Future Routes that would be viable?

[Badger]

My thoughts on the matter:

Grey: station reopening (or new)

http://bb.ohsk.net/uploads/railwaymap1.png

Not to scale.

 

[Ivo]

My thoughts on the matter:

Grey: station reopening (or new)

http://bb.ohsk.net/uploads/railwaymap1.png

Not to scale.

Not bad...!

 

[transmanche]

It was previously double tracked to allow services from Welwyn and Potters Bar to go to Broad Street but this was removed once Broad Street closed (I'm not really sure what the intention in doing so and installing OHLE was).

The Canonbury Curve is used for freight. It also been used for stock movements between Hornsey depot and the West Anglia lines via the Graham Road curve.

 

[Lee_Again]

The Canonbury Curve is used for freight. It also been used for stock movements between Hornsey depot and the West Anglia lines via the Graham Road curve.

Part of my 'plan' for the Kings Cross surburban services would be to split and expand the existing Hertford/WGC>Moorgate services. I would have 4tph from both with half going to Moorgate and the other half going through the Canonbury tunnel (even if a rebuild is required) to join the new North London services. Almost like a mini Thameslink. Surely only good things can come from linking Hertfordshire commuter towns with South East London.

With some investment between Bell Isle and Alexandra Palace, making it 6 tracks throughout, it would almost be possible to grade seperate the entire Thameslink services from existing ECML fast services. This would limit any impact of problems in the Thameslink core from the ECML services.

For what it's worth, I would then route the 2 non-stop Cambridge services around the Hertford Loop, passing the slows at Gordon Hill. I would also run 2 new services coming off the Thameslink core around the Loop. This would only increase journey times by a few minutes (less than 10) but also free at least 2 paths across the Welwyn viaduct.

 

[Zoe]

I would then route the 2 non-stop Cambridge services around the Hertford Loop, passing the slows at Gordon Hill.

That's not going to help though as it would increase London to Cambridge journey times.

 

[sonic2009]

This kind of thread has popped up so many times.

 

[Lee_Again]

That's not going to help though as it would increase London to Cambridge journey times.

Not by a lot. And remember, until recent times journey times from Liverpool St were well over an hour. A small increase in the non-stop service to say 55 minutes would not be that bad a deal. The up side of 4 free paths over the viaduct would be huge. The costs of making a physical change to the Welwyn problem to buy 4 extra paths are just too high.

 

[Zoe]

Not by a lot. And remember, until recent times journey times from Liverpool St were well over an hour. A small increase in the non-stop service to say 55 minutes would not be that bad a deal. The up side of 4 free paths over the viaduct would be huge. The costs of making a physical change to the Welwyn problem to buy 4 extra paths are just too high.

There are quite a few rich people in Cambridge though that would not be happy with the slowing down of services.

 

[ntg]

The Canonbury Curve is used for freight. It also been used for stock movements between Hornsey depot and the West Anglia lines via the Graham Road curve.

Lots of lines are used for freight and stock movement.

 

[transmanche]

Part of my 'plan' for the Kings Cross surburban services would be to split and expand the existing Hertford/WGC>Moorgate services. I would have 4tph from both with half going to Moorgate and the other half going through the Canonbury tunnel (even if a rebuild is required) to join the new North London services. Almost like a mini Thameslink. Surely only good things can come from linking Hertfordshire commuter towns with South East London.

I don't disagree with the idea, the problem will be conflicting movements (and the consequent loss of available paths).

ELL & NLL tracks have been arranged so that they don't cross. To get a northbound ELL service over to the Canonbury Curve, you'd have to cross three tracks on the flat (s/b ELL, w/b NLL and e/b NLL). Even if you only linked to the NLL, you'd still have to cross the e/b/ NLL on the flat.

I'm not sure if there's room for a flyover there, or if its just the cost that was prohibitive. But I'm guessing that's why the ELL runs to Highbury & Islington, rather than Finsbury Park.

 

[Lee_Again]

There are quite a few rich people in Cambridge though that would not be happy with the slowing down of services.

It's only a few minutes. The fact that they're 'rich' is not relavent. There is a bigger picture to consider. And as I said, £2bn to build a new viaduct versus a fraction of that to add a few minutes.

There's also the benefit of reliability to services. Once Thameslink joins the ECML and delays increase the few minutes would be quickly forgotten. Also, added journey options like getting to South East London without using the tube would be a good sweetner.

 

[Zoe]

The fact that they're 'rich' is not relavent.

It's easy to say that but rich people can have quite a bit of influence.

