Wessex Route Study - draft out for consultation

[infobleep]

First Great Western's franchise was extended so that a new operator didn't come in whilst the infrastructure projects to electrify the west route were on going. Would they consider extending South West Trains franchise beyond 2019, given that some of the stuff in CP6 will lead to quite some disruption and South West Trains are in alliance with Network Rail in terms of infrastructure?

I've not heard that their partnership isn't working well so I assume it must be. Therefore why change it, if it's working well.

 

[Bald Rick]

I've not heard that their partnership isn't working well so I assume it must be. Therefore why change it, if it's working well.

Alternatively, you've not heard that it is working well, saving tons of cash and resulting in best ever train performance, so therefore it must be bad news?

 

[infobleep]

Alternatively, you've not heard that it is working well, saving tons of cash and resulting in best ever train performance, so therefore it must be bad news?

Surely if things were bad the Evening Standard or some other train company would have picked up on it.

 

[21C101]

Surely if things were bad the Evening Standard or some other train company would have picked up on it.

Not to mention someone who used to live in Effingham

 

[Olaf]

The portal is north of Wimbledon in the current plans.

Chris

I think that was only illustrative in the schematic; is it stated anywhere that this is the case?

At the moment they are still investigating the options, none of the design work has been done yet.

It would be convenient to have cross-platform transfers, but would it be possible to accommodate surface access to Crossrail2 platforms at Wimbledon? I am assuming that the Crossrail2 portal will be south of Wimbledon, but would be interested if there is a definitive statement that it will be otherwise.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Is it possible that having the CR2 portal north or Wimbledon and tunnelling the fast tracks under Wimbledon station could be cheaper than putting the CR2 portal South of Wimbledon? That would mean you don't have to build any underground platforms (and possibly, don't need to build any new platforms at all) at Wimbledon.

That was the alternative I was thinking off. The problem is that it does not offer an interchange between stoppers on teh mainline and Crossrail2 as suggested in the report.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It would be cheaper but it would mean that no extra capacity is provided on the South West Main Line.

Six tracks are needed north of Hampton Court Junction (or Raynes Park as a minimum)

The report is saying that the sixth track is only required between New Maldon and Wimbledon.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

First Great Western's franchise was extended so that a new operator didn't come in whilst the infrastructure projects to electrify the west route were on going. Would they consider extending South West Trains franchise beyond 2019, given that some of the stuff in CP6 will lead to quite some disruption and South West Trains are in alliance with Network Rail in terms of infrastructure?

I expect that something like that would be a possibility, but none of the proposals have been finalised yet so it is no clear on what or when.

 

[21C101]

I think that was only illustrative in the schematic; is it stated anywhere that this is the case?

At the moment they are still investigating the options, none of the design work has been done yet.

It would be convenient to have cross-platform transfers, but would it be possible to accommodate surface access to Crossrail2 platforms at Wimbledon? I am assuming that the Crossrail2 portal will be south of Wimbledon, but would be interested if there is a definitive statement that it will be otherwise.

No way you can accomodate two extra platforms at Wimbledon for Crossrail on the surface (unless you want to demolish a good chunk of Wimbledon Town Centre along with the office block built over the track at the southern end of the station)

The report is saying that the sixth track is only required between New Maldon and Wimbledon.

That is much better than six tracks only to Raynes Park but not as good as six tracks to Hampton Court Junction. New Malden is where the Kingston line goes off. I suspect it will mean that Crossrail wont run to Hampton Court and only run to Twickenham, Shepperton, Dorking via Epsom, Chessington South and possibly Guildford via Epsom.

It will still release a large amount of slow line paths, which in turn will release a large amount of fast line paths (eg Alton to London services won't have to cross over to the fasts north of Surbiton)


With Wimbledon Crossrail built subsurface (and if they are sensible positioned directly below the District line platforms to make interchange to them as simple as possible), the obvious place for Crossrail/SWML interconnection is Raynes Park where it could be done cross platform using the existing up platforms and conversion of the down platform to an island - with a new platform for the diverging down line to Epsom/Chessington.

Google maps suggests there is room to put another pair of lines beside the up and down slows between New Malden Jct and north of Raynes Park where the crossrail lines dive down a tunnel, except at New Malden station, however if the fast line platform is abolished there and the fast lines slewed into the middle it could be fitted in.

This would make something like the below possible (they wouldn't need to run nearly this many on some of the lines in 2019 but it gives an idea of future capacity for the next 50 years if Crossrail 2 is built). I've put the approx current service per hour at the end in brackets. Also assumes new fast to slow crossovers at Farnborough discussed earlier in the thread along with flyovers at Woking and Bas (including turnback track) have been built.

