Should Crossrail be mothballed?

[si404]

There'll be a heck of a lot generated from previously "difficult" journeys being easy - such as East London connected to Heathrow by a single direct train, or passengers taking new easy routes (e.g Thameslink to Farringdon then Crossrail to Canary Wharf)

There would certainly be a lot of generated revenue from the new journeys that weren't done by rail (or at the very least, weren't using TfL's rail) before - I never said otherwise.

I was just pointing out that getting the fares from West of London was always going to be where a lot of the new revenue would come from and they already have a lot of that big cash cow (though more will come with through trains). As outside Greater London, the fares are not only new to TfL, but also a lot higher per passenger than shorter hops within the zones.

 

[AlbertBeale]

In the meantime, what happens to the existing railway that people are using now. That should be the top priority.

Indeed - in the current period of uncertainty over future travel levels, it of course makes sense to concentrate on improving existing services where they need it, rather than on completely new projects. But Crossrail is mostly finished (in terms of the work needed, if not in time terms), so mothballing it must make little sense. Now HS2 on the other hand...

 

[Ianno87]

Indeed - in the current period of uncertainty over future travel levels, it of course makes sense to concentrate on improving existing services where they need it, rather than on completely new projects. But Crossrail is mostly finished (in terms of the work needed, if not in time terms), so mothballing it must make little sense. Now HS2 on the other hand...

HS2 will be needed more than ever as remote working means that people can live further away from the office if they don't need to commute in every single day (but will need to go in once or twice per week).

Planning should not stop just because there's uncertainty.

 

[The Ham]

What does that mean? 37% is not near 4/5ths. But anyway, Crossrail will not be doing anything to alter carbon emissions, open or mothballed.

Sorry now corrected to 2/5ths.

Crossrail will encourage more rail use (not least on the sections beyond the core, quite likely including a reasonably amount of local-ish travel between stations on the network rail sections), which is likely to reduce car use. However even if it doesn't then the wider rail projects which we should have for on with by now would have, which includes Crossrail 2 where it would increase the number of middle to long distance services on the SWR network.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

HS2 will be needed more than ever as remote working means that people can live further away from the office if they don't need to commute in every single day (but will need to go in once or twice per week).

Planning should not stop just because there's uncertainty.

If everybody is only going in 1-2 days/week then the existing network has more than sufficient capacity to cater for that demand i would suggest. Certainly my recent trips on WCML still show a significant amount of unused seats and even allowing for social distancing reductions.

What we don't know yet is whether our behaviour is fundamentally changed by this or will it revert back over time as we get to find a way of living with the virus. What is pretty clear is the test of viability is going to fail for most projects on current passenger numbers.

 

[cactustwirly]

There would certainly be a lot of generated revenue from the new journeys that weren't done by rail (or at the very least, weren't using TfL's rail) before - I never said otherwise.

I was just pointing out that getting the fares from West of London was always going to be where a lot of the new revenue would come from and they already have a lot of that big cash cow (though more will come with through trains). As outside Greater London, the fares are not only new to TfL, but also a lot higher per passenger than shorter hops within the zones.

I think it's a bit of a red herring tbh, as the most lucrative fares still go to GWR. TfL are only really getting the fares from Langley and Iver into London. As ORCATs would mean GWR get 70% of the Twyford, Maidenhead and Slough to London fares because of the speed and they run more services later into the night.

 

[SynthD]

One thing that has not been mentioned about the choice between ETCS and CBTC is that there are increasing concerns that ETCS based on GSM-R will not have the capacity to cope with the volume of messages required for a high frequency metro-type service, where every train will need to be in almost constant communication, constantly updating its position so that the train behind can have its movement authority extended.

Where are these concerns? You’ve described the core function as if it was a brand new troubling roadblock.

 

[AM9]

Where are these concerns? You’ve described the core function as if it was a brand new troubling roadblock.

How is it that Thameslink has been managing without significant problems for over 2 years then?

 

[Purple Orange]

Would I mothball it? No. But it should be repurposed...

What could be better than a slow canal boat ride under London to the tune of It’s A Small World!

 

[Domh245]

How is it that Thameslink has been managing without significant problems for over 2 years then?

I might have missed it, but the Thameslink core has hardly been operating it's ETCS system as a high frequency service as of yet? My understanding is that it was still a handful of trains per day operating on it, with the rest still using the conventional signalling, so any issues about running out of GSM-R bandwidth won't have been encountered yet

 

[AM9]

I might have missed it, but the Thameslink core has hardly been operating it's ETCS system as a high frequency service as of yet? My understanding is that it was still a handful of trains per day operating on it, with the rest still using the conventional signalling, so any issues about running out of GSM-R bandwidth won't have been encountered yet

OK, I thought that when the ATO was switched on, the whole system was also tested. Is ATO being used an all trains at the moment and does it ride on the back of the ETCS installation?

