Crossrail - Any benefit extending eastwards?

[cle]

I thought Crossrail would create some capacity at Liverpool St?

There will be some peak Shenfield slows, but generally a lot more platform and station relief. What is going in their place?

Is there any ability for Crossrail trains after Pudding Mill to join the fasts and run along those until Shenfield, and then cleanly access the Southend line?

 

[Eagle]

The problem with that is that those would have to be extra trains in addition to the ones planned to call all stations to Shenfield.

Is there enough capacity in the core to do that? That's the question.

 

[joeykins82]

http://www.crossrail.co.uk/assets/library/document/a/original/a2servicepattern.pdf

4. Potential Service Improvements
4.1 A major benefit of Crossrail will be the release of platform capacity at Liverpool Street station that could be used to improve train frequencies to other destinations. The exact specification of these services will be determined at a later date and will not be the responsibility of Crossrail.
4.2 However, for the purposes of planning, it has been assumed that Crossrail would release paths on both the Great Eastern and West Anglia routes into Liverpool Street.
4.3 On the Great Eastern route, it has been assumed that a 6 tph service would operate in the peak period between Gidea Park and Liverpool Street. On the West Anglia route via Hackney Downs, an additional 6 tph are assumed to operate following the opening of Crossrail.

 

[cle]

Thanks - interesting.

I guess the route to Enfield Town is an easy one to increase without much in the way of conflict, and seems underserved at 2tph to there and 2tph to Cheshunt.

 

[Aictos]

With the longer extensions, I really don't see there being significant levels of outer branch intermediate journies (above and beyond what will be catered for by existing services).

I can't see people being happy to use overgrown tube trains from Milton Keynes, Reading or Southend.

I can't see "regional" trains working well in the core (Thameslink struggles a bit with this).

So yes, extended to the WCML and North Kent, but terminate at Tring and Gravesend. Do everything possible to minimise interactions with other services.

That's why the "regional" idea for Crossrail 2 is a bit barmy, and why I reckon Thameslink should be pruned- except there's no room at St pancras high level or London Bridge low level for fast "outer" services.

Talking of Thameslink, this is why I believe the Sutton/Wimbledon services should follow the model of the existing SWT Waterloo to Waterloo Metro services except run Blackfriars to Blackfriars.

Now swt_passenger, bald rick or Class377/5 can explain in more detail but I'm under the impression that splitting the existing Luton/St Albans to Wimbledon/Sutton into Luton/St Albans to Elephant & Castle/Three Bridges and Blackfriars to Blackfriars would not only improve the reliability of the Core but also increase the number of services around the loop.

*Note I'm sure there are more suitable places to terminate these services but my knowledge of the rail network isn't too good in that area*

The other thing I think would be good although I'm sure the guys above would give a reason to argue against it is to terminate the weekday Sevenoaks to Kentish Town by using the bay platforms at Blackfriars.

 

[Deerfold]

Now swt_passenger, bald rick or Class377/5 can explain in more detail but I'm under the impression that splitting the existing Luton/St Albans to Wimbledon/Sutton into Luton/St Albans to Elephant & Castle/Three Bridges and Blackfriars to Blackfriars would not only improve the reliability of the Core but also increase the number of services around the loop.

It probably would, but would be unpopular with people travelling from the loop to City Thameslink and Farringdon.

 

[Bald Rick]

I'm not getting involved with that hot potato (again)!

 

[joeykins82]

When Thameslink is operating 24tph between Blackfriars and St Pancras it won't exactly be a huge hardship for Wimbledon loop passengers to change trains, especially if it was offset by an increase in service frequency to turn up and go levels. The only valid criticism is that the design of the new Blackfriars station isn't really helpful for getting from platform 1 to platforms 3 or 4 unless you're right at the end of a train. A mid platform overbridge might've reduced opposition to the plans.

Never underestimate the capacity of people to see only the negative aspects of a proposal I suppose.

 

[cle]

When Thameslink is operating 24tph between Blackfriars and St Pancras it won't exactly be a huge hardship for Wimbledon loop passengers to change trains, especially if it was offset by an increase in service frequency to turn up and go levels. The only valid criticism is that the design of the new Blackfriars station isn't really helpful for getting from platform 1 to platforms 3 or 4 unless you're right at the end of a train. A mid platform overbridge might've reduced opposition to the plans.

Never underestimate the capacity of people to see only the negative aspects of a proposal I suppose.

Exactly. Not to mention that a good whack of people get off at Elephant for the tube anyway. And this will only increase as the interchange and area improve.

People will congregate at the front (especially) and back of the train for changing at Blackfriars. A doubling of service would soon see them happier, I think. It's change that people don't like. And it probably wasn't sold very well.

I imagine they'll keep as is for 6 or 12 months as a supposed trial, blame performance/conflicts and then revert to the intended plan.

 

[bicbasher]

The Sydenham line lost it's through evening and Sunday service to Charing Cross in 2009. However, they were compensated with the East London line extension with easier connections to the Jubilee line at Canada Water and a higher frequency.

Personally, Crossrail should stay at Abbey Wood. Let those passengers from the Dartford, Erith and Slade Green areas use the current services and change at Abbey Wood. This will relieve pressure on the current Greenwich line trains in the peaks benefitting those who live in Charlton and Greenwich.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Personally, Crossrail should stay at Abbey Wood. Let those passengers from the Dartford, Erith and Slade Green areas use the current services and change at Abbey Wood. This will relieve pressure on the current Greenwich line trains in the peaks benefitting those who live in Charlton and Greenwich.

I'm inclined to agree. As it happens my local station is Abbey Wood. As far as I can tell, the existing services are quite lightly used east of Abbey Wood. Even in the peak Abbey Wood itself is the first station towards London that trains start to fill up. Realistically, using Crossrail to provide additional services east of Abbey Wood, while useful, is not the kind of thing that should be a priority. The real pressure on that line is between Woolwich and London - and as you say, Crossrail, even terminating at Abbey Wood, will help that massively.

 

[NLC1072]

The problem with that is that those would have to be extra trains in addition to the ones planned to call all stations to Shenfield.

Is there enough capacity in the core to do that? That's the question.

There is indeed extra capacity to future proof the central section starting with 24tph which can rise (but for love nor money can I find where I read this!!!)

I did find this though which is interesting;

Crossrail station platforms will be 250m in length to accommodate 200m trains that will pass through each station, as well as enabling longer 240m trains to operate in the future as passenger demand increases. The mock-up of the Crossrail platform section is life sized, measuring 20m in length, 10m in width, with a ceiling height of 5m above the platform-edge doors. It also contains a 4m long side-tunnel entrance providing entrance and exit.

from http://www.crossrail.co.uk/news/articles/glimpse-future-as-mock-up-crossrail-station-revealed