Crossrail
Six Per Hour Twickenham via Kingston (four per hour offpeak) [2p.h. now]
Six Per Hour Shepperton via Kingston (four per hour offpeak) [2p.h. now]
Six Per Hour Chessington South (four per hour offpeak) [2p.h. now]
Four Per Hour Dorking via Epsom (two per hour offpeak) [2p.h. now]
Two Per Hour Guildford via Epsom and Effingham [2p.h. now]

Slow Lines
Four Per Hour Vaux, Clapham Jct, Earlsfield, Wimbledon, Raynes Park, Surbiton Hinchley wood and all stns to Guildford [2p.h. now]
Four Per Hour Vaux, Clapham Jct, Earlsfield, Wimbledon, Raynes Park, Surbiton, Esher and all stns to Guildford via Woking. [2p.h. now]
Two Per Hour Vaux, Clapham Jct, Earlsfield, Wimbledon, Raynes Park, Surbiton, Walton, Weybridge, Woking and all stns to Alton [0p.h. now]
Two per hour Vaux, Clapham Jct, Earlsfield, Wimbledon, Raynes Park, Surbiton, Walton, Weybridge, Woking and all stns to Basingstoke. [2p.h. now]
Four per Hour Vaux, Clapham Jct, Earlsfield, Wimbledon, Raynes Park, Berrylands, Surbiton Thanes Ditton, Hampton Court.[2p.h. now]

Fast Lines
4 Per Hour to Poole (2 onto Weymouth) [2p.h. now]
4 per Hour to Salisbury (2 onto Exeter) [2p.h now]
4 Per Hour to Portsmouth via Guildford [3p.h. now]
4 Per Hour to Woking, Farnborough, Fleet, Basingstoke, only (Peak only) (Cross to slow at Farnborough) [0p.h. now]
2 Per Hour Woking and all stations to Alton (cross to Slow at Woking) [2.p.h now]
2 Per Hour Woking, Farnborough and all stations to Southampton (cross to Slow at Farnborough) [1p.h now]
2 per hour Portsmouth via Eastleigh [1p.h. now]
2 per hour Woking, Guildford, Farncombe Godalming only (peak only) (cross to slow at Woking) [0p.h. now]


The suburban and outer suburban lines out of Waterloo generally only have a half hourly service now due to lack of paths, even in the height of the peak hours, there must be a fair bit of suppressed demand on them, not to mention the overcrowding.

 

[Olaf]

No way you can accomodate two extra platforms at Wimbledon for Crossrail on the surface (unless you want to demolish a good chunk of Wimbledon Town Centre along with the office block built over the track at the southern end of the station)

That is similar to what I was thinking. You could possibly relocate the Croydon Tram terminal to free up space, but you may still need to provide additional lines under the modern buildings that have appeared in recent years. On the other hand, it would be expensive but not impossible.

That is much better than six tracks only to Raynes Park but not as good as six tracks to Hampton Court Junction. New Malden is where the Kingston line goes off. I suspect it will mean that Crossrail wont run to Hampton Court and only run to Twickenham, Shepperton, Dorking via Epsom, Chessington South and possibly Guildford via Epsom.

That is what I read into the comments in the report. The TfL site suggests through connections to Crossrail2 from Surbiton and beyond, but NR's proposal suggests that suburban services joining the SWML south of the current New Maldon junction would continue on the existing slow lines to serve the inner suburban stations.

 

[21C101]

That is similar to what I was thinking. You could possibly relocate the Croydon Tram terminal to free up space, but you may still need to provide additional lines under the modern buildings that have appeared in recent years. On the other hand, it would be expensive but not impossible.

Its not just Tramlink, you've got the line to Sutton running immediately alongside the down slow for about a mile to near Wimbledon Chase and no room on the up side for another track either.

If you don't put Crossrail into a tunnel about half a mile north of Raynes Park you start running out of land.

That is what I read into the comments in the report. The TfL site suggests through connections to Crossrail2 from Surbiton and beyond, but NR's proposal suggests that suburban services joining the SWML south of the current New Maldon junction would continue on the existing slow lines to serve the inner suburban stations.

My guess is that they won't want to import train delays from the SWML into Crossrail 2 and vice versa or compromise the ability to run semi fasts to places like Alton and Basingstoke on the slow line all the way, releasing those fast line paths. Plus they still have to serve Vauxhall and Earlsfield and, of course, Waterloo so they need some suburban services left to those places.

 

[Chris125]

I think that was only illustrative in the schematic; is it stated anywhere that this is the case?

