Realistic outlook for new lines in London

[DynamicSpirit]

It is a common proposal to have the Victoria line take over the Central line to Hainault via Leytonstone.

Out of interest, why? That would seem to be of no benefit to the people along the Central line to Hainault, who already have a perfectly good tube service into Central London, plus connections at Stratford that would be lost if the Victoria line took over the route. And the Victoria line has no capacity to fit all those people on it anyway. I'm curious why anyone would propose that?

 

[321362]

Victoria line to Chingford - I'm not 100% convinced on this one - and could be 12tph or so with a rebuild at Walthamstow, as over-supply - but I do wonder if taking 4tph off the WA lines would be useful to redeploy - if they even could be. Clapton would be a tricky one though.

Maybe 2tph Chingford-Stratford and 2tph Chingford-Liverpool St would be a good mix. The former would of course bring many connections, and Crossrail/DLR/Jubilee options... probably a similar journey time to TCR and quicker to Canary Wharf.

And then 2tph are freed up to send up to Tottenham Hale and beyond - although they'd still need to call at Clapton.

Yeah, Chingford is completely fine with 4tph to Liv St and connections at Walthamstow for the Victoria. Doesn't need anything more.

Clapton is always the constraint - this is why I think all the Cambridge and possibly Hertfords should go via Stratford and potentially call at Lea Bridge, therefore allowing either Crossrail 2 or extra northbound stuff. Also provides the benefit of better connectivity northbound from Stratford, since I still feel the Stratford-Tottenham Hale corridor is underutilised, although at the cost of a few minutes extra journey time. Would take a bit of work at the Stratford end I believe since they'd have to cross over a few lines, but that's achievable-ish (can grade separate if necessary)

I'm not sure halving Hackney to Walthamstow frequency is great - there are buses but they tend to be slow. The tradeoff for Clapton getting extra Tottenham Hale trains might be worth it though, but not convinced. I'm fairly sure with a bit of shuffling and probably quadtracking Tottenham Hale you could add Clapton stops onto the Hertfords with no drawback.

 

[The Ham]

Wouldn't Crossrail 2 provide capacity release between Victoria and Euston on the Victoria Line and so an extended Victoria Line could work in a post Crossrail 2 world.

 

[Cambus731]

The issue is that it will just be stuck in traffic the whole time and theirs not an easy way to reroute traffic like what happened with Addisscombe road. Especially considering Superloop is a thing now and they'll be a faster route for end to end passengers

I guess you’re possibly right. Although I have been there I am not familiar with Beckenham Road so I don’t know how congested it gets. It does seem a shame though as the Bromley North line does seem wasted just shuttling to Grove Park and back.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Wouldn't Crossrail 2 provide capacity release between Victoria and Euston on the Victoria Line and so an extended Victoria Line could work in a post Crossrail 2 world.

Yes that's a good point. Especially because - as I understand it - the most likely route for CrossRail2 would also serve Seven Sisters and Tottenham Hale, so it would be likely to take some of the passengers who currently use the Victoria line to travel from those areas. So I guess that means that, post CrossRail2, you could more plausibly extend the Victoria line Southwards. Another reason for hurrying up with CR2

 

[cle]

Yes that's a good point. Especially because - as I understand it - the most likely route for CrossRail2 would also serve Seven Sisters and Tottenham Hale, so it would be likely to take some of the passengers who currently use the Victoria line to travel from those areas. So I guess that means that, post CrossRail2, you could more plausibly extend the Victoria line Southwards. Another reason for hurrying up with CR2

The Central line doesn't really need the capacity - it is very busy, but more trains are not needed for the Epping line, for instance.

North and North East London has a lot of good service. Tubes and higher frequency rail lines which could do more (eg Moorgate service could be doubled) . . . . . it's more to free up capacity for the outer services and growth areas.

 

[BritishGuy54]

Wouldn't Crossrail 2 provide capacity release between Victoria and Euston on the Victoria Line and so an extended Victoria Line could work in a post Crossrail 2 world.

On both ends, it could.

A southern extension to Sutton / Croydon or an eastern extension to Hainault / Romford aren’t out of the realm of possibility in a post-Crossrail 2 world.

