• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

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

Status
Not open for further replies.

PGAT

Established Member
Joined
13 Apr 2022
Messages
2,132
Location
Selhurst
Why can't South Eastern have regular say 10-15 min gaps in the timetables like over on Southern/South Western instead of the larger 20-30 min gaps? It seems like that SE suburban services are the poor relation of the three railways south of the river.
Because on the SE suburban network all services are different. On the North Kent Line southeastern go to Cannon Street via 2 different routes, one of which is a circular service which has to line up with all the timings from the Bexleyheath line.

etc etc etc it’s too convoluted
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

NorthKent1989

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2017
Messages
2,172
Why can't South Eastern have regular say 10-15 min gaps in the timetables like over on Southern/South Western instead of the larger 20-30 min gaps? It seems like that SE suburban services are the poor relation of the three railways south of the river.

For the Greenwich line it’s due I think to how Thameslink is timetabled through the line, but not 100% certain.

SE Metro routes as I see it is in managed decline, years of zero investment in the stock, the only reason why we even got the 707’s from SWR is because they were getting other stock, otherwise we wouldn’t even those, stations along the Woolwich and Bexleyheath lines are emptier since the December timetable change, and the Elizabeth line seems to have more and more passengers by the day to point it standing room only by the time it gets to Woolwich and Custom House, not surprising really.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

Because on the SE suburban network all services are different. On the North Kent Line southeastern go to Cannon Street via 2 different routes, one of which is a circular service which has to line up with all the timings from the Bexleyheath line.

etc etc etc it’s too convoluted

The Cannon Street via Lewisham service is hugely pointless, pretty much only used now to reach Lewisham, picks up air at St. John’s and New Cross and crawls London Bridge most days.
 

PGAT

Established Member
Joined
13 Apr 2022
Messages
2,132
Location
Selhurst
The Cannon Street via Lewisham service is hugely pointless, pretty much only used now to reach Lewisham, picks up air at St. John’s and New Cross and crawls London Bridge most days.
Would you suggest it go to Charing Cross fast to London Bridge? The fast/Charing Cross lines are pretty much full in the peak
 

NorthKent1989

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2017
Messages
2,172
Would you suggest it go to Charing Cross fast to London Bridge? The fast/Charing Cross lines are pretty much full in the peak

Personally If I could and if possible I’d rip up the current timetable and revert to the 2018/pre covid timetable, it’s been nothing short of a failure.

Short of that send the Lewisham/Woolwich service to somewhere more of use, someone up thread suggested Victoria as that’s due to go 4tph, at least you’d be making new connections (cross South London links and all)

But I don’t want to go too OT as this is for the EL.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

As for the EL, has there been any suggestion for it to be extended to Chelmsford?

And could a Milton Keynes extension be on the cards once OAC opens?
 
Last edited:

PGAT

Established Member
Joined
13 Apr 2022
Messages
2,132
Location
Selhurst
As for the EL, has there been any suggestion for it to be extended to Chelmsford?
Post #122 suggests a Southend extension which is roughly the same story. It's too far, disrupts local services and has no real benefit.
 

London Trains

Established Member
Joined
9 Oct 2017
Messages
1,229
And could a Milton Keynes extension be on the cards once OAC opens?
WCML platforms at Old Oak Common (Willesden Junction renamed) would be a much better idea and it could all come together to create an enormous hub station at OOC with HS2, Avanti, LNWR, GWR, Elizabeth Line, London Overground and even Chiltern (down the NNML) all serving the station.

The West London Line could then be cut off from the North London Line and you could have 24tph (freight diverted elsewhere) shuttling between Clapham Junction and Old Oak Common, with Clapham Junction rebuilt entirely which would allow everything to stop there. This would connect the two hubs and provide thousands of connections that would avoid Central London, consequently improving journey times and also relieving the Victoria Line.
 

Horizon22

Established Member
Associate Staff
Jobs & Careers
Joined
8 Sep 2019
Messages
11,012
Location
London
Why can't South Eastern have regular say 10-15 min gaps in the timetables like over on Southern/South Western instead of the larger 20-30 min gaps? It seems like that SE suburban services are the poor relation of the three railways south of the river.

Needs a timetable recast and also to align with the rounders. It probably could (and should) happen even if it’s just marginally better spaced.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==


== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

As for the EL, has there been any suggestion for it to be extended to Chelmsford?

And could a Milton Keynes extension be on the cards once OAC opens?

