TV Alert: BBC 2's Documentary "15 Billion Pound Railway"

[jon0844]

I've been very impressed with the series and it seems to keep getting better. I guess for one thing, they have plenty of material and so wouldn't have been struggling to find interesting things when editing it together as we've seen elsewhere.

While it still jumps back and forth, it never feels like it has any padding.

And they kept the bit with the German guy saying he had wood, which made me chuckle!

 

[AM9]

I've been very impressed with the series and it seems to keep getting better. I guess for one thing, they have plenty of material and so wouldn't have been struggling to find interesting things when editing it together as we've seen elsewhere.

While it still jumps back and forth, it never feels like it has any padding.

And they kept the bit with the German guy saying he had wood, which made me chuckle!

That's because his job excites him.

 

[edwin_m]

Final question. The GWML is notorious for delays whether lightning strikes, points/signal failures, broken down trains or people under trains. How will Crossrail function if trains have stopped or delayed because of signalling problems at say Maidenhead or Ealing Broadway ?

Of the 24 trains per hour in the central section about 14 will turn back at Westbourne Park, having gone out of service at Paddington (some of which might go onto the Euston lines if that connection is built). The turnback is within Crossrail central section so can still function even if the GWML stops completely. Hopefully new trains and signalling will make GWML more reliable as well!

 

[NotATrainspott]

Absolutely - Reading now has 15 platforms whereas before it had just 9. The station will also be handling the new Reading to Heathrow rail link. Which begs the question how much capacity do the slow lines have or will rail link be using fast lines along with HST/IEP?

Final question. The GWML is notorious for delays whether lightning strikes, points/signal failures, broken down trains or people under trains. How will Crossrail function if trains have stopped or delayed because of signalling problems at say Maidenhead or Ealing Broadway ?

It was said somewhere that the South Wales-Heathrow path was on the relief lines and was relatively slow. It would make sense to build the GWML-WRAtH junction to be expanded in future to be grade-separated to both the main and relief lines, as the Crossrail works at Heathrow Junction are reconfiguring it at the moment.

 

[edwin_m]

They presumably can't all turn back from east at Old Oak Common. Can anyone provide a complete turn-back list, from both directions, of both those that might be used to combat late running and those only to be used in extremis?

The Westbourne Park turnback could probably cope with a few more in emergency than it is timetabled to do. If there is access as far as Old Oak then they would probably thin out the service by dropping some of the trains into the Crossrail depot there.

 

[NotATrainspott]

I think the Westbourne Park sidings will remain after Old Oak Common and its turnback (which would then become the WCML connection) are operational so there would be enough turnback capacity on the ATO-controlled core for the full 32tph that CR is signalled for.

 

[AM9]

Yes that was very interesting about the Excel/Connaught Tunnel. I have enjoyed the series, I wonder if they will do a follow up.
They say this was the biggest construction project for a long time, was it more complicated in some ways than the building of the Channel Tunnel?

I seem to recall when crossrail was first planned in the 1980s it was to have been a much larger project, as well as going west to Reading (Rather than Maidenhead), it was also going up the Chiltern route towards Aylesbury and I think further east in Essex and south in Kent. Abbey Wood seems an odd place to terminate. I should have thought that Dartford, Ashford or Ebbsfleet/Northfleet or the Medway towns would have been a good destination with more interchange facilities. At least it is now going to Reading which makes more sense.

Originally proposed by BR, Crossrail is now a TfL project so it has been planned to stay broadly within the London zones. As it is, Shenfield and Maidenhead, although outside the London Councils area, are being added to the Oyster card zones (and maybe Travelcard also). Reading is a late addition made possible by increased capacity at Reading and the impact of GWML electrification.
Whilst serving deeper into Essex and Kent could be acheived without much in the way of infrastructure, any significant extensions would detract from the high density metro role of Crossrail. Extending into the Chilterns, e.g. Aylesbury would create issues with the LUL 4-rail DC infrastructure between NW London and Amersham.

 

[edwin_m]

I think the Westbourne Park sidings will remain after Old Oak Common and its turnback (which would then become the WCML connection) are operational so there would be enough turnback capacity on the ATO-controlled core for the full 32tph that CR is signalled for.

I agree the turnback at Westbourne Park is needed because there isn't capacity to run the full tunnel service frequency out to Old Oak. Of the trains that go out of service at Paddington, some will go to Westbourne Park and return eastwards and others will go to Old Oak, for example for inter-peak maintenance. In normal operation I don't think there is any need to turn back trains at Old Oak, unless they are visiting the depot for some other reason.