 

[Instinct04]

The Central line doesn't really need the capacity - it is very busy, but more trains are not needed for the Epping line, for instance.

North and North East London has a lot of good service. Tubes and higher frequency rail lines which could do more (eg Moorgate service could be doubled) . . . . . it's more to free up capacity for the outer services and growth areas.

What needs to improve are its orbital links, particularly to East London.

 

[SynthD]

So I guess that means that, post CrossRail2, you could more plausibly extend the Victoria line Southwards. Another reason for hurrying up with CR2

I wonder if the relieved Victoria line only has enough spare capacity for its own growth on its current stretch. If it's at 120% capacity now and demand rises 20% by the time CR2 opens, dips 60% as people use CR2, then grows 20% in the next 20-40 years, it will be back to full trains.

 

[cle]

I think the northern end would be relieved more by CR2, but as I mentioned, also a more frequent Moorgate service - and likely also a brand new feeling Piccadilly line - higher frequency, new trains, faster, air con... that will probably divert (or retain from changing at Finsbury Park) - a fair few punters.

But then ironically growth on the Cheshunt / WA lines services really just feeds the Victoria more, because the final stretches to Liverpool St are agonizing.

 

[The Ham]

Yes that's a good point. Especially because - as I understand it - the most likely route for CrossRail2 would also serve Seven Sisters and Tottenham Hale, so it would be likely to take some of the passengers who currently use the Victoria line to travel from those areas. So I guess that means that, post CrossRail2, you could more plausibly extend the Victoria line Southwards. Another reason for hurrying up with CR2

The more I understand some of the secondary benefits of CR2 the more I agree that not building it is likely to hinder rail going forwards.

Other such secondary benefits include the 8tph of extra paths from Waterloo to/through Woking, effectively allowing the addion of 1tph to each 2tph service (so +2tph for a route with 4tph and +1tph for a route with 2tph).

That could be quite far reaching with the Victoria Line being able to be extended southwards and at the same time potentially permitting (with other works) 2tph for trains through Salisbury to Exeter.

I wonder if the relieved Victoria line only has enough spare capacity for its own growth on its current stretch. If it's at 120% capacity now and demand rises 20% by the time CR2 opens, dips 60% as people use CR2, then grows 20% in the next 20-40 years, it will be back to full trains.

Whilst the trains would then back to 104% full there's three factors to consider.

Firstly those trains are less busy than they are now.

Secondly without CR2 the trains would be even busier (whist growth might not be as high, it is likely to still happen)

Thirdly there could be other schemes being delivered in 60 years time to cater for that extra growth

Then there's things which may have an impact which we know are coming but just not how it might change things. The obvious one is the aging population, that might change the way people travel (for example older people don't commute as much as younger people, which may show up as total passenger growth but the busiest trains may not be so crowded).

 

[BritishGuy54]

After some deliberation, I do have a few ideas for an expanded Underground network.

Victoria line extension beyond Brixton:

• Brixton (Southeastern)
• Ruskin Park
• North Dulwich (Southern)
• Dulwich Village
• Dulwich Common
• Upper Sydenham
• Crystal Palace (Windrush, Southern)
• Birkbeck (Trams)
• Beckenham Junction (Trams, Southeastern)

Maybe a takeover of existing NR routes to Beckenham or West Croydon could be possible as an alternative proposal, but I wanted to keep it simple with a new route with only the Beckenham Southern spur being taken over here.

Victoria line extension beyond Walthamstow Central:

• Walthamstow Central (Weaver)
• Whipps Cross
• South Woodford (Central)
• Clayhall
• Barkingside (Central)
• Little Heath
• Marks Gate
• Crowlands
• Romford (Elizabeth, Liberty, Greater Anglia)

I’d say this routing is easier to conceptualise since Northeast London doesn’t have as many spare mainline routes to takeover anymore. It also helps Stratford and the Hainault loop get relief and links it better with both North London and East London.

Northern line extension beyond Battersea:

• Battersea Power Station
• Battersea Bridge
• Clapham Junction (Mildmay, Windrush, Southwestern, Southern)
• Wandsworth South
• Southfields (District)
• Putney Heath
• Roehampton
• Kingston Vale
• Coombe Wood
• Kingston (Southwestern)

There is a network hole in parts of Southwest London (mainly due to Richmond Park and Wimbledon Common).