As earlier maps showed a portal south of Wimbledon I had assumed the recent change was deliberate and I see no reason to think otherwise, but I've double checked and found a mention in the report of the route consultation - CR2 Consultation Analysis

The Council also notes Crossrail 2’s intention to relocate the southernmost tunnel portal just north of Wimbledon, which the council supports in principal, as this is likely to have less impact on Merton residents than the previous option, although it recognises that this will be subject to detailed investigations.


Chris

 

[hwl]

From the Sussex Route draft study on Wimbledon (and the TL / London Bridge Loop services)

see:
http://www.networkrail.co.uk/long-term-planning-process/south-east-route-sussex-area-route-study/

page 151
"Should Crossrail 2 go ahead and the Wimbledon station area be significantly remodelled, consideration should be given to the opportunity to re-instate a second Wimbledon Loop platform as part of the new layout to aid performance."

 

[Olaf]

As earlier maps showed a portal south of Wimbledon I had assumed the recent change was deliberate and I see no reason to think otherwise, but I've double checked and found a mention in the report of the route consultation - CR2 Consultation Analysis

The Council also notes Crossrail 2’s intention to relocate the southernmost tunnel portal just north of Wimbledon, which the council supports in principal, as this is likely to have less impact on Merton residents than the previous option, although it recognises that this will be subject to detailed investigations.


Chris

Many thanks.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The cost estimates have now been revised upwards:
http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1988705&postcount=85

 

[The Ham]

No way you can accomodate two extra platforms at Wimbledon for Crossrail on the surface (unless you want to demolish a good chunk of Wimbledon Town Centre along with the office block built over the track at the southern end of the station)




That is much better than six tracks only to Raynes Park but not as good as six tracks to Hampton Court Junction. New Malden is where the Kingston line goes off. I suspect it will mean that Crossrail wont run to Hampton Court and only run to Twickenham, Shepperton, Dorking via Epsom, Chessington South and possibly Guildford via Epsom.

It will still release a large amount of slow line paths, which in turn will release a large amount of fast line paths (eg Alton to London services won't have to cross over to the fasts north of Surbiton)


With Wimbledon Crossrail built subsurface (and if they are sensible positioned directly below the District line platforms to make interchange to them as simple as possible), the obvious place for Crossrail/SWML interconnection is Raynes Park where it could be done cross platform using the existing up platforms and conversion of the down platform to an island - with a new platform for the diverging down line to Epsom/Chessington.

Google maps suggests there is room to put another pair of lines beside the up and down slows between New Malden Jct and north of Raynes Park where the crossrail lines dive down a tunnel, except at New Malden station, however if the fast line platform is abolished there and the fast lines slewed into the middle it could be fitted in.

This would make something like the below possible (they wouldn't need to run nearly this many on some of the lines in 2019 but it gives an idea of future capacity for the next 50 years if Crossrail 2 is built). I've put the approx current service per hour at the end in brackets. Also assumes new fast to slow crossovers at Farnborough discussed earlier in the thread along with flyovers at Woking and Bas (including turnback track) have been built.

Crossrail
Six Per Hour Twickenham via Kingston (four per hour offpeak) [2p.h. now]
Six Per Hour Shepperton via Kingston (four per hour offpeak) [2p.h. now]
Six Per Hour Chessington South (four per hour offpeak) [2p.h. now]
Four Per Hour Dorking via Epsom (two per hour offpeak) [2p.h. now]
Two Per Hour Guildford via Epsom and Effingham [2p.h. now]

Slow Lines
Four Per Hour Vaux, Clapham Jct, Wimbledon, Raynes Park, Surbiton Hinchley wood and all stns to Guildford [2p.h. now]
Four Per Hour Vaux, Clapham Jct, Wimbledon, Raynes Park, Surbiton, Esher and all stns to Guildford via Woking. [2p.h. now]
Two Per Hour Vaux, Clapham Jct, Wimbledon, Raynes Park, Surbiton, Walton, Weybridge, Woking and all stns to Alton [0p.h. now]
Two per hour Vaux, Clapham Jct, Wimbledon, Raynes Park, Surbiton, Walton, Weybridge, Woking and all stns to Basingstoke. [2p.h. now]
Four per Hour Vaux, Earlsfield, Clapham Jct, Wimbledon, Raynes Park, Berrylands, Surbiton Thanes Ditton, Hampton Court.[2p.h. now]

Fast Lines
4 Per Hour to Poole (2 onto Weymouth) [2p.h. now]
4 per Hour to Salisbury (2 onto Exeter) [2p.h now]
4 Per Hour to Portsmouth via Guildford [3p.h. now]
4 Per Hour to Woking, Farnborough, Fleet, Basingstoke, only (Peak only) (Cross to slow at Farnborough) [0p.h. now]
2 Per Hour Woking and all stations to Alton (cross to Slow at Woking) [2.p.h now]
2 Per Hour Woking, Farnborough and all stations to Southampton (cross to Slow at Farnborough) [1p.h now]
2 per hour Portsmouth via Eastleigh [1p.h. now]
2 per hour Woking, Guildford only (peak only) (cross to slow at Woking) [0p.h. now]


The suburban and outer suburban lines out of Waterloo generally only have a half hourly service now due to lack of paths, even in the height of the peak hours, there must be a fair bit of suppressed demand on them, not to mention the overcrowding.

