Potential new West London Orbital route

[Railwaysceptic]

They should advance the NLL station at OOC regardless (this would be at a parallel island?) - it’s the most important piece of this. Arguably the only one.

Interesting to have dropped West Hampstead - I suppose it is duplicative in a way to the NLL, but it is also far more useful. And Neasden has the Jubilee to there so it’s not difficult I guess.

Brent Cross West hasn’t been a hit yet - hopefully the housing and population will advance. Otherwise I’d think this is better heading north, but trains would be slow vs TL - and how to cross the MML. I’d expect it remains in the safeguarded bay.

I certainly agree about OOC being by far the most important single item of this project.

My guess is that West Hampstead Station has been dropped because the Hendon Lines have no platforms there, and there is no room for them either. In other threads the idea of a burrowing junction with the slow lines has been debated at length. I can't imagine that a cost conscious approach to the London Orbital Route would be enthusiastic about adding that enormous cost to the project!

I assume - perhaps incorrectly - that the plan for Brent Cross involves new platforms on the Hendon Lines.

 

[jon0844]

Brent Cross West hasn’t been a hit yet - hopefully the housing and population will advance. Otherwise I’d think this is better heading north, but trains would be slow vs TL - and how to cross the MML. I’d expect it remains in the safeguarded bay.

It's still very quiet around there and there's a LOT of work yet to be done. Access to the shopping centre is still poor by foot and buses are pretty busy, but I am fairly confident the station will be a success in the long term.

 

[swt_passenger]

I assume - perhaps incorrectly - that the plan for Brent Cross involves new platforms on the Hendon Lines.

IIRC they were described as such in the planning drawings for Brent Cross West.

But in fact they’re on the other side of the Hendon lines, on the revised Brent Curve. I posted a planning drawing here that shows the expected layout:

New Brent Cross West (Thameslink) station

Random aside, is there any reason why Cricklewood as never extended for 12 car trains? Looks to be plenty of space?

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Ian Hardy]

Although no decision has been made, battery trains are a possibility which would mean that curve at Kew could remain unelectrified.

In the PWI presentation, it was stated that the existing 3rd Rail supply around the Hounslow loop was not able to power an additional 4 DC services in each direction an hour, in addtion to the 4 existing SWR services in each direction. It can manage 6 services in each direction because when the line through Richmond is closed for engineering works, the 2tph Reading and 2tph Windsor services are diverted via Hounslow and the 2tph Weybridge services still operate.

To upgrade the Hounslow loop DC supply would need an upgrade to the link from the National Grid substation at Wimbledon to the Network Rail supply point near Wimbledon depot and that would probably cost more than whole of the West London Orbital project.

Therefore there would be no point electrifying the line between Kew East Junction and Old Kew Junction, if the trains couldn't then be electrically powered beyond Old Kew Junction to and from Hounslow.

Another consideration would be, is Network Rail willing to support a business case and risk assessment that would be required to electify a line with 3rd rail supply as 3rd Rail supply does not meet the requirements of the HSR 25 Guidance on Regulations – The Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 https://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/priced/hsr25.pdf
It is good job that these regulations are not retrospective and only apply to new things, because if it was retrospective, the LUL network and the Network Rail 3rd rail lines would have to be de-energised permanently.

Therefore it is very likely that the West London Orbital trains will operate as 25kV AC north of Acton Central and on battery power south of Acton Central and the non-electrified gap between Kew East Junction and Old Kew Junction will remain.

 

[Teds]

One of the other issues that I don't think has been mentioned are the Bollo Lane crossings in Acton. The crossings are a very short distance apart with the high possibily that the vehicles queueing for one crossing would block back over the other. Currently there are few trains on the freight line so it is not an issue.
Apologies if this not the right way to insert a screen grab.

 

[Acton1991]

One of the other issues that I don't think has been mentioned are the Bollo Lane crossings in Acton. The crossings are a very short distance apart with the high possibily that the vehicles queueing for one crossing would block back over the other. Currently there are few trains on the freight line so it is not an issue.
Apologies if this not the right way to insert a screen grab. View attachment 199701View attachment 199701

I believe the plan would be to close the crossings at both Bollo Lane and Churchfield Road in Acton. A good idea really as both are already pretty backed up with queues with the current timetable. It remains to be seen where those cars would go!

 

[Ian Hardy]

I believe the plan would be to close the crossings at both Bollo Lane and Churchfield Road in Acton. A good idea really as both are already pretty backed up with queues with the current timetable. It remains to be seen where those cars would go!

According to the PWI presentation, the northern Bollo Lane crossing (i.e. the one on the line to Old Kew Junction, New Kew Junction and Hounslow) will remain open for buses only as closing that crossing would prevent the buses on routes 70 & 440 from serving Chiswick Park Business Park (which is on the site of London Transport's Chiswick Bus Works).