DLR Expansion in East London
Barking - Bexleyheath Branch

• Barking (District, Hammersmith & City, Suffragette, c2c)
• Roding Riverside
• East Beckton
• Beckton Riverside
• Thamesmead
• Southmere Park
• Abbey Wood (Elizabeth, Southeastern, Thameslink)
• Bostal Hill
• Bostal Heath
• Bexleyheath (Southeastern)
• Bexleyheath High Street

This is kind of an amalgamation of the current Thamesmead extension, the considered Barking spur, and an extension southwards. Bexleyheath High Street also is a little removed from the mainline station, I suppose.

Abbey Wood - Harold Hill Branch

• Abbey Wood (Elizabeth, Southeastern, Thameslink)
• Crossness
• Barking Riverside (Suffragette)
• Goresbrook
• Dagenham Dock (c2c)
• Dagenham Park
• Dagenham East (District)
• Eastbrook
• Becontree Heath
• Rush Green
• Romford (Elizabeth, Liberty, Greater Anglia)
• Romford Market
• Rise Park
• Collier Row
• Harold Hill

I think I should clarify that these extensions might only make sense in a post-Crossrail 2 world.

Is it realistic? Uh… maybe? If realistic only means projects in the near future, then it’s really some of what’s only been proposed by TFL officially.

But realistic in a post-Crossrail 2 world might change things.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

After some deliberation, I do have a few ideas for an expanded Underground network.

Victoria line extension beyond Brixton:

• Brixton (Southeastern)
• Ruskin Park
• North Dulwich (Southern)
• Dulwich Village
• Dulwich Common
• Upper Sydenham
• Crystal Palace (Windrush, Southern)
• Birkbeck (Trams)
• Beckenham Junction (Trams, Southeastern)

Maybe a takeover of existing NR routes to Beckenham or West Croydon could be possible as an alternative proposal, but I wanted to keep it simple with a new route with only the Beckenham Southern spur being taken over here.

Victoria line extension beyond Walthamstow Central:

• Walthamstow Central (Weaver)
• Whipps Cross
• South Woodford (Central)
• Clayhall
• Barkingside (Central)
• Little Heath
• Marks Gate
• Crowlands
• Romford (Elizabeth, Liberty, Greater Anglia)

I’d say this routing is easier to conceptualise since Northeast London doesn’t have as many spare mainline routes to takeover anymore. It also helps Stratford and the Hainault loop get relief and links it better with both North London and East London.

Northern line extension beyond Battersea:

• Battersea Power Station
• Battersea Bridge
• Clapham Junction (Mildmay, Windrush, Southwestern, Southern)
• Wandsworth South
• Southfields (District)
• Putney Heath
• Roehampton
• Kingston Vale
• Coombe Wood
• Kingston (Southwestern)

There is a network hole in parts of Southwest London (mainly due to Richmond Park and Wimbledon Common).

DLR Expansion in East London
Barking - Bexleyheath Branch

• Barking (District, Hammersmith & City, Suffragette, c2c)
• Roding Riverside
• East Beckton
• Beckton Riverside
• Thamesmead
• Southmere Park
• Abbey Wood (Elizabeth, Southeastern, Thameslink)
• Bostal Hill
• Bostal Heath
• Bexleyheath (Southeastern)
• Bexleyheath High Street

This is kind of an amalgamation of the current Thamesmead extension, the considered Barking spur, and an extension southwards. Bexleyheath High Street also is a little removed from the mainline station, I suppose.

Abbey Wood - Harold Hill Branch

• Abbey Wood (Elizabeth, Southeastern, Thameslink)
• Crossness
• Barking Riverside (Suffragette)
• Goresbrook
• Dagenham Dock (c2c)
• Dagenham Park
• Dagenham East (District)
• Eastbrook
• Becontree Heath
• Rush Green
• Romford (Elizabeth, Liberty, Greater Anglia)
• Romford Market
• Rise Park
• Collier Row
• Harold Hill

I think I should clarify that these extensions might only make sense in a post-Crossrail 2 world.

