More ELL services from 2018

[bicbasher]

TfL plan to add an extra 2tph on the Crystal Palace and Clapham Junction branches from 2018.

This would add bring the service between NXG and Sydenham on London Overground to 10tph and 6tph between Queens Road Peckham and Clapham Junction.

However I suspect this may mean the end of the current 4tph to New Cross which is lightly used.

http://www.southlondonpress.co.uk/a...ine=More trains planned for London Overground

More trains planned for London Overground

Tuesday, 13 October 2015 By Kate Gould

PLANS to increase capacity on a busy commuter line have been welcomed by public transport campaigners.

Transport for London (TfL) wants to introduce two more London Overground trains per hour between Dalston Junction and Crystal Palace from 2018.

It would increase the frequency of the trains on the line at peak time from eight trains per hour to 10.

TfL also plans an extra two trains per hour on the line from Dalston Junction to Clapham Junction via Surrey Quays and Peckham Rye, from 2019.

The scheme to deliver a 25 per cent capacity increase on the line has been necessitated by the growth of passenger journeys on the former East London Line.

In 2014, London Overgrouned train services were increased from four to five carriages, to add 25 per cent more capacity.

However TfL says in a report to be discussed today (Friday) that demand is still growing.

In the report it says London Overground demand increased by 144 per cent between 2010/11 and 2014/15.

New services continued to be introduced during that time with the extension of London Overground services from Dalston Junction or Highbury and Islington to Clapham Junction in 2012 and an increase in frequency on the lines from 12 trains per hour (tph) to 16tph.

It says over the past four years London Overground demand has increased by 96 per cent compared with 27 per cent growth on London and South East rail services

The new service from will be introduced subject to the availability of routes being confirmed by Network Rail.

Lewisham councillor and train campaigner Lord Kennedy said: "It is good news that we are going to have more trains running on the London Overground service through South London.

"However, a proper long term co-ordinated plan needs to be put in place by TfL, Network Rail and the train operating companies to deliver rail services that properly meet the needs of residents and business."

 

[Class 170101]

Might this actually be using Rolling Stock capacity released from the new Rolling Stock to be introduced on the Euston to Watford DC lines.

 

[Nym]

It might ya know...

I beleive there's also plans afoot to make Willesden the home of this new stock for the GOBLIN and DC Lines.

 

[James H]

From papers for Friday's TfL rail and underground panel:

4.9 Other options are also being considered to increase capacity. In the short term, frequency improvements may be brought forward by leasing additional trains before the LO train units are built.

http://content.tfl.gov.uk/rup-20151016-part-1-item09-lo-and-dlr-growth.pdf

 

[Tobbes]

Thanks James, all looks very welcome - the Clapham Junc to Canada Water element of the ELLX is rammed every morning I use it.

Does anyone know the practical maximum capacity from Surrey Quays to Dalston Junction? Presumably extending the platforms in the tunnels would be prohibitively expensive.

Many thanks

Toby

 

[Bald Rick]

Thanks James, all looks very welcome - the Clapham Junc to Canada Water element of the ELLX is rammed every morning I use it.

Does anyone know the practical maximum capacity from Surrey Quays to Dalston Junction? Presumably extending the platforms in the tunnels would be prohibitively expensive.

Many thanks

Toby

24 trains an hour with Automatic Train Operation. Apparently.

 

[jopsuk]

I think they recoken (and did the work the last time they had major closures) they can get 6-car trains (120m) just about on the ELL without the SDO required causing too many dwell time problems

 

[Nym]

But you can't extend 378s to 6 car without a shed load of work.

Theoretically, since the core of the line is grade separated, I'd say 24tph?

 

[plcd1]

It is important to note that the "options" listed in the TfL paper, that the journalist seems to have picked up on, are a mixture of planned and aspirational. The list doesn't show which option falls into which category. While there's no doubt that ELL services are very crowded in the peaks there would need to be substantial investment in signalling and control systems to create the paths for 4 extra peak services per hour. There must also be interesting questions about paths through Peckham to Clapham Junction.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

From papers for Friday's TfL rail and underground panel:



http://content.tfl.gov.uk/rup-20151016-part-1-item09-lo-and-dlr-growth.pdf

Any ideas as to where they intend to lease the extra units from? I thought that all suitable units around the UK were already spoken for

 

[G_A_C_C_C]

But you can't extend 378s to 6 car without a shed load of work.

I think "At All" is more realistic, well, unless you convert them back to 3 car units with cabs that take space in the center...waste of space and not going to happen...to go 6 car TfL will really have to dump the 378s.

The new build to replace the 313s are going to be 6 car....maybe TfL will take a look at those when the build details come through and throw the 378s at the next part of the London network they take over.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

How much of a major rewire would be needed to extend the 378s to 6 car or longer (presumably some stations might then need ASDO)?

 

[Philip Phlopp]

How much of a major rewire would be needed to extend the 378s to 6 car or longer (presumably some stations might then need ASDO)?

It's not a 're-wire' that is needed, it's a partial re-tractioning of part of the train that is needed, as I understand it (it's something that has been touched upon tangentially in relation to OLE, pantographs and tensioning).

