DLR Thamesmead extension - the logical conclusion

[quantinghome]

Why doesn't the DLR just go the whole hog and extend itself to Tilbury?

 

[PGAT]

Far too many river crossings, far too long, far too expensive. I believe TfL would ideally see it extended to Belvedere if money allowed but no further

 

[The Pelican]

It's a pity that the DLR's Dagenham Dock via Barking Riverside extension didn't go ahead, which would have got it a long way towards the M25. The consultation on the Thamesmead extension dicussed a potential Barking town centre extension from Beckton, which might mosly be in a tunnel. Establishing a third four platform "hub" of the DLR network around Beckton and Gallions Reach might allow more trains not to have to run as far as Central London- I believe a turnback was proposed either West of Custom House or West of Canning Town. (I count Poplar and Canning Town as the major hubs of the network).

 

[brad465]

The Elizabeth line to Gravesend would achieve most of this proposal and cost much less to implement. Purfleet and Tilbury would miss out, but a DLR extension won't do them much good given the speed of the journey compared to C2C will be slower that far out from London.

 

[LLivery]

It's a pity that the DLR's Dagenham Dock via Barking Riverside extension didn't go ahead, which would have got it a long way towards the M25. The consultation on the Thamesmead extension dicussed a potential Barking town centre extension from Beckton, which might mosly be in a tunnel. Establishing a third four platform "hub" of the DLR network around Beckton and Gallions Reach might allow more trains not to have to run as far as Central London- I believe a turnback was proposed either West of Custom House or West of Canning Town. (I count Poplar and Canning Town as the major hubs of the network).

Dagenham Dock isn't quite dead as far as I'm aware. The doubling of planned housing at Barking Riverside means the GOBLIN service really isn't going to be good enough. I don't remember seeing Beckton Town Centre provision in the Thamesmead extension, I'm pretty sure it was Dagenham Dock being spoken about.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Nov 2025 ==

Why doesn't the DLR just go the whole hog and extend itself to Tilbury?

View attachment 191892

Jubilee Line 2.0

The crossings would be useful, I must admit

 

[321362]

The Elizabeth line to Gravesend would achieve most of this proposal and cost much less to implement.

If you're sending it there, surely there needs to be some form of walkway or free shuttle bus between Northfleet and Ebbsfleet. They have absolutely no connection currently, which is incredibly unhelpful for, say, Bexleyheath to Ashford traffic, who currently have to go to London Bridge and get the slower train to Ashford, or go to Gravesend and then back up to Ebbsfleet.

Unfortunately there just isn't the passenger flows to warrant funding for this.

 

[Mark J]

Why doesn't the DLR just go the whole hog and extend itself to Tilbury?

View attachment 191892

Someone has gone mad with the Crayons!

 

[MPW]

Why doesn't the DLR just go the whole hog and extend itself to Tilbury?

View attachment 191892

I have drawn this fantasy map too but even this first tunnel is already "controversial" due to the cost. I think you could achieve a similar level of connection by extending from beckton(ish) north to barking without any additional river crossings. All the NR and overground lines in that area north of the river connect to barking.

The route goes along a dual carriageway with the exception of the final bit to barking station, which is probably the downfall of my idea in terms of cost. Also, no one has proposed this option either, so will just stay next to my sons bears and rainbows in my drawer full of crayon artwork.

 

[Mgameing123]

Why doesn't the DLR just go the whole hog and extend itself to Tilbury?

View attachment 191892

Can’t we solve the issue by getting Southeastern High Speed to stop somewhere around Rainham (Essex)

 

[mr_jrt]

Dagenham Dock isn't quite dead as far as I'm aware. The doubling of planned housing at Barking Riverside means the GOBLIN service really isn't going to be good enough. I don't remember seeing Beckton Town Centre provision in the Thamesmead extension, I'm pretty sure it was Dagenham Dock being spoken about.

I always felt the ideal situation at Barking Riverside would have been an interchange station with the Goblin to having N-S underground platforms for a future extension across the river, and the DLR to have elevated surface E-W platforms on a route to Dagenham Dock.

 

[The Pelican]

Dagenham Dock isn't quite dead as far as I'm aware. The doubling of planned housing at Barking Riverside means the GOBLIN service really isn't going to be good enough. I don't remember seeing Beckton Town Centre provision in the Thamesmead extension, I'm pretty sure it was Dagenham Dock being spoken about.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Nov 2025 ==


Jubilee Line 2.0

The crossings would be useful, I must admit

The consultation earlier this year had an options report, which discusses a potential Gallions Reach station to Barking DLR line. In the options report, it gives this new line as a reason for grade seperating the junction where the Gallions Reach-Thamesmead route will diverge from the Gallions Reach-Beckton line. In the diagrams connected to the options report, the potential Barking spur is shown joining these two lines, sometimes with a triangular junction to allow Thamesmead-Barking DLR services.

