Chiltern electrification alternatives being studied...

[12LDA28C]

THe simple way would be to bypass the ORR proscription on new Network Rail third rail installations by transferring the route to Aylesbury via Amersham to London Underground and operating it as an extension of the Metropolitan Line. Now the peak service has fallen off a bit there is room to terminate a couple of extra fast trains at Baker Street each hour.

ORR does not forbid extensions of LU 4th Rail because their operational practices are considered to mitigate the risk to the required degree.

Chiltern could continue to serve Aylesbury via Princess Risborough.

This has been mooted ad nauseum on this forum and is beyond unlikely. Given the increasing financial pressures on TfL, this pie-in-the-sky nonsense is even further away from reality than it's ever been.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Sep 2023 ==

Transferring a minor branch line that is largely operated by London Underground anyway is rather different to the North Kent lines and Thameslink.
And transferring NOrth Kent or Thameslink doesn't save the Treasury many many millions of pounds in capital expenditure......

A minor branch line? Clearly you're not a regular user of trains between Marylebone and Aylesbury.

 

[HSTEd]

A minor branch line? Clearly you're not a regular user of trains between Marylebone and Aylesbury.

Compared to the North Kent line, it effectively is.

Aylesbury has similar passenger numbers to Belvedere, let alone the rest of the North Kent line!

This has been mooted ad nauseum on this forum and is beyond unlikely. Given the increasing financial pressures on TfL, this pie-in-the-sky nonsense is even further away from reality than it's ever been.

It's no more pie in the sky than the idea of 25kV electrication of this line or the Chiltern more generally! Considering these projects is ultimately the price of admission in this thread.

And TfL's financial weakness isn't really material in the situation, if anything it makes it more likely because it increases the leverage of the Treasury.

 

[12LDA28C]

It's no more pie in the sky than the idea of 25kV electrication of this line or the Chiltern more generally!

No argument from me there. I expect to see neither in my lifetime.

 

[The Planner]

Because even with five additional footbridges, it is highly likely that 4th rail electrification will come out much cheaper than a 25kV installation, given the cost of the latter continues to rise into the stratosphere (£2.5m+/stkm?).
There will also be no need to electrify the section of the line south of Harrow on the Hill since it probably wouldn't really be used in such an arrangement which saves several track kilometres.

Given the downturn in peak traffic on the sub-surface lines post coronavirus, you probably could run it, at least partially, using slack in the existing S-stock fleet.


The same people who would pay for it to stay open if it stays as it is?
Closing the line is politically impossible, the question is what option costs the treasury least.
Electrification at 25kV will cost more than conversion to London Underground.

Where has the £2.5m per stkm come from? Its not that high.

 

[option]

While I am 100% with you on the fact that the Snow Hill lines are long overdue, I've never quite got why projects should be rotated round regions within certain time frames. The Snow Hill Lines should be done because they're an urban metro commuter line, and not because it's the West Mids's turn.

Not about it being anyone's turn.
That 30 years covers multiple governments, who have all shown zero interest in it, & now there's new DMUs for it, that's another 10-20years of not doing it. Is that just politicians of all parties being useless, or is there something inherently rotten at the DfT?
Why should a piddly station in London take so much DfT time/resources/priority? Why are they so weak that they can't stand up to a minister & prevent the wastage of public time/money on stupid schemes?

 

[Trainbike46]

Not about it being anyone's turn.
That 30 years covers multiple governments, who have all shown zero interest in it, & now there's new DMUs for it, that's another 10-20years of not doing it. Is that just politicians of all parties being useless, or is there something inherently rotten at the DfT?
Why should a piddly station in London take so much DfT time/resources/priority? Why are they so weak that they can't stand up to a minister & prevent the wastage of public time/money on stupid schemes?

The snow hill lines having new DMUs is not a reason to not electrify them - the DMUs can be cascaded elsewhere after electrification

 

[Vanmanyo]

The snow hill lines having new DMUs is not a reason to not electrify them - the DMUs can be cascaded elsewhere after electrification

Plus they were probably ordered at a time where electrification wasn't really considered, and new trains were necessary to cope with commuters etc.

 

[Railwaysceptic]

This has been mooted ad nauseum on this forum and is beyond unlikely. Given the increasing financial pressures on TfL, this pie-in-the-sky nonsense is even further away from reality than it's ever been.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Sep 2023 ==



A minor branch line? Clearly you're not a regular user of trains between Marylebone and Aylesbury.

