Is it a practical solution to build a second line that operates like Victoria Line? What would be the issues? How might it help in London?

[DynamicSpirit]

The problem with orbital lines is that they almost inevitably mean 2 changes for any journey: radial-orbital-radial. Unless the frequencies are high enough that wait times are negligible then it becomes a serious disadvantage, and changes alone are bad enough. I used to live in Harrow and I did used to occasionally daydream about where a sensible orbital line would go - follow the 140/superloop to Heathrow and maybe to Feltham? Or to Ealing-Brentford-Richmond? Either would have some merit, but would either be enough to justify the investment? In the event anything were ever built I would assume it would be something like the DLR, segregated, automated shortish trains

I think the key to avoiding that problem is to ensure that the orbital lines do directly serve major destinations, which means that they would allow most of the main flows within their areas without requiring two changes. The DLR is pretty good at that: The Woolwich-Stratford line for example is basically an orbital line and it serves Woolwich, London City Airport and Stratford, which are places that a large number of people who might use the line are actually trying to get to. Ditto the Lewisham-Stratford line, which serves all of Lewisham, Greenwich town centre, Canary Wharf and Stratford. Serving such big destinations is doubly beneficial because it makes it easy to attract enough passengers to run trains at high-ish frequencies, which then means it becomes practical for people to do two changes (as I often used to do with the DLR, for example using it to go Abbey Wood-Woolwich-Stratford-Highbury and Islington).

 

[cle]

You could now go Abbey Wood > Whitechapel > H&I

But I agree, that when we are beating ourselves up about Paris lines 15+ and the trams, that we do have the Overground, DLR and Tramlink doing orbital functions.

Yes we could have more - for example the Victoria to Lewisham is ostensibly orbital in nature but better if it was more frequent. Waterloo-Reading is used as such too. Both being E/W after their initial terminus starts. And slower than some direct routes.

Ours focus on zones 2/3 rather than the actual periphery - which to me is better.

 

[D365]

He didn't say public... Woolwich does have a second escape route - it's part of the ventilation structure 250m east of the entrance. Second routes of escape came in presumably after Kings Cross, although I wouldn't swear to it

Bear in mind that the requirement for a second, separated route of escape - or at the very least, a refuge point - is now also a requirement for surface level ’island’ platforms. So not exclusive to underground stations.

 

[The Ham]

Buses are incredibly efficient in terms of road space. We need more bus lanes though, relatively cheap to build and if more people saw the bus speed ahead of them while they were stuck in traffic, I think modal shift would follow. Also some of London’s suburban town centres should - rather than pedestrianise - become bus-only where possible to encourage more local bus use.

Indeed, even though a bus takes up the same space as two cars, even a near empty bus with just 8 people on is transporting about 5 cars worth of people.

At 4bph with each carrying 40 people (so still not overly busy) is enough to reduce car traffic by 10% of maximum capacity.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

You could now go Abbey Wood > Whitechapel > H&I

Well I did say, I used to It was pre-Elizabeth line that I travelled Abbey Wood-Woolwich-Stratford->Highbury and Islington. I no longer need to make that journey anyway, but I think your suggestion involves you paying a Zone 1 fare (because of Shoreditch High Street being in Zone 1), which is what I was trying to avoid by going via Stratford (Pre-Elizabeth line, avoiding Zone 1 on that route made the journey a bit longer, but not that much longer so I judged it was worth it).

 

[Railwaysceptic]

Buses are incredibly efficient in terms of road space. We need more bus lanes though, relatively cheap to build and if more people saw the bus speed ahead of them while they were stuck in traffic, I think modal shift would follow. Also some of London’s suburban town centres should - rather than pedestrianise - become bus-only where possible to encourage more local bus use.

We've had bus lanes ever since Ken Livingstone was Mayor. People have not in large numbers abandoned using their cars and adopted buses instead. What has happened is that many passengers have given up traveling by bus because the roads are no longer fit for purpose, and that is not because of the number of cars on the road.

 

[Bald Rick]

We've had bus lanes ever since Ken Livingstone was Mayor.

There’s been bus lanes in London since Ken Livingstone joined the Labour party in 1968…

One of the reasons bus usage is doen in London (albeit not down that much compared to, say, 2008 when Livingstone left the Mayor’s office), is that rail trasport is so much better now in the capital than it was then. Especially the overground, Elizabeth Line, and improved frequencies and overnight services on some tube lines.