Why would it need to? Shenfield is a suitable terminus with 2 terminating platforms and a sidings. Also trains aren't normally that busy after/before Romford. There wouldn’t really any beneficiary as there’s only Ingatestone and Chelmsford after Shenfield both of which get decent GA services already. It’s also only a two track section past Shenfield and Chelmsford only has two platforms. If it was to go anywhere, the Southend branch would be more likely candidate but even that is unnecessarily long, unlikely to ever happen and a long way from London.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

WCML platforms at Old Oak Common (Willesden Junction renamed) would be a much better idea and it could all come together to create an enormous hub station at OOC with HS2, Avanti, LNWR, GWR, Elizabeth Line, London Overground and even Chiltern (down the NNML) all serving the station.

The West London Line could then be cut off from the North London Line and you could have 24tph (freight diverted elsewhere) shuttling between Clapham Junction and Old Oak Common, with Clapham Junction rebuilt entirely which would allow everything to stop there. This would connect the two hubs and provide thousands of connections that would avoid Central London, consequently improving journey times and also relieving the Victoria Line.

Old Oak Common is about 0.5 miles from Willesden Junction so you’d need some teleportation or huge track curvature and demolition to get that to work!
 
Last edited:

London Trains

Established Member
Joined
9 Oct 2017
Messages
1,229
Old Oak Common is about 0.5 miles from Willesden Junction so you’d need some teleportation or huge track curvature and demolition to get that to work!
All that is needed is a covered walkway between the two parts of the station (OOC and Willesden Junction) with travelators (flat moving walkways) like they have in airports across the world - I wouldn’t move any lines, just (re)construct WCML platforms at Willesden Junction and rename it Old Oak Common.

The walk between the two parts of the station would probably be shorter than the distance between different lines at some tube stations.
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
7,436
The Elizabeth Line is a gold mine and a catalyst for new development so its not unlikely that the extension will happen
The Elizabeth line was predominantly funded for and by Londoners. I can't see any mayor agreeing anything that would impact on the core service.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

I seem to remember Thurrock councils wet dream of an extention View attachment 135887
That is the Thurrock council which, courtesy of half-assed wacky investments by the ruling Tories is bankrupt..... If they can fund it then perhaps it could be considered....
 

317 forever

Established Member
Joined
21 Aug 2010
Messages
3,286
Location
North West
An extension could be built from Abbey Wood to Thamesmead, even if not all the trains are extended there.

Thamesmead is one of the largest settlements in London without any type of railway. Furthermore, as so many more people need to reach Woolwich than east London, this seems more practical than an extension of the Docklands Light Railway from the Thamesmead area.
 

NSEWonderer

Established Member
Joined
5 Dec 2020
Messages
2,908
Location
London
An extension could be built from Abbey Wood to Thamesmead, even if not all the trains are extended there.

Thamesmead is one of the largest settlements in London without any type of railway. Furthermore, as so many more people need to reach Woolwich than east London, this seems more practical than an extension of the Docklands Light Railway from the Thamesmead area.
Can't be. If they even possibly could do this it would mean extending somewhat to Belevedere and Erith first to really turn towards Thamesmead and even then it would also mean that part of Abbeywood station would be rebuilt to remove the lower floor entrance and ticket area which is in the way of the platform 4 side tracks.

Thamesmead more likely will recieve the DLR as its imo the only one fully feasible to run thru.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
23,375
Thamesmead more likely will recieve the DLR as its imo the only one fully feasible to run thru.
Terminating the DLR at Abbey Wood after Thamesmead would provide a reasonable people mover, although presumably the various bus routes (to Abbey Wood, and North Greenwich) do this already.
 

NSEWonderer

Established Member
Joined
5 Dec 2020
Messages
2,908
Location
London
Terminating the DLR at Abbey Wood after Thamesmead would provide a reasonable people mover, although presumably the various bus routes (to Abbey Wood, and North Greenwich) do this already.
The only issue would be that DLR station highly likely won't be at Abbey Wood Station itself but end up like a Woolwich situation with Woolwich Arsenal and Woolwich Elizabeth Line stations separately placed.
 

SynthD

Established Member
Joined
4 Apr 2020
Messages
2,049
Location
UK
The only issue would be that DLR station highly likely won't be at Abbey Wood Station itself but end up like a Woolwich situation with Woolwich Arsenal and Woolwich Elizabeth Line stations separately placed.
Woolwich Elizabeth line station was paid for by the home builder company. If housing pays for the Abbey Wood DLR station then they’ll want the Elizabeth line connection. I think it depends on what further housing can be unlocked between the announced extension and Abbey Wood station.
 

