Euston approach track layout

[class303]

Hi,

I have been travelling out of euston a lot recently, and I am interested to learn about the complex rabbit warren of tracks on the approach. considering (almost?) every passenger train out of euston heads to Watford in some way or another (fasts, slows, DC, etc) why is it so complicated? Particularly interested in the lines that seem to "burrow" beneath any line that i am travelling on (electrified, shiney rails but almost never seem to have a train travelling on them).

They're fascinating, them ole railways!

 

[Eagle]

A place to start would be the track diagrams in the Sectional Appendix. Euston is listed in the LNW (South) file at the start of the first line.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

It was massively remodelled around 2000 IIRC, I believe almost everything was altered on the approaches in some way or another around then. A huge credit to the work however is the simple fact that it almost certainly means that you never need to wait for a path into Euston - I've been on hundreds of journeys into Euston and I might have had to wait outside the station for a platform about <5% of the time. Even in those cases it seems more like an instance of waiting at the final signal, unlike some other stations on the network where the layout means you're right up the backside of local traffic for the last few miles (and consequently get an awful run of signals).

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Hi,

I have been travelling out of euston a lot recently, and I am interested to learn about the complex rabbit warren of tracks on the approach. considering (almost?) every passenger train out of euston heads to Watford in some way or another (fasts, slows, DC, etc) why is it so complicated? Particularly interested in the lines that seem to "burrow" beneath any line that i am travelling on (electrified, shiney rails but almost never seem to have a train travelling on them).

They're fascinating, them ole railways!

The LNWR put in all the grade-separated junctions a century ago.
The ones furthest out sort out the North London Line junction at Primrose Hill (only used for freight these days), and the others give a decent run into the three groups of platforms at Euston.
Most of these were used by empty stock and light engines, but the 2000 remodelling brought them up to spec and now passenger trains can use all six approach lines, giving rise to multiple routes in and out of the station.
One thing they didn't get rid of, however, was the DC route in the middle, so there are still constraints in the layout.
Time that was dumped and AC used for the last lap on Watford services.

 

[dggar]

Here are a coulpe of links to a posting I made in 2011 regarding the Euston layout

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=678260&postcount=18

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=679609&postcount=20

 

[miikey]

Its a nightmare to walk down!

 

[rebmcr]

Time that was dumped and AC used for the last lap on Watford services.

I believe there have been murmurings of switching the entire DC line over to the Bakerloo. Either way, it would indeed dump the third rail from the Euston throat.

 

[Eagle]

I believe there have been murmurings of switching the entire DC line over to the Bakerloo.

Although to do that you'd need a service to pick up calls at Kilburn High Road and South Hampstead (usual suggestion is a Willesden Junction–Primrose Hill–Camden Road or thereabouts service, which could conceivably become an extension of certain ELL services from Highbury).

 

[swt_passenger]

Although to do that you'd need a service to pick up calls at Kilburn High Road and South Hampstead (usual suggestion is a Willesden Junction–Primrose Hill–Camden Road or thereabouts service, which could conceivably become an extension of certain ELL services from Highbury).

You should write 'inconceivably', for all the reasons previously discussed, e.g. there being no paths amongst the freight trains, and the practical impossibility of the conflicting crossing movements at Highbury etc...

 

[Poggs]

One thing they didn't get rid of, however, was the DC route in the middle, so there are still constraints in the layout.
Time that was dumped and AC used for the last lap on Watford services.

Where would the changeover point be? (leading question)

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Where would the changeover point be? (leading question)

I imagine it might be best at Queens Park, but South Hampstead would do.
I don't know if 3rd rail is still in place Primrose Hill-Camden Road, but that could go too.

 

[Eagle]

I don't know if 3rd rail is still in place Primrose Hill-Camden Road, but that could go too.

It is, as it's a standard diversionary route for LO NLL services.

 

[Trog]

I imagine it might be best at Queens Park, but South Hampstead would do.
I don't know if 3rd rail is still in place Primrose Hill-Camden Road, but that could go too.

That would require the rebuilding of the Kensal Green and or Primrose Hill DC line tunnels depending on which you chose as the change over point. :roll:

 

[jopsuk]

You should write 'inconceivably', for all the reasons previously discussed, e.g. there being no paths amongst the freight trains, and the practical impossibility of the conflicting crossing movements at Highbury etc...