Add to that a significant increase in cycling.

 

[Mikey C]

Add to that a significant increase in cycling.

And a significant increase in road capacity given over to cycles, at the expense of other road users, including buses.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

We've had bus lanes ever since Ken Livingstone was Mayor. People have not in large numbers abandoned using their cars and adopted buses instead. What has happened is that many passengers have given up traveling by bus because the roads are no longer fit for purpose, and that is not because of the number of cars on the road.

I suspect that last point - whether the roads are fit for purpose - is very subjective, and depends on which users you think the roads should be primarily serving. But my sense as someone who does a lot of cycling (as well as using public transport and some walking) around London is that there are many, many London roads that are completely overwhelmed and clogged up with cars, to the point where no-one can move efficiently, despite that in most of those areas there is excellent public transport provision, to the point that I doubt anyone really needs to be driving unless they are carrying a large amount of luggage, have serious mobility problems, or are heading to somewhere remote outside London. That suggests to me that the number of cars on the road is precisely the problem.

 

[The Ham]

I suspect that last point - whether the roads are fit for purpose - is very subjective, and depends on which users you think the roads should be primarily serving. But my sense as someone who does a lot of cycling (as well as using public transport and some walking) around London is that there are many, many London roads that are completely overwhelmed and clogged up with cars, to the point where no-one can move efficiently, despite that in most of those areas there is excellent public transport provision, to the point that I doubt anyone really needs to be driving unless they are carrying a large amount of luggage, have serious mobility problems, or are heading to somewhere remote outside London. That suggests to me that the number of cars on the road is precisely the problem.

It's not only those cats which are moving which are an issue, but the amount of road space given to parking of cars.

Even at the highest (first vehicle rate) for a car parking permit in Westminster is £321 for the year. That's less than £1 a day, which won't put many off owning a car.

Given that the accessibility indices (PTAL) for Westminster is mostly 6 (out of 6) and so is very high, the need for a car should be fairly limited.

 

[Peter Sarf]

The problem with orbital lines is that they almost inevitably mean 2 changes for any journey: radial-orbital-radial. Unless the frequencies are high enough that wait times are negligible then it becomes a serious disadvantage, and changes alone are bad enough. I used to live in Harrow and I did used to occasionally daydream about where a sensible orbital line would go - follow the 140/superloop to Heathrow and maybe to Feltham? Or to Ealing-Brentford-Richmond? Either would have some merit, but would either be enough to justify the investment? In the event anything were ever built I would assume it would be something like the DLR, segregated, automated shortish trains

But in the case of London going to the centre and back out often involves using the underground in central London to get between two different main line Termini. So it ends up being two changes anyway.

And a significant increase in road capacity given over to cycles, at the expense of other road users, including buses.

This is my bug bear.

I suspect that last point - whether the roads are fit for purpose - is very subjective, and depends on which users you think the roads should be primarily serving. But my sense as someone who does a lot of cycling (as well as using public transport and some walking) around London is that there are many, many London roads that are completely overwhelmed and clogged up with cars, to the point where no-one can move efficiently, despite that in most of those areas there is excellent public transport provision, to the point that I doubt anyone really needs to be driving unless they are carrying a large amount of luggage, have serious mobility problems, or are heading to somewhere remote outside London. That suggests to me that the number of cars on the road is precisely the problem.

In the very centre of Croydon there are roads with very little traffic on but are now for cycles and not buses. These routes have VERY few cycles on them and a lot of bus passengers having to walk further. We bus users now find central Croydon a lot less accessible. In fact I can get nearer by driving ironically.

It's not only those cats which are moving which are an issue, but the amount of road space given to parking of cars.

Even at the highest (first vehicle rate) for a car parking permit in Westminster is £321 for the year. That's less than £1 a day, which won't put many off owning a car.

Given that the accessibility indices (PTAL) for Westminster is mostly 6 (out of 6) and so is very high, the need for a car should be fairly limited.

So many cars just parked and inactive could be a sign of success. My car spends most of its time parked as I prefer walking and public transport. In an ideal world we would never have let car culture flourish over the past few (many) decades.

 

[The Ham]

In the very centre of Croydon there are roads with very little traffic on but are now for cycles and not buses. These routes have VERY few cycles on them and a lot of bus passengers having to walk further. We bus users now find central Croydon a lot less accessible. In fact I can get nearer by driving ironically.