 

[transmanche]

The Canonbury Curve is used for freight. It also been used for stock movements between Hornsey depot and the West Anglia lines via the Graham Road curve.

Lots of lines are used for freight and stock movement.

Quite. But you said "I'm not really sure what the intention in [singling the Canonbury Curve] and installing OHLE was".

Without OHLE, stock would not be able to move under its own power - so electrifying it makes sense. Without OHLE all freight traffic would have to be diesel-hauled, so electrifying this short stretch to allow for through traffic makes sense. And without singling, it wouldn't have been electrified.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Overnight sleeper services from St Pancras International to Germany.

Direct international services from the north to France/Belgium.

Which, of course, were both supposed to happen.

In my opinion there isn't a market for rail travel from the north to France simply because in the vast majoityof cases its quicker to fly. Sadly the same goes for international overnight services to Germany; Germany is not a popular holiday destination for us Brits and I can't imagine that people travelling to Germany for their job would take a overnight train with little chance to sleep.

 

[sonic2009]

Personally I think a Bristol - Birmingham New Street service operated by Either LM or FGW would work using a fleet of 172s 100mph version but with tables.

Stopping at Bristol Parkway, Gloucester, Cheltenham Spa,Worcester Parkway (if it ever opens) Bromsgrove, Birmingham New Street.

Gives a Direct Link between Cheltenham Spa and Bromsgrove

 

[Zoe]

Stopping at Bristol Parkway, Gloucester, Cheltenham Spa,Worcester Parkway (if it ever opens) Bromsgrove, Birmingham New Street.

Gives a Direct Link between Cheltenham Spa and Bromsgrove

I'd run it via Shrub Hill and Kidderminster.

 

[Lee_Again]

I don't disagree with the idea, the problem will be conflicting movements (and the consequent loss of available paths).

ELL & NLL tracks have been arranged so that they don't cross. To get a northbound ELL service over to the Canonbury Curve, you'd have to cross three tracks on the flat (s/b ELL, w/b NLL and e/b NLL). Even if you only linked to the NLL, you'd still have to cross the e/b/ NLL on the flat.

I'm not sure if there's room for a flyover there, or if its just the cost that was prohibitive. But I'm guessing that's why the ELL runs to Highbury & Islington, rather than Finsbury Park.

I know what you mean. It's a bit tight down by that junction. The junction would have to be grade seperated otherwise, like you say, the conflicting movements would destroy the benefits. It would be interesting to see what the costs would be. How about a triangle junction so that you could head west as well as east. Direct Finsbury Pk to Clapham Jn services; would take an age though.

 

[p.d87]

Id like to see better links from Glasgow south like there was pre Dec'07. Possibly extend some of the VT Voyagers south to Bristol from Birmingham N St ( i know there is no stock to do this) maybe every 2 hours opening up faster links to the SE and South Wales. (Avoiding the need to change at New St). Also with regards to the TPE Manchester services, hand back to the ICWC franchise, order more 350's and run a train every hour from both Glasgow and Edinburgh joining at Carlisle and running south as an 8car train every hour to Preston then every 2 hours to each of Manchester and Liverpool, (splitting at Carlisle on the Northbound workings) creating better links to the North West from central Scotland. Possibly have some running to Blackpool at weekends in summer to benefit the holiday makers. This sort of service in my opinion would be viable.

 

[scarby]

In my opinion there isn't a market for rail travel from the north to France simply because in the vast majoityof cases its quicker to fly. Sadly the same goes for international overnight services to Germany; Germany is not a popular holiday destination for us Brits and I can't imagine that people travelling to Germany for their job would take a overnight train with little chance to sleep.

Fair points. However, the Malmö-Berlin (spring-autumn) and Paris-Berlin overnight services seem to do fine, even in the face of numerous air options, so you would think London-Berlin would have a market.

Don't forget it also works in both directions - London is a pretty popular destination!

 

[Zoe]

Air travel isn't sustainable though so a rail based future needs to be planned for.

 

[Lee_Again]

Air travel isn't sustainable though so a rail based future needs to be planned for.

There will always be a place for air travel, despite all the noise made by the 'green' lobby. I agree that routes like London to Edinburgh/Glasgow would benefit by having a fast rail service. However, this is fine if you live in these cities. Trains will never compete with Bristol/Cardiff to Edinburgh/Glasgow. Or what about Aberdeen to London.

Internal flights to London should be kept to a minimum. Fortunately, security requirements are doing there best to make rail the obvious choice for routes like Newcastle/Birmingham/Manchester/Leeds/Liverpool to London by increasing the real journey time.

