ideas for a possible Hall Farm curve reinstatement?

[leytongabriel]

This curve, which could re-link Chingford and Walthamstow to Stratford, was the subject of discussion at the Waltham Forest Public Transprt Consultative Group (online) on 22 Sept. The council are keen to move things on, especially in view of the massive developments in the area which are in the pipeline. Tfl are saying there is an issue with platform availability at Stratford ( though there are two platforms currently used by Lea Valley line trains terminating there) and that estimated costs of NR reinstatement would be £400 million. So not a priority. LBWF say they have costs of just over £40 million. A huge discrepancy.

Are Tfl quoting an inflated figure to put everyone off or is the local authority figure hopelessly short? Any ideas /inf please?

 

[Ianno87]

Whilst there are two platforms at Stratford, one needs to be kept clear in the peaks for Empty Stock moves between Liverpool Street and Orient Way, so only 1 platform is available in practice. So the cost of an extra platorm probably needs to be included.

Plus getting into and out of Orient Way on between a 6tph passenger service starts to get tricky, so maybe a loop / third track to help with that.

I'd guess £40m just covers the curve itself, £400m includes all the other stuff.

 

[fat_boy_pete]

Whilst there are two platforms at Stratford, one needs to be kept clear in the peaks for Empty Stock moves between Liverpool Street and Orient Way, so only 1 platform is available in practice. So the cost of an extra platorm probably needs to be included.

Plus getting into and out of Orient Way on between a 6tph passenger service starts to get tricky, so maybe a loop / third track to help with that.

I'd guess £40m just covers the curve itself, £400m includes all the other stuff.

There is passive provision for 2 additional platforms between 11 and 10A ( where they want to build the Sphere thingy), but as it probably involves another bridge across HS1 at the end of the platform, that's probably where the £400m comes from. The additional platforms were an option on the Network Rail route study.

 

[Ianno87]

There is passive provision for 2 additional platforms between 11 and 10A ( where they want to build the Sphere thingy), but as it probably involves another bridge across HS1 at the end of the platform, that's probably where the £400m comes from. The additional platforms were an option on the Network Rail route study.

Possibly also need to buy the required land. Which won't be cheap around there.

 

[fat_boy_pete]

Possibly also need to buy the required land. Which won't be cheap around there.

LLDC own the land (and are the planning authority), so could easily mandate a concrete platform box at ground level for the developer.

 

[gaillark]

The Chingford line is my local line.
The through journey to Stratford would be hugely beneficial.
As for the costs quoted I think the Council's estimate are reasonable. The railway tends to price everything to a gold standard which quite frankly is unaffordable post covid.
Yes platform 12 at Stratford is normally kept clear but I do think that with some smart working and local alterations such as using two trains in one platform (11) and use of P12 sometimes and other times reversing the service in Channelsea loop with some minor alterations to infrastructure this service from Chingford could be accommodated. The shuttle that runs to Meridian Water also could have its turnaround time reduced.

 

[Ianno87]

The Chingford line is my local line.
The through journey to Stratford would be hugely beneficial.
As for the costs quoted I think the Council's estimate are reasonable. The railway tends to price everything to a gold standard which quite frankly is unaffordable post covid.
Yes platform 12 at Stratford is normally kept clear but I do think that with some smart working and local alterations such as using two trains in one platform (11) and use of P12 sometimes and other times reversing the service in Channelsea loop with some minor alterations to infrastructure this service from Chingford could be accommodated. The shuttle that runs to Meridian Water also could have its turnaround reduced.

Try actually timetabling all of that compliantly, and see how far you get. For example: Two trains in one platform means a 5 car maximum for each train. Pretty sure Lea Valley commuters will have something to say about that. Or shunting to Channlsea loop probably means knocking out a Felixstowe freight path or two. Pretty sure the Freight operators will have something to say about that. Etc.

The Council seens to have priced the curve and absolutely nothing else needed.

 

[Bald Rick]

Knowing a bit about this subject, allow me to help.

Are Tfl quoting an inflated figure to put everyone off or is the local authority figure hopelessly short? Any ideas /inf please?

No. If anything it’s an underestimate.

There is passive provision for 2 additional platforms between 11 and 10A ( where they want to build the Sphere thingy), but as it probably involves another bridge across HS1 at the end of the platform, that's probably where the £400m comes from. The additional platforms were an option on the Network Rail route study.

There isn’t passive provision for extra platforms, although there is space. And it does need an extra bridge across HS1.

LLDC own the land (and are the planning authority), so could easily mandate a concrete platform box at ground level for the developer.

Such a box would, at a guess, cost the best part of £100m, and would reduce the value of the land by the same amount. Which makes it a cost to the project. As an aside, the MSG Sphere plans are well developed, and would have to be binned and restarted were such a proposal to be taken forward. More cost.