One of the things with cycles is that they take up a lot less road space than a car, even though most cars are carrying just one person.

As such it's possible (and I'm not saying this is the case here) that almost as many people are using a cycle road as of was open to car traffic.

The issue with buses and cyclists using the same space is either the cyclists feel unsafe sharing with the buses or the bus users when accessing the bus stops feel unsafe.

It's why such a restrictive segregation is likely to be in place.

So many cars just parked and inactive could be a sign of success. My car spends most of its time parked as I prefer walking and public transport. In an ideal world we would never have let car culture flourish over the past few (many) decades.

For those who use a car infrequently, it could be that they would be better off using a car club car.

 

[Mikey C]

One of the things with cycles is that they take up a lot less road space than a car, even though most cars are carrying just one person.

As such it's possible (and I'm not saying this is the case here) that almost as many people are using a cycle road as of was open to car traffic.

The issue with buses and cyclists using the same space is either the cyclists feel unsafe sharing with the buses or the bus users when accessing the bus stops feel unsafe.

It's why such a restrictive segregation is likely to be in place.

Segregated cycle lanes if well used are clearly excellent.

If they aren't used, then all that's achieved is road capacity lost to other forms of transport, notably in this situation, buses, who are forced to queue with all the other road traffic.

 

[Peter Sarf]

One of the things with cycles is that they take up a lot less road space than a car, even though most cars are carrying just one person.

As such it's possible (and I'm not saying this is the case here) that almost as many people are using a cycle road as of was open to car traffic.

The issue with buses and cyclists using the same space is either the cyclists feel unsafe sharing with the buses or the bus users when accessing the bus stops feel unsafe.

It's why such a restrictive segregation is likely to be in place.

In the Croydon streets I am thinking of there is a remarkable lack of car traffic. There are rarely any bicycles using the cycle lanes - almost none strangely. To me it seems that recently the only transport mode being kept away are buses and their passengers.

For those who use a car infrequently, it could be that they would be better off using a car club car.

To try to wean them off owning a car could be tricky. Would have been easier before the advent of "out of town" shopping areas of course.

Segregated cycle lanes if well used are clearly excellent.

If they aren't used, then all that's achieved is road capacity lost to other forms of transport, notably in this situation, buses, who are forced to queue with all the other road traffic.

This is the problem. Further out the buses are tangling with traffic that may well be worse than it used to be. The road near the centre is remarkably lacking use by all modes of transport. It feels as though those making decisions want to drive people away from central Croydon. This is amplified by the planning blight ruining the main shopping centre (Whitgift) and the wasteland that was another shopping centre (St Georges Walk) still waiting to be finished for what seems like decades.

 

[The Ham]

To try to wean them off owning a car could be tricky. Would have been easier before the advent of "out of town" shopping areas of course.

Although more easily to do now with internet shopping, as there's almost no need to own a car to go and buy a washing machine or a three piece suite!

 

[Mgameing123]

Segregated cycle lanes if well used are clearly excellent.

If they aren't used, then all that's achieved is road capacity lost to other forms of transport, notably in this situation, buses, who are forced to queue with all the other road traffic.

Used or not they are vital infrastructure. Here in Denmark most of our bike lanes aren't used well yet we build more of them as we understand the need for children to be able to get to school safely and get around safely.

 

[PGAT]

Used or not they are vital infrastructure. Here in Denmark most of our bike lanes aren't used well yet we build more of them as we understand the need for children to be able to get to school safely and get around safely.

Cycle lanes generally don’t get traffic so it’s easy to underestimate their usage

 

[Railwaysceptic]

I suspect that last point - whether the roads are fit for purpose - is very subjective, and depends on which users you think the roads should be primarily serving. But my sense as someone who does a lot of cycling (as well as using public transport and some walking) around London is that there are many, many London roads that are completely overwhelmed and clogged up with cars, to the point where no-one can move efficiently, despite that in most of those areas there is excellent public transport provision, to the point that I doubt anyone really needs to be driving unless they are carrying a large amount of luggage, have serious mobility problems, or are heading to somewhere remote outside London. That suggests to me that the number of cars on the road is precisely the problem.