Is it realistic? Uh… maybe? If realistic only means projects in the near future, then it’s really some of what’s only been proposed by TFL officially.

But realistic in a post-Crossrail 2 world might change things.

Interesting ideas, but I think the problem with most of these is that many of the routes you're proposing don't (by London standards) serve that many people. Certainly not enough to justify tunnelling new lines and building very expensive underground platforms and escalators etc. You seem to be suggesting a number of stations that - as far as I can make out from tracing likely routes on Google maps) would be in the middle of not much more than fields. (Kingston Vale, Bostall Hill, Bostall Heath, Dulwich Common, for example).

The suggestions from your list that I think have legs are;

• Barking-Bexleyheath on the DLR, because it would connect Bexleyheath and Thamesmead to the Elizabeth line, and help cross river connections. And because Bexleyheath shopping centre is quite a big destination, so that would be well used. But scrap the Bostall Hill and Bostall Heath stations and replace with one at Brampton Road/King Harolds Way. This is still expensive though as would require a lot of tunnelling. You could probably build it above ground as far as Abbey Wood, but once you get to the top of Bostall Hill there's just no room anywhere other than in a tunnel.
• Northern line extension but only as far as Clapham Junction (and as you say, only once Crossrail2 is built).

Kingston certainly deserves a much better service to central London, but that would be more effectively provided by Crossrail2.

 

[cle]

Northern line extension beyond Battersea:

• Battersea Power Station
• Battersea Bridge
• Clapham Junction (Mildmay, Windrush, Southwestern, Southern)
• Wandsworth South
• Southfields (District)
• Putney Heath
• Roehampton
• Kingston Vale
• Coombe Wood
• Kingston (Southwestern)

This part I support. I'm of the view that a future Northern line extension - if lines split, Camden sorted, resignalled to 32tph - Clapham Junction could handle it. It won't be the best option for many journeys, so I don't think it'll be a full exodus.

But if it went beyond, I also think you can either do Earlsfield (close NR station) - or a Roehampton route is actually very useful. It's isolated, densely populated / disadvantaged in parts, and has big hospital and university presence. And then getting to Kingston is a no-brainer. Even with the SWT - Kingston could justify having two links. Many outer centres of its size, or smaller - do. And Unilever just moved there, plus a ton more building - so I'd think it would be well-used.

 

[Bald Rick]

the main issue with proposals to extend the Victoria or Northern lines is:

Where are the existing passengers going to go?

A morning peak at Balham, Victoria or Highbury & Islington stations is instructive.

 

[cle]

the main issue with proposals to extend the Victoria or Northern lines is:

Where are the existing passengers going to go?

A morning peak at Balham, Victoria or Highbury & Islington stations is instructive.

Northern is branched - otherwise I agree. I don't think the Vic to Herne Hill or Streatham plans would work for that reason.

Bakerloo is clearly where the opportunity is. Life expired (re-animated) stock / order needed, spare capacity on the southern end, largely replicates the destinations it would 'sever' - - and would free up those paths if extended to Hayes. 4 new services out of Charing Cross each hour, each direction (2 fast, 2 via Lewisham) would be very helpful.

It goes through areas of deprivation but also massive opportunity for new homes close to Central London (all that big box crap) - links up lots of transport routes inc a lot of feed anticipated from the ELL (e.g. Brockley/Forest Hill to Bakerloo) plus Goldsmith Uni...

And then smaller but cool elements like bringing Beckenham onto the tube map (and LB Bromley as a whole - and SE London really - they are owed it) - and more connections there. I think that'll be very popular.

It's a no-brainer to me, and should be the single biggest project for TfL right now. Far more important than CR2.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

the main issue with proposals to extend the Victoria or Northern lines is:

Where are the existing passengers going to go?

A morning peak at Balham, Victoria or Highbury & Islington stations is instructive.

I would assume that's partly why the person suggesting the extensions referred to a post-Crossrail2 World - since Crossrail2 is likely to take quite a few passengers off the Victoria Line between Victoria and Tottenham Hale. If the Piccadilly Line ever gets its resignalling to speed services up, that might also absorb some Victoria line passengers between Green Park and Highbury and Islington too. Crossrail2 will also take quite a few people from the Northern Line at Balham, although that won't necessarily impact the Charing Cross Branch so much.