Of course (at a further later date) it may be possible for some of the peak hour services to run off peak to provide extra capacity without needing to do much in the way of other works.

Personal I think that NR see Crossrail 2 as the only realistic option, it is more a case of when they can get it built rather than if it is built.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

My guess is that they won't want to import train delays from the SWML into Crossrail 2 and vice versa or compromise the ability to run semi fasts to places like Alton and Basingstoke on the slow line all the way, releasing those fast line paths. Plus they still have to serve Vauxhall and Earlsfield and, of course, Waterloo so they need some suburban services left to those places.

That's a bit I don't understand. If I've read it right, the report appears to be implying that CR2 will free up paths for fast trains into London. That in turn would imply that they are relying on CR2 removing trains from the existing slow lines, which gives you those extra paths.

But as far as I can see, that doesn't work. If you have the Hampton Court, Woking, and Cobham locals still running up to Waterloo, that's still a stopping train every 10 minutes on those slow lines. That means the only way you can put many fast trains on those lines is if they run at the same speed as the stopping trains - that's not going to be popular with commuters from Basingstoke and Guildford etc.! (And probably wouldn't work either - most longer distance commuters would just change to the 'real' fast trains at Woking).

And realistically, even with CR2, every 10 minutes is probably the absolute minimum frequency you'd want for connecting busy places like Wimbledon and Earlsfield to Waterloo, I wouldn't be surprised if some extra stopping trains need to be added on top of that, which means even fewer paths for faster trains.

So how exactly is CR2 going to free up paths for the longer distance trains?

 

[21C101]

That's a bit I don't understand. If I've read it right, the report appears to be implying that CR2 will free up paths for fast trains into London. That in turn would imply that they are relying on CR2 removing trains from the existing slow lines, which gives you those extra paths.

But as far as I can see, that doesn't work. If you have the Hampton Court, Woking, and Cobham locals still running up to Waterloo, that's still a stopping train every 10 minutes on those slow lines. That means the only way you can put many fast trains on those lines is if they run at the same speed as the stopping trains - that's not going to be popular with commuters from Basingstoke and Guildford etc.! (And probably wouldn't work either - most longer distance commuters would just change to the 'real' fast trains at Woking).

And realistically, even with CR2, every 10 minutes is probably the absolute minimum frequency you'd want for connecting busy places like Wimbledon and Earlsfield to Waterloo, I wouldn't be surprised if some extra stopping trains need to be added on top of that, which means even fewer paths for faster trains.

So how exactly is CR2 going to free up paths for the longer distance trains?

Crossrail would basically take Ten trains an hour off the slow lines. (2x Shep, 2 Twick, 2 Chess, 4 Epsom etc.)

I'm proposing that eight of those paths are replaced by doubling the Hampton Court and Guildford new line service frequency and keeping the four outer surburban stoppers that currently fun fast from Surbiton to Clapham (2 from Alton 2 from Basingstoke) on the slow lines and giving them additional calls at Raynes Park (xrail interchange), Wimbledon and Vauxhall (both tube interchange)

This will release disproportionate number of paths on the mainline as it will no longer have four slow moving trains and hour crossing onto the fasts north of Surbiton

So this enables new fast line paths as follow four an hour Waterloo - Woking - Farnborough - Fleet - Basingstoke** and two an hour Waterloo - Woking - Ash Vale - Aldershot - Farnham - Alton. (** crossover at new high speed crossovers south of Pirbright Jct or north of Woking)

So the principal stations get extra fast trains to Waterloo with a doubling in service frequency for Bas/Alton/Hampton Court/Guildford New and the existing services make more stops for interchange (noting that fast trains stopping at Clapham is probably out if the fast goes up to 24ph)

Obviously a lot of the extra capacity for 24tph on the fasts is gained by grade separating Woking and Basingstoke but that grade separation would be pointless if there were still slow trains crossing over to the fasts north of Surbiton.

Perhaps it is more accurate to say Crossrail enables a doubling of service frequency and therefore capacity to all surburban and outer suburban locations and, in conjunction with grade separation at Woking and Basingstoke (and e.c.t.s signalling) would double the capacity of the fast lines from the current 12 paths an hour (3 pompey, 1 pompey via eastleigh, 2 bas 2 alton 2 salisbury, 2weymouth) to 24 paths an hour.

