration, braking, and door cycle times, driving standards that use that to the full, DCO to enable 20 second dwells, two ‘driver revenue collectors’ on board to enable 3 minute turnrounds (the one collecting revenue is already in the back cab on arrival, and drives it the other way), a couple of linespeed improvements (including upgrading Watford North level crossing), and skip stop How Wood / Park St on alternate services. That would deliver a 30 minute service, and a 4 minute end to end journey time improvement, amd perhaps a doubling of revenue for a minimal incremental cost. Even then it would still lose money, albeit quite a bit less.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Jan 2025 ==

A tram with decent segregation off the former railway alignment may work though.

Where, though?

 

[mr_jrt]

You add the passing loop to get the line half hourly and usage will improve dramatically. Add another one or two to get it to every 20 minutes and usage will jump up. I'm not sure quite what that would look like, infrastructure-wise, but I suspect it'd involve more double track around either end, and possibly a pair of platforms.

 

[Bald Rick]

You add the passing loop to get the line half hourly and usage will improve dramatically. Add another one or two to get it to every 20 minutes and usage will jump up. I'm not sure quite what that would look like, infrastructure-wise, but I suspect it'd involve more double track around either end, and possibly a pair of platforms.

But the point is, it wouldn’t improve dramatically enough to justify the marginal cost of operating the additional units and crew, let alone what would be £20m+ for one loop (and signalling - of which there is currently none) let alone more than one loop.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

2) No paths for the Tring terminators to go north.

That surprises me since evidently the paths for the Tring terminators exist South of Tring, and I don't perceive any difference in the line compared to North of Tring. What's different about the line North of Tring that it can't support as many trains?

Genuinely, I cant think of what beenfit there woudl be linking the Abbey Line to the MML, not least because there are no spare paths on the MML!

That also surprises me. I haven't lived in St Albans for quite a few years, but my memory from when I did live there is that Abbey Station is kinda in the middle of nowhere, not really convenient for anything except a small number of houses (though probably could be improved a bit if you provided an access way towards the Sainsburys car park) City station on the other hand, while also not being very central, is in a much more densely populated area and is at least a bit closer to the town centre. City station also provides frequent connections for Harpenden, Luton, Bedford, etc. which would allow people to travel by train between Watford and all those places (even if lack of capacity on the MML meant all you could do is build a spur from the Abbey line into St Albans City and not run trains any further). It would also allow people who live along the Abbey line to get to London destinations that are along the MML rather than the Lioness line. For bus connections, the buses around City station come from places like Hatfield, from which you might plausibly want to connect to get to Watford. The buses around Abbey station on the whole just compete with the railway by going to - ummm - Watford.

Even if none of those individually are huge flows, that's a lot of different new journeys that become possible by rail, each one of which would cause at least a few more people to use the Abbey line if it went to St Alban's City.

I can believe that linking the Abbey line to St Albans city would be a difficult and expensive project, and maybe the expense wouldn't justify the benefits. But I can't believe there would be no benefits

 

[stuu]

Genuinely, I cant think of what beenfit there woudl be linking the Abbey Line to the MML, not least because there are no spare paths on the MML!

Obviously the lack of paths makes it entirely moot, but there's a lot of Luton-Watford traffic on the roads. When I worked in Watford about half the staff came from Luton, at two very different companies. There is a significant flow that could be catered for, as well as a better connection to St Albans itself. Never going to happen though

 

[Bald Rick]

That surprises me since evidently the paths for the Tring terminators exist South of Tring, and I don't perceive any difference in the line compared to North of Tring. What's different about the line North of Tring that it can't support as many trains?

The LNR Birmingham trains use the fast lines south of Ledburn junction (a few miles north of Tring) and the slows north of there. And EWR will soon be on the slows Bletchley to MK.

that Abbey Station is kinda in the middle of nowhere, not really convenient for anything except a small number of houses (though probably could be improved a bit if you provided an access way towards the Sainsburys car park) City station on the other hand, while also not being very central, is in a much more densely populated area and is at least a bit closer to the town centre.

The Abbey station does have fewer people around it, sure, but diverting the line to the City station you would be removing the rail option from them entirely, to provide a further rail option to an area that has plenty.

The distance from the Abbey station to the Peahen Junction (quite a famous place for A road fans) is almost exactly the same as it is from the closest entrance to the City station.

even if lack of capacity on the MML meant all you could do is build a spur from the Abbey line into St Albans City and not run trains any further)

There is no capacity on the MML at and immediately south of St Albans for most of the day. The only way to build a link would be to build a seperate line, and that means demolition of the best part of a hundred million pounds worth of real estate.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Jan 2025 ==

I can believe that linking the Abbey line to St Albans city would be a difficult and expensive project, and maybe the expense wouldn't justify the benefits. But I can't believe there would be no benefits

Perhaps I should have said no net benefit. and there‘s no maybe!

