How could Crossrail (Elizabeth Line) services be improved/extended?

[cle]

I can't see four tracking though really. Perhaps 2tph could continue on (but if those come from TL as well as the SE network, so much delay risk) - otherwise the best suggestion is terminating our 6tph Greenwich and 2tph Blackheath at Abbey Wood - with obvious ability to run through and dual-mode until Slade Green.

Or if four tracked, anything DC is only ever a to be a rounder. AC lines to Dartford (for Crossrail) and segregated in regular use.

 

[Trainguy34]

Probably very unlikely, but could the Shenfield branch be extended to Southend Victoria 4tph (every other train) and replace the Greater Anglia service 3tph or would it just cart fresh air around

 

[JonathanH]

Probably very unlikely, but could the Shenfield branch be extended to Southend Victoria 4tph (every other train) and replace the Greater Anglia service 3tph or would it just cart fresh air around

Would passengers for London from the Southend line be expected to change at Shenfield for a faster service?

The issue is capacity on the Shenfield starters to accommodate Southend line passengers, as west of Romford and Ilford they are already well loaded.

 

[PGAT]

Southend to Heathrow is a long way to go without any toilets

 

[Trainguy34]

I think it only adds about 15 Mins and up to 5 extra TPH

Would passengers for London from the Southend line be expected to change at Shenfield for a faster service?

Yes and no, if they live closer to Southend they could change for C2C which takes less time to get to London then the current Greater Anglia train or if they live closer to Shenfield they could change there

 

[JonathanH]

I think it only adds about 15 Mins and up to 5 extra TPH

Where does it add up to five extra trains per hour?

I'm not convinced all eight Shenfield trains extending to Southend Victoria each hour is necessary, or appropriate.

 

[Trainguy34]

3 tph currently, up to 8 tph if all Xrail services were extended

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Probably very unlikely, but could the Shenfield branch be extended to Southend Victoria 4tph (every other train) and replace the Greater Anglia service 3tph or would it just cart fresh air around

I'm not clear what the purpose of doing that would be? No-one travelling from Southend to London is going to want to travel on a train that stops everywhere between Shenfield and London. And the much smaller number of journeys to intermediate EL line stations are already adequately catered for with a very easy change at Shenfield.

 

[JonathanH]

No-one travelling from Southend to London is going to want to travel on a train that stops everywhere between Shenfield and London.

I suspect the OP isn't appreciating the number of commuters on the Southend line whose final destination is within walking distance of Liverpool Street, and thinking they all want destinations further west.

The same essentially applies with all the ideas that Dartford passengers would prefer to travel on the Elizabeth Libe, rather than to Cannon Street.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

As has been shown many many times before, the general traveller way prefers a through train even if its quite infrequent - look at how much outrage there was after the southeastern timetable change

That's the age-old issue between trains-from-everywhere-to-everywhere vs. more frequent services with a change. Probably there are some people who prefer less frequent through trains, and some who prefer more frequent with change. Personally I see no problems with changing PROVIDED that both services are very frequent and the station layout doesn't mean you have miles to walk. If a theoretical Abbey Wood-London Bridge service did run every 10 minutes, then both of those conditions would be satisfied if Belvedere/Erith/Slade Green became served only by EL trains every 7-8 minutes.

In general, trying to run trains to everywhere usually carries the disadvantage that you end up with irregular intervals between trains - as perfectly illustrated by the Woolwich line ever since Thameslink arrived there causing a much inferior service with often wider gaps between trains. And of course, disruption spreads more easily thereby affecting more people.

I'm not sure how much attention I'd pay to people complaining when a direct service is removed in this context - because some of that will be down to, some people will always complain if they perceive that something is being withdrawn, even if whatever's replacing it is just as good. The question is: If people have to change, can that change be made conveniently and without too long a wait.

 

[Benjwri]

I suspect the OP isn't appreciating the number of commuters on the Southend line whose final destination is within walking distance of Liverpool Street, and thinking they all want destinations further west.

The same essentially applies with all the ideas that Dartford passengers would prefer to travel on the Elizabeth Libe, rather than to Cannon Street.