Aye, you'd really need to finally get rid of ALL freight from the NLL, extend the ELL lines from H&I to Caledonian Road & Barnsbury which would want rebuilt as a four platform station, build two extra lines between Camden Road East and West junctions (there's an old alignment for most of the route) and rebuild Camden Road as four platform. Put in a AC/DC changeover point at Camden Junction (in case of emergency diversions). You've then fully got a pair of lines for Virgin WC and a pair for LM services into Euston, expanding to six lines further on, and no DC complications.

 

[paulb1973]

Here are a coulpe of links to a posting I made in 2011 regarding the Euston layout

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=678260&postcount=18

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=679609&postcount=20

Just looking at your second link to your posts in 2011 and in particular the diagram of the approaches to Euston after modernisation [in the mid 60's presumably] - has the 'Shunt Neck' and some of the Goods Loops immediately south/east of Primrose Hill Tunnel been removed since electrification?

Looking at this picture on Flickr [not mine] http://www.flickr.com/photos/duanemclemore/4405573467/in/faves-23917561@N03/
There appears to be a gap in the centre of the picture where tracks once stood with a few redundant OHLE structures in-situ. I keep noticing this gap when I occasionally travel to Euston from Coventry.

Similarly this Flickr link:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/16523911@N06/4155832419/in/faves-23917561@N03/
Appears to show the commencement of the now disused Up Empty Carriage Line in the same area. This line was formerly electrified - the tunnel opening nearer the Downside Carriage Shed and Euston station can just be made out today.

 

[Bald Rick]

As the individual who drew the layout on the back of an envelope in 1992, then wrote the papers in 1998 that got the money to do the work, I thank you for your kind words.

 

[Eagle]

Is this the bit where your pen went over the edge of the flap? :P

 

[Bald Rick]

Is this the bit where your pen went over the edge of the flap? :P

Couldn't afford pens in BR days. It was a pencil I stole from school. And we were lucky...

 

[MarkyT]

Although to do that you'd need a service to pick up calls at Kilburn High Road and South Hampstead (usual suggestion is a Willesden Junction–Primrose Hill–Camden Road or thereabouts service, which could conceivably become an extension of certain ELL services from Highbury).

If the Euston DC lines service disappear to Bakerloo, or (maybe more practically) to Crossrail via OOC, those inner stations could remain served by Euston trains under the outer suburban operator, if the tracks were converted to AC overhead electrification. That could also provide improved freight capacity by enabling some slow line passenger trains to switch to the (former) DCs for overtaking manoeuvres, and give more flexibility for infrastructure maintenance. That's all assuming OHLE will fit in the DC lines tunnels.

 

[Eagle]

If the Euston DC lines service disappear to Bakerloo, or (maybe more practically) to Crossrail via OOC, those inner stations could remain served by Euston trains under the outer suburban operator, if the tracks were converted to AC overhead electrification. That could also provide improved freight capacity by enabling some slow line passenger trains to switch to the (former) DCs for overtaking manoeuvres, and give more flexibility for infrastructure maintenance. That's all assuming OHLE will fit in the DC lines tunnels.

Which LM services are you planning to insert these calls into (bearing in mind you'll need to give them at least 3tph to match the current service)?

 

[mr_jrt]

First up, my preference is extending the ELL from H&I to Watford Junction, with the entire section from Camden Junction four-tracked and segregated.

The problem is the freight, with its need to run without stopping and to cross over at Camden Junction from the northern pair to the Primrose Hill lines. Or is it?

That freight joins the NLL at Stratford. The GEML relief lines between Stratford and the junction to the Thameside route are going to shortly be much, much busier thanks to Crossrail. That means the only way to get that freight to Willesden is to go via the Goblin, which doesn't touch the GEML at all. If it's going via the Goblin, then it doesn't need paths through Camden Road. QED.

 

[MarkyT]

Which LM services are you planning to insert these calls into (bearing in mind you'll need to give them at least 3tph to match the current service)?

Looking at the timetable its a difficult prospect! If not existing services, then a 'fill in' LO branded service, but run using AC electric units (and possibly manned by LM crew to avoid the need for a separate operator's depot at Euston). I still stand by the idea of converting the inner portion (at least) of the DC lines to AC though, as dedicating an entire pair of tracks to only 3 TPH on the final approach to a major terminal is remarkably wasteful, when parallel tracks are running at full capacity.

