Where else could the DLR extend to?

[NorthKent1989]

The DLR has become quite a large rail network in its own right in recent years, where else could it go?

I know there was talk of it being extended from Bank to Charing X & Euston via two new lines, an extension to Thamesmead would be handy also, could the Woolwich branch extend further?

 

[VT 390]

The DLR has become quite a large rail network in its own right in recent years, where else could it go?

I know there was talk of it being extended from Bank to Charing X & Euston via two new lines, an extension to Thamesmead would be handy also, could the Woolwich branch extend further?

I think that it should extend from bank to city thameslink where the line would divide with one branch calling at Aldwych and Charing Cross then a loop through Green Park, Victoria, Westminster and back round to charing cross. The other branch should run to Holborn, Euston, Kings Cross/St Pancras and Highbury and Islington (through a loop). I would have the ends as loops so the service could be more frequent and the reason why is should extend to Highbury and Islington would be to have a link with the North London Line but more importantly once HS2 opens the Victoria line will be even busier so by extending to Highbury and Islington passengers could travel on a DLR extention or Victoria Line, spreading the load of passengers between two lines. Also this extention would relieve the Nothern line between Euston and Bank and to a lesser extent the Central between Bank and Holborn.

I would also still like to see an extention to Barking Riverside or Thamesmead even though the Overground will be going there (Barking Riverside), but not as a service to central London. I think that the current Beckton service should still run but to Bank (Victoria/Euston) but with the extention service running to Canary Wharf or continuing to Lewisham. This woluld provide a Crossrail interchange at Canary Wharf as well as being a usefull destionation for commuters.

 

[Ianno87]

Loops are virtually pointless on the DLR for adding capacity - they don't have drivers needing to change ends! A reversal can be done in a normal station dwell time pretty much.

I think there might be a risk that any westward extension from Bank might be overwhelmed by demand (especially if it were Kings Cross/Euston). As a minimum, I think it would need effective closure of Tower Gateway (with Beckton trains diverted via Bank - TG retained as an emergency turnback only) to provide an adequate service frequency.

Another challenge is that the current Bank headshunt point northwards towards Lothbury, which might be a constraint on a Charing Cross-bound alignment.

 

[VT 390]

Loops are virtually pointless on the DLR for adding capacity - they don't have drivers needing to change ends! A reversal can be done in a normal station dwell time pretty much.

I think there might be a risk that any westward extension from Bank might be overwhelmed by demand (especially if it were Kings Cross/Euston). As a minimum, I think it would need effective closure of Tower Gateway (with Beckton trains diverted via Bank - TG retained as an emergency turnback only) to provide an adequate service frequency.

Another challenge is that the current Bank headshunt point northwards towards Lothbury, which might be a constraint on a Charing Cross-bound alignment.

Would it be possible to add a station in the current DLR tunnel at Tower Hill to replace Tower Gateway and for an easier interchange with the Underground.
If the alignment does not allow an extension to Charing Cross then would it be better just to extend to Euston and St Pancras, for HS1 and HS2, with a train every 2-3 minutes between Euston and Westferry.

 

[Ianno87]

Would it be possible to add a station in the current DLR tunnel at Tower Hill to replace Tower Gateway and for an easier interchange with the Underground.
If the alignment does not allow an extension to Charing Cross then would it be better just to extend to Euston and St Pancras, for HS1 and HS2, with a train every 2-3 minutes between Euston and Westferry.

Doubt there's space for a station, the tunnel is already pretty curvy and steeply graded to roughly follow the road above and building foundations (probably including the Tower of London too)

 

[swt_passenger]

Doubt there's space for a station, the tunnel is already pretty curvy and steeply graded to roughly follow the road above and building foundations (probably including the Tower of London too)

I’ve seen a few references to the DLR tunnel to Bank already allowing for a station near Tower Hill, which would allow Tower Gateway to close. Are they all wrong?

Eg the London Infrastructure plan 2050 (transport supporting statement) suggests closing Tower Gateway and replacing with a new underground station with links to Tower Hill, page 143:
https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/Transport Supporting Paper_3.pdf

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Very easy - from Bank to stations at Blackfriars (also with a station on the Waterloo & City Line) and into Charing Cross’ old Jubilee platforms.

From Gallions Reach over to Thamesmead, Abbey Wood and in Tunnel to Bexleyheath (Station) and Bexleyheath Town Centre.

 

[bionic]

Stick it down the Hayes line from Lewisham. That would give the Bakerloo NIMBYs down there something to really moan about!

 

[AM9]

Doubt there's space for a station, the tunnel is already pretty curvy and steeply graded to roughly follow the road above and building foundations (probably including the Tower of London too)

The only suggestion I've seen since Bank took over from Tower Gateway as the city terminus, is for the north-facing stub to be extended to Moorgate. There are probably numerous subterranean obstructions en route including Crossrail but if the DLR with it's sharp turns and steep gradient abilities could get somewhere near the City Widened lines, there is a ready made under used route to Farringdon where a station could be built in the wasted space between the LU and Thameslink lines, currently open air too. It might be argued that Crossrail makes this unnecessary but it would provide access from the District to Crossrail in central London.

