LU district line tactic?

[pethadine82]

I couldn't help wondering that over the Xmas period Piccadilly lines were diverted to Ealing Broadway.
Also LU are inviting comments on stopping trains at intermediate stations between Hammersmith and Acton town.

No new trains for the Piccadilly line have been ordered, and the 24 hour tube service will only go to Heathrow.

I can't help but wonder if it is the intention of LU or TFL to extend the District line to Rayners Lane / Uxbridge and to have the Piccadilly line running to Heathrow / shuttle service to Ealing Broadway.
This means that passengers from South Harrow downwards will have slower journeys, just as how LU have removed off peak fast services from Amersham / Chesham / Moor Park .
Comments welcome

 

[telstarbox]

There was a post on 'London Reconnections' about this which has now disappeared.

 

[Mojo]

As far as I'm aware the consultation was only about stopping Piccadilly trains at Turnham Green, not all of the intermediate stations.

There are a few speed restrictions that apply to Sub-surface stock on the South Harrow branch, but not to Tube stock, however this is only in a few locations so not insurmountable even if it was not fixed.

I have to admit I've not heard any suggestions about the Piccadilly line running to Ealing Broadway but some people have mentioned total segregation of the lines, so the Piccadilly would only run on the fasts and the District would only run on the locals, and the District would take over the South Harrow branch so all Piccadilly trains would go to Heathrow. That does however leave the question about how trains would reverse at Acton Town, and who would have use of 23, 22 & 21 siding (to the East), and 26 siding (to the West).

 

[NeilWatson]

There's an interesting post on this subject on the Station Master blog: http://www.stationmasterapp.com/blog/2014/01/piccadilly-to-ealing-broadway-permanently/

 

[Vicpaul]

There was a lot of talk while I was driving for them of swapping the pic to Ealing and the district up to rayners lane and uxbridge so it's definitely been thought about

 

[tractakid]

There's an interesting post on this subject on the Station Master blog: http://www.stationmasterapp.com/blog/2014/01/piccadilly-to-ealing-broadway-permanently/

I was wondering if the district service pattern idea mentioned would work, and if so, at what frequencies?

 

[jopsuk]

If this were done, Acton Town could have the platforms re built to be step free too (District only 1 & 4, Picadilly 2 & 3)

You'd almost certainly still have to have shared track and platforms though Ealing Common, as making the whole stretch four track would be rather expensive. However, if it was done, you'd want to use the existing flyovers at Acton, making the District the easternmost pair of tracks- access to the depot.

If this was done (including four track through Ealing), would this then mean that at no point on the network would S-Stock share platforms with Tube stock? Obviously tube stock would still share with mainline on the Watford DC and S-Stock with mainline to Richmond and Amersham.

 

[Nym]

Need I mention that with the onset of S Stock, Power Upgrades and the ATC Project (when it's decided who's doing it) will mean the District Line and Piccadilly Line will likely have very similar journey times between Acton Town and Hammersmith, especially when the picc starts getting congested if it's running with the current conventional signalling and the sigs changes lift the speed restrictions on the District.

 

[tranzitjim]

A question, at Earling Broadway, would it be possible for Pic trains to share with Central line on their three platforms?

Would it be reasonable to replace Rayners lane with District, retain District to Earling as well as diverting Piccadilly there as well?

If we have District trains to Rayners lane and Uxbridge, would we see S7 or S8 stock, or may we see a mix of the two?

 

[Vicpaul]

Being the "money" line only changes that benefit the airport will go through

 

[Nym]

A question, at Earling Broadway, would it be possible for Pic trains to share with Central line on their three platforms?

No, you would need to at minimum for the current tripcock protection not all steps included;

Fit westrace interlocking to the SSR lines and Central Line if not already fitted at EAB.
Overlay WT interlocking with CL sigs and provide an all headed section with no BMBs back to the next auto section; proberbly Acton Town & Park Royal also with westrace.
Overlay and interlock trainstops into the westrace ladder map against the appropriate relays.

Post ATC you'd need to overlay a 'new' ATP system with the 25 year old Central Line coded track.

 

[jopsuk]

If we have District trains to Rayners lane and Uxbridge, would we see S7 or S8 stock, or may we see a mix of the two?

