Should Crossrail be open to long distance services?

[Jack27]

With the stumbling blocks on east west rail route from Cambridge to Bedford. IMO the crossrail route should have a couple of paths for long distance trains/freights. This would produce the connection for services between Norwich/Ipswich to Reading and beyond without requiring the building of the Cambridge to Bedford route if that will cause to many problems. I do think east west rail should go ahead tho

 

[CMS1]

It could be viewed like Thameslink, which is basically what your proposal would be. But it provides a very popular underground service in London, much more so than Thameslink does, meaning there's no capacity for long distance services.

 

[D365]

A freight route already exists between Acton and Stratford.

 

[Sorcerer]

I am going to be bold and definitively say that Crossrail probably shouldn't be open to long-distance traffic, and it should absolutely not be open to freight traffic. It was designed as a regional express network for London similar to how the RER serves Paris, and adding in a mixture of traffic through the core of the capital would be a huge drain on capacity.

 

[Bald Rick]

Definitely not, it would significantly reduce capacity on what is the country’s busiest railway. Similar reasons why We don’t want the central line opened up for Banbury to Southend services.

What is the market for Norwich / Ipswich to Reading and beyond?

The market for Norwich to Sheffield / Manchester, which already has a direct service, should give a good idea.

 

[Topological]

How far is someone prepared to travel in a 345? Because you need to serve all the central stations. Any longer distance service could only be an extension of existing services.

 

[AlastairFraser]

With the stumbling blocks on east west rail route from Cambridge to Bedford. IMO the crossrail route should have a couple of paths for long distance trains/freights. This would produce the connection for services between Norwich/Ipswich to Reading and beyond without requiring the building of the Cambridge to Bedford route if that will cause to many problems. I do think east west rail should go ahead tho

The issue with cancelling the Bedford to Cambridge section is that it is and definitely will be desperately needed to connect towns in-between Bedford and Cambridge.

For example, a sizeable new town is proposed at Tempsford where the ECML/EWR interchange station is, which will need rail connections east/west in order to avoid overwhelming the local A1/A421 roads(in addition to north/south services on the ECML), and then you have the existing new town of Cambourne, which has around 12k residents with expansion to 20k+ population likely in the next decade.

You also have the large amount of housing built just north of Tempsford at St. Neots (a lot of residents will be commuting to Cambridge from those new housing estates), and Universal are currently developing a proposal for a station serving their proposed theme park near the current Stewartby station just west of Bedford. They will likely value good regional connections heavily, and may contribute a significant amount to ensure this gets delivered.

 

[BerkshireRails]

How far is someone prepared to travel in a 345? Because you need to serve all the central stations. Any longer distance service could only be an extension of existing services.

I can see Reading to Gravesend and Heathrow to Southend Victoria being the longest services once the planned extensions are done. Reading to Gravesend and Heathrow to Southend Victoria being around 2 hours.

 

[Bald Rick]

I can see Reading to Gravesend and Heathrow to Southend Victoria being the longest services once the planned extensions are done. Reading to Gravesend and Heathrow to Southend Victoria being around 2 hours.

There aren’t any planned extensions.

 

[Magdalia]

With the stumbling blocks on east west rail route from Cambridge to Bedford.

Only a few weeks ago the Spending Review allocated £2.5 bn for East West Rail.

See here on the Department for Transport website dated 8 July:

Green light for over 50 road and rail upgrades supporting over 39,000 new homes and 42,000 jobs

Commuters and businesses to benefit from quicker journeys as more than 50 road and rail upgrades are agreed.

www.gov.uk

Press release

Green light for over 50 road and rail upgrades supporting over 39,000 new homes and 42,000 jobs​

East West Rail to Cambridge	The Spending Review confirmed £2.5 billion to drive forward the delivery of East-West Rail to unlock growth across the Oxford-Cambridge Growth Corridor.

 

[BerkshireRails]

There aren’t any planned extensions.

There is plans, as they are currently doing the business cases for them Gravesend and Southend.

Oh, I completely forgot about Staines.

 

[Bald Rick]

There is plans, as they are currently doing the business cases for them Gravesend and Southend.

Oh, I completely forgot about Staines.

No, “they” are not doing business cases. Gravesend has been looked at years ago, and has been on the shelf for years. Southend has not been looked at. Staines is effectively Heathrow Southern Link.

None are being taken forward.

 

[dk1]

No plans to extend anywhere else. The only change on the cards are possibly going up to 26 then 28 trains per hour and possibly diverting Liverpool St high level peak services into the core.

 

[Backroom_boy]

I know it's semantics but I'd suggests 'plans for' implies something more than kite flying boosterism that most of these proposals are.

My own two cents is the Staines proposal is the most likely as it could tap into money from Heathrow, it's self-contained so won't complicate existing services and 80%ish of flow would be between Staines and Heathrow so it wouldn't take up existing seat capacity on the core.

Still needs a couple of billion being pulled together to fund it though, so unlikely to proceed currently

 

[Bletchleyite]

Absolutely not, for two reasons.

1. Do we really want to destroy its punctuality like has happened with the silly and misguided "direct trains from everywhere to everywhere" thing that has ruined Thameslink, turning it into a super-Castlefield?

2. London is in the bottom right hand corner of England. Therefore the demand is skewed to the other side of London. The demand for stuff like Bristol to Kent is minimal and so this is not worth doing. It's the reason why there are arguments for a through HS2/NPR station at Manchester Piccadilly (though due to cost it is unlikely) and there is no real argument, outside of the UK joining Schengen*, for one in London.