Or the amount of people that aren't actually travelling to London. That is being seen right now on the GWML. As mentioned in RAIL 984's timetable review, anyone living Slough or further East has lost out, losing fast services to Paddington in the peaks at Slough, and anywhere further East has the frequency of services to outer London reduced to 2tph from the 4 which have existed for at least the past decade. Anyone living past Reading, as I do, has lost the direct trains to outer London which have existed for as long as I can find timetables. And anyone living at Slough and west of it seems great increased journey times. As a personal example I regularly make a journey from between Didcot and Reading to Outer London. It has always involved a change, but it was a short wait and pain free, taking in total 50 minutes. That has remained fairly constant until May, when the Elizabeth Line sent it skyrocketing to 1 hour 25 minutes, a journey which has painfully close changes which disruption often causes to last over 2 hours.

Not to mention the thames valley branches that have lost direct London trains, which although not the end of the world, often now have a change and a very long journey stopping everywhere and anywhere. The Elizabeth Line is great for anyone travelling from outer London to the centre, but for everyone else it hasn't provided huge benefits.

 

[PGAT]

Also for those suggesting terminating SE at Abbey Wood, the Elizabeth Line needs to be an improvement, not a compromise

 

[Horizon22]

Or the amount of people that aren't actually travelling to London. That is being seen right now on the GWML. As mentioned in RAIL 984's timetable review, anyone living Slough or further East has lost out, losing fast services to Paddington in the peaks at Slough, and anywhere further East has the frequency of services to outer London reduced to 2tph from the 4 which have existed for at least the past decade. Anyone living past Reading, as I do, has lost the direct trains to outer London which have existed for as long as I can find timetables. And anyone living at Slough and west of it seems great increased journey times. As a personal example I regularly make a journey from between Didcot and Reading to Outer London. It has always involved a change, but it was a short wait and pain free, taking in total 50 minutes. That has remained fairly constant until May, when the Elizabeth Line sent it skyrocketing to 1 hour 25 minutes, a journey which has painfully close changes which disruption often causes to last over 2 hours.

Not to mention the thames valley branches that have lost direct London trains, which although not the end of the world, often now have a change and a very long journey stopping everywhere and anywhere. The Elizabeth Line is great for anyone travelling from outer London to the centre, but for everyone else it hasn't provided huge benefits.

The only real loser (east of Reading) is Slough (in the peak only) and West Drayton (which no longer has the semi-fast service). The branches have lost direct trains for many years now and simply isn't compatible with the Elizabeth line timetable.

Yes anyone living Reading-Didcot going to outer London has lost out but that is a small minority of trips. At least it's a same platform change at Slough off-peak. GWR have decided obviously to not continue to run a service in the peak that matches the off-peak, preferably the Elizabeth line to take up that with a "semi-fast" Ealing Broadway - West Drayton train which does Paddington to Slough in 30 minutes. Of course GWR could run a faster service to the Outer Thames Valley but have clearly prioritised stations further down the line.

 

[NorthKent1989]

Also for those suggesting terminating SE at Abbey Wood, the Elizabeth Line needs to be an improvement, not a compromise

This is the trouble with the Elizabeth Line, it’s a fantastic service and much needed, but on the SE side of things the line has been used to make drastic cuts, in particular the loss of Charing Cross trains from the Woolwich line have hit the line hard, since changing at London Bridge has exposed how inadequate an interchange it really is and with large gaps between trains some stations basically have a half hourly service, the Liz line was supposed to be an addition, not a replacement.

I honest see little benefits to cutting SE/Thameslink at Abbey Wood, just to make way for the Elizabeth line, I see no reason why both couldn’t run alongside each other, not every EL train will continue to Dartford and I would imagine Abbey Wood would still be used as turn back terminal for the line, what I do see happening is that Slade Green, Erith and Belvedere will be served by EL trains only while SE/Thameslink will run fast from Dartford to Abbey Wood, similar to how GA trains run fast from Shenfield and Romford to Stratford.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 Jun 2023 ==

There’s passive provision to extend the Elizabeth line past Abbey Wood and I’m pretty sure the route is still safeguarded too.

No need to start messing around with new junctions (not to mention the CBTC problems) west of Abbey Wood.

Yes one of the tracks continues quite a way down toward Belvedere, I assumed that this would later be doubled at merge with the NKL

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Also for those suggesting terminating SE at Abbey Wood, the Elizabeth Line needs to be an improvement, not a compromise

I'd argue it would be a considerable improvement: Belvedere and Erith can typically see gaps of up to 20 minutes between trains. Last Sunday - admittedly an unusual timetable because of engineering works - they had 4 tph to Cannon Street, with regular 24 minute gaps! If they were instead served by EL trains only, then they would have a service every 7-8 minutes during the day and every 6 minutes at rush hour. And if that recast allows SouthEastern to actually provide a decent fixed 10-minute interval Abbey Wood-Cannon Street instead of the mess we currently have, then journeys like Erith-Charlton or Slade Green-Deptford would still be convenient to do with one single change.