I think this might also mean that any WCML connection needs to start from Westbourne Park, unless they've found some way of squeezing a few more trains in as far as Old Oak.

 

[jon0844]

That's because his job excites him.

That was the joke.

 

[Busaholic]

T

Yes that was very interesting about the Excel/Connaught Tunnel. I have enjoyed the series, I wonder if they will do a follow up.
They say this was the biggest construction project for a long time, was it more complicated in some ways than the building of the Channel Tunnel?

I seem to recall when crossrail was first planned in the 1980s it was to have been a much larger project, as well as going west to Reading (Rather than Maidenhead), it was also going up the Chiltern route towards Aylesbury and I think further east in Essex and south in Kent. Abbey Wood seems an odd place to terminate. I should have thought that Dartford, Ashford or Ebbsfleet/Northfleet or the Medway towns would have been a good destination with more interchange facilities. At least it is now going to Reading which makes more sense.

Abbey Wood = the station for Thamesmead. So what? Well, it's probably now forgotten by many, if it ever was known, that when the Jubilee Line was built out to Stratford a reason given for the station at North Greenwich ,necessitating an extra TWO crossings under the Thames between Canary Wharf and Canning Town was the later possibility of an extension from N.G. to Thamesmead, rather than the real reason of making the building of the Millenium Dome slightly less of a national disaster/scandal than it already was: oh, and the 'regeneration' of the Greenwich Peninsula too. I lived in the vicinity for donkey years and had never heard of the ' Greenwich Peninsula' but, get a load of consultants in who wouldn't dream of going south of the river except possibly west of Kennington, and suddenly they become 'experts' in the area and the travel patterns of its inhabitants. Anyway, probably LB of Greenwich kept the pressure up and got Woolwich to Abbey Wood added to the Crossrail proposals, although this section was still in doubt, for financial reasons, up to the last minute, particularly Woolwich Arsenal station.

Imagine the outcry now if an attempt was made to divert any Stratford-bound Jubilee Line trains to Thamesmead!

 

[AM9]

T

Abbey Wood = the station for Thamesmead. So what? Well, it's probably now forgotten by many, if it ever was known, that when the Jubilee Line was built out to Stratford a reason given for the station at North Greenwich ,necessitating an extra TWO crossings under the Thames between Canary Wharf and Canning Town was the later possibility of an extension from N.G. to Thamesmead, rather than the real reason of making the building of the Millenium Dome slightly less of a national disaster/scandal than it already was:

Well I have no inside knowledge of such schemes, but local news reports were openly saying that North Greenwich was to give passenger access to the Dome and that the area had very limited car access.
In the event, the (eventual) development of the dome by O2 into a large entertainment complex has shown just how relevant the station is.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That was the joke.

And a German one as well?

 

[HSTEd]

Wouldn't it be plausible to simply hand the GWML slow lines entirely to Crossrail?
It could be rigged for ATO that way and the system could be entirely isolated at that end.

You could then run as many trains through to Reading as desired without worrying about having some rump NR services.

 

[306024]

Err where would the goods trains go? Quite a bit of freight uses the relief lines on the Great Western.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Also it's probably also useful to have the Crossrail network connected upto the national network somewhere for things like p-way trains, engineers trains

 

[edwin_m]

Crossrail trains will normally use the reliefs on the GWML but will be allowed to use the mains during engineering access or disruption. They then won't be able to serve those stations that only have platforms on the reliefs.

 

[GodAtum]

I feel sorry for the FGW commuters at stations between Reading and Paddington. Hopefully no-one at Reading will get on Crossrail!

 

[HSTEd]

Err where would the goods trains go? Quite a bit of freight uses the relief lines on the Great Western.

How many?
We have a once in a generation opportunity to deliver a truly transformative change to rail provision in the GWML suburban corridor and it is not being grasped.
Once again freight of marginal economic utility is allowed to cripple a passenger scheme.

Since the reliefs would be recast as a simple two track railway with little or no need for freight loops or similar then the lines could be slewed over to allow for the loops to be transferred to the Main Lines, along with additional loops potentially placed in the space freed by the demolition of the redundant fast line platforms at stations between Reading and London.

Even if those loops are useless there are only 30 miles between Acton where the freight traffic leaves the railway and Reading.
Which means that a freight train which would have a clear run of greens on the fast line (as the train in front would be pulling away rapidly at 125) would cover the distance in something like 24 minutes at 75mph, as opposed to 15 minutes at 125mph assuming neither train had stopped at Reading which is a conservative scenario.
With a low density of freight trains that is not catastrophic considering the capability of ETCS to make up the difference at other parts of the hour.