Obviously the lack of paths makes it entirely moot, but there's a lot of Luton-Watford traffic on the roads. When I worked in Watford about half the staff came from Luton, at two very different companies. There is a significant flow that could be catered for, as well as a better connection to St Albans itself. Never going to happen though

But do they go from within walking distance of Luton station to walking distance of the Junction? Some will, but most wont.

 

[Clarence Yard]

And that is the problem. Journeys these days are rarely station area to station area. The person may be dropping off a child on the way, or the other half at their own place of work, or you are doing a shop on the way back. That is why some use a car into work.

People are now time pressured so effectively doing an L shaped journey by public transport, wherever people come from, is not attractive. When you can easily use the M1 or A41 to get from home to Watford and vice versa, people will use it in preference to public transport.

 

[stuu]

But do they go from within walking distance of Luton station to walking distance of the Junction? Some will, but most wont.

True, but that also applies to every single other rail journey in the country/world. It could take half an hour to get from the M25 to central Watford when I lived that way, and I can't imagine traffic has improved since, so a theoretical rail journey would be a lot quicker centre to centre

 

[Bald Rick]

It could take half an hour to get from the M25 to central Watford when I lived that way

Depends which way you go, and how brave you are at the M1 junction. I routinely do it in peak time in around 10-15 mins. If I’m going to the town centre or the Junction, I take the train. Anywhere else in Watford and I’m in the car.

 

[mr_jrt]

That also surprises me. I haven't lived in St Albans for quite a few years, but my memory from when I did live there is that Abbey Station is kinda in the middle of nowhere, not really convenient for anything except a small number of houses (though probably could be improved a bit if you provided an access way towards the Sainsburys car park) City station on the other hand, while also not being very central, is in a much more densely populated area and is at least a bit closer to the town centre. City station also provides frequent connections for Harpenden, Luton, Bedford, etc. which would allow people to travel by train between Watford and all those places (even if lack of capacity on the MML meant all you could do is build a spur from the Abbey line into St Albans City and not run trains any further). It would also allow people who live along the Abbey line to get to London destinations that are along the MML rather than the Lioness line. For bus connections, the buses around City station come from places like Hatfield, from which you might plausibly want to connect to get to Watford. The buses around Abbey station on the whole just compete with the railway by going to - ummm - Watford.

Even if none of those individually are huge flows, that's a lot of different new journeys that become possible by rail, each one of which would cause at least a few more people to use the Abbey line if it went to St Alban's City.

I can believe that linking the Abbey line to St Albans city would be a difficult and expensive project, and maybe the expense wouldn't justify the benefits. But I can't believe there would be no benefits

When I was toying with big concepts many years ago I settled on building a new massive station on London road with plenty of platforms, with the Abbey line diverted to low level platforms underneath (be it with a reversal or a very tight curve). You would then close the existing City station, and add in a new one in north St Albans to improve overall catchment. I envisaged something on the road junction by the William IV pub.

Nowadays, I suspect the better answer is probably a nice straightish fast line tunnel under the city. Intercity services are never going to be stopping here again, it eliminates the speed-reducing curvature, and frees up the existing tracks for local capacity. Of course, you would still have to find a way to get the Abbey line to it.

The old Park St. connection is a bust thanks to the freight interchange, but there's nothing stopping you branching of slightly further north with something new, then doing a little swaperoo with the fast lines around Napsbury. Have the fasts dive down there, and the Abbey line take over the freed up pair of tracks. The Abbey line then terminates in a new station in north St Albans and the fast lines pop back up around Porter's Wood.

 

[Howardh]

I'm not local to Watford but reading this with interest. I take it the issue's not North-South but more East - West? Looking at a map and with unlimited funds (like, yeah) it looks simple to extend the tube line via Coxley Green underground to the station and link to the St Albans line, and change the whole of the Metropolitan line to (is it??) Overground and run it as a rail service.

OK I expect "it's completely barmy, pointless and too expensive and as a northerner why can't you solve Manchester's issues instead??!!"

On the other hand - how many use Watford (Tube) and Croxley anyway, could that be closed and what you have already improved?? Does seem a bit of an oddity when anyone commuting to London would surely use the rail?