 

[PGAT]

I'd argue it would be a considerable improvement: Belvedere and Erith can typically see gaps of up to 20 minutes between trains. Last Sunday - admittedly an unusual timetable because of engineering works - they had 4 tph to Cannon Street, with regular 24 minute gaps! If they were instead served by EL trains only, then they would have a service every 7-8 minutes during the day and every 6 minutes at rush hour. And if that recast allows SouthEastern to actually provide a decent fixed 10-minute interval Abbey Wood-Cannon Street instead of the mess we currently have, then journeys like Erith-Charlton or Slade Green-Deptford would still be convenient to do with one single change.

It’s an improvement for Belvedere and Erith, but not so much so for anybody else. To fit 8tph off-peak or 10tph in the peak you would have to divert almost everything away from Dartford. That includes the Victoria - Dartford service which now has to reverse at Barnehurst, or the ThamesLink service which now has nowhere to go. It also pushes away nearly every South-East London to Kent customer onto the car.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

It’s an improvement for Belvedere and Erith, but not so much so for anybody else. To fit 8tph off-peak or 10tph in the peak you would have to divert almost everything away from Dartford. That includes the Victoria - Dartford service which now has to reverse at Barnehurst, or the ThamesLink service which now has nowhere to go. It also pushes away nearly every South-East London to Kent customer onto the car.

I'm kinda assuming that, if you did replace SouthEastern with the Elizabeth line between Abbey Wood and Dartford, you'd do some rebuilding at Dartford so that Dartford could cope with all the extra trains arriving there from the West.

So on other words, the off-peak service pattern on those lines would be something like:

• 8tph Elizabeth line to Dartford
• 6tph Cannon Street-Abbey Wood
• 6tph London-Bexleyheath-Dartford
• 6tph London-Sidcup-Dartford

(With something from the Bexleyheath or Sidcup lines extended to Gravesend/Medway)

 

[NorthKent1989]

I'm kinda assuming that, if you did replace SouthEastern with the Elizabeth line between Abbey Wood and Dartford, you'd do some rebuilding at Dartford so that Dartford could cope with all the extra trains arriving there from the West.

So on other words, the off-peak service pattern on those lines would be something like:

• 8tph Elizabeth line to Dartford
• 6tph Cannon Street-Abbey Wood
• 6tph London-Bexleyheath-Dartford
• 6tph London-Sidcup-Dartford

(With something from the Bexleyheath or Sidcup lines extended to Gravesend/Medway)

But Thameslink isn’t going anywhere so where would that fit in?

 

[PGAT]

I'm kinda assuming that, if you did replace SouthEastern with the Elizabeth line between Abbey Wood and Dartford, you'd do some rebuilding at Dartford so that Dartford could cope with all the extra trains arriving there from the West.

So on other words, the off-peak service pattern on those lines would be something like:

• 8tph Elizabeth line to Dartford
• 6tph Cannon Street-Abbey Wood
• 6tph London-Bexleyheath-Dartford
• 6tph London-Sidcup-Dartford

(With something from the Bexleyheath or Sidcup lines extended to Gravesend/Medway)

I doubt there’s space to expand Dartford station itself. Even if there was, 2 of them need to be through platforms which will almost be exclusively be used by the 6tph to Gravesend and beyond. You could maybe use the down sidings, but they conflict with the through lines so capacity is limited.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 Jun 2023 ==

But Thameslink isn’t going anywhere so where would that fit in?

Exactly that was my point as well.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

But Thameslink isn’t going anywhere so where would that fit in?

Those Thameslink trains always seem to me a bit like an anomaly - trains looking for somewhere to go without there being a huge need for them. But I've long felt the most useful thing for them would have been to take over the Lewisham-Woolwich route. So in the scenario I'm suggesting, maybe you'd run them to Abbey Wood via Lewisham.

 

[NorthKent1989]

Those Thameslink trains always seem to me a bit like an anomaly - trains looking for somewhere to go without there being a huge need for them. But I've long felt the most useful thing for them would have been to take over the Lewisham-Woolwich route. So in the scenario I'm suggesting, maybe you'd run them to Abbey Wood via Lewisham.