The southern Bollo Lane crossing (i.e. the one on the line to Gunnersbury and Richmond) will be closed.

The PWI presentation suggests that Wood Lane crossing between Syon Lane & Isleworth would also be closed.

TfL has done some traffic modelling and closing those crossings is better than them only being open for road traffic for about 10 minutes in every hour.

 

[sad1e]

Will this line have new rolling stock ordered for it ? , I don't think there are enough 378's and 710s to cover all of the existing LO duties plus the West London Orbital.

This also brings up the question as where to this new rolling stock will be stabled. Is there any space at Willesden to keep more units ?

 

[Ian Hardy]

Will this line have new rolling stock ordered for it ? , I don't think there are enough 378's and 710s to cover all of the existing LO duties plus the West London Orbital.

This also brings up the question as where to this new rolling stock will be stabled. Is there any space at Willesden to keep more units ?

Watch the PWI presentation linked in post 5, that will answer all your questions: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/potential-new-west-london-orbital-route.281786/post-7217031

 

[450.emu]

It's still very quiet around there and there's a LOT of work yet to be done. Access to the shopping centre is still poor by foot and buses are pretty busy, but I am fairly confident the station will be a success in the long term.

There's plans to redevelop Brent Cross with 125 new shops, it's looking rather down at heel and even the current bus station is a mess. The main housing area hasn't changed much. I'm sure the station would do better with better access to the shopping centre in future

 

[jon0844]

There's plans to redevelop Brent Cross with 125 new shops, it's looking rather down at heel and even the current bus station is a mess. The main housing area hasn't changed much. I'm sure the station would do better with better access to the shopping centre in future

There are a few construction areas still closed off that prevents easier walking to/from Brent Cross shopping centre, which should help. The problem isn't so much all the new development (we can argue elsewhere about the gentrification aspect!) but the horrible road layout for the A406 and M1. It all needs to be rebuilt, but obviously would cost billions.

With so many new people living there, the roads make it hard to get around the area and local communities (I assume there are some?) will suffer if most people living there only spend their money when they jump on a train and go somewhere else.

 

[Dave W]

They should advance the NLL station at OOC regardless (this would be at a parallel island?) - it’s the most important piece of this. Arguably the only one.

Interesting to have dropped West Hampstead - I suppose it is duplicative in a way to the NLL, but it is also far more useful. And Neasden has the Jubilee to there so it’s not difficult I guess.

Brent Cross West hasn’t been a hit yet - hopefully the housing and population will advance. Otherwise I’d think this is better heading north, but trains would be slow vs TL - and how to cross the MML. I’d expect it remains in the safeguarded bay.

In fairness Brent Cross Town (the area adjacent to the new station) isn't just a new faceless housing estate. When the owners of the centre pulled out of the grand plans to redevelop everything including the shopping centre, Barnet - for all their faults - have made a conscious decision to push a lot of social and urban sustainability principles. Proof naturally in the pudding but it is quite an impressive development.

I have used the station a couple of times. It's notably dead and the west side is a very odd mix of industrial and retail, but the town is starting to take shape. It'll need a couple of flagship retailers I think.

It'd be shortsighted not to incorporate BCW into the scheme, imo. Cost notwithstanding, of course.

 

[jon0844]

In my experience of other developments, a lot of things promised often don't happen. Developers suddenly say they're not economically viable, or leave until the last moment - sometimes the developer even goes bust.

I really do hope it works out as the development east of the station looks very nice (no idea how expensive the properties are, or if they've all been bought by investors etc) and it certainly has potential.

The shopping centre is nice too, even if it looks horrid from the outside and really is from an era where everyone thought North America was the gold standard on designing roads and retail.

 

[norbitonflyer]

One of the other issues that I don't think has been mentioned are the Bollo Lane crossings in Acton. The crossings are a very short distance apart with the high possibily that the vehicles queueing for one crossing would block back over the other. Currently there are few trains on the freight line so it is not an issue.
Apologies if this not the right way to insert a screen grab. View attachment 199701View attachment 199701

A similar situation to that at Vine Road in Barnes, whose crossings, also less than 50m apart, carry an off peak service of 2tph each way on the Brentford Loop, and 6tph on the main Windsor line (with more in the peaks) If the off peak Hounslow Loop is reinatsted that will be 8tph off peak on the main line

 

[RGM654]

According to the PWI presentation, the northern Bollo Lane crossing (i.e. the one on the line to Old Kew Junction, New Kew Junction and Hounslow) will remain open for buses only as closing that crossing would prevent the buses on routes 70 & 440 from serving Chiswick Park Business Park (which is on the site of London Transport's Chiswick Bus Works).