The issues don’t stop at Stratford. On the assumption this would mean more services on the Chingford line, something would have to be done about Highams Park Level crossing. That something would almost certainly have to be a bridge. I also suspect power supply will be an issue. Finally, as @Ianno87 correctly says, pathing anymore services between Stratford and Lea Bridge in the peak is tricky at best.

 

[gaillark]

4 car services run off peak most of the time. Yes it would be a challenge but not impossible.
Anyway the point is you have to balance cost against benefit otherwise nothing will get done. There needs be some trade off. You could possibly divert 2tph via Stratford and run them through to/from Liverpool Street whilst maintaining 4 tph on the core route although at peak times might be difficult. The loss of calls at Clapton and Hackney Downs would not cause great hardship in having a through service still every 30 mins.
Issue at Highams Park level crossing could be resolved by timetabling up and down trains to cross simultaneously like what is proposed on the flat crossing at Newark.
Building a bridge at Highams Park would be impractical involving demolition of many properties and also involve some road closures . Closing the crossing completly will cause huge local traffic problems. The only economic and practical solution is for the crossing to remain.

 

[Bald Rick]

There needs be some trade off. You could possibly divert 2tph via Stratford and run them through to/from Liverpool Street

There isn’t space in the timetable to do that at any time, let alone in the peak.

Issue at Highams Park level crossing could be resolved by timetabling up and down trains to cross simultaneously like what is proposed on the flat crossing at Newark.

Which would screw up the timetable for most of East Anglia. I’m not exaggerating.

Building a bridge at Highams Park would be impractical involving demolition of many properties and also involve some road closures . Closing the crossing completly will cause huge local traffic problems. The only economic and practical solution is for the crossing to remain.

Indeed. And if the crossing remains, it will be difficult to run more trains over it because of the traffic problems.

It’s difficult isn’t it! That’s why Network Rail plans the rail network, and not London Boroughs.

 

[PeterC]

I thought that the Hall Farm reinstatement had been firmly consigned to the crayon box ages ago.

 

[Bald Rick]

I thought that the Hall Farm reinstatement had been firmly consigned to the crayon box ages ago.

It’s one of the whack-a-mole jobs.

 

[306024]

It’s difficult isn’t it! That’s why Network Rail plans the rail network, and not London Boroughs.

Or indeed enthusiasts, however well intentioned.

 

[Class 170101]

I wonder how easy it would be to extend and link Platforms one and two to the Stratford to Coppermill Jn line and extend those services to Chingford instead if Chingford to Stratford services are important.

Another perhaps cheaper option might be to build a Tamworth style station where the Liverpool Street to Chingford line crosses the Stratford to Tottenham Hale line.

 

[Ianno87]

Another perhaps cheaper option might be to build a Tamworth style station where the Liverpool Street to Chingford line crosses the Stratford to Tottenham Hale line.

For Walthamstow-Stratford, that wouldn't offer much benefit over the present route of using the Victoria line and changing at Tottenham Hale.

 

[Class 170101]

For Walthamstow-Stratford, that wouldn't offer much benefit over the present route of using the Victoria line and changing at Tottenham Hale.

The line isn't just Walthamsow though. Also how busy is Walthamstow Central to Tottenham Hale?

 

[Bald Rick]

I wonder how easy it would be to extend and link Platforms one and two to the Stratford to Coppermill Jn line and extend those services to Chingford instead if Chingford to Stratford services are important

Possible, but not very desirable. It means you have to lose P12,and probably P11. It leaves the issue of what to do with the existing services to Stratford, and there is still the issue of providing paths for the freight / ECS.

 

[Class 170101]

Possible, but not very desirable. It means you have to lose P11, and probably P12. It leaves the issue of what to do with the existing services to Stratford, and there is still the issue of providing paths for the freight / ECS.

Could see 12 having to go but 11 I disagree. I suppose losing 12 wouldn't be too bad if ARL services are extended to cover for removed Stratford to Meridian Water GA services. Even if 11 was lost (as well) and became just a track to / from Orient Way without platform just extending services ARL northwards in lieu of GA services I guess could be an option rather than having two terminating services end on end effectively.

 

[Bald Rick]

Could see 12 having to go but 11 I disagree. I suppose losing 12 wouldn't be too bad if ARL services are extended to cover for removed Stratford to Meridian Water GA services. Even if 11 was lost (as well) and became just a track to / from Orient Way without platform just extending services ARL northwards in lieu of GA services I guess could be an option rather than having two terminating services end on end effectively.

Sorry I go tthe the wrong way round! Edited.

Then that means short trains on the Lea Valley in the peak. Not desirable.

 

[Class 170101]

Sorry I go tthe the wrong way round! Edited.

Don't worry I think I read what you meant and didn't even notice.