In a Post Crossrail2 world, I doubt that extending the Northern Line Battersea spur to Clapham Junction would add much pressure: There aren't that many destinations in central London for which it would make more sense for someone at Clapham Junction to use the Northern line versus using Crossrail2. And to some extent it will even remove passengers from the crowded parts of the Northern Line since it will mean that some people at Kennington/Nine Elms/Battersea Power Station will find it more convenient to get to central London via Clapham Junction/Crossrail2. It also means some existing Northern Line passengers who currently change to SWR at Waterloo might find it more convenient to stay on the Northern Line as far as Clapham Junction, which is fine because Northern Line (CX branch) trains are not generally that busy South of Waterloo.

 

[Instinct04]

Northern is branched - otherwise I agree. I don't think the Vic to Herne Hill or Streatham plans would work for that reason.

Bakerloo is clearly where the opportunity is. Life expired (re-animated) stock / order needed, spare capacity on the southern end, largely replicates the destinations it would 'sever' - - and would free up those paths if extended to Hayes. 4 new services out of Charing Cross each hour, each direction (2 fast, 2 via Lewisham) would be very helpful.

It goes through areas of deprivation but also massive opportunity for new homes close to Central London (all that big box crap) - links up lots of transport routes inc a lot of feed anticipated from the ELL (e.g. Brockley/Forest Hill to Bakerloo) plus Goldsmith Uni...

And then smaller but cool elements like bringing Beckenham onto the tube map (and LB Bromley as a whole - and SE London really - they are owed it) - and more connections there. I think that'll be very popular.

It's a no-brainer to me, and should be the single biggest project for TfL right now. Far more important than CR2.

Why does everyone want to extend the Victoria line? It is literally at capacity, and can’t really handle any more people.

 

[Mr. SW]

A couple of points here.

I've been crayoning on and off for years trying to get the tube into South London and found that you need two and a half (!) lines to get to somewhere important like Sutton or Croydon. Please read on.

The "Half" line is partly already there: it's the Overground to West Croydon.
Now add in the Bakerloo extension. This is fine for Lewisham and Hayes.
But then I found I could not get places like Norbury/Selhurst/Croydon properly served.

A plain extension of the Victoria Line did not do the job and I ended up with two possible routes. And then I ended up with two lines.

The DLR should not extend drastically anywhere really beyond Barking in the north, Dagenham Dock in the north east, Belvedere in the south east and Abbey Wood in the south. It shouldn't be really be used as a cheap substitute for the Tube or heavy rail. It needs to stay compact and workable. The Thamesmead extension is the right way to go.
As the saying goes: "Do not send a boy to do a man's work."

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I'm not convinced that you particularly need the tube in South London [*], since there is already a fairly dense network of national rail lines. The problem is that frequencies on most of those lines are - by tube standards, very low. I would assume the barriers to higher frequencies are that (a) most of the lines end at central London terminuses where capacity to turn frequent trains round is limited, (b) on some lines, the metro services are competing with regional services to Kent/Sussex/Hampshire for paths, and (c) the fact that it's a network rather than individual lines creates all sorts of conflicts at junctions that limit the frequencies. Also because the trains are often bigger and longer than tube trains, you end up with lower frequencies being sufficient to fill the trains (although that's less convenient to passengers)

By contrast North London tends to have isolated tube lines, where the fact that there are few interactions with other lines and very little actually terminates in central London enables higher frequencies - but with the disadvantages that journey opportunities are more limited: You're fine if you want to go into central London but basically screwed if you want to go anywhere else.

I think in principle what's needed in South London is more like, targeted interventions at junctions etc. designed to enable more of a pattern of services running much more frequently but with a clearer separation between different routes, so trains only go to one destination. And make sure that anywhere lines cross, there is a station so people can interchange (Hello Brockley). An example would be: Rebuild Lewisham so that every metro train can stop there, and aim for e something like trains every 7-8 minutes Victoria-Lewisham-Bexleyheath line, trains every 7-8 minutes Cannon Street-Lewisham-Sidcup line, and so on. That way South London could actually end up with better journey opportunities than North London - similar turn-up-and-go frequencies (perhaps slightly lower because of the bigger trains) but with much better interchange opportunities so rail can basically be used from anywhere to anywhere else.