S7, as I don't think S8 would work on the south side of the Circle or east of Tower Hill? Might be possible to modify or use the SDO function, but more likely is that S7 would be used. Circle is set up for S8 operation only between Baker Street and Aldgate.

 

[Chris125]

You'd almost certainly still have to have shared track and platforms though Ealing Common, as making the whole stretch four track would be rather expensive.

Exactly - swapping the Piccadilly and District's western branches would not segregate them, as they'd still have to share the line through Ealing Common.

Hence the suggestion in the latest London Reconnections blog - 'Upgrading the Piccadilly' - that LU are looking at the Piccadilly operating to Ealing Broadway as well as Uxbridge.

There are various reasons why this may seem, initially, to be a bad idea. Most notably:

- The District Line will have only just been resignalled and now it looks like the branch to Ealing Broadway will need resignalling again.

- Some journeys such as Richmond to Ealing Broadway would involve going all the way to Hammersmith to change.

- Chiswick Park station would need to be added to the Piccadilly Line, which would mean platform height alterations and new points so the Piccadilly Line would call there. This would not be a popular move with most station users who would probably see their daily journey involving a change back onto the District Line at Hammersmith or Barons Court.

- Ealing Common depot is the depot for the District Line on the west side of London. If the Piccadilly Line goes to Ealing Broadway instead, then the District Line depot will not be on the line it serves

- The Piccadilly Line serves Heathrow. One would not want additional branches on the Piccadilly Line if it meant lowering the proportion of trains serve this busy transport hub.

- The Piccadilly Line effectively already has three ultimate destinations in the west (Heathow Terminal 5, Heathrow terminal 4 and Uxbridge). A fourth would make operating the line even more difficult.

The counter arguments, however, put this proposal in a different light:

- Given that this is a long term plan there is no need to re-signal the Ealing Broadway branch twice. For example, knowing the long term plan, one could continue to have District Line trains driven manually between Acton Town and Ealing Broadway until the Piccadilly takes over.

- Subsequent to this the strategy being adopted it now actually looks more and more likely like that either the same signalling system will be used for both lines or at least there will be a higher level of compatibility making this less of an issue.

- The problem of longer journeys involving a change at Hammersmith and doubling back could be eliminated by stopping all Piccadilly Line trains at Turnham Green. This would also eliminate the current situation when Piccadilly Line trains only stop at Turnham Green at certain times.

- The platforms for Chiswick Park could be relocated on the Richmond branch. Furthermore, by diverting all former District Line Ealing Broadway trains to Richmond the service from Chiswick Park would be much better than previously with double the number of trains.

- The fact that the depot isn’t on the line doesn’t really matter. In west London many drivers book on and off at Earls Court so many shifts would be unaffected. There would be some “dead running” but this cannot be avoided.

- One can only send a limited number of trains to Heathrow. Due to passengers typically being unfamiliar with the tube, possibly jetlagged and also having a lot of luggage you are never going to be able to run that many trains to Heathrow anyway as the dwell times have to be longer. Even if the Piccadilly only runs a maximum 32tph there are plenty of trains to serve Uxbridge and Ealing Broadway.

- In 2023 the concession for Heathrow Express expires. It is not currently clear what will happen then, but presumably the mayor would be free to run more Crossrail services to Heathrow – and without charging a fares premium. If that were to happen, and given that there is little chance of any significant capacity expansion at Heathrow in the short to medium term, then it could reasonably be expected that the number of passengers on the

- Heathrow branch of the Piccadilly Line would actually go down.
The number of trains required to serve Ealing Broadway will not be that great if passengers transfer to Crossrail, so it wouldn’t take many trains to provide an adequate service.

- The fact that the branches of the Piccadilly line are imbalanced is irrelevant. If you run 32tph through the central area then you need the facility to turn round 32tph on the western branches regardless of what is happening on the east side of the line. You are not going to need more than 8tph for Uxbridge and they need to dovetail in with the 16tph on the Metropolitan Line to Uxbridge. There is a limit to what you can run to Heathrow so in practice you can also serve Ealing Broadway without other branches suffering.

The main advantages of Piccadilly Line trains serving Ealing Broadway instead of the District Line are:

- It makes the Piccadilly Line completely independent of the District Line for normal daily working.

- The District Line can run 16tph to Richmond in the peak period instead of the currently inadequate 8tph.