Ah! That's interesting. I only use the route off peak. Is it heavily used during rush hour?

 

[zwk500]

Ah! That's interesting. I only use the route off peak. Is it heavily used during rush hour?

Aylesbury is a big commuter town. Pre-Covid Aylesbury (town) had 1.2m entries/exits, Aylesbury Vale Parkway 0.2m entries/exits (it's right on the edge, but is quickly being built up around).

 

[12LDA28C]

Ah! That's interesting. I only use the route off peak. Is it heavily used during rush hour?

Less than pre-Covid but certainly many peak time trains are full, especially in the evening out of Marylebone

 

[Mikey C]

Less than pre-Covid but certainly many peak time trains are full, especially in the evening out of Marylebone

If they were a normal London commuter train length, I imagine there would be plenty of seats to go around.

 

[12LDA28C]

If they were a normal London commuter train length, I imagine there would be plenty of seats to go around.

And what is a 'normal London commuter train length', in your opinion?

 

[zwk500]

And what is a 'normal London commuter train length', in your opinion?

Presumably 8/12 car.

 

[cle]

Aylesbury is a big commuter town. Pre-Covid Aylesbury (town) had 1.2m entries/exits, Aylesbury Vale Parkway 0.2m entries/exits (it's right on the edge, but is quickly being built up around).

That's very small usage for its population. And against other commuter stations in the South East.

I'd be curious to know about rail-headding into other places (Tring?), car commuting to e.g Milton Keynes. And also potential for suppressed demand because the service is so slow. But that is not 'big commuting' by any means.

A peak service via High Wycombe (only calling there) might be more competitive time-wise?

 

[12LDA28C]

Presumably 8/12 car.

Good luck with running a 12-car train on the Chilterns. No infrastructure to support it and no agreement in place to run 12-car DOO, even if any stations could accommodate it. Most of the stations can't accommodate 8 car trains either.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If they were a normal London commuter train length, I imagine there would be plenty of seats to go around.

If it were better more people would use it. A lot drive to Tring for a vastly better service.

 

[zwk500]

That's very small usage for its population. And against other commuter stations in the South East.

I'd be curious to know about rail-headding into other places (Tring?), car commuting to e.g Milton Keynes. And also potential for suppressed demand because the service is so slow. But that is not 'big commuting' by any means.

A peak service via High Wycombe (only calling there) might be more competitive time-wise?

There's a lot of road commuting from Aylesbury as well. But 1.5m combined exits from a population of 60k is not exactly minimal usage.

Good luck with running a 12-car train on the Chilterns. No infrastructure to support it and no agreement in place to run 12-car DOO, even if any stations could accommodate it.

Well indeed, which is I think sort of the point @Mikey C was making. Chiltern trains are much shorter than most other London commuter lines, and so the same number of passengers if they were on an 8 car train wouldn't be particularly packed in.

 

[12LDA28C]

Chiltern trains are much shorter than most other London commuter lines, and so the same number of passengers if they were on an 8 car train wouldn't be particularly packed in.

Which is rather irrelevant as Chiltern can't run 8-car trains on suburban commuter routes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Which is rather irrelevant as Chiltern can't run 8-car trains on suburban commuter routes.

They can however run 6x23m which isn't much shorter than 8x20m.

 

[The Ham]

Presumably 8/12 car.

As a comparison Hook (Hampshire - near Basingstoke, with a population of, then, about 8,000) had a minimum of 8 coach trains all day (2tph, OK, technically there were a few shorter services, but they tended to be shoulder peak services and when it was at a higher frequency of service, so one being 5x23m coaches but the last of the extra services which was at 4tph) for a station with circa 0.75 million passengers pre COVID.

Obviously that's not the end of the line, however does show that much smaller locations do see much better capacity.

 

[CR165022]

For the mainline the max they can run is 9 car and for the amersham line the max is 5, with a 6 max if the service skips rickmansworth or if the rear unit is locked out, I don't know if it's true or not but I've heard 7 or more car trains aren't allowed over the met, although then again I've seen a 7 on the met before so I don't know!

 

[12LDA28C]

They can however run 6x23m which isn't much shorter than 8x20m.