 

[Tomnick]

Aren't the lines used by Watford DC trains dual-electrified between Euston and Camden Junction?

 

[MarkyT]

Aren't the lines used by Watford DC trains dual-electrified between Euston and Camden Junction?

I believe you are correct, but extending the AC further out could be very useful (with suitable additional junctions around Queens Park).

 

[tbtc]

I'd never understood why there's still third rail at Euston, since the EMUs could surely changeover at Kilburn High Road and South Hampstead so that everything in Euston was AC (meaning no need for separate dedicated platforms for the Watford stoppers) - am finding this a very interesting thread.

Great station, very efficiently used, yet the only thing enthusiasts seem interested about is whether there's an arch outside it!

 

[MarkyT]

First up, my preference is extending the ELL from H&I to Watford Junction, with the entire section from Camden Junction four-tracked and segregated.

The problem is the freight, with its need to run without stopping and to cross over at Camden Junction from the northern pair to the Primrose Hill lines. Or is it?

That freight joins the NLL at Stratford. The GEML relief lines between Stratford and the junction to the Thameside route are going to shortly be much, much busier thanks to Crossrail. That means the only way to get that freight to Willesden is to go via the Goblin, which doesn't touch the GEML at all. If it's going via the Goblin, then it doesn't need paths through Camden Road. QED.

I can't agree with the idea of diverting all the DC lines service away from either the traditional terminus or a new cross London route (e.g. Crossrail).

In respect to freight interaction and future potential HS 1/2/ transfer traffic, I refer you to my idea for diverting NLL and GOBLIN to Kentish Town to avoid significant work at Camden and improve connections. This gives both LO lines a new interchange with the Northern Line and the Thameslink MML arm.

http://www.townend.me/files/kentishtown.pdf

At Stratford a fair proportion of the freight traffic is continuing on down the GEML to Felixstowe. With double headed electrics and maximum speed of 75 MPH, this traffic fits much better on the main (fast) lines, does not have to cross to the reliefs and is thus not affected by Crossrail developments.

 

[jopsuk]

If the Watford DC was connected to the ELL (I notice there's defunct alignment for two tracks that could be brought back, the only issue is at the junction at Kentish Town Road!) that would be a "cross London route"- albeit one that skirts the west end and goes round the eastern edge of the City. Could be a prompt to improve some of the Overground/Underground interchanges along the route- at Camden Town for example would give Watford DC passengers a choice of both Northern line branches before the other commuters into Euston get on the trains.

 

[Trog]

If the Euston DC lines service disappear to Bakerloo, or (maybe more practically) to Crossrail via OOC, those inner stations could remain served by Euston trains under the outer suburban operator, if the tracks were converted to AC overhead electrification. That could also provide improved freight capacity by enabling some slow line passenger trains to switch to the (former) DCs for overtaking manoeuvres, and give more flexibility for infrastructure maintenance. That's all assuming OHLE will fit in the DC lines tunnels.

That would require the rebuilding of the Primrose Hill DC line tunnels. You would also need a complete track relay, of both lines as they are only laid for lightish use at the moment. If your trains are going to rejoin the slows before Queens Park so they do not get tangled up in the Bakerloo service, your over taking loop is going to be a bit short, although the speed difference between the Slows and the DC may be enough that the freights will be well away before your passengers come out behind them.

 

[DXMachina]

I'd never understood why there's still third rail at Euston, since the EMUs could surely changeover at Kilburn High Road and South Hampstead so that everything in Euston was AC

Not all Class 378s have AC - only some of them are dual-voltage. Although the AC/DC units are used on Watford subs it could be they want to keep the options open. LO have in the past also used DC-only Class 508s on Euston-Watford

And didn't I read that a few of the tunnels on the DC line have very restricted headroom and OHLE would be an issue?

 

[Bald Rick]

I think you read it in the post above.

Just to confirm, AC equipment will not fit in the DC line tunnels at Primrose Hill.

As part of the Euston Remodelling, we did look at taking out the DC kit south of Primrose Hill Tunnel, with trains doing the changeover at Camden on the slows. Apart from the timetable constraint, there was also the small matter that Silverlink still used some DC only units on the route, and wanted to keep this.