The options report is at https://haveyoursay.tfl.gov.uk/dlr-extension-consultation-2/news_feed/stations

I hope the Dagenham Dock proposal does get revived eventually though- it would be quite a scenic route not far from the waterside.

 

[LLivery]

The consultation earlier this year had an options report, which discusses a potential Gallions Reach station to Barking DLR line. In the options report, it gives this new line as a reason for grade seperating the junction where the Gallions Reach-Thamesmead route will diverge from the Gallions Reach-Beckton line. In the diagrams connected to the options report, the potential Barking spur is shown joining these two lines, sometimes with a triangular junction to allow Thamesmead-Barking DLR services.

The options report is at https://haveyoursay.tfl.gov.uk/dlr-extension-consultation-2/news_feed/stations

I hope the Dagenham Dock proposal does get revived eventually though- it would be quite a scenic route not far from the waterside.

It does, but I took that to mean Barking Riverside - https://www.standard.co.uk/news/tra...-london-mayor-dagenham-dock-tfl-b1170169.html

I always felt the ideal situation at Barking Riverside would have been an interchange station with the Goblin to having N-S underground platforms for a future extension across the river, and the DLR to have elevated surface E-W platforms on a route to Dagenham Dock.

Agreed

 

[Farigiraf]

Why doesn't the DLR just go the whole hog and extend itself to Tilbury?

View attachment 191892

What would the Tilbury - London journey time be? Must be around 2-3 hours...
A few of these cross-river journeys made considerably faster would be nice but DLR isn't the solution.
For Dagenham, it's extending the Overground across the river. For Tilbury, it's reinstating the ferry, or building a bridge. Purfleet has the M25 which does carry some buses over it to Dartford.

Interestingly this proposal misses out the one thing that the Thamesmead DLR extension would be most useful for, which is a connection to faster rail services at Abbey Wood. Without that, the main route taken to central London would still be a bus to Abbey Wood then the Elizabeth Line. So I really don't know what market would be served by this routing.

 

[Mgameing123]

What would the Tilbury - London journey time be? Must be around 2-3 hours...
A few of these cross-river journeys made considerably faster would be nice but DLR isn't the solution.
For Dagenham, it's extending the Overground across the river. For Tilbury, it's reinstating the ferry, or building a bridge. Purfleet has the M25 which does carry some buses over it to Dartford.

Interestingly this proposal misses out the one thing that the Thamesmead DLR extension would be most useful for, which is a connection to faster rail services at Abbey Wood. Without that, the main route taken to central London would still be a bus to Abbey Wood then the Elizabeth Line. So I really don't know what market would be served by this routing.

People heading to Docklands or Stratford perhaps?

 

[Brubulus]

I'd much rather see a Elizabeth line extension to Dartford. This would involve terminating the existing Southeastern service at Abbey Wood, and running a 6tph shuttle to Cannon Street. Then co-opting the outer island at Dartford as EL platforms, shortening them slightly (20M) so they can still fit 345s, but allows for a single EL track on the approach, (separated from 2 third rail tracks). This would support up to 12tph, and any increase on that would have to terminate at Abbey Wood.

 

[Mgameing123]

[Message Redacted]

 

[Farigiraf]

People heading to Docklands or Stratford perhaps?

Taking c2c to West Ham and changing to the DLR or Jubilee line is always going to be faster for these journeys.

 

[Stephen42]

I'd much rather see a Elizabeth line extension to Dartford. This would involve terminating the existing Southeastern service at Abbey Wood, and running a 6tph shuttle to Cannon Street. Then co-opting the outer island at Dartford as EL platforms, shortening them slightly (20M) so they can still fit 345s, but allows for a single EL track on the approach, (separated from 2 third rail tracks). This would support up to 12tph, and any increase on that would have to terminate at Abbey Wood.

There is no cheap way to extend a significant proportion of the Elizabeth line services to Dartford.

Cutting Southeastern (and Thameslink) at Abbey Wood reduces 4 trains per hour at Dartford, but the Bexleyheath and Sidcup trains that go onto the Woolwich line would then need to go through Dartford adding those 4 trains per hour back. Dartford reverses 6 trains and has 12 through (often with trains calling in both directions at same time) per hour in peaks which won't be achievable on 2 platforms. There's also Slade Green depot/sidings and the Bexleyheath line sharing with the Woolwich line on approach to Dartford with no grade separation anywhere. Ignoring the depot moves the Bexleyheath line has 8 trains per hour in morning peak which would be 20 in peak direction on that two track section with flat crossing moves either end.

 

[The Pelican]

There is no cheap way to extend a significant proportion of the Elizabeth line services to Dartford.