* But even so, what would you do with about twenty five trains per hour approaching London from the north and west? There would never be demand to continue more than a tenth of that across to Kent and mainland Europe.

 

[MP33]

There are two bay platforms at Wickford, that could be extended. These are used for engineering trains and, sometimes, empty rolling stock. That would only extend the route by two stations, and would not add very much.

 

[AlastairFraser]

I know it's semantics but I'd suggests 'plans for' implies something more than kite flying boosterism that most of these proposals are.

My own two cents is the Staines proposal is the most likely as it could tap into money from Heathrow, it's self-contained so won't complicate existing services and 80%ish of flow would be between Staines and Heathrow so it wouldn't take up existing seat capacity on the core.

Still needs a couple of billion being pulled together to fund it though, so unlikely to proceed currently

Perhaps Weybridge via Staines would be better for connections to the SWML, although then you have a punctuality risk, need to compulsory purchase a shopping centre carpark and the increased level crossing closure times through Egham may be unacceptable. But if Heathrow got permission to expand, a rail connection to the SWML might be needed to hit sustainable travel goals.

 

[BerkshireRails]

1. Do we really want to destroy its punctuality like has happened with the silly and misguided "direct trains from everywhere to everywhere" thing that has ruined Thameslink, turning it into a super-Castlefield?

I think the peak Thameslink extensions like East Grinstead should be scrapped and replaced by more frequent trains on the core route of Brighton to Bedford and Sutton Loop.

I know it's semantics but I'd suggests 'plans for' implies something more than kite flying boosterism that most of these proposals are.

My own two cents is the Staines proposal is the most likely as it could tap into money from Heathrow, it's self-contained so won't complicate existing services and 80%ish of flow would be between Staines and Heathrow so it wouldn't take up existing seat capacity on the core.

Still needs a couple of billion being pulled together to fund it though, so unlikely to proceed currently

It might be possible to do without increasing unit diagrams requirements as the Heathrow T5 trains sit there for 17 based on 9T43 becoming 9W46.

Perhaps Weybridge via Staines would be better for connections to the SWML, although then you have a punctuality risk, need to compulsory purchase a shopping centre carpark and the increased level crossing closure times through Egham may be unacceptable. But if Heathrow got permission to expand, a rail connection to the SWML might be needed to hit sustainable travel goals.

The planned route seems to avoid Egham completely.

There are two bay platforms at Wickford, that could be extended. These are used for engineering trains and, sometimes, empty rolling stock. That would only extend the route by two stations, and would not add very much.

The bays at Wickford are facing the wrong way for an Elizabeth Line extension.

 

[AlastairFraser]

The planned route seems to avoid Egham completely.

Oh I've heard about the Airtrack/Heathrow Southern Railway plans before, but I don't think Heathrow's mitigation fund will stretch to paying for new infrastructure beyond Staines at the moment.

 

[MP33]

Unless, the track has been removed. Since I was last there, in January. There are two short platforms, although one has a fence in the way. In one of them, a tamping machine is permanently parked when not required.

I did once see, a rail man on the telephone, operating a ground frame. To enable empty stock to leave the other siding. This may be why the track is not in the diagram.

 

[A S Leib]

I can see Reading to Gravesend and Heathrow to Southend Victoria being the longest services once the planned extensions are done. Reading to Gravesend and Heathrow to Southend Victoria being around 2 hours.

Realistically I suspect most people would change at Old Oak Common or Stratford, with Twyford to Canary Wharf or Brentwood to Paddington being the longest direct journey I suspect anybody might frequently make.

 

[BerkshireRails]

Realistically I suspect most people would change at Old Oak Common or Stratford, with Twyford to Canary Wharf or Brentwood to Paddington being the longest direct journey I suspect anybody might frequently make.

During the Evening peak it might be there is some passengers who go the full route due to certain off peak tickets only being valid on Elizabeth Line.

 

[MikeFromLFE]

Could a similar argument be made for the EMR Corby services be extended through the Thameslink core to release platforms at St Pancras for EMR Intercity services?

 

[BerkshireRails]

Could a similar argument be made for the EMR Corby services be extended through the Thameslink core to release platforms at St Pancras for EMR Intercity services?

a) Where do you plan on sending it?
b) What stock would you use?
c) Are there the paths to do that?

 

[A S Leib]

a) Where do you plan on sending it?

I can't remember if the paths meant for Cambridge to Maidstone / Ashford services are still unused, but I'm not sure if the reliability risk would be worth doing that even if they are.

 

[TheWierdOne]

Back to the original post, could the Elizabeth line allow freight through at night?

 

[BerkshireRails]

Back to the original post, could the Elizabeth line allow freight through at night?

The freight would require CBTC for the core and can not be longer than 370m.

 

[JamesT]

The freight would require CBTC for the core and can not be longer than 370m.

Also the freight wagons mustn’t be fouled by 1100mm high platforms.

 

[BerkshireRails]

Also the freight wagons mustn’t be fouled by 1100mm high platforms.

As long the wagons follow W6A gauge rules they are permitted in the Elizabeth Line core.

 

[Krokodil]

No plans to extend anywhere else. The only change on the cards are possibly going up to 26 then 28 trains per hour and possibly diverting Liverpool St high level peak services into the core.

Isn't the intention that the Paddington terminators will extend to OOC when that opens?