 

[mmh]

OK, I thought that when the ATO was switched on, the whole system was also tested. Is ATO being used an all trains at the moment and does it ride on the back of the ETCS installation?

ATO is being used on no trains at the moment.

 

[AM9]

ATO is being used on no trains at the moment.

Not right now but wasn't it in use before the current reductions in service, i.e. at 20tph.

 

[Domh245]

Not right now but wasn't it in use before the current reductions in service, i.e. at 20tph.

Reading this post - no, at least not at any sort of significant scale.

OK, I thought that when the ATO was switched on, the whole system was also tested. Is ATO being used an all trains at the moment and does it ride on the back of the ETCS installation?

I'm sure that they have tested the ETCS installation as much as they can, but I don't think they've tested it at a the full 24tphpd frequency. I'd be surprised however if they hadn't been aware of this and sought to ensure that there was enough GSM-R capacity for it

 

[squizzler]

The pandemic would seemingly make a fast mainline sized link under London to replace station transfers via cramped and badly ventilated legacy Victorian tubes an even more compelling proposition.

With the economy and travel patterns likely to become more dispersed from the capital in future, the need will be for more not fewer such cross-city trips - neither starting or ending in London - which will increase the business case for Crossrail 2.

If Crossrail had opened on schedule, I reckon it’s usage would be holding up better right now than that of the Underground as a whole (hole?).

 

[AlbertBeale]

The pandemic would seemingly make a fast mainline sized link under London to replace station transfers via cramped and badly ventilated legacy Victorian tubes an even more compelling proposition.

But are there currently many cross-London transfers between Paddington and Liverpool Street by long-distance travellers? Swansea-Southend anyone?

 

[The Ham]

But are there currently many cross-London transfers between Paddington and Liverpool Street by long-distance travellers? Swansea-Southend anyone?

It's probably a difficult dataset to find in the public domain, however between the South West and East of England (which would almost entirely be through London) there's about 600,000 or about 2,000 a day.

In rail terms that's not a lot, however it's also a figure which is unlikely to be impacted negatively by WFH. If anything it could see an increase due to less justification for car ownership if travel reduces.

 

[Ianno87]

But are there currently many cross-London transfers between Paddington and Liverpool Street by long-distance travellers? Swansea-Southend anyone?

Not just Paddington-Liverpool Street, but many journeys currently made via the Central or northern side of the Circle Line and some of the Jubilee Line would logically transfer to Crossrail.

 

[squizzler]

It's probably a difficult dataset to find in the public domain, however between the South West and East of England (which would almost entirely be through London) there's about 600,000 or about 2,000 a day.

Looking at a map of English regions, is is clear that for Paddington to Liverpool Street transfers, many of the journeys will be from the part of the Southeast that the GWML passes through. Still more will originate from outer parts of London.

I have read elsewhere that London itself has become polycentric to a greater degree, so that not only are office workers now carrying out their craft from home to a greater extent but people are increasingly choosing to live and work in their own 'hood rather that traipse into the centre.

Not just Paddington-Liverpool Street, but many journeys currently made via the Central or northern side of the Circle Line and some of the Jubilee Line would logically transfer to Crossrail.

Whilst Crossrail is envisioned to relieve overcrowding on the Underground, the tube has always been reason not to travel through London if you have luggage or pushchairs. More spacious and pleasant travel conditions (not to mention speed) hopefully mean that the M25 also stands to lose traffic to Crossrail schemes.

 

[camflyer]

But are there currently many cross-London transfers between Paddington and Liverpool Street by long-distance travellers? Swansea-Southend anyone?

Crossrail will certainly be a lot better for those in Essex/East Anglia wanting to get to Heathrow. Most of the time I choose to drive as the cross-London rail connection is such a pain. Also easier for those coming in on Thameslink as there will be a simple connection at Farringdon.

Mothballing a railway which is 99% complete sounds like madness especially as TfL is desperate for the fares income.

 

[Tobbes]

But are there currently many cross-London transfers between Paddington and Liverpool Street by long-distance travellers? Swansea-Southend anyone?

Much more than that - LST/KGX - PAD also covers much of the East Anglia - Oxford traffic until EWR, too.

 

[AlbertBeale]

Much more than that - LST/KGX - PAD also covers much of the East Anglia - Oxford traffic until EWR, too.