Cutting Southeastern (and Thameslink) at Abbey Wood reduces 4 trains per hour at Dartford, but the Bexleyheath and Sidcup trains that go onto the Woolwich line would then need to go through Dartford adding those 4 trains per hour back. Dartford reverses 6 trains and has 12 through (often with trains calling in both directions at same time) per hour in peaks which won't be achievable on 2 platforms. There's also Slade Green depot/sidings and the Bexleyheath line sharing with the Woolwich line on approach to Dartford with no grade separation anywhere. Ignoring the depot moves the Bexleyheath line has 8 trains per hour in morning peak which would be 20 in peak direction on that two track section with flat crossing moves either end.

The lack of station on the stretch shared by the Slade Green to Dartford and the Barneshurst to Dartford trains makes me think that would be the part to four track, with the Elizabeth Line tracks remaining north and east of two Southeastern tracks. An operational study could be done to see if the Elizabeth line could cope with a single platform at Dartford, with two sidings to store out of use trains beyond it.

On the other hand, the cost effectivness of this limited quadrupuling needs to be compared with quad tracking the whole way from Abbey Wood and running both sets of services.

 

[Stephen42]

The lack of station on the stretch shared by the Slade Green to Dartford and the Barneshurst to Dartford trains makes me think that would be the part to four track, with the Elizabeth Line tracks remaining north and east of two Southeastern tracks. An operational study could be done to see if the Elizabeth line could cope with a single platform at Dartford, with two sidings to store out of use trains beyond it.

On the other hand, the cost effectivness of this limited quadrupuling needs to be compared with quad tracking the whole way from Abbey Wood and running both sets of services.

With 12 trains in each direction it's not feasible to use a single platform at Dartford. Southeastern and Thameslink couldn't cope with using three platforms either. Any degree of quad tracking and new platform(s) will be expensive.

Most new lines in the London area will be judged based on how much new housing they unlock. That's one of the key reasons for the proposed DLR extension only going as far as it does.

 

[HSTEd]

There is no cheap way to extend a significant proportion of the Elizabeth line services to Dartford.

Cutting Southeastern (and Thameslink) at Abbey Wood reduces 4 trains per hour at Dartford, but the Bexleyheath and Sidcup trains that go onto the Woolwich line would then need to go through Dartford adding those 4 trains per hour back. Dartford reverses 6 trains and has 12 through (often with trains calling in both directions at same time) per hour in peaks which won't be achievable on 2 platforms. There's also Slade Green depot/sidings and the Bexleyheath line sharing with the Woolwich line on approach to Dartford with no grade separation anywhere. Ignoring the depot moves the Bexleyheath line has 8 trains per hour in morning peak which would be 20 in peak direction on that two track section with flat crossing moves either end.

Couldn't you sever the line via Bexleyheath at Slade Green with a single platform terminus on the land used by the current Erith Loop. Then concentrate the traffic to beyond Dartford onto the line via Sidcup? After all the Elizabeth line is likely to absorb much of the peak load in any case.

There are three tracks between the connection of the line via Sidcup could allow you to avoid crossing move interactions with the Elizabeth Line if you force the line via Sidcup to swap to right hand running on the shared section. Two eastbound tracks and one westbound. Elizabeth Line would use the northernmost island and we'd rearrange the layout east of the station to make reversing sidings available. No Southeastern/TL Trains would terminate at Dartford.

Obviously a bit of a mess and would need a complete timetable recast though.....

 

[ScotGG]

Taking c2c to West Ham and changing to the DLR or Jubilee line is always going to be faster for these journeys.

Yep. Bus to Abbey Wood then Liz line is faster than any DLR extension for pretty much the entirety of Thamesmead. Can't see who'll use it given it's slower and less frequent.

Another way to reach east London areas such as Stratford or parts of east London is EL to Stratford via Whitechapel. Or EL to Custom House and same station change to DLR services. For Canary Wharf EL from Abbey Wood is 9-10 mins. Whitechapel is about 14 minutes on the Liz from Abbey Wood and has the District heading east.

 

[NCT]

DLR to Custom House for the Liz Line or Canning Town for the Jub will be faster than bussing it to Abbey Wood.

 

[Mgameing123]

Yep. Bus to Abbey Wood then Liz line is faster than any DLR extension for pretty much the entirety of Thamesmead. Can't see who'll use it given it's slower and less frequent.

Another way to reach east London areas such as Stratford or parts of east London is EL to Stratford via Whitechapel. Or EL to Custom House and same station change to DLR services. For Canary Wharf EL from Abbey Wood is 9-10 mins. Whitechapel is about 14 minutes on the Liz from Abbey Wood and has the District heading east.

People who value direct services over speed. I used to take the bus to school even though the train was faster just so I didn’t need to walk to the station. So it can help relieve the Elizabeth Line.

 

[ScotGG]

DLR to Custom House for the Liz Line or Canning Town for the Jub will be faster than bussing it to Abbey Wood.