 

[455driver]

I'm proposing that eight of those paths are replaced by doubling the Hampton Court and Guildford new line service frequency and keeping the four outer surburban stoppers that currently fun fast from Surbiton to Clapham (2 from Alton 2 from Basingstoke) on the slow lines and giving them additional calls at Raynes Park (xrail interchange), Wimbledon and Vauxhall (both tube interchange).

Put that to the Alton line users association and see what they have to say about it!

 

[21C101]

Put that to the Alton line users association and see what they have to say about it!

You didn't read the rest did you?

"So this enables new fast line paths as follows four an hour Waterloo - Woking - Farnborough - Fleet - Basingstoke** and two an hour Waterloo - Woking - Ash Vale - Aldershot - Farnham - Alton.

So they get a doubling of their service with a new limited stop service to Waterloo and the existing all stations to Surbiton trains calling additionally at Raynes Park, Wimbledon and Vauxhall as well as Clapham Jct.

Dont think they will be complaining about that!

 

[wastedlife]

You didn't read the rest did you?

"So this enables new fast line paths as follows four an hour Waterloo - Woking - Farnborough - Fleet - Basingstoke** and two an hour Waterloo - Woking - Ash Vale - Aldershot - Farnham - Alton.

So they get a doubling of their service with a new limited stop service to Waterloo and the existing all stations to Surbiton trains calling additionally at Raynes Park, Wimbledon and Vauxhall as well as Clapham Jct.

Dont think they will be complaining about that!

No, the Alton line users association shouldn't be complaining about that. (However, the local Aldershot councillor Mike Roberts is a fairly prominent member thereof, whose propensity to whinge and moan about anything is prolific, so I wouldn't bet on it).

However, and correct me if I'm wrong, but are you basically proposing no more non-stops to Waterloo from Surbiton? A reasonably fair response would be to say we would have lots of great new destinations and higher frequency. However, my considered response - and I think the overwhelming response from the rest of the crowds that throng platform 1 - would be "no, [insert expletive] off".

I really don't think the crossover is a particular issue - it's a high speed crossover just outside Berrylands, and I think the line speed on the slow is 80mph, so if things work properly trains crossing to the fast line are already doing a fair old lick and the impact on fast line capacity should be minimal. You certainly don't see that many fast line trains crawling through Surbiton outside of the rush hour. A far bigger PITA is the geniuses in timetabling have timetabled a significant number of services to leave Surbiton and then wait at a red signal for several minutes while (often more than one) train on the fast line passes.

When we were consulted on Crossrail 2, a significant concern was deterioration in speed and frequency of existing services. All non-stops that arrive at Surbiton from the 7.27 to the 8.25 are already full and standing, so stopping them at four more stations and extending the journey time by 40% isn't an option. (Aside from which, I don't see the demand for four trains an hour to Alton & Basingrad, but that's probably a separate issue).

 

[21C101]

No, the Alton line users association shouldn't be complaining about that. (However, the local Aldershot councillor Mike Roberts is a fairly prominent member thereof, whose propensity to whinge and moan about anything is prolific, so I wouldn't bet on it).

However, and correct me if I'm wrong, but are you basically proposing no more non-stops to Waterloo from Surbiton? A reasonably fair response would be to say we would have lots of great new destinations and higher frequency. However, my considered response - and I think the overwhelming response from the rest of the crowds that throng platform 1 - would be "no, [insert expletive] off".

I really don't think the crossover is a particular issue - it's a high speed crossover just outside Berrylands, and I think the line speed on the slow is 80mph, so if things work properly trains crossing to the fast line are already doing a fair old lick and the impact on fast line capacity should be minimal. You certainly don't see that many fast line trains crawling through Surbiton outside of the rush hour. A far bigger PITA is the geniuses in timetabling have timetabled a significant number of services to leave Surbiton and then wait at a red signal for several minutes while (often more than one) train on the fast line passes.

When we were consulted on Crossrail 2, a significant concern was deterioration in speed and frequency of existing services. All non-stops that arrive at Surbiton from the 7.27 to the 8.25 are already full and standing, so stopping them at four more stations and extending the journey time by 40% isn't an option. (Aside from which, I don't see the demand for four trains an hour to Alton & Basingrad, but that's probably a separate issue).

Yeah, sorry, I'm offering no more fasts to Waterloo from Surbiton, in exchange for 16 trains an hour (4 ex hampton Court, 4 ex Guildford New line, 4 woking all stns, 2 Bas and 2 Alton).