Yes, we should be planning for a rail future but only where it is realistic and economic to do so.

 

[Zoe]

Yes, we should be planning for a rail future but only where it is realistic and economic to do so.

With climate change concerns I'm not sure that you can justify not doing anything due to economic reasons.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Fair points. However, the Malmö-Berlin (spring-autumn) and Paris-Berlin overnight services seem to do fine, even in the face of numerous air options, so you would think London-Berlin would have a market.

Don't forget it also works in both directions - London is a pretty popular destination!

Attitudes to rail travel are different in this country to those on the continent though (my German son would confirm this I think). It would be interesting to see the break down of the various socio-economic groups using those services; its hard to imagine people taking an overnight train between Paris and Berlin if they could afford to fly.

 

[northwichcat]

If that's the case you clearly haven't been adventurous enough. I would like to see a Runcorn East to Ascot service going to Warrington, Settle, Carlisle, Barrow, Lancaster, Clitheroe, Wakefield, Doncaster, Corby, Bedford, Disneyland, Bushey, Willesden Jct, Reading West and Martins Heron. With additional bi-hourly extensions to Scandanavia and St Austells left nostril.

I'd have it going around in circles a bit more and going through key stations (not stopping)

It could start at Chester but not pick up any passengers until Runcorn East, pick up at Warrington Bank Quay, continue to Manchester (not stopping), down to Crewe calling only at Goostrey, do a reversal at Crewe (without picking up or setting down passengers), pick up at Hartford, go through Warrington Bank Quay. Head off in the direction of Liverpool calling at Rainhill, then in to Lime Street and sit there for a couple of hours. Then it can pick up the pace and go to Preston express via Wigan, make a trip to Blackpool South, go back to Preston, up to Lancaster and Carnforth. At Carnforth the conductor gets off and points at the famous clock for 10 minutes, he/she then goes for a coffee break before the train continues onwards.....

 

[RichmondCommu]

With climate change concerns I'm not sure that you can justify not doing anything due to economic reasons.

When families are booking holidays to hot and sunny destinations climate change concerns are a pretty low priority. Every year my family and I take a holiday to the south of France; there is no way my wife and kids would agree to take the train from London to Nice. The train simply takes too long and dragging cases on the Paris Metro is not fun.

 

[ntg]

Quite. But you said "I'm not really sure what the intention in [singling the Canonbury Curve] and installing OHLE was".

Without OHLE, stock would not be able to move under its own power - so electrifying it makes sense. Without OHLE all freight traffic would have to be diesel-hauled, so electrifying this short stretch to allow for through traffic makes sense. And without singling, it wouldn't have been electrified.

Ah I follow, sorry for my confusion. That's true. I guess it made sense given I imagine not many customer were travelling from say, New Barnet to Shoreditch, so it was always the City as the post popular destination which the NCL accommodated before, but still, all those stairs at Finsbury Park and Highbury just to get from the ECML to LO on the Victoria is not that convenient.

 

[swcovas]

The Swansea District line with new (parkway) stations serving the very populated areas of North Swansea with as, the most basic service, a Llanelli - Port Talbot service. I know the idea has been mooted over the years but it could surely be viable.

 

[OxtedL]

I was under the impression that the Hertford Loop currently extended journey times by ~20 minutes.

 

[ainsworth74]

When families are booking holidays to hot and sunny destinations climate change concerns are a pretty low priority. Every year my family and I take a holiday to the south of France; there is no way my wife and kids would agree to take the train from London to Nice. The train simply takes too long and dragging cases on the Paris Metro is not fun.

I don't really agree with Zoe on much when it comes to climate change but here I do think she has a point. I'm not sure if the cause will be due to climate change concerns but I do think that the future of cheap short-haul air travel is not bright. Increasing oil prices are almost certainly going to mean that the days of being able to fly from the UK to the South of France or Cyprus or any of those other islands for fifty quid are going to come to end sometime in the next twenty years or so. It might well be that you're faced with either spending thousands on flying to Nice or hundreds on taking the train. Personally in that situation I know which I would choose

 

[150222]

Are there any routes you'd like to see coming up in the future?
I'd like Glasgow-Euston stopping services, as well as Virgin Trains Euston-Inverness/Aberdeen. I'm also in favor of Windemere-Weymouth via Manchester, Heald Green, Crewe, and Birmingham. Finally I would like to see Brighton-Glasgow Airport via City Thameslink, Peterborough, Stockport, Manchester Victoria and the WCML.
Thoughts? Any more?

I don't think that diesals are allowed in the Thameslink tunnel?