 

[bionic]

The only suggestion I've seen since Bank took over from Tower Gateway as the city terminus, is for the north-facing stub to be extended to Moorgate. There are probably numerous subterranean obstructions en route including Crossrail but if the DLR with it's sharp turns and steep gradient abilities could get somewhere near the City Widened lines, there is a ready made under used route to Farringdon where a station could be built in the wasted space between the LU and Thameslink lines, currently open air too. It might be argued that Crossrail makes this unnecessary but it would provide access from the District to Crossrail in central London.

Farringdon City sidings S stock stabling facility has already laid claim to the CWL between Moorgate and Farringdon.

 

[AM9]

Farringdon City sidings S stock stabling facility has already laid claim to the CWL between Moorgate and Farringdon.

Yes I know, - but if it was ever decided to make profitable use of about a mile of prime twin track tunnel, two full sized stations with Met/Circle interchange on the same level and adequate space for a terminus with full LU + TL + Crossrail interchange, Tfl would very quickly find a way of releasing the infrastructure from its current inefficient role.

 

[bionic]

Yes I know, - but if it was ever decided to make profitable use of about a mile of prime twin track tunnel, two full sized stations with Met/Circle interchange on the same level and adequate space for a terminus with full LU + TL + Crossrail interchange, Tfl would very quickly find a way of releasing the infrastructure from its current inefficient role.

You can't get to Farringdon. That's why it's being used as sidings. The 12 car platform extensions banjaxed the junction. That's why Barbican and Moorgate CWL closed in the first place. Besides, if that was turned into DLR (which it won't be) where would they keep all the LU trains that will be booked to stable there?

 

[edwin_m]

You can't get to Farringdon. That's why it's being used as sidings. The 12 car platform extensions banjaxed the junction. That's why Barbican and Moorgate CWL closed in the first place. Besides, if that was turned into DLR (which it won't be) where would they keep all the LU trains that will be booked to stable there?

LU would find a way to replace the stabling if there was enough benefit - for example isn't there still some spare trackbed round South Kensington? And I imagine it would be possible to drop into a new deeper tunnel somewhere east of Farringdon if there was a need to go beyond.

But with two Underground lines already linking Farringdon with Moorgate and Crossrail linking Farringdon with Liverpool Street and Docklands by a much quicker route, I suggest this would be a solution in need of a problem. It's a shame DLR doesn't link properly with the sub-surface lines in the Tower Hill area, but Crossrail provides an alternative for many of the journeys that would benefit from such an interchange.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

The DLR has become quite a large rail network in its own right in recent years, where else could it go?

I know there was talk of it being extended from Bank to Charing X & Euston via two new lines, an extension to Thamesmead would be handy also, could the Woolwich branch extend further?

I think I'd be reluctant to extend the DLR anywhere in central London: Aside from the problem of little room for new tunnels there, DLR trains are shorter - and therefore presumably have a lower capacity than - tube trains. And if you are going to find a way to tunnel anywhere in Zone 1, you'll probably want that tunnel to be used by the highest capacity trains you've got. And those aren't going to be DLR trains.

Outside zone 1 where routes aren't so packed out, there are more possibilities. I think the most useful extension of the Woolwich branch would be to Eltham town centre, via the Queen Elizabeth hospital and Eltham NR station. Possibly carry on to Mottingham or new Eltham just for the connectivity. The Woolwich DLR platforms point the wrong way for this, but with the DLR's ability to take sharp curves, that shouldn't be too much of a problem.

Other people have mentioned Bexleyheath. In fact the most ambitious of TfL's proposals was for a line from Ilford to Bexleyheath town centre, running Ilford - Barking - Gallions Reach - Thamesmead - Abbey Wood - Bexleyheath - Bexleyheath Centre. Personally I'd extend it at both ends to run Newbury Park - Ilford - etc. - Bexleyheath Town Centre - Crayford, but otherwise I think that would be amazingly useful.

Lewisham station isn't that conveniently sited for Lewisham Town Centre and I have sometimes thought that a short extension of the DLR to Lewisham High Street - and perhaps Lewisham University Hospital - would be well used. There have been various more ambitious proposals to extend the DLR from Lewisham to Bromley or Catford, but since those tend to involve the cheap option of running alongside existing rail lines (instead of running/tunnelling where people actually live and where the shops and businesses are), I'm not sure how useful they'd be.

For Stratford, I'd get rid of the DLR link to Stratford International (frankly, a travelator could make that connection just as quickly and a good deal more conveniently for most people), and tunnel it up to Walthamstow Central via Leyton and Leyton Midland Road instead.