 

[RT4038]

I'm not local to Watford but reading this with interest. I take it the issue's not North-South but more East - West? Looking at a map and with unlimited funds (like, yeah) it looks simple to extend the tube line via Coxley Green underground to the station and link to the St Albans line, and change the whole of the Metropolitan line to (is it??) Overground and run it as a rail service.

OK I expect "it's completely barmy, pointless and too expensive and as a northerner why can't you solve Manchester's issues instead??!!"

On the other hand - how many use Watford (Tube) and Croxley anyway, could that be closed and what you have already improved?? Does seem a bit of an oddity when anyone commuting to London would surely use the rail?

I guess because such tunneling would be very expensive and not really achieve much as far as additional journey opportunities. The cost per passenger journey would be out of proportion to the benefit I should think.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I'm not local to Watford but reading this with interest. I take it the issue's not North-South but more East - West? Looking at a map and with unlimited funds (like, yeah) it looks simple to extend the tube line via Coxley Green underground to the station and link to the St Albans line, and change the whole of the Metropolitan line to (is it??) Overground and run it as a rail service.

Rerouting the Metropolitan line onto the old line through Croxley Green and onto Watford Junction - yes, not only were there plans for that, but it hit the point a few years ago where it was actually going to be built, until the costs rose causing TfL to pull out of the scheme. Actually connecting the Met to the St Albans line - no, that means you have to get the trains across Watford Junction, which in turn means a very expensive flyover or tunnel, which would serve no purpose other than saving a few people [*] from making a simple interchange at Watford Junction. Plus the Met uses 4th rail electric supply, the Abbey line doesn't (I think it's non-electrified), so you'd need a new micro-fleet of bi-mode trains. There are better ways to spend money

Rebranding the Met as Overground? Not sure what the purpose of that would be. Note that the Met does actually run underground and shares a lot of track with the Circle and Hammersmith and City lines when it reaches London.

[*] I say 'a few' because most people arriving from the St Albans direction who want London would probably still interchange anyway - to get to the faster LNWR trains into London.

 

[Howardh]

Rebranding the Met as Overground? Not sure what the purpose of that would be. Note that the Met does actually run underground and shares a lot of track with the Circle and Hammersmith and City lines when it reaches London.

As a non-Londoner (therefore no Oyster) I can't get a senior discount on the Met line, but I presume I could if it were Overground? That aside, if the current Metropolitan line became the Overground, would that mean new trains and faster journeys? And could, theoretically, tracks be shared?

 

[jfollows]

As a non-Londoner (therefore no Oyster) I can't get a senior discount on the Met line, but I presume I could if it were Overground? That aside, if the current Metropolitan line became the Overground, would that mean new trains and faster journeys? And could, theoretically, tracks be shared?

Not being a Londoner doesn’t prevent you from having an Oyster card, and you can set up a railcard discount on it. Do you mean no freebie old folk’s Oyster?

I choose not to have Oyster with discount because contactless suits me better.

 

[Richardr]

The distance from the Abbey station to the Peahen Junction (quite a famous place for A road fans) is almost exactly the same as it is from the closest entrance to the City station.

Of course one is reasonably flat and the other quite a hill.

 

[Mgameing123]

Look at the timetable.
Every hour for most of the day; reduces to 44-46 minutes Mon-Friday 0600-0900 and 1600-1900 (roughly), where there are 4 trains in the three hours rather than three.

Being a regular user of the line, usually at peak times, I can confirm that the total number of people on each train would usually fit on one double decker bus.

Well I mean its a small branch line so thats quite expected. Maybe if the Abbey Line had a direct connection to Euston maybe there would come more riders.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

As a non-Londoner (therefore no Oyster) I can't get a senior discount on the Met line, but I presume I could if it were Overground? That aside, if the current Metropolitan line became the Overground, would that mean new trains and faster journeys? And could, theoretically, tracks be shared?

I'm guessing you mean, National Rail, not what is officially (to TfL) the Overground, which is specifically a particular group of ex-national-rail lines in London now operated by TfL and with fares set as if they were Underground/TfL fares rather than national rail fares)? (All getting increasingly confusing because even in London a lot of the general public colloquially refer to national rail lines as the 'overground')

 

[Howardh]

Not being a Londoner doesn’t prevent you from having an Oyster card, and you can set up a railcard discount on it. Do you mean no freebie old folk’s Oyster?

I choose not to have Oyster with discount because contactless suits me better.

Possibly; and equivalent of my Senior Railcard?

 

[jfollows]

Possibly; and equivalent of my Senior Railcard?

You can get an Oyster card and apply a senior railcard discount to it as well.
The only thing you can’t get is the one allowing free travel most of the time to older residents of London.