The transformer currently fitted can't manage additional traction motors and output for hotel power for an additional coach, five cars is the absolute limit for the transformer. The only way around this I know of is to add a second pantograph/transformer vehicle (PTSO) and form the Class 378s into 6 car sets using 2 3 car half sets (Eurostar Class 373 style). That would give a formation of DMSO-PTSO-MSO+MSO-PTSO-DMSO, with a 25kV bus running on the roof to remove the requirement for two pantograph operation. It also allows 'correct' pantograph orientation (they're more effective knuckle forward) with pantographs being switched at a change of ends.

 

[swt_passenger]

How much of a major rewire would be needed to extend the 378s to 6 car or longer (presumably some stations might then need ASDO)?

There are already stations on the core ELL that require ASDO, ever since they went to 5 car...

I don't believe 6 car will be impossible, just more difficult than 3 to 4 and 4 to 5, because it wasn't initially designed for.

 

[Nym]

And the MITRAC TMS doesn't support 6 car units.

I believe there are plenty of 319s left kicking around, and there (god forbid) are the 442s coming up available soon, this could displace ALL stock from the Watford DC lines over to the ELL to give a quick win on stock, and allow them to make them 5 car services on both sections. You might loose some time on the DC lines, but when you're inter-running with 1972TS you're never going to get up to any kind of speed anyway.

 

[Bald Rick]

Surely the options in the order for the WA suburban and Gospel Oak-Barking... Buy another 8(?) 4 car units for the DC lines and swap the 378s to ELL / NLL.

 

[Class 170101]

From papers for Friday's TfL rail and underground panel:

4.9 Other options are also being considered to increase capacity. In the short term, frequency improvements may be brought forward by leasing additional trains before the LO train units are built.

Sounds like an interim solution is needed sooner than the new stock.

Perhaps either bring back the Class 508s (are there any spare) or Class 319s as they become spare.

 

[HH]

It is important to note that the "options" listed in the TfL paper, that the journalist seems to have picked up on, are a mixture of planned and aspirational. The list doesn't show which option falls into which category. While there's no doubt that ELL services are very crowded in the peaks there would need to be substantial investment in signalling and control systems to create the paths for 4 extra peak services per hour. There must also be interesting questions about paths through Peckham to Clapham Junction.

An extra 2tph are planned. But OFC the best laid plans of mice and men...

(The other 2 are not even short-term aspirational)

 

[Stats]

Surely the options in the order for the WA suburban and Gospel Oak-Barking... Buy another 8(?) 4 car units for the DC lines and swap the 378s to ELL / NLL.

The LOTRAIN order already includes 6 trains for the DC lines to cascade the 378s to NLL/ELL.

 

[Clip]

Get some of the vivarail trains onto Watford and give their trains to the ELL

 

[Skoodle]

New Cross Gate Depot couldn't handle 6 car trains, it would be another extensive depot alteration that would reduce capacity and rest of the core route would require even more alterations to signalling placement etc. It would take a lot more work, not just in depot so I highly doubt this would happen. Some form of automation would be the way forward.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

New Cross Gate Depot couldn't handle 6 car trains, it would be another extensive depot alteration that would reduce capacity and rest of the core route would require even more alterations to signalling placement etc. It would take a lot more work, not just in depot so I highly doubt this would happen. Some form of automation would be the way forward.

Would automation actually be viable given that south of New Cross Gate they're interacting with trains (using the same tracks) run by Southern.

 

[Nym]

If you where to use some kind of DTG-R protection system overlaied with the AWS and TPWS on the fully Network Rail sections and then signaled as a low headway high capacity network in the core, you could easily achieve a nice smooth handover at branched stations.

You could pick up the ATP at Queens Road Peckham and New Cross Gate, possibly even proceeding in ATO from them points, provided the overlay is done in such a way that allows this. Alternatively, one could changeover from AWS and TPWS ATP to DTG-R ATP at said stations on the MCS, proceeding in Protected Manual under DTG-R with ADR functioning to try and get everything to Surrey Quays in order, then proceed from there in Auto for the remainder of the route to Highbury and Islington, handing back over to AWS and TPWS on the over run road there. It would of course be better to proceed in Auto under DTG-R with ATR.

When the handover is sorted, one could then, rather than having a complex handover from one system to another, install the additional track circuits required incrementally, then install the block marker boards and DTG-R when required, after the migration is complete, AWS and TPWS could either be removed, or wired up with a Four / Five aspect signalling system to allow alien trains to run under their own protection without being specially fitted.

So yes, over the next couple of years, an on line upgrade could be carried out to increase core capacity significantly, possibly up to the order of 24tph, potentially even 30tph if it's well designed and the conflicts around Surrey Quays can be sorted.

One could of course extend the DTG-R protection when interunning with other NR trains and continue running in automatic, but you wouldn't really gain THAT much, you would gain if you sent more trains to New Cross Gate or turned more at New Cross in the peak to get fast returners back through Canada Water.

PS: I'm not a Signalling Engineer...!

 

[Bald Rick]

Or, when south of New Cross Gate is resignalled (it's due in the next 5-10 years), resignal with an ETCS overlay, add ATO, equip the 378s, and hey presto, approx 75% of the trains on the route are driving themselves.

 

[Nym]

Yes indeedy...

I was thinking with today's mature technology what could be done, since I've not seen ERTMS / ETCS work on a line with a particularly heavy service, especially since the ELL is not going to be inter-operable any time soon anyway.