Some of the non stops from Surbiton already stop at Clapham Jct, so adding four more stops (Raynes Park, Wimbledon, Earlsfield and Vauxhall) in return for a tube frequency service is not I think the end of the world and with less trains on the slow lines anyway, will ensure more reliable journey times. The eight minutes spent on the four extra stops is probably the amount of time you spend at that red awaiting a fast line path anyway. (I would only stop the 4x Hampton Courts at Berrylands, so the other 12 wouldn't stop there)

With that arrangement (and the Berrylands crossovers only used for out of course working) it should be possible to extend 100/(125mph if a.c.) running on the fast lines to Earlsfield.

The bigger headache if you had 24ph on the fasts (or even 18-20) is how to fit in calls at Woking with only a single fast line platform in each direction. (Basingstoke would be ok because fast line occupancy would only be 10p.h. by then)

At Woking you would need to turn both side platforms at Woking into Islands to give six through platforms and the flyover to be an (Heathrow) airport junction type flyover, not just an up flyover from Pompey to the up slow)

The track layout would need to be Down Slow, Down Pompey, Down Fast; Up Fast; Up Pompey, Up Slow with the pompey lines having access to the both fast and slow lines where it goes back to 4 track at the north of the station. High speed crossovers from Fast to Slow between West Byfleet and Woking would also be needed.

 

[455driver]

You didn't read the rest did you?

"So this enables new fast line paths as follows four an hour Waterloo - Woking - Farnborough - Fleet - Basingstoke** and two an hour Waterloo - Woking - Ash Vale - Aldershot - Farnham - Alton.

So they get a doubling of their service with a new limited stop service to Waterloo and the existing all stations to Surbiton trains calling additionally at Raynes Park, Wimbledon and Vauxhall as well as Clapham Jct.

Dont think they will be complaining about that!

So you are going to relay the second line from Farnham to Alton are you?

 

[21C101]

So you are going to relay the second line from Farnham to Alton are you?

Yep, and extend the fasts to Southampton via Alresford and Winchester. Compared with the latest estimate of £27 billion for Crossrail 2 its chicken feed.

Might not go down to well with the Mad Hants though....someone will have to rebuild the Meon Valley for them to play with.

 

[infobleep]

They surely must stop fast trains at Clapham Junction or all the people from south of Woking won't have access to Cross Rail 2, not to mention all the other interchange opportunities at Clapham Junction, which are current dined during peak rush hour.

They decided against increasing the number of Southern services through Clapham Junction because it would mean trains couldn't call there and it would take away interchange opportunities. I agree and think the same should apply at Clapham Junction. When the infrastructure is improved of course. I don't mean right now.

 

[The Ham]

They surely must stop fast trains at Clapham Junction or all the people from south of Woking won't have access to Cross Rail 2, not to mention all the other interchange opportunities at Clapham Junction, which are current dined during peak rush hour.

They decided against increasing the number of Southern services through Clapham Junction because it would mean trains couldn't call there and it would take away interchange opportunities. I agree and think the same should apply at Clapham Junction. When the infrastructure is improved of course. I don't mean right now.

Given the increase in the number of services there is plenty of scope for providing a balance between fast services and services which provide good interchange opportunities.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Yeah, sorry, I'm offering no more fasts to Waterloo from Surbiton, in exchange for 16 trains an hour (4 ex hampton Court, 4 ex Guildford New line, 4 woking all stns, 2 Bas and 2 Alton).

Some of the non stops from Surbiton already stop at Clapham Jct, so adding four more stops (Raynes Park, Wimbledon, Earlsfield and Vauxhall) in return for a tube frequency service is not I think the end of the world and with less trains on the slow lines anyway, will ensure more reliable journey times. The eight minutes spent on the four extra stops is probably the amount of time you spend at that red awaiting a fast line path anyway. (I would only stop the 4x Hampton Courts at Berrylands, so the other 12 wouldn't stop there)

With that arrangement (and the Berrylands crossovers only used for out of course working) it should be possible to extend 100/(125mph if a.c.) running on the fast lines to Earlsfield.

The bigger headache if you had 24ph on the fasts (or even 18-20) is how to fit in calls at Woking with only a single fast line platform in each direction. (Basingstoke would be ok because fast line occupancy would only be 10p.h. by then)

At Woking you would need to turn both side platforms at Woking into Islands to give six through platforms and the flyover to be an (Heathrow) airport junction type flyover, not just an up flyover from Pompey to the up slow)

The track layout would need to be Down Slow, Down Pompey, Down Fast; Up Fast; Up Pompey, Up Slow with the pompey lines having access to the both fast and slow lines where it goes back to 4 track at the north of the station. High speed crossovers from Fast to Slow between West Byfleet and Woking would also be needed.

I'm not convinced that there is space for two further through lines at Woking. For instance there isn't much space between platform 1 and the road outside the station.