NSEWonderer

Established Member
Joined
5 Dec 2020
Messages
2,908
Location
London
Woolwich Elizabeth line station was paid for by the home builder company. If housing pays for the Abbey Wood DLR station then they’ll want the Elizabeth line connection. I think it depends on what further housing can be unlocked between the announced extension and Abbey Wood station.
Depends. With Abbeywood they'd not stop services and close off certain roads to allow such a rebuild. The DLR would essentially end up going underground which would need some sort of rebuilding at Abbey Wood main station site.

However if indeed yeh a housing company wants the DLR they'd highly likely want it around their new buildings and with the current sites avaliable for such possibility it would mean separate stations. The distance wouldn't be too far tbh.

The caravan site is apparently set for demolishing to make way for houses aswell as plenty of undeveloped land opposite the caravan site that could to a degree be big enough for a new DLR link. However I'd not be surprised if it ever happened that the link would be more towards Southmere Lake and Yarton Way.

I'd rather the Extention takes the DLR to Plumstead or more potentially reconnects to the Woolwich DLR line which I'm sure wouldn't be too bad of a shout for an Extention reconnecting up with Thamesmead and Beckton.
 
Last edited:

NSEWonderer

Established Member
Joined
5 Dec 2020
Messages
2,908
Location
London
Abbey Wood is currently in the process of validator installation. The next few days will see installation of the long awaited Passenger Validators which should make interchanging to and from Kent easier now.
 

Wolfie

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2010
Messages
7,436
Abbey Wood is currently in the process of validator installation. The next few days will see installation of the long awaited Passenger Validators which should make interchanging to and from Kent easier now.
Good news but the gap between the opening and this installation shows a distinct lack of forethought about passenger requirements.
 

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
5,655
Maybe some way should be found of properly utilising the shiny platform 5s at Hayes & Harlington and West Drayton.

This to me feels like the most likely expansion on the west side - once they are all at OOC, if 1-2tph could be extended west, even in peaks, it'll be to that platform (at whatever stopping pattern - hopefully speeding something else up!)

Terminating the DLR at Abbey Wood after Thamesmead would provide a reasonable people mover, although presumably the various bus routes (to Abbey Wood, and North Greenwich) do this already.
Agreed. Overground from Barking Riverside is only 4tph and doesn't really get you anywhere that critical. DLR will get Thamesmead folks to Custom House (for CR), Canary Wharf and to the City in one ride. Maybe up to Stratford (Int) too, for all those connections.

DLR to Abbey Wood the other way feels like it would be more for network connectivity - but heading from Thamesmead to Custom House might be more intuitive and maybe not longer. That said, both Woolwich and Greenwich (and Lewisham) have this SE->DLR function too.
 

FlyingPotato

Member
Joined
23 Mar 2023
Messages
351
Location
Always moving
A pet idea for me that crossed my mind once is could the Maidenhead terminators be extended to Henley on Thames if platforms were extended and electric.
The 2ph lines up with the current GWR service

A lot of commuters use the Regatta line and it would help during the Henley Regatta

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

No idea about the feasibility of it
But this is speculation after all
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
23,375
No idea about the feasibility of it
Putting a high frequency service onto a single line isn't a great idea, although it might be noted this happens at Heathrow.

The demand on the Henley branch doesn't justify either redoubling, or 9-coach trains.
 

FlyingPotato

Member
Joined
23 Mar 2023
Messages
351
Location
Always moving
Putting a high frequency service onto a single line isn't a great idea, although it might be noted this happens at Heathrow.

The demand on the Henley branch doesn't justify either redoubling, or 9-coach trains.
Why would you need to re double the line? It already supports 2ph and 2ph is what I suggested

I used to commute on that line and and the trains were often standing and remember this would be an extension of a service not a brand new one
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
34,307
A pet idea for me that crossed my mind once is could the Maidenhead terminators be extended to Henley on Thames if platforms were extended and electric.
The 2ph lines up with the current GWR service

A lot of commuters use the Regatta line and it would help during the Henley Regatta

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

No idea about the feasibility of it
But this is speculation after all
Through services on/off the branches, ie Greenford, Bourne End and Henley, were all binned to remove the timetabling problem of down trains towards the branches conflicting with up direction through trains at the flat crossings. I very much doubt they’ll ever be back.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
23,375
Why would you need to re double the line? It already supports 2ph and 2ph is what I suggested
The Henley line can support a 2tph timetable where only one unit is involved, running into and out of the bay.

With only a single connection off the branch using platform 4 at Twyford, it can't support a through service at 2tph without additional infrastructure being installed.
 

PGAT

Established Member
Joined
13 Apr 2022
Messages
2,132
Location
Selhurst
If the Maidenhead terminators go to Henley that means they’re unable to go to Reading in the peak which will probably cause some trouble
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top