Crossrail Station Operations

[Haydn1971]

Does anyone have any details on how the stations for the central core will work - I'm thinking 24 trains per hour leaves little dwell time for each, so will each central core station have double platforms for each direction ? And will passengers be flowed through from one side of the train to another - i.e. Entry on the left, exit on the right or visa versa

 

[Simon11]

24tph isn't a lot when you compare it to the Jubilee and Victoria lines which managed to cope.

No need for further money to be spent on extra tunnelling.

 

[Haydn1971]

To be fair Simon, the Class 345 units will have nearly three times the capacity of a typical tube stock unit - that's the main basis of my question

 

[Nym]

There are larger circulation areas and twice as many exits than most LU stations. Should work to buffer the paasengers nicely.

 

[Chris125]

To be fair Simon, the Class 345 units will have nearly three times the capacity of a typical tube stock unit - that's the main basis of my question

True, but at around 200m long they'll be considerably longer than most tube stocks and each carriage will have three sets of double doors so entry and exit should be pretty swift - it's a much bigger issue for Thameslink.

Chris

 

[NotATrainspott]

The platform-train interface will also be significantly better than on any other National Rail line in the UK - Thameslink included. All core platforms are more or less perfectly straight, there is no gap between the platform and the train floor and there are platform edge doors to ensure that the entirety of the available platform space can be used for passengers.

 

[edwin_m]

To answer the original question, each underground station will have platforms on the right in the normal direction of travel, linked by cross-passages into a common circulating area with lifts and escalators to the surface and other connections. Platform screen doors will be provided at underground stations, but intended to optimise ventilation and assist with fire handling. The platforms will also be higher than normal to allow level boarding (but not at suburban stations where this would be foul of passing freight trains).

A lot of work has gone into designing both the stations and the trains for minimum dwell time, as this is critical to keeping the service running.

 

[21C101]

I think it is station logistics that will do for the Heathrow Express.

Currently the plan, AIUI, is for four Crossrail services per hour to Heathrow, replacing Heathrow Connect and the HE continuing to run to Paddington High Level.

That means one every 15 mins, so you end up with the central core stations getting clogged up by passengers with large amount of luggage on the platforms, letting up to five trains go past while waiting for a Heathrow train.

Get rid of HE and you can have eight an hour from Heathrow to Crossrail.

In the longer term, once the western extension runs from T5 to Slough, I can see the whole suburban service from Paddington running via Heathrow, with Iver and West Drayton getting services in peak hours only.

 

[edwin_m]

I think it is station logistics that will do for the Heathrow Express.

Currently the plan, AIUI, is for four Crossrail services per hour to Heathrow, replacing Heathrow Connect and the HE continuing to run to Paddington High Level.

That means one every 15 mins, so you end up with the central core stations getting clogged up by passengers with large amount of luggage on the platforms, letting up to five trains go past while waiting for a Heathrow train.

Get rid of HE and you can have eight an hour from Heathrow to Crossrail.

That would probably happen in a rational world, using some of the Crossrail paths that will otherwise turn back at Westbourne Park. However BAA are no doubt making ££££ on the Heathrow Express, they have a track access contract that has several years to run, and to be fair to them they did pay for the branch that Crossrail is now to use.

In the longer term, once the western extension runs from T5 to Slough, I can see the whole suburban service from Paddington running via Heathrow, with Iver and West Drayton getting services in peak hours only.

This is also a good idea that could help with capacity on the GW main line. An alternative would be to extend the proposed East West Rail service from Reading to Heathrow - the shorter trains with longer-distance interiors might be a better match to demand on this section, and it opens up an interesting range of through journeys.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Watched the program about Crossrail last night, I'm surprised that they've not built the tunnels large enough to be potentially able to handle double-decker trains. Was the "eye of the needle" the only reason or was there other reasons?

 

[rdeez]

Watched the program about Crossrail last night, I'm surprised that they've not built the tunnels large enough to be potentially able to handle double-decker trains. Was the "eye of the needle" the only reason or was there other reasons?

I would have thought that double deck would increase dwell times hugely, if nothing else

 

[306024]

Watched the program about Crossrail last night, I'm surprised that they've not built the tunnels large enough to be potentially able to handle double-decker trains. Was the "eye of the needle" the only reason or was there other reasons?

Perhaps the fact you would have to rebuild the GWML from Paddington to Reading and Heathrow, plus the GEML from Liverpool St to Shenfield influenced their thinking

You would have to rename the program the £150bn railway.

 

[swt_passenger]

Perhaps the fact you would have to rebuild the GWML from Paddington to Reading and Heathrow, plus the GEML from Liverpool St to Shenfield influenced their thinking.

They might have been taken in by that comprehensive report they (the DfT) commissioned from Arups a few years ago that gave all sorts of details on why not to use double deck trains.