This then leads to the question, how busy will the slows be? As could the outter platforms (1&5) could be used for some of the services which use the fasts east of Woking (bearing in mind the way platform 3 is used).

As an example it is not uncommon for services to or through Guildford to use Platform 5.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Yep, and extend the fasts to Southampton via Alresford and Winchester. Compared with the latest estimate of £27 billion for Crossrail 2 its chicken feed.

I actually think that both of these ideas - redoubling to Alton and reopening Alton-Winchester - are good ideas. I also appreciate your explanations of your reasoning.

However, I suspect this is getting a little off-sub-topic , to the extent that the draft study we are discussing does not to my knowledge propose redoubling to Alton or reopening Alton-Winchester. Yet somehow, it still envisages that CR2 will free up significant numbers of paths for fast trains into Waterloo, which, based on what various people have said on this thread so far, doesn't seem to be plausible given the continuing use of the slow lines by stopping trains, unless you slow down quite a few of the fast trains.

 

[21C101]

They surely must stop fast trains at Clapham Junction or all the people from south of Woking won't have access to Cross Rail 2, not to mention all the other interchange opportunities at Clapham Junction, which are current dined during peak rush hour.

They decided against increasing the number of Southern services through Clapham Junction because it would mean trains couldn't call there and it would take away interchange opportunities. I agree and think the same should apply at Clapham Junction. When the infrastructure is improved of course. I don't mean right now.

Another good reason for the semi fast services that currently join the fast lines at Surbiton to stay on the slow lines post Crossrail in the timetable scenario I posted is to give interchange to Crossrail at Raynes Park, Wimbledon and Clapham. The choice is more fast line trains or unacceptable overcrowding, so Clapham stops on the fast lines is just too bad. It will be bad enough trying to fit in stops at Woking.

I think if you read the "A Study in Sussex" series at London Reconnections it makes it pretty clear that there are bigger issues in running more trains to Victoria on the fasts than Clapham Junction calls.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm not convinced that there is space for two further through lines at Woking. For instance there isn't much space between platform 1 and the road outside the station.

This then leads to the question, how busy will the slows be? As could the outter platforms (1&5) could be used for some of the services which use the fasts east of Woking (bearing in mind the way platform 3 is used).

As an example it is not uncommon for services to or through Guildford to use Platform 5.

In the timetable scenario I outline inpost 156 two there are twelve per hour using the slow lines at Woking (six to Guildford, Four to Alton and two to Basingstoke) and Twenty per hour on the fast lines.

I think with that quantity of trains you need three platforms each way to avoid the congestion you got at Reading before the rebuild.

Adding a third down platform is dead easy, you just turn platform 6 from a bay into a full length platform.

A third up platform would be difficult but looking from above on google I think it could just be squeezed in. A new booking hall above the platforms would be needed with new footbridge and new main booking hall on the down side.

With three platforms each way (and the current platform 3 north facing bay abolished as all terminators would go to Guildford to avoid conflicting moves) there would be an enormous amount of flexibility with a layout like that shown in the attached.

 

[infobleep]

Given the increase in the number of services there is plenty of scope for providing a balance between fast services and services which provide good interchange opportunities.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I'm not convinced that there is space for two further through lines at Woking. For instance there isn't much space between platform 1 and the road outside the station.

This then leads to the question, how busy will the slows be? As could the outter platforms (1&5) could be used for some of the services which use the fasts east of Woking (bearing in mind the way platform 3 is used).

As an example it is not uncommon for services to or through Guildford to use Platform 5.

Their use to be a platform the other side of platform 1. If they brought that back, the road would have to be thinned again. I can't see that happening might you.

Services to Guildford use platform 4 and 5. From Guildford to London they tend to solely use platform 2.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Another good reason for the semi fast services that currently join the fast lines at Surbiton to stay on the slow lines post Crossrail in the timetable scenario I posted is to give interchange to Crossrail at Raynes Park, Wimbledon and Clapham. The choice is more fast line trains or unacceptable overcrowding, so Clapham stops on the fast lines is just too bad. It will be bad enough trying to fit in stops at Woking.

I think if you read the "A Study in Sussex" series at London Reconnections it makes it pretty clear that there are bigger issues in running more trains to Victoria on the fasts than Clapham Junction calls.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


In the timetable scenario I outline inpost 156 two there are twelve per hour using the slow lines at Woking (six to Guildford, Four to Alton and two to Basingstoke) and Twenty per hour on the fast lines.

I think with that quantity of trains you need three platforms each way to avoid the congestion you got at Reading before the rebuild.

Adding a third down platform is dead easy, you just turn platform 6 from a bay into a full length platform.