Chris

 

[tranzitjim]

Would a solution be to have District line trains operate to Heathrow, or even a combination of District and Piccadilly?

District line trains being larger, should naturally carry more, so you would need a lower frequency.

 

[edwin_m]

Unfortunately the Heathrow Piccadillly tunnels are only to "tube" dimensions so can't take surface stock. Rather a shame they built it that way as the larger stock would probably have been more suitable for the long run and have more room for luggage.

 

[jopsuk]

Any "ideal" solution at the west end of the District and Picadilly line would see complete seperation, allowing them to use different signalling systems (so that the Pic can go to UTO) and also so that both lines have the potential to have step free platforms (the shared District/Overground section would possibly remain an issue, I doubt floor height is the same on a 378 and S-Stock). That's why, ignoring every other issue, district to Uxbridge and a four-track section through Ealing Common makes sense (unless you start asking ho much it would cost)

 

[joeykins82]

I wonder whether we could see Ealing Broadway and Northfields change hands. Once the Piccadilly line upgrade is done it's safe to assume a peak service pattern of at least 32tph and we're assuming 16tph peak District west of Earl's Court:
8tph Piccadilly to Heathrow T5
8tph Piccadilly via Heathrow T4 loop
8tph Piccadilly to Ealing Broadway
8tph Piccadilly to Rayners Lane/Uxbridge
12tph District to Richmond
4tph District to Northfields

Unfortunately it still leaves the Piccadilly line sharing track with the Met line, and I can't envisage how to untangle those two at Rayners Lane cheaply. It'd also seriously annoy the users of Chiswick Park station having their service dropped to 4tph, so maybe not such a brainwave on my part after all.

 

[Chris125]

4tph District to Northfields

Such a low frequency would be hard to justify, especially when there's an opportunity to simplify the service. Chiswick Park could be served by Uxbridge/Ealing Broadway services using today's District tracks west of Turnham Green.

Chris

 

[simple simon]

Unfortunately it still leaves the Piccadilly line sharing track with the Met line, and I can't envisage how to untangle those two at Rayners Lane cheaply. It'd also seriously annoy the users of Chiswick Park station having their service dropped to 4tph, so maybe not such a brainwave on my part after all.

Adding a second westbound platform at Rayners Lane should be realtively easy.

When I visited this station to see December's Steam On The Uxbridge Branch train I looked over the westbound platforms's side wall (with this idea in mind) and saw two disused / little used siding tracks. The one nearer the existing platform could be converted to a new platform, and the other one could be extended below the A4090 Alexandra Avenue.

This way there would be no need to change existing passenger access routes between the ticket hall and platform, although if it was to become possible installing an accessibility lift would be beneficial.

There are two possible solutions to linking what would become the new westbound platform track into the existing railway.

The cheaper and simpler variant would be to divert the westbound Piccadilly Line trains to the new platform. Logic suggests that all works should retain the line's availability for subsurface sized trains.

However, whilst this variant would reduce delays to westbound trains it would do little to resolve conflicts between departing eastbound Piccadilly Line trains and arriving westbound Metropolitan Line trains.

Perhaps therefore it could also be possible to realign the westbound Metropolitan Line a few metres south and then via a new flyunder below both Piccadilly Line tracks (as well as Alexandra Avenue), so that Metropolitan Line trains use the new platform, as this would eliminate all conflicting movements at the junction where the two lines meet just outside the station.

Whilst this would represent a more expensive and disruptive solution (possibly requiring a Christmas holiday Piccadilly Line closure) it would solve two nuisances in one action, as well as also increase accessibility facilities, albeit only in one direction of travel.

Simon

 

[tranzitjim]

Solutions to solve the floor level issue includes,

++ As Simple Simon said, put in a third platform at Rayners Lane to terminate the Piccadilly line trains at
++ Cut Uxbridge Piccadilly line totally back to Rayners Lane only.

++Otherwise I would suggest changing this to District line, as both district and Metropolitan both use the same S stock, and thus the same floor level.

++The only reason I would suggest diverting Piccadilly line to Earling Broadway, is I guess Piccadilly and Central lines would share the same floor level, both being deep tube lines, and could therefore share the same platforms at ease there.

 

[Nym]

They can't share platforms at EAB...(!) Read up a bit and I go into quite a bit of detail about why, not even mentioning the performance risks.