Routinely ignored by most posters here of course...

 

[Chris125]

IIRC it was confirmed that the tunnels are just about big enough for double deck rolling stock, if platforms and OHLE were modified with greater clearances, but for reasons that have been repeated many times here that's never going to happen.

Chris

 

[gordonthemoron]

double deck stock would require lower platforms

 

[TommyD]

I would have thought that double deck would increase dwell times hugely, if nothing else

I don't know where this idea comes from but it seems to have acquired status through repetition. I've travelled in Double-Deck trains in lots of countries in Europe and never noticed it be a problem. Not even in a heavily crush-loaded one (standees on the top deck - which is tricky to do!) into Zurich HBf in the morning rush hour!

 

[Ironside]

I don't know where this idea comes from but it seems to have acquired status through repetition. I've travelled in Double-Deck trains in lots of countries in Europe and never noticed it be a problem. Not even in a heavily crush-loaded one (standees on the top deck - which is tricky to do!) into Zurich HBf in the morning rush hour!

I think it was in the report that swt_passenger was referring too.

 

[swt_passenger]

I think it was in the report that swt_passenger was referring too.

It is. One of the major points made is that a potential UK spec DD train (designed to fit UK infrastructure widthways but with maximised height) would have nothing like the same space available on the lower deck for entry and exit as a typical continental design. Because of this the dwell times become significant, and the capacity increase is just not worthwhile - ranging from only 8% to no more than 20% depending on whether 2+2 or 2+3 seating is being compared.

With such low capacity gains from DD anyway it is almost always going to be more cost effective to just operate longer trains - in principle increasing from 12 to 16 car at 20m giving 33%, and more if fixed formation trains are chosen.

Found a link to the report: http://webarchive.nationalarchives....railwhitepapersupportingdocs/provevalddtrains

- although I guess anyone who's really mad about DD trains will just see it as one big conspiracy...

 

[edwin_m]

Double deck suburban units on the Paris RER have the doors at an intermediate level with a wheelchair space adjacent and steps up and down to the two decks. At stations with traditional French low platforms there is quite a big step up to this type of stock, but I think level boarding to the doors on a TGV Duplex which are on the lower level.

 

[Busaholic]

Double deck suburban units on the Paris RER have the doors at an intermediate level with a wheelchair space adjacent and steps up and down to the two decks. At stations with traditional French low platforms there is quite a big step up to this type of stock, but I think level boarding to the doors on a TGV Duplex which are on the lower level.

Anybody on here remember the one Southern Electric doubledecker on S.E. London services? I do, often saw it on the Bexleyheath line in late 1950s and early/mid 60s but rarely travelled on it, probably owing to it being used mainly as a peak extra. Last saw it (and travelled on it) I think in early 70s when I lived at Hither Green so guess it was on the Sidcup line: I do remember getting on it at London Bridge in the p.m. peak and groaning when it came into the platform because I was going to have to stand and it was a right performance when somebody came downstairs to get off, so from personal memory would not advocate them for London use.

 

[paulravuslante]

In the longer term, once the western extension runs from T5 to Slough, I can see the whole suburban service from Paddington running via Heathrow, with Iver and West Drayton getting services in peak hours only.

I bloody hope not! hock: There are many people living there that require trains outside the peaks!

 

[LLivery]

double deck stock would require lower platforms

Have you seen the height of platforms in Sydney? They are not lower than ours! We can't lengthen trains forever, I already see people standing on 12 car 377 Thameslink trains. Yes the 700s are coming soon but with over 1million extra Londoners by 2030, are people going to start wanting 16 carriage trains?

 

[ModernRailways]

Have you seen the height of platforms in Sydney? They are not lower than ours! We can't lengthen trains forever, I already see people standing on 12 car 377 Thameslink trains. Yes the 700s are coming soon but with over 1million extra Londoners by 2030, are people going to start wanting 16 carriage trains?

And that's why people want Crossrail 2. We don't have any more space, most platforms are now at their longest without undertaking huge operations to lengthen them again. I'd probably say trains aren't going to get longer than 12 coaches.

However, what we can do to increase capacity is have faster trains, with faster dispatch and turn around times. Other than that, there isn't much you can do.

It's why in my view, our current economy is partially balanced on the railways. Look at the damage that happens to the economy when the tube alone goes on strike and only runs a partial service. People rely on trains to get to work and if they can't get to work then the economy suffers. The only real way would be to change times of work, so have staff during the day and staff during the night instead of the current 9 to 5.



Anyway, back to the topic. 24 tph is nothing really, it's a train every 2 minutes 30 seconds, so say one train has an extended dwell time of one minute, the train behind is 1 min 30 away. It all depends on the signalling systems though.