Not for most of Thamesmead. 3-5 mins on a bus to Abbey Wood or 3-5 mins on a bus to north Thamesmead where DLR planned. One has more frequent trips and is faster (Abbey Wood) compared to DLR.

If in west Thamesmead or parts of the north it's 5 mins to Woolwich stations.

Given DLR doesn't go many places useful directly a change will still be needed. Most will still go Abbey Wood or Woolwich except those in immediate vicinity of DLR. Worth spending £1bn just for that?

How long would DLR to Custom House take from Thamesmead on DLR? 15 mins? It's six from Abbey Wood. Considering the expanse of Thamesmead most would still need a bus to reach north Thamesmead. Makes little sense to go there for 8tph when Liz is 12 tph and by the time any DLR is built that would have increased further with new trains on order.

Another factor is taking DLR then changing at Custom House or onto Jubilee at Canning Town takes time and trains can arrived rammed. Bussing to Abbey Wood for the first stop means a chance of a seat and guaranteed to get on.

I'm sure some will prefer the slower DLR but given all the projects in London it hardly seems priority number 1.

 

[Farigiraf]

There'll be a market for both routes - DLR will be the preferred option for travel to the Docklands as well as for travellers from northern Thamesmead, EL from Abbey Wood for other travellers - and the debate over which is preferable shows that people travelling to/from Thamesmead, even post-DLR extension, will be split between taking the DLR and going via Abbey Wood.

To cater for this, I think the 'logical conclusion' for where to continue the route after 'Thamesmead North' would definitely be Abbey Wood station. Based on distances between stops on other DLR routes, stations at Thamesmead North, Thamesmead Town Centre and Abbey Wood North (example names) would be suitable. 1-seat journeys from most of the area towards the docklands, and an easier and more integrated transfer to the Elizabeth Line if you want to go that way.

It's quite disappointing that the current spec of the extension stops at northern Thamesmead, as this'll mean extension beyond that will get pushed back by decades.

Plus, I don't understand why Belvedere is shown as a potential option. Abbey Wood is the transport hub of the area so running to a station with far less train services makes little sense. The limited market of passengers travelling from Belvedere to the Docklands could still change at Abbey Wood, which would still be faster than the existing bus-only route.

 

[The Pelican]

With 12 trains in each direction it's not feasible to use a single platform at Dartford. Southeastern and Thameslink couldn't cope with using three platforms either. Any degree of quad tracking and new platform(s) will be expensive.

Most new lines in the London area will be judged based on how much new housing they unlock. That's one of the key reasons for the proposed DLR extension only going as far as it does.

Fair enough- I would have thought 12 through and 6 reversing over three platforms wouldn’t have been too bad- it’s only six through trains on two of the platforms, and six reversing trains on the other one.
As for the Elizabeth line terminus, could a Clapham Junction Overground/ wimbledon tramlink staggered platform solution make fitting in two platforms easier? Otherwise, it might be nessecary to build a single third terminating platform somewhere between Abbey Wood and Dartford, if the Elizabeth line is ever extended in that direction.

 

[brad465]

Looks like the extension is getting backing in the Budget:

Treasury expected to back extending London's DLR to Thamesmead

BBC London understands Rachel Reeves is to use next week's budget to give the project the go-ahead.

www.bbc.co.uk

Chancellor Rachel Reeves is expected to use next week's budget to give the go-ahead for the Docklands Light Railway (DLR) to be extended to Thamesmead.
BBC London understands that the Treasury will back the plan, saying it could lead to 25,000 new homes in the area and up to 10,000 new jobs.
The extension of the DLR would see a new line built from Gallions Reach to a new station at Beckton Riverside and then across the river to Thamesmead.
Transport for London (TfL) welcomed the news the government plans to back the extension, saying it would "create green, liveable neighbourhoods" and "improve connectivity across the river by cutting journey times and reducing car dependency".
Last month Thamesmead was one of the areas shortlisted for the construction of a new town under the housing secretary's plan to "get Britain building again".
A Treasury source said: "Extending the DLR to Thamesmead will deliver much needed new homes, new jobs and quicker commutes - the building blocks for boosting growth, putting more pounds in pockets."
TfL expects construction of the extension to begin in 2027, with customers using it "in the early 2030s".

 

[The Pelican]

Looks like the extension is getting backing in the Budget:

Treasury expected to back extending London's DLR to Thamesmead

BBC London understands Rachel Reeves is to use next week's budget to give the project the go-ahead.

www.bbc.co.uk

Sounds good, I went out to Gallion's Reach to have a look at the junction location this morning. It will be great seeing another DLR tunnel under the river!

 

[Thirteen]

I find it interesting that DLR is more likely be backed then West London Orbital which is a lot less expensive. The BLE is so expensive that I think it's going to need more than Government backing.