And as to Crossrail running on the main lines - that will never happen in practice for the simple reason that it would cause the main line service to collapse.
The Crossrail service is more amenable to bustitution than the main line service and thus the main line service will run as normal and the Crossrail service will be replaced with more red london buses on the corridor.

Also wouldn't a combination of EWR and maybe a headshunt at Acton Wells Junction allow freight to route around the GWML via Oxford, the Chiltern Main line and the Dudding Hill Line?

 

[edwin_m]

Some of the freight trains in question are multi-thousand-tonne aggregate loads that are split into shorter trains at Acton Yard and tripped to various terminals around London. Although final distribution to construction sites is by road, these trains still take a huge number of lorries off London's streets. These are 60mph trains not 75mph and will take some distance to get up to speed.

An alternative routeing via Oxford might allow trains to approach via the MML instead, but that has congestion problems of its own.

Running Crossrail on the mains is only envisaged during engineering work, when less frequent services would be operating, or if the route is severely disrupted.

 

[HSTEd]

As aggregate is not normally a time critical good (since it is so cheap to store as it is just a pile of stone) wouldn't it be best to just have the Aggregate train run in before the first inbound IEP arrives and then have the empties run out after the last outbound one?

The aggregate trains could be flighted if there is more than one per day.

 

[LexyBoy]

I feel sorry for the FGW commuters at stations between Reading and Paddington. Hopefully no-one at Reading will get on Crossrail!

Why do you feel sorry? They will have a vastly improved service!

The 4 tph between Maidenhead and Paddington (rising to 10 tph from Hayes) will provide masses more capacity than the current service (4 tph locals of 3-6 carriages).

I a lot of people will get Crossrail from Reading: first off, those who already pack into the stoppers to intermediate stations; secondly, for those going to London, as a TfL brand it will be well trusted - plus you'll get a seat. Doubly true for those who will be able to make their journey without changing by using Crossrail.

Wouldn't it be plausible to simply hand the GWML slow lines entirely to Crossrail?
It could be rigged for ATO that way and the system could be entirely isolated at that end.

You could then run as many trains through to Reading as desired without worrying about having some rump NR services.

So you'd be making one of the busiest mainlines into a 2-track line on its busiest section? That doesn't sound like a good idea at all. What happens when something (read: aging HST) breaks down, or there's an obstruction on the line? What about weekend maintenance - are you going to divert IEPs into Waterloo?

The current plans call for only 4 tph Crossrail between West Drayton and Reading, which is probably all that is needed - at most 6 tph. Whereas non-Crossrail we have around 10-12 tph IC, a few (2 tph?) semifast from Oxford/Newbury stopping at Maidenhead, Slough and Ealing. The GWML RUS talks about 3-4 tph freight to Acton in future - not sure how realistic this is but certainly freight isn't going to be only a couple of trains a day.

 

[STEVIEBOY1]

Will Crossrail trains call at terminal 5, 4 & 1/2/3.? According to the routes shown on the TV Programme, it only seems to show T4 & 1/2/3. T 5 Was not shown.

 

[swt_passenger]

Will Crossrail trains call at terminal 5, 4 & 1/2/3.? According to the routes shown on the TV Programme, it only seems to show T4 & 1/2/3. T 5 Was not shown.

Crossrail will run to and from T4 via T1/2/3 at 4 tph, replacing and augmenting Heathrow Connect's current 2 tph.

T5 remains Heathrow Express only, still running at 4 tph via T1/2/3.

This division of services has always been the case ever since Crossrail was given the go-ahead, it has been consistent in all previous and currently published plans and 'timetables'...

 

[HSTEd]

So you'd be making one of the busiest mainlines into a 2-track line on its busiest section? That doesn't sound like a good idea at all. What happens when something (read: aging HST) breaks down, or there's an obstruction on the line?

The same thing that happens when any 2 track lien suffers a train failure?
What about HS2? Its not a good idea to make it two track because of what happens in disruption?

And there will be almost no HSTs into Paddington by the time Crossrail is ready - it will be almost all IEPs.

What about weekend maintenance - are you going to divert IEPs into Waterloo?

Nope, terminate them all at Reading and detrain them all onto Crossrail trains.
Much simpler. And considering the low speed that trains will end up with on the relief lines not that much slower.

The current plans call for only 4 tph Crossrail between West Drayton and Reading, which is probably all that is needed - at most 6 tph.