The Thameslink’s should be diverted via Lewisham & Blackheath then onto Woolwich and beyond, it’s the only metro route of SE that is 2tph and was used for outer suburban services to Gillingham, so the Thameslink via Lewisham/Woolwich to Rainham is a much better fit.

But by terminating it at Abbey Wood you’d be mucking up services north of the river, and as I said earlier I doubt that all EL trains would be running to Dartford since a few would terminate at Abbey Wood still.

 

[SynthD]

Thameslink shouldn’t go to Lewisham and the Elizabeth line shouldn’t go beyond Shenfield. There is too much risk for picking up delays and losing slots in the core.

 

[PGAT]

The Thameslink’s should be diverted via Lewisham & Blackheath then onto Woolwich and beyond, it’s the only metro route of SE that is 2tph and was used for outer suburban services to Gillingham, so the Thameslink via Lewisham/Woolwich to Rainham is a much better fit.

That would mean completely altering its slot to fit in with the SEML, the ThamesLink core, the Bexleyheath line and the Midland Mainline. Reliability also goes out the window considering the crossing moves at Lewisham and Tanner’s Hill

 

[JonathanH]

That would mean completely altering its slot to fit in with the SEML, the ThamesLink core, the Bexleyheath line and the Midland Mainline. Reliability also goes out the window considering the crossing moves at Lewisham and Tanner’s Hill

Or just withdrawing it completely. Is a semi-fast from Luton actually needed north of the river?

 

[NorthKent1989]

That would mean completely altering its slot to fit in with the SEML, the ThamesLink core, the Bexleyheath line and the Midland Mainline. Reliability also goes out the window considering the crossing moves at Lewisham and Tanner’s Hill

The Thameslink whenever it’s been diverted via Lewisham has never used Tanners Hill fly down, always uses the SEML slows but not stopping at St. John’s and New Cross.

Thameslink shouldn’t go to Lewisham and the Elizabeth line shouldn’t go beyond Shenfield. There is too much risk for picking up delays and losing slots in the core.

Why though? The Greenwich line could then have a consistent timetable (4tph or 6tph) without the Thameslink incursion, pretty sure that they wanted Thameslink take over the Lewisham/Woolwich route and that due to the Greenwich line losing Charing Cross as a terminal it was decided to reroute it through Greenwich instead as a consultation prize, but it did mucked things up for a while, the irony is, is that the Charing Cross trains via Lewisham and Woolwich are no more since December 2022!

 

[mr_jrt]

Could space at Dartford for more platforms be found by diving back down into tunnel underneath? (Or even more fancifully, creating a dual-level station with platforms up above on a viaduct)

 

[JonathanH]

Could space at Dartford for more platforms be found by diving back down into tunnel underneath? (Or even more fancifully, creating a dual-level station with platforms up above on a viaduct)

Money is going to be an issue to do anything at Dartford, in what is a very constrained and awkward site.

 

[PGAT]

Why though? The Greenwich line could then have a consistent timetable (4tph or 6tph) without the Thameslink incursion, pretty sure that they wanted Thameslink take over the Lewisham/Woolwich route and that due to the Greenwich line losing Charing Cross as a terminal it was decided to reroute it through Greenwich instead as a consultation prize, but it did mucked things up for a while, the irony is, is that the Charing Cross trains via Lewisham and Woolwich are no more since December 2022!

Honestly ThamesLink has no business being in Southeastern’s metro at all. Luton to Tattenham Corner was very much the plan for a while until they changed it to Rainham last minute. That’s not relevant however; sending trains via Greenwich causes the least trouble compared to alternatives.

Anyways at Dartford, there’s no space to expand outwards (the platforms are already quite narrow) and pulling a Canning Town and having high and low level platforms would be enormously expensive for what it’s worth.

 

[JonathanH]

Anyways at Dartford, there’s no space to expand outwards (the platforms are already quite narrow) and pulling a Canning Town and having high and low level platforms would be enormously expensive for what it’s worth.

Technically, I suspect you could encroach on Station Approach, but the site is constrained by the narrow formation of the approach lines beyond the station.

The fact that the platforms are staggered, rather than adjacent, illustrates how tight the site is.

 

[PGAT]

Now that I think of it, some SouthEastern trains could turnaround at Northfleet or Strood as an alternative. Might need some extra networkers though…