 

[47421]

To save terminating / blocking 11/12 at Stratford is there any possibility of running Lea Valley / Meridian Water trains in a loop Lea Bridge - Temple Mills - Channelsea - Stratford - Temple Mills - Lea Bridge

 

[PeterC]

To save terminating / blocking 11/12 at Stratford is there any possibility of running Lea Valley / Meridian Water trains in a loop Lea Bridge - Temple Mills - Channelsea - Stratford - Temple Mills - Lea Bridge

That would involve crossing North London Line services in both directions. As much as I would love to see the curve reopened I think that it would only be operationally feasible if capacity could be released at Liverpool Street so that trains could run through. (Crossrail 2 perhaps?). As I understand it all the capacity to be freed up by Crossrail 1 belongs to Greater Anglia.

 

[Class 170101]

That would involve crossing North London Line services in both directions. As much as I would love to see the curve reopened I think that it would only be operationally feasible if capacity could be released at Liverpool Street so that trains could run through. (Crossrail 2 perhaps?).

It also causes issues with freight where the longest freights still foul Stratford Central Jns when waiting at L295 Sigtnal for access onto the GEML towards Forest Gate Jn.

As I understand it all the capacity to be freed up by Crossrail 1 belongs to Greater Anglia.

I don't think any individual operator can claim the freed up capacity as their own. It has to go through Sale of Aceess Rights.

 

[Bald Rick]

As I understand it all the capacity to be freed up by Crossrail 1 belongs to Greater Anglia.

The thing is, the capacity freed up by Crossrail isn’t useful, at least not yet. The only capacity released is between Bow and Liverpool Street, and even then it is only 1 platform’s worth (net), and only on the electric lines. Unless you can get additional services from anywhere to the electric lines at Bow, the released capacity is not able to be used.

 

[Cricketer8for9]

While risking getting the crayons out isn’t a possibility for the service not to be from Liverpool St but instead as an extension of the Overground? The purpose would be to serve Stratford (of itself) and as a connection to Docklands. If so does that help with platform occupancy?

 

[Class 170101]

While risking getting the crayons out isn’t a possibility for the service not to be from Liverpool St but instead as an extension of the Overground? The purpose would be to serve Stratford (of itself) and as a connection to Docklands. If so does that help with platform occupancy?

I'll refer you to my earlier comment I'm afraid

It also causes issues with freight where the longest freights still foul Stratford Central Jns when waiting at L295 Sigtnal for access onto the GEML towards Forest Gate Jn.

 

[Bevan Price]

While risking getting the crayons out isn’t a possibility for the service not to be from Liverpool St but instead as an extension of the Overground? The purpose would be to serve Stratford (of itself) and as a connection to Docklands. If so does that help with platform occupancy?

Would it be feasible - and less costly - to try and extend the Docklands line to an interchange station in the Walthamstow area on the Chingford branch ??

 

[30907]

Would it be feasible - and less costly - to try and extend the Docklands line to an interchange station in the Walthamstow area on the Chingford branch ??

ISTR that has been suggested - the route to run via Whipps Cross Hospital en route - but Google hasn't found it.

 

[Taunton]

Issue at Highams Park level crossing could be resolved by timetabling up and down trains to cross simultaneously

Which would screw up the timetable for most of East Anglia. I’m not exaggerating.

You do realise that when the Chingford line was electrified in the 1960s, it was 2 trains every 10 minutes. That's 12 trains per hour. Each way. Compare that to the 4 trains per hour of nowadays. Which of course was managed quite OK then; they also had far more buses going over the crossing than now. So even if there was an equal additional service to Stratford, that would still be only two-thirds of what used to be achieved. And, believe it or not, that intense service had been the same in steam days, with N7s.

Plus getting into and out of Orient Way on between a 6tph passenger service starts to get tricky, so maybe a loop / third track to help with that.

Now when we moved up from Somerset to the Wirral in the mid-1960s, there were electric services every 10 minutes from both West Kirby and New Brighton through the Bidston junctions, meshing together to Liverpool. Across both lines, on the third side of the triangle, came the steam-hauled heavy freights of iron ore from Bidston dock to Shotton steelworks. Right in the middle of the peak period (none of this Southern Region 'no freights in the peaks' stuff). Do you know, never any delay at all. All done with manual signalboxes, and loose coupled freight with steam locos, no fancy computers or anything.

Sometimes I just feel we look for non-existent problems nowadays.

 

[Bald Rick]

You do realise that when the Chingford line was electrified in the 1960s, it was 2 trains every 10 minutes. That's 12 trains per hour. Each way. Compare that to the 4 trains per hour of nowadays. Which of course was managed quite OK then; they also had far more buses going over the crossing than now. So even if there was an equal additional service to Stratford, that would still be only two-thirds of what used to be achieved. And, believe it or not, that intense service had been the same in steam days, with N7s.

Yes I know. Road traffic on Hale End Rd / Larkshall Rd was rather lower back then. Also Level Crossing risk assessments hadn’t been invented - if there was an incident at the crossing it was swept up quickly and dealt with as ‘one of those things’. It’s rather different now. A doubling of rail traffic implies a near doubling of risk.

It will be a brave person who signs a revised risk assessment that shows a doubling of risk, but not implementing mitigating actions, in the certain knowledge that any future incidents at the crossing would see them in the dock facing charges.