The infrastructure involved would be expensive - but I would guess no more expensive than building whole new tube lines and associated underground stations.

[*] Other than that the Bakerloo extension to Hayes is an obvious opportunity.

 

[cle]

I think in principle what's needed in South London is more like, targeted interventions at junctions etc. designed to enable more of a pattern of services running much more frequently but with a clearer separation between different routes, so trains only go to one destination. And make sure that anywhere lines cross, there is a station so people can interchange (Hello Brockley). An example would be: Rebuild Lewisham so that every metro train can stop there, and aim for e something like trains every 7-8 minutes Victoria-Lewisham-Bexleyheath line, trains every 7-8 minutes Cannon Street-Lewisham-Sidcup line, and so on. That way South London could actually end up with better journey opportunities than North London - similar turn-up-and-go frequencies (perhaps slightly lower because of the bigger trains) but with much better interchange opportunities so rail can basically be used from anywhere to anywhere else.

I've tried to think on this - ostensibly slowing down every service to up frequency - and I think it's too difficult.

Victoria - Bromley South: you could have 6tph A pattern and 6tph B pattern - they make 3 calls before Bromley South. Herne Hill / Beckenham Junction as A/B. Or just hand it all to stoppers, at 10-12tph.

Charing Cross should then be used for outer services - it's quadded and can get to Swanley in the same time as from Victoria (less from London Bridge) - Bromley South is the main victim here, slowed down by 10 or so mins.

But overall - a tunnel to carry fast services to Bromley South - which branches off to East Croydon (underground station) - might enable more frequency within South London, which I agree is far more important, population-wise - and does worse than places like Sevenoaks.

 

[Brubulus]

So here are some things I have thought of. Extending Tramlink from Wimbledon to Sutton. Or extending the Northern Line from Morden to Sutton. Extending Tramlink from West Croydon to Epsom Downs via Sutton, or extending the Windrush line to Epsom Downs.

Then a Tramlink extension to Grove park. Split the Northern Line, but do it at the same time as HS2 reaches Euston, and don't touch Canning Town. Then extend the Northern line, at least as far as Clapham Junction.

DLR - Thamesmead extension should be developer led - not something paid for by the wider public. However I would much rather that the route was a whole new line from West Ham that ran on the Greenway, then on to Thamesmead.

Potential opening of new station on NLL off York Way (north of Kings Cross, and re-opening Primrose Hill overground, as part of extending an ELL service to Willesden Junction, while extending Bakerloo line to Watford Junction.

Elizabeth line - extend to Dartford with short single line section, maximum frequency to Dartford of 6tph so half of trains terminate at Abbey Wood. Potentially using Greenford as an EL reversing siding?

Victoria line extension on a loop to Whipps Cross as final suggestion.

 

[321362]

So here are some things I have thought of. Extending Tramlink from Wimbledon to Sutton. Or extending the Northern Line from Morden to Sutton. Extending Tramlink from West Croydon to Epsom Downs via Sutton, or extending the Windrush line to Epsom Downs.

Then a Tramlink extension to Grove park. Split the Northern Line, but do it at the same time as HS2 reaches Euston, and don't touch Canning Town. Then extend the Northern line, at least as far as Clapham Junction.

DLR - Thamesmead extension should be developer led - not something paid for by the wider public. However I would much rather that the route was a whole new line from West Ham that ran on the Greenway, then on to Thamesmead.

Potential opening of new station on NLL off York Way (north of Kings Cross, and re-opening Primrose Hill overground, as part of extending an ELL service to Willesden Junction, while extending Bakerloo line to Watford Junction.

Elizabeth line - extend to Dartford with short single line section, maximum frequency to Dartford of 6tph so half of trains terminate at Abbey Wood. Potentially using Greenford as an EL reversing siding?

Victoria line extension on a loop to Whipps Cross as final suggestion.