All that is needed?
4 trains per hour is not turn up and go frequencies.
Is Crossrail the 'super tube line' that I am often told about or is it Thameslink?

It seems to be trying to be both at once for no apparent reason.

Whereas non-Crossrail we have around 10-12 tph IC, a few (2 tph?) semifast from Oxford/Newbury stopping at Maidenhead, Slough and Ealing.

What are the flows between Ealing/Slough/Maidenhead and stations beyond Reading? I can not see this as a large scale flow. It would unlikely to significantly reduce custom if passengers had to change trains at Reading, especially if the Crossrail service was incredibly intensive.
12tph is hardly filling the fast lines if you ignore freight, and you remove any and all stops between Reading and Paddington/OOC.

HS2 demonstrates 18tph is feasible on two track lines with uniform train characteristics.

The GWML RUS talks about 3-4 tph freight to Acton in future - not sure how realistic this is but certainly freight isn't going to be only a couple of trains a day.

And where would the subsidy for that come from? Especially once EWR rips the heart out of the cross-london freight market.
Could also make some improvements to the Chiltern Main line and route trains to Acton over the NNML now that it will not be annihalated by HS2 construction.
We have an opportunity to build what amounts to a super tube line all the way to Reading.
16tph Reading
8tph Heathrow.

EDIT:
There would certainly be room for freight loops on the sites of Maidenhead and Slough stations when they were remodelled to have three platforms at each (two Crossrail platforms and one branch line platform).

 

[NotATrainspott]

The GWML Relief lines will be equipped with ETCS, and Crossrail will be the primary (but not exclusive) operator on them so I can't see how converting them to Crossrail-only would be either expensive or justified. There's no need to have ATO on them and you would never have that many services continuing past Airport Junction.

 

[HSTEd]

Why not?
The line is almost entirely in built up areas all the way to Maidenhead.

 

[edwin_m]

Crossrail trains will be 12 cars long. With most current GW suburban trains being no more than half that, and also carrying commuters from beyond Reading who wouldn't transfer to Crossrail, there is simply not the demand to run Crossrail more frequently on the GWML.

 

[306024]

Sorry to be pedantic, but the class 345s are 9 cars with a total length of approximately 205m. They will run as 7 cars on the GE initially as anything longer won't fit in platforms 16-18 at Liverpool St.

......We have an opportunity to build what amounts to a super tube line all the way to Reading.
16tph Reading
8tph Heathrow.

I'll have what you're drinking .....or perhaps not.

 

[Busaholic]

Going back to the original thread about the TV programme: the general consensus on here seemed to be that the second and third episodes were interesting and informative, the first perhaps less so. But looking at it from the perspective of a general viewer, even one who commutes in the areas served or who is an occasional traveller, I do wonder whether the programmes gave a slightly rose-tinted view of how things will actually be when Crossrail opens. The programmes were only concerned with the new-build, exciting and challenging enough, but not to really mention the bulk of the route(s) may have left the impression with some that new stations were being created right out to Reading (o.k., I know that is the exception) and Shenfield with new FAST (my emphasis) trains to whizz them to the central section, like the Paris RER, whereas, as far as I can gather, there are no plans for anything other than all-stations services.
,
Please correct me if I am wrong, and I'll pre-empt some comments by agreeing there was never anything said to suggest anything about fast services, but a bit like Sherlock Holmes and dogs in the night, it was what wasn't said.

As a relative newbie, this has probably been covered many times before on old threads, but are there really no plans to run any services not calling at Maryland, West Ealing or Plumstead to name but three? If not, I suspect there may have to be a re-think once services start - for instance, after Shenfield, just Brentwood, Romford and Ilford before Stratford.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Just to make myself clear, I was suggesting some fast ones as well as the 'stoppers'.

 

[306024]

With trains every 5 minutes between Shenfield and Central London in the peak, any semi-fast train would soon catch up the one in front (by Gidea Park in the GE example).

The GE metro service today sees some semi fast trains in the peak because there is not the passenger capacity on many trains to be able to stop them at all stations, and even if there was, the slightly longer journey times would then require more 315s.

There is a plan not to stop at Plumstead, by not providing a station there

 

[edwin_m]

Sorry to be pedantic, but the class 345s are 9 cars with a total length of approximately 205m. They will run as 7 cars on the GE initially as anything longer won't fit in platforms 16-18 at Liverpool St.

Yes you're right. I was thinking of the original spec which would have been 10 by 20m with the option to extend to 12 by 20m. The platform tunnels will be 240m but I believe 40m at one end will be walled off and not fitted out.