You are not addressing the issue of why the roads are "clogged up with cars." Post 68 immediately above yours gives one of several reasons.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Anyway. We have drifted off the subject perhaps. To me another Victoria line is about longer distance journeys that are arguably on the edge of the typical range of cycling ?.

I still think cycling has a place but all public transport has to be seen together and judgements made about how the space they use is shared with cycles, pedestrians, cars and delivery vehicles. We should not forget that a very significant part of transport in London is buses which are good for shorter trips but I know of people who used buses to get from near Croydon to the West End (especially now there is no all night service between Croydon and Victoria) !. I am reminded of the rumours of the Victoria Line being extended to Croydon.

A new underground line has the advantage that it does not interfere with other surface modes. We have seen how much hidden demand there was for the Elizabeth line. I was on it yesterday at about 17:40 Farringdon to Abbey Wood and people were getting left behind - it has not even been open that long !.

 

[Mgameing123]

Anyway. We have drifted off the subject perhaps. To me another Victoria line is about longer distance journeys that are arguably on the edge of the typical range of cycling ?.

I still think cycling has a place but all public transport has to be seen together and judgements made about how the space they use is shared with cycles, pedestrians, cars and delivery vehicles. We should not forget that a very significant part of transport in London is buses which are good for shorter trips but I know of people who used buses to get from near Croydon to the West End (especially now there is no all night service between Croydon and Victoria) !. I am reminded of the rumours of the Victoria Line being extended to Croydon.

A new underground line has the advantage that it does not interfere with other surface modes. We have seen how much hidden demand there was for the Elizabeth line. I was on it yesterday at about 17:40 Farringdon to Abbey Wood and people were getting left behind - it has not even been open that long !.

The Victoria Line doesn’t have enough capacity for an extension to Croydon. An extension to Croydon would have to wait until Atleast when Crossrail 2 becomes a thing.

 

[Peter Sarf]

The Victoria Line doesn’t have enough capacity for an extension to Croydon. An extension to Croydon would have to wait until Atleast when Crossrail 2 becomes a thing.

Indeed. The only temptation left in that category is turning the Hayes branch over to an extended Bakerloo line.

It would have to be a new Victoria line. But we have to re-visit whether to build another underground style line ever. Would it be better to build a Crossrail style line that pulls in a few standard loading gauge routes either side of London ?. The strongest feature of the Victoria line in my opinion however is that it is an isolated line that imports no delays from connecting routes.

 

[Mgameing123]

Indeed. The only temptation left in that category is turning the Hayes branch over to an extended Bakerloo line.

It would have to be a new Victoria line. But we have to re-visit whether to build another underground style line ever. Would it be better to build a Crossrail style line that pulls in a few standard loading gauge routes either side of London ?. The strongest feature of the Victoria line in my opinion however is that it is an isolated line that imports no delays from connecting routes.

For me the only benefit is that it's frequent, fast and that it exists.

 

[MarkyT]

But we have to re-visit whether to build another underground style line ever. Would it be better to build a Crossrail style line that pulls in a few standard loading gauge routes either side of London ?. The strongest feature of the Victoria line in my opinion however is that it is an isolated line that imports no delays from connecting routes.

There were two main options for Crossrail 2. An isolated metro line that just ran from Wimbledon to north east London or the one that was chosen to develop further that tagged on a selection South Western of inner suburban branches. Either way it would be have been built for large mainline profile trainsets up to 250m long, not diminutive tube stock of restricted length. I doubt if a new traditional tube profile line will ever be built in London, but there will likely be some more minor extensions, but not too far out. The outer reaches of the Central and Northern that took over former heavy rail branches in north and east London were probably the last. I think Hayes is probably too far out for the Bakerloo. You'll likely still get a lot of people changing at Lewisham for faster SE trains to London Bridge etc.

 

[Peter Sarf]

There were two main options for Crossrail 2. An isolated metro line that just ran from Wimbledon to north east London or the one that was chosen to develop further that tagged on a selection South Western of inner suburban branches. Either way it would be have been built for large mainline profile trainsets up to 250m long, not diminutive tube stock of restricted length. I doubt if a new traditional tube profile line will ever be built in London, but there will likely be some more minor extensions, but not too far out. The outer reaches of the Central and Northern that took over former heavy rail branches in north and east London were probably the last. I think Hayes is probably too far out for the Bakerloo. You'll likely still get a lot of people changing at Lewisham for faster SE trains to London Bridge etc.