The Greenway is great as is, thanks.

Whipps Cross doesn't need a tube, it has Leytonstone as well as Walthamstow Wood Street.

 

[Brubulus]

The Greenway is great as is, thanks.

Whipps Cross doesn't need a tube, it has Leytonstone as well as Walthamstow Wood Street.

If you stop looking at it from a new lines perspective, the optimal solution for Whipps Cross is probably to relocate Cambridge services from the Clapton line and run them via Stratford. This means that Chingford can move to 6tph.

 

[SynthD]

Extending Tramlink from Wimbledon to Sutton. Extending Tramlink from West Croydon to Epsom Downs via Sutton

What do you think of the tram line to the cancer hub in Sutton?

Sutton Link - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Beyond that, is it densely populated enough for the tram?

Split the Northern Line, but do it at the same time as HS2 reaches Euston, and don't touch Canning Town

How does Camden Town cope with the increased interchange without the planned works?

Elizabeth line - extend to Dartford with short single line section, maximum frequency to Dartford of 6tph so half of trains terminate at Abbey Wood.

How short is the single line, just the throat of Dartford, and double line from Abbey Wood?

extending the Windrush line to Epsom Downs.

Overground to Sutton

Questions to the Mayor: You will know that delivering a tram to Sutton remains my priority. Can the Mayor advise me whether previous requests to extend the Overground to Sutton have been rejected?

www.london.gov.uk

It’s not possible now, I wonder what is the minimum necessary to enable it.

Potentially using Greenford as an EL reversing siding?

Greenford on the central line?

 

[Brubulus]

What do you think of the tram line to the cancer hub in Sutton?

Sutton Link - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Beyond that, is it densely populated enough for the tram?

How does Camden Town cope with the increased interchange without the planned works?

How short is the single line, just the throat of Dartford, and double line from Abbey Wood?

Overground to Sutton

Questions to the Mayor: You will know that delivering a tram to Sutton remains my priority. Can the Mayor advise me whether previous requests to extend the Overground to Sutton have been rejected?

www.london.gov.uk

It’s not possible now, I wonder what is the minimum necessary to enable it.

Greenford on the central line?

The Greenford Branch, you'd probably need to close Drayton Green.
TFL said that it was technically possible, so don't see an issue there.
Regarding Camden Town, the main interchange hub would be Euston, which is why I said to time with HS2.
The single track section would likely be from Dartford to Crayford Creek Junction.
The Cancer Hub in Sutton is along the Epsom Downs Branch, plus there is a large nearby prison complex which probably should be expanded and have courts added to it.

 

[Recessio]

Or extending the Northern Line from Morden to Sutton.

Sutton is already well connected. Looking at the PTAL values, I think the (originally planned) extension down the A24 to North Cheam, via Morden South and Stonecot, would be a much better option for improving connectivity and reducing car usage.

Most of the people living in the area take the 93 bus to Morden anyway, so less of a risk of overcrowding as all you'd be doing is saving existing Northern Line passengers a bus ride.

TfL already own a large sports ground next to the Sainsburys, so that would cut down on costs if the side could be reused for a station.

 

[JonathanH]

Most of the people living in the area take the 93 bus to Morden anyway, so less of a risk of overcrowding as all you'd be doing is saving existing Northern Line passengers a bus ride.

The 93 runs from Morden to North Cheam (having come from Putney Bridge and Wimbledon), not Sutton though. All the roads have a 20mph restriction, including the A24.

 

[Mr. SW]

I would leave the Greeford Branch as is. If you wanted to reverse Elizabeth Line trains in the area, I would suggest taking them through Hanwell and reversing them in the goods sidings to the east of Southall on the north side of the line. Easy to implement and no sharp curves and short platforms to deal with.

 

[JonathanH]

I would leave the Greeford Branch as is. If you wanted to reverse Elizabeth Line trains in the area, I would suggest taking them through Hanwell and reversing them in the goods sidings to the east of Southall on the north side of the line. Easy to implement and no sharp curves and short platforms to deal with.

Really needs a reversing arrangement in the middle of the formation rather than to one side, and even more one that doesn't involve having to check the train is vacated on arrival.