Yes - but you can't avoid the Underground by using Crossrail from beyond terminal stations on each side (which is the sort of suggestion I was commenting on) if you're going up the Kings Cross line! It only works for Paddington and Liverpool Street, which weren't - I was suggesting - responsible for many of the region-to-region cross-London transfers which happen. Thameslink is quite useful for that, for many combinations of out of London places; but Crossrail doesn't fulfil that function to much of an extent. Crossrail might be seen as a way of - effectively - travelling in bigger tube carriages if you happen to be going that way, but it doesn't save many people travelling bewtween main line stations from needing to get in and out of Underground trains.

 

[camflyer]

Yes - but you can't avoid the Underground by using Crossrail from beyond terminal stations on each side (which is the sort of suggestion I was commenting on) if you're going up the Kings Cross line! It only works for Paddington and Liverpool Street, which weren't - I was suggesting - responsible for many of the region-to-region cross-London transfers which happen. Thameslink is quite useful for that, for many combinations of out of London places; but Crossrail doesn't fulfil that function to much of an extent. Crossrail might be seen as a way of - effectively - travelling in bigger tube carriages if you happen to be going that way, but it doesn't save many people travelling bewtween main line stations from needing to get in and out of Underground trains.

You seem to be criticising Crossrail for not doing something it wasn't designed for.

Sounds like you need Crossrail 2.

 

[AlbertBeale]

You seem to be criticising Crossrail for not doing something it wasn't designed for.

Sounds like you need Crossrail 2.

Not really - I was commenting on what other people seemed to be saying, namely that many cross-London journeys (which I took to mean from beyond London terminals at each end) could, with the help of Crossrail, be made without resorting to existing Underground lines. I was pointing out that that use of Crossrail is minor, compared to, eg, the equivalent for Thameslink.

 

[JonathanH]

It seems likely that Crossrail will be mothballed if additional funding is not obtained. It would be interesting to see the knock on effects of this, for example perpetual operation of the 345 fleet as 7-car units rather than getting the 9-car fleet to work reliably, although I guess this is more about construction work than operational matters.

Crossrail ‘needs extra £80m to avoid being mothballed’

Crossrail urgently needs an extra £80m in funding to stay on track, according to reports.

www.standard.co.uk

Crossrail ‘needs extra £80m to avoid being mothballed’, TfL chief reportedly warns Government

Crossrail urgently needs an extra £80m in funding to stay on track, according to reports.

Andy Byford, the London transport commissioner, has written to the permanent secretary at the Department for Transport (DfT) seeking the release of new Government funding for the long delayed project, Sky News reported.

Mr Byford reportedly warned that the project faces being "mothballed" unless the funding is agreed soon.

"If agreement is not reached this week, we will have no option but to mothball the project and to seek alternative governance for its eventual completion," the letter said, according to Sky's sources.

"I sincerely hope that we can avoid such a Doomsday scenario."

When contacted by The Evening Standard a spokesperson for TfL would not deny the reports.

Instead, they said: “TfL, the GLA and Government all continue to have discussions around the additional funding needed to complete the Crossrail project".

As it moved from the construction phase to the operational phase, direct control of Crossrail was handed over to TfL, which will be the operator and maintainer of the railway.

The troubled line, from Berkshire to Essex via central London, was originally expected to open in December 2018 but repeated delays have pushed it back.

An update from Crossrail Ltd at the end of August said the opening of the railway, which will be called the Elizabeth Line, was to be delayed again until the first half of 2022.

Covid-19 is one of the reasons behind the new delay, the team said, with social distancing meaning that a maximum of 2,000 people are now allowed on Crossrail sites, which is less than 50% of the staffing levels before the pandemic.

The Department for Transport has been contacted for comment.

 

[the sniper]

It would seem comical to talk about it being mothballed for the sake of £80m when how many Billions have already been spent on it? If that's the rhetoric required to get a top up though, fair enough...

 

[popeter45]

It would seem comical to talk about it being mothballed for the sake of £80m when how many Billions have already been spent on it? If that's the rhetoric required to get a top up though, fair enough...

yea i think its more for show than a actual idea, get media saying its at risk unless gov step up and therefore puts pressure on gov to provide the funds

 

[camflyer]

It would seem comical to talk about it being mothballed for the sake of £80m when how many Billions have already been spent on it? If that's the rhetoric required to get a top up though, fair enough...

When we are borrowing £20bn a month, 80 million is a mere rounding error. WIth TfL in financial trouble, Crossrail needs to be running to generate income.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Its not going to be mothballed its just political posturing and forcing TfL to get its house in order and do what the govt wants.

The fact that Wildes been there 2 years now and still won't give any certainty to when its open though will be exercising the mandarins at DofT and given the amount of cash there burning through rightly so.

 

[JKF]

Rather than mothball it, just set up a manual token system (or ‘one train in steam’) and stick a few freights through each day, free up a bit of capacity on the NLL.