I have always assumed that a proportion of Hayes branch passengers would have to suffer the inconvenience of changing off the Bakerloo but that the number would be balanced by those no longer having to change at Charing Cross.

I agree it would be surprising if another tube loading gauge line got built. The only excuse for the last one (Jubilee line) was that it took over one of the two Bakerloo branches to the North - but then I think that branch was actually a former Met line before so would surely have been nearer to main line loading gauge ?.

I think the TfL Overground lines to Enfield Town, Cheshunt and Chingford would make candidates for the North Eastern end of Cross Rail Two. Nice to use branches that will not get tangled up in delays on the mainline. Abbey Wood achieves that for Cross Rail One (Elizabeth Line).

 

[SynthD]

But we have to re-visit whether to build another underground style line ever. Would it be better to build a Crossrail style line that pulls in a few standard loading gauge routes either side of London ?. The strongest feature of the Victoria line in my opinion however is that it is an isolated line that imports no delays from connecting routes.

The size of the tunnels makes little to no difference to fitting them into the crowded space under London. The double uplift in taking suburban routes underground, on both sides of London, will win out over isolating a line. Even the Victoria line has issues like sick passengers. Apparently the London 2050 document has a Crossrail 3 that avoids the central area, instead it goes - Twickenham, Clapham Junction, Waterloo, London Bridge, Canary Wharf, Barking (iirc, and other stops).

but then I think that branch was actually a former Met line before so would surely have been nearer to main line loading gauge ?.

If, in an alternate timeline, the branch was converted directly from Met to Jubilee, could they have kept it Met sized by building the tunnels south of Finchley Road large?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

A new underground line has the advantage that it does not interfere with other surface modes. We have seen how much hidden demand there was for the Elizabeth line. I was on it yesterday at about 17:40 Farringdon to Abbey Wood and people were getting left behind - it has not even been open that long !.

To be fair, a big part of that could well be induced demand rather than previously suppressed demand.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Feb 2025 ==

The Victoria Line doesn’t have enough capacity for an extension to Croydon. An extension to Croydon would have to wait until Atleast when Crossrail 2 becomes a thing.

I think that's very true. I do wonder though whether it has capacity for a smaller extension just one stop to Herne Hill - which I believe has been thought about, and would confer the double advantage of better interchange with national rail, and (if I recall correctly from Internet chatter at the time when such an extension was being thought about) the ability to build better capacity for terminating trains than exists at Brixton.

 

[Mikey C]

I agree it would be surprising if another tube loading gauge line got built. The only excuse for the last one (Jubilee line) was that it took over one of the two Bakerloo branches to the North - but then I think that branch was actually a former Met line before so would surely have been nearer to main line loading gauge ?.

The bored tunnel between Finchley Road and Baker Street, dug in the 30s for the Bakerloo Line, forced the whole of the Jubilee Line to be similarly small!

 

[Peter Sarf]

The bored tunnel between Finchley Road and Baker Street, dug in the 30s for the Bakerloo Line, forced the whole of the Jubilee Line to be similarly small!

Ah yes, that would make sense as where the two branches met was after a length of running in Tunnel for both of course.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Getting back to the issue of relieving capacity on the Victoria line - a random thought has just occurred to me. I bet if you could speed up the Piccadilly line between Green Park and Finsbury Park and make the Piccadilly service more frequent, a fair few people who currently use the Victoria line would swap. (Anecdotal example: I have a friend who regularly travels from Wood Green to central London, and who will normally change to the Victoria at Finsbury Park because the Victoria line into London is quicker - even if her final destination isn't on the Victoria line).

So how possible is it to improve line speeds on the Piccadilly line with a view to relieving congestion on the Victoria? What work would need to be done?

 

[Bald Rick]

I agree it would be surprising if another tube loading gauge line got built. The only excuse for the last one (Jubilee line) was that it took over one of the two Bakerloo branches to the North - but then I think that branch was actually a former Met line before so would surely have been nearer to main line loading gauge ?.

Yes I do think that were the Jubilee to be built now, it would be to main line gauge, and probably take traffic from the Chiltern line as well as the ‘old’ Met.

The bored tunnel between Finchley Road and Baker Street, dug in the 30s for the Bakerloo Line, forced the whole of the Jubilee Line to be similarly small!

yep