A third up platform would be difficult but looking from above on google I think it could just be squeezed in. A new booking hall above the platforms would be needed with new footbridge and new main booking hall on the down side.

With three platforms each way (and the current platform 3 north facing bay abolished as all terminators would go to Guildford to avoid conflicting moves) there would be an enormous amount of flexibility with a layout like that shown in the attached.

The thing is. There are no semi fast services to Clapham Junction during peak rush hour currently. In fact no services from Woking stop at Clapham Junction in the morning peak. That would need to resolve that.

Also will these semi fast services actually be timed to connect with other fast services. Currently they don't connect so well for Portsmouth Direct services. In fact if you get on a 17 mins psst or 47 mind past off peak services from Guildford and want to go to Clapham Junction, it is still quicker to not do this and wait for the 02 mins past and 34 mins past services from Guildford which stop at Clapham Junction than get a ssmi-fast service from Woking.

 

[21C101]

[/size]

The thing is. There are no semi fast services to Clapham Junction during peak rush hour currently. In fact no services from Woking stop at Clapham Junction in the morning peak. That would need to resolve that.

Also will these semi fast services actually be timed to connect with other fast services. Currently they don't connect so well for Portsmouth Direct services. In fact if you get on a 17 mins psst or 47 mind past off peak services from Guildford and want to go to Clapham Junction, it is still quicker to not do this and wait for the 02 mins past and 34 mins past services from Guildford which stop at Clapham Junction than get a semi-fast service from Woking.

Under my scenario there are no fast line trains stopping at Clapham Jct all day.

However there will be 8 slow line trains a day stopping at Clapham junction all day including the peaks.

With all fast and slow destinations doubling their service level then it will be a case of changing to/frrm one of the 8 per hour slow line services that stop at Woking. With 8 an hour up the slow line from Woking - not all of which are "slow" if you look at the stopping patterns there won't need to be much wait for anyone.

OTOH pax may prefer to get one of the 24 per hour fast to waterloo then one of the 16 per hour "slow" back to Clapham.

 

[swt_passenger]

Yet somehow, it still envisages that CR2 will free up significant numbers of paths for fast trains into Waterloo, which, based on what various people have said on this thread so far, doesn't seem to be plausible given the continuing use of the slow lines by stopping trains, unless you slow down quite a few of the fast trains.

Isn't this 'problem' more to do with an overwhelming number of posts that are proposing personal great ideas, rather than sticking with what is actually written in the route study?

The way I read it the basic plan from the London and SE RUS will be carried forward, and there will be additional fast line capacity, because those trains that currently move from slow to fast in the Surbiton area won't need to, they'll stay on the slows.

Introducing page after page of hypothetical service patterns (as 21C101 appears to be doing) that are completely unconnected to anything in the route study isn't helping, IMHO.

 

[JamesRowden]

I think that having four platforms at Clapham Junction which are dedicated to fast servcies via Woking would allow a 24tph fast line service to have all services call at Clapham Junction once the signalling systems have been upgraded. The Western Route study implies that Old Oak Common will be able to cope with a 24tph GWML fast line service with all services calling at four dedicated platforms.

 

[Bigfoot]

Introducing page after page of hypothetical service patterns (as 21C101 appears to be doing) that are completely unconnected to anything in the route study isn't helping, IMHO.

Couldn't agree more. When I read these posts I put on my adenoid voice as the majority of the posts are unachievable and ideal world scenarios. Not what the draft sets out.

We all know what we'd like. 20 lines in and out of Waterloo, a thousand new trains. Oh and steam ones at that. With br blue coaches. And that is how far fetched these ideas are...

 

[infobleep]

Under my scenario there are no fast line trains stopping at Clapham Jct all day.

However there will be 8 slow line trains a day stopping at Clapham junction all day including the peaks.

With all fast and slow destinations doubling their service level then it will be a case of changing to/frrm one of the 8 per hour slow line services that stop at Woking. With 8 an hour up the slow line from Woking - not all of which are "slow" if you look at the stopping patterns there won't need to be much wait for anyone.

OTOH pax may prefer to get one of the 24 per hour fast to waterloo then one of the 16 per hour "slow" back to Clapham.

As far as I'm aware, doubling back between Waterloo and Clapham Junction is not allowed if you have a ticket routed via Clapham Junction.

I doubt they would ever put an easement to allow travel via Waterloo as it would undercut Waterloo fares.

Going via Waterloo adds at least 20 minutes on and no doubt much more as you have to allow 10 minutes between services.

You can get from Woking to Clapham Junction in under 20 minutes when fast services actually run so that's a bog increase. One that already exists of course in certain parts of the morning but I wouldn't want to see it across the whole day on the fast lines. Still its not due to be happening.