Potential Crossrail Elizabeth line extension to Ebbsfleet

[700007]

Hey guys,

I don't think this has been a thread as of yet (if there is, I apologise sincerely about this and you can feel free to lock this admins!) but we've seen a few mutterings here and there about the safeguarded route for the Elizabeth line extension beyond Abbey Wood into Ebbsfleet International (to connect with HS1) via Dartford, Bluewater, Gravesend and then a new spur track to Ebbsfleet - with the aim to achieve this by the late 2020s.

I thought it would be good to have a dedicated thread to this project and the impacts that it also haves on other local services in the area (such as HS1, ThamesLink and Southeastern local services).

The Thames Estuary project would like to see this link happen, with lots of backing for the £1.5bn scheme.

 

[swt_passenger]

Crossrail only has a safeguarded zone as far as Gravesend and Hoo Junction. Safeguarding is a planning function to denote an area which may become needed by the railway. The implication is that they’d extend over existing tracks to reach Ebbsfleet.
http://www.crossrail.co.uk/route/safeguarding/abbey-wood-to-hoo-junction
The last few pages of discussion I could find were here:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/ebbsfleet-flogging-a-dead-horse.151680/#post-3079606
Not sure about that thread title though...

 

[HowardGWR]

How about Birmingham Moor St to Paris/Brussel/ Amsterdam via OOC, Crossrail and HS1. Don't need the 'Two Lords' solution then.

 

[si404]

HS1 should be uneffected, other than perhaps having to run additional trains via Gravesend, replacing Rainham services (if TfL don't allow 2tph Southeastern to run between Dartford and Gravesend).

Thameslink's Rainhams are not very popular, and the Windmill Bridge bottleneck will be sorted by the late 2020s. As such, they might have been handed over to Southeastern before the Elizabeth line comes, though certainly an Elizabeth extension would guarantee it.

Southeastern (or Overground, depending on whether a change has happened then) is where it is interesting. Will there be separate tracks between Abbey Wood and Dartford? Will TfL seek to maximise segregation, or will they put up with it? Will the required Dartford rebuild, and the ability to change to the Liz there reduce the amount of loopers?

 

[swt_passenger]

...Will there be separate tracks between Abbey Wood and Dartford? Will TfL seek to maximise segregation, or will they put up with it...

Separate tracks. It’s why the Abbey Wood layout was changed - and has been regularly discussed in the previous Crossrail threads.

 

[rebmcr]

with the aim to achieve this by the late 2020s.

I don't recall that there has ever been a timeline for this. It's still anyone's guess whether it will even happen.

 

[si404]

Separate tracks. It’s why the Abbey Wood layout was changed - and has been regularly discussed in the previous Crossrail threads.

That's the plan currently (with, therefore something like 2*8tph serving Erith and Belverdere), but cost cutting might remove it.

The current layout makes 4-tracking slightly easier (you don't need to change the signalling on the down North Kent/put in some sort of diveunder/flyover as its paired by line, rather than direction), but also taking over the existing tracks much easier vs the original plan.

The original plan, with 2 tracks, would have required intensive track-sharing due to the inability to terminate North Kent lines trains at Abbey Wood. The built plan enables trains to terminate at Abbey Wood, and thus only needing new tracks at Abbey Wood (crossovers for reversal, the slewing of the North Kent to the northern island at the station) and between Slade Green (the depot, perhaps the station) and Dartford.

 

[cle]

Beyond Dartford, surely it would still need to be 4 tracked, due to North Kent trains running beyond Gravesend? Or would these be handed over exclusively to HS1 - enabling Crossrail to run everything east of Dartford?

Gravesend itself would be interesting given both Crossrail and HS1 would share it and it currently doesn't have the tracks. And am assuming Northfleet would be repurposed as Ebbsfleet Crossrail, with some actual connectivity and investment provided.

 

[si404]

Given TfL are apparently fine with 2tph on the GWML reliefs (even with the Reading extension there's still to be 2tph Ealing Bdwy, Hayes & H, Slough, Maidenhead, Twyford, Reading on the Reliefs), 2tph Southeastern via Sidcup to Rainham sharing tracks between Dartford and Gravesend should be allowed. Otherwise it's a butt-ton of money for very little gain to 4-track the line there.

If extra Javelins isn't an option, and TfL insist, then a cheaper idea could be repurposing the NR-proposed link to Ebbsfleet (repurposing the HS1 spur) from the Chatham Main Line to go to Gravesend - the trackbed for that is arguably more there than to go to Ebbsfleet - and then run Victoria (or Blackfriars) to Rainham via Bromley South

 

[ScotGG]

Given the new timetable gives just two trains an hour from Medway and kent to Abbey Wood (slower and possibly less than existed before in the peaks) there's many immediate ways to improve the situation that aren't being taken. Why not 6-8 tph SE through to Medway? I doubt any more Crossrail than that would go. All could stop at Northfleet and actually build a link from there to Ebbsfleet (they're very close together).

 

[Taunton]

I suspect that with only half the Crossrail core service able to serve Canary Wharf, plus the passenger loads from the other Abbey Wood branch stations, any additional passengers will very soon become impractical.

 

[hwl]

I suspect that with only half the Crossrail core service able to serve Canary Wharf, plus the passenger loads from the other Abbey Wood branch stations, any additional passengers will very soon become impractical.

As it will be virtually impossible to get the 345s more than 50% loaded at Abbey Wood (local demand and passengers changing from SE /TL services services). Plenty of room and TfL have long term aims to increase the levels above 24tph so the Abbey Wood Branch would get more services and the 345s can get extended by 2 cars...

 

[Taunton]

I don't think the issue will be at Abbey Wood itself, I think it will be Canary Wharf. 12tph westbound there in the evening peak is going to be one of the challenges.

The hoo-hah that Network Rail have made about extending to 9 cars makes a further two cars extension of all platforms particularly challenging.

 

[cle]

The trains can be extended, and don’t forget that standing is fine. Folk will get on and off throughout the route, like a metro rather than a radial heading to a single terminus - so the traffic will rotate. Eg even if packed at Canary Wharf, 5 mins later half the train might get off at Liverpool Street.

If working with 12tph I would say an end goal would be 4tph Dartford, 4tph Gravesend and 4tph Rochester or Rainham (with wires as required). And it could cover off any SE trains east of Dartford, and with varied stopping patterns.

Four tracking to Dartford will enable a more intense service on the metro to there and around the loops. The whole area, especially the Greenwich line, has a ton of housing developments along it.

 

[Highland37]

How would this extension be paid for?