The southern Bollo Lane crossing (i.e. the one on the line to Gunnersbury and Richmond) will be closed.

The PWI presentation suggests that Wood Lane crossing between Syon Lane & Isleworth would also be closed.

TfL has done some traffic modelling and closing those crossings is better than them only being open for road traffic for about 10 minutes in every hour.

There are alternative routes for motor vehicles, although the most obvious one is via Chiswick Roundabout, which gets very congested at times. However there is also some pedestrian traffic along Bollo Lane. What are those people expected to do?

 

[absolutelymilk]

With so many new people living there, the roads make it hard to get around the area and local communities (I assume there are some?) will suffer if most people living there only spend their money when they jump on a train and go somewhere else.

There are supposedly plans for another pedestrian bridge over the North Circular, but not sure when that will happen...

 

[Mr. SW]

Of more concern than the above to me, is dealing with the manned/mechanical signal boxes and the freight trains. I think that the minor descoping from the original proposals is rather to do with these difficulties and to get the service up and running as quickly and cheaply (!) as possible. After all, you can always go back later and add and improve things. Yes, there are costs involved, but sometimes you just have to paint your front door next year instead of this.

Additional: Two videos came up on my YT feed by Mick Lewis
Driver's Eye View - Felton to Acton Wells Jun - 2026 [sic - it's Feltham]
Driver's Eye View - Acton Wells Jun to Silkstream Jn - 2026
They are both very recent and worthwhile looking at.

edit for grammer

 

[kevin_roche]

Of more concern than the above to me, are dealing with the manned/mechanical signal boxes and the freight trains. I think that the minor descoping from the original proposals is rather to do with these difficulties and to get the service up and running as quickly and cheaply (!) as possible. After all, you can always go back later and add and improve things. Yes, there are costs involved, but sometimes you just have to paint your front door next year instead of this.

Additional: Two videos came up on my YT feed by Mick Lewis
Driver's Eye View - Felton to Acton Wells Jun - 2026 [sic - it's Feltham]
Driver's Eye View - Acton Wells Jun to Silkstream Jn - 2026
They are both very recent and worthwhile looking at.

Has the plan to change to ETCS which was mentioned in the PWI presentaion been delayed? I would not be surprised if it had been as they have already delayed installing it on the GWML to avoid having to reconfigure it once OOC is opened. I got the impression that the WLO would be set to open after OOC was opened on the GWML. Maybe the planning for ETCS to Paddington will be under review after the HS2 reset is complete and we have some idea when the station will open.

 

[zwk500]

Has the plan to change to ETCS which was mentioned in the PWI presentaion been delayed? I would not be surprised if it had been as they have already delayed installing it on the GWML to avoid having to reconfigure it once OOC is opened. I got the impression that the WLO would be set to open after OOC was opened on the GWML. Maybe the planning for ETCS to Paddington will be under review after the HS2 reset is complete and we have some idea when the station will open.

ETCS is already deployed as overlay Ealing Broadway to Heathrow.

I think on current timescales for the ECDP it is not a safe assumption to assume that Acton Wells could transition to ETCS before the WLO opened.

 

[kevin_roche]

ETCS is already deployed as overlay Ealing Broadway to Heathrow.

I think on current timescales for the ECDP it is not a safe assumption to assume that Acton Wells could transition to ETCS before the WLO opened.

I guess they have limited capacity to do things like that in parallel. Have they decided to delay the ETCS from Ealing Broadway to Paddington until after ECDP too?

 

[zwk500]

I guess they have limited capacity to do things like that in parallel.

Also that upgrading the signalling to ETCS means all trains passing through an area must be ETCS-Equipped, or an Overlay/Underlay provided for non-fitted trains (and drivers trained as well).

Have they decided to delay the ETCS from Ealing Broadway to Paddington until after ECDP too?

I'm afraid I don't know anything for why ETCS was not fitted between Paddington and Ealing Broadway.

 

[kevin_roche]

I'm afraid I don't know anything for why ETCS was not fitted between Paddington and Ealing Broadway.

It was planned to be completed about a year after Ealing Broadway to Heathrow. Then, they realised it was a very difficult job and that everything would have to be modified multiple times during the construction and again when OOC was finished, because the track layout was being completely changed.

Also that upgrading the signalling to ETCS means all trains passing through an area must be ETCS-Equipped, or an Overlay/Underlay provided for non-fitted trains (and drivers trained as well).

I expect they will have new rolling stock on the WLO and if ETCS is used will be with an overlay in any case, but they would like ETCS to enable more traffic through the junction with the other overground line.