In which case capacity shouldn't be vastly different meaning the argument is void anyway.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Sep 2023 ==

For the mainline the max they can run is 9 car and for the amersham line the max is 5, with a 6 max if the service skips rickmansworth or if the rear unit is locked out, I don't know if it's true or not but I've heard 7 or more car trains aren't allowed over the met, although then again I've seen a 7 on the met before so I don't know!

Permission from LU must be granted to run a 7-car or longer on the Met. It sometimes happens if a Birmingham service gets diverted via Amersham due to a line blockage on the 'Western' route.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In which case capacity shouldn't be vastly different meaning the argument is void anyway.

What mostly actually runs is 2, 3 or 4 car, though, with one or two 5s a day. Chiltern is short of rolling stock and so can't run many longer trains. The 2s are a definite problem, though most other lengths are about right.

 

[12LDA28C]

What mostly actually runs is 2, 3 or 4 car, though, with one or two 5s a day. Chiltern is short of rolling stock and so can't run many longer trains. The 2s are a definite problem, though most other lengths are about right.

There are also some booked 6-cars. It will be interesting to see what stock arrives to replace the 165s in the next five years.

 

[Mikey C]

What mostly actually runs is 2, 3 or 4 car, though, with one or two 5s a day. Chiltern is short of rolling stock and so can't run many longer trains. The 2s are a definite problem, though most other lengths are about right.

A massive contrast to the GWR area where services previous operated by similar length 165s and 166s now are operated by 345s (9 * 23ish) or 387s (8*20m even regularly in off peak)

Chiltern are even down on units from where they were, having given back the 172s and missing a 165 and a 168 to failed Hybrid projects.

 

[Bletchleyite]

A massive contrast to the GWR area where services previous operated by similar length 165s and 166s now are operated by 345s (9 * 23ish) or 387s (8*20m even regularly in off peak)

GWR was, however, severely overcrowded with those short DMUs, and that was suppressing even more demand. Chiltern is slightly under-resourced, but not massively. The thing about the Aylesbury line is that it's really quite slow - just over an hour from Vale Parkway into Marylebone - and much as Marylebone is lovely, quaint and civilised it's also very poorly connected with only the Bakerloo Line for the Tube (though I'm sure some walk to Baker St for the wider selection there as it's not very far). Whereas if you're on the right side of Aylesbury you're going to get a far quicker end to end journey for most purposes if you drive to Tring - 37 minutes on a semifast (starts there, too, so never an issue getting a seat) and a far better Tube connection at Euston.

I really love the civility of the Aylesbury branch and the lovely quaintness of the "Metroland" Met Line stations, I've been using Vale Parkway on and off for a bit now just because it's, well, nice (assuming the purpose of my visit isn't alcohol consumption, as it requires driving there). But most people just want to get to where they're going as quickly as possible and ideally with a seat, and Chiltern just isn't as good for that.

 

[Energy]

though I'm sure some walk to Baker St for the wider selection there as it's not very far

Baker Street is well sign posted within Marylebone.

GWR was, however, severely overcrowded with those short DMUs, and that was suppressing even more demand. Chiltern is slightly under-resourced, but not massively

Chiltern would be fine with 5/6x23m. 4x23m is usually fairly full off peak.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Chiltern would be fine with 5/6x23m. 4x23m is usually fairly full off peak.

It depends what you mean by "Chiltern". 4x23m is likely to be very busy on the mainline other than late evening, but Aylesbury seems to have relatively low leisure traffic, and 2s are mostly sufficient on weekends, particularly Sundays. They're two very, very different routes that happen to come under the same TOC.

 

[Energy]

It depends what you mean by "Chiltern". 4x23m is likely to be very busy on the mainline other than late evening, but Aylesbury seems to have relatively low leisure traffic, and 2s are mostly sufficient on weekends, particularly Sundays. They're two very, very different routes that happen to come under the same TOC.

Chiltern mainline. Aylesbury via Amersham should be with London Underground.

 

[12LDA28C]

Chiltern are even down on units from where they were, having given back the 172s and missing a 165 and a 168 to failed Hybrid projects.

Also they no longer have the 'slam door' Mk III set and several units are out of traffic long term for repairs or awaiting parts.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Sep 2023 ==

Aylesbury seems to have relatively low leisure traffic, and 2s are mostly sufficient on weekends, particularly Sundays.

Sorry, but this is utter nonsense. Saturdays are often extremely busy, I've been on trains from Aylesbury to Marylebone which are full and standing.