 

[zwk500]

I expect they will have new rolling stock on the WLO

WLO (probably) will but the other services interacting with the route won't. Not just the 378s and 710s on the Overground route, but NR test trains, Charter & Heritage stock, and Freight as well.

and if ETCS is used will be with an overlay in any case, but they would like ETCS to enable more traffic through the junction with the other overground line.

In order to make a noticeable difference, this would also require the Mildmay line stock to be ETCS enabled, and for the ETCS to extend a meaningful distance around Acton Wells Jn to allow closing-up of units waiting an MA.

Future-proofing the area for ETCS is worth it, but fitting ETCS to the WLO before it's fitted to the NLL almost certainly isn't.

 

[MarkyT]

WLO (probably) will but the other services interacting with the route won't. Not just the 378s and 710s on the Overground route, but NR test trains, Charter & Heritage stock, and Freight as well.

In order to make a noticeable difference, this would also require the Mildmay line stock to be ETCS enabled, and for the ETCS to extend a meaningful distance around Acton Wells Jn to allow closing-up of units waiting an MA.

Future-proofing the area for ETCS is worth it, but fitting ETCS to the WLO before it's fitted to the NLL almost certainly isn't.

'ETCS ready' has been standard for new signalling installations for many years. It's likely such critical mixed traffic cross-London lines would be most suitable for an overlay solution; until all main lines radiating from the capital are fully equipped, there will be unfitted rolling stock to deal with.

On this type of low-speed urban route with close signal spacing, some closing up can be fairly readily incorporated using conventional colour lights, though it can be a more complex and expensive add-on than additional ETCS block markers for trains that are so equipped, as employed on Thameslink. ETCS would give finer and more optimised speed profiles for closely following trains, fully supervised for safety.

 

[zwk500]

'ETCS ready' has been standard for new signalling installations for many years.

Quite so.

It's likely such critical mixed traffic cross-London lines would be most suitable for an overlay solution; until all main lines radiating from the capital are fully equipped, there will be unfitted rolling stock to deal with.

Respecfully disagree. These lines stand to benefit more from ETCS Underlay solution, retaining legacy systems only for occassional moves much like Thameslink does. The mix of relatively short stopping passenger and long rolling freight means you want as many trains as possible running on ETCS.

On this type of low-speed urban route with close signal spacing, some closing up can be fairly readily incorporated using conventional colour lights, though it can be a more complex and expensive add-on than additional ETCS block markers for trains that are so equipped, as employed on Thameslink. ETCS would give finer and more optimised speed profiles for closely following trains, fully supervised for safety.

But are the realisable (Key word there) benefits worth the additional costs? I suspect they won't be.

 

[MarkyT]

Quite so.

Respecfully disagree. These lines stand to benefit more from ETCS Underlay solution, retaining legacy systems only for occassional moves much like Thameslink does. The mix of relatively short stopping passenger and long rolling freight means you want as many trains as possible running on ETCS.

Are you using the term overlay as per the GWML scheme, not providing additional fill-in block markers? I first heard the term underlay (apart from carpet fitters) on LU projects where it was used for the treatment of the Piccadilly tracks in the corridor shared with the District. As new trains were not yet on the horizon, the solution was to replicate existing colour light signalling in the new CBTC system, which could be removed later and replaced by additional CBTC kit when new trains were introduced. Is underlay now commonly used for ETCS schemes with signals and fill-in block markers?

But are the realisable (Key word there) benefits worth the additional costs? I suspect they won't be.

We're not yet at Thameslink frequencies on the LO network, but the traffic mix is a challenge.

 

[zwk500]

Are you using the term overlay as per the GWML scheme, not providing additional fill-in block markers? I first heard the term underlay (apart from carpet fitters) on LU projects where it was used for the treatment of the Piccadilly tracks in the corridor shared with the District. As new trains were not yet on the horizon, the solution was to replicate existing colour light signalling in the new CBTC system, which could be removed later and replaced by additional CBTC kit when new trains were introduced. Is underlay now commonly used for ETCS schemes with signals and fill-in block markers?

Overaly = Signalling design optimised for conventional signals, ETCS added on the top (with or without additional blocks)
Underlay = Signalling design optimised for ETCS, Conventional signals provided for use by non-ETCS traffic (intended primarily as a transition).

Thameslink has additional blocks, but is down in the Sectional Appendix as Overlay.

 

[MarkyT]

Overaly = Signalling design optimised for conventional signals, ETCS added on the top (with or without additional blocks)
Underlay = Signalling design optimised for ETCS, Conventional signals provided for use by non-ETCS traffic (intended primarily as a transition).

Practically, they'll end up with much the same signalling layout I think. You can't take too many shortcuts in any 'temporary' CL provision, or it can become overly disruptive to use it through the transition phase.