I agree with other people's comments about closing Tower Gateway and running all services there to Bank instead. I'm not sure what the point of the expense of building Tower Hill platforms would be though since (a) it'd slow down the service to Bank, and (b) the DLR connects with the District and Circle lines at Bank anyway.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

The only suggestion I've seen since Bank took over from Tower Gateway as the city terminus, is for the north-facing stub to be extended to Moorgate. There are probably numerous subterranean obstructions en route including Crossrail but if the DLR with it's sharp turns and steep gradient abilities could get somewhere near the City Widened lines, there is a ready made under used route to Farringdon where a station could be built in the wasted space between the LU and Thameslink lines, currently open air too. It might be argued that Crossrail makes this unnecessary but it would provide access from the District to Crossrail in central London.

Alternatively, if it was possible... Just extend from Bank to Moorgate. The interchange there with Crossrail would work just as well there, and take care of getting to Farringdon. And a good many other places besides

 

[PeterC]

I think I'd be reluctant to extend the DLR anywhere in central London: Aside from the problem of little room for new tunnels there, DLR trains are shorter - and therefore presumably have a lower capacity than - tube trains. And if you are going to find a way to tunnel anywhere in Zone 1, you'll probably want that tunnel to be used by the highest capacity trains you've got. And those aren't going to be DLR trains.

Outside zone 1 where routes aren't so packed out, there are more possibilities. I think the most useful extension of the Woolwich branch would be to Eltham town centre, via the Queen Elizabeth hospital and Eltham NR station. Possibly carry on to Mottingham or new Eltham just for the connectivity. The Woolwich DLR platforms point the wrong way for this, but with the DLR's ability to take sharp curves, that shouldn't be too much of a problem.

Other people have mentioned Bexleyheath. In fact the most ambitious of TfL's proposals was for a line from Ilford to Bexleyheath town centre, running Ilford - Barking - Gallions Reach - Thamesmead - Abbey Wood - Bexleyheath - Bexleyheath Centre. Personally I'd extend it at both ends to run Newbury Park - Ilford - etc. - Bexleyheath Town Centre - Crayford, but otherwise I think that would be amazingly useful.

Lewisham station isn't that conveniently sited for Lewisham Town Centre and I have sometimes thought that a short extension of the DLR to Lewisham High Street - and perhaps Lewisham University Hospital - would be well used. There have been various more ambitious proposals to extend the DLR from Lewisham to Bromley or Catford, but since those tend to involve the cheap option of running alongside existing rail lines (instead of running/tunnelling where people actually live and where the shops and businesses are), I'm not sure how useful they'd be.

For Stratford, I'd get rid of the DLR link to Stratford International (frankly, a travelator could make that connection just as quickly and a good deal more conveniently for most people), and tunnel it up to Walthamstow Central via Leyton and Leyton Midland Road instead.

I agree with other people's comments about closing Tower Gateway and running all services there to Bank instead. I'm not sure what the point of the expense of building Tower Hill platforms would be though since (a) it'd slow down the service to Bank, and (b) the DLR connects with the District and Circle lines at Bank anyway.

Extending into zone 1 is definitely a bad idea.

A couple of years ago I would have agreed about Stratford International but I went past there on the bus recently and the amount of new residiential build in the area (assuming it doesn't all end up as "buy to leave") may well justify the station. However something does need to be done about the Stratford - Leyton- Walthamstow corridor.

A north - south light rail route on the Roding Valley axis, with or without a Thames crossing, has attractions especially if it serves communities north of the A12 without the delays currently experienced when using bus or car. Whether this should be DLR or conventional tram is another matter.

 

[AM9]

LU would find a way to replace the stabling if there was enough benefit - for example isn't there still some spare trackbed round South Kensington? And I imagine it would be possible to drop into a new deeper tunnel somewhere east of Farringdon if there was a need to go beyond.

But with two Underground lines already linking Farringdon with Moorgate ...

At the moment, there is only really one LU line linking Farringdon with Moorgate. There is only one track in each direction and headways are shared between three 'branded' lines, (Hammersmith & City, Met and Circle).

... and Crossrail linking Farringdon with Liverpool Street and Docklands by a much quicker route, I suggest this would be a solution in need of a problem. ...

Well this whole thread is really about seeing the DLR as a solution then looking for problems where it could be used. I did say it might be argued that Crossrail makes this unnecessary. Post #9

 

[LUYMun]

Similarly to what happened on the NLL's North Woolwich section, the line between Moorgate and Drayton Park should be converted to light rail operations and be extended to Highgate, with new platforms at Finsbury Park and a new station called Crouch Hill (in between the closed Crouch End and Stroud Green; to allow interchange with the nearby LO station) and Highgate.

Problem is that none of the stations between Moorgate and Drayton Park connect with the rest of the DLR's network.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Similarly to what happened on the NLL's North Woolwich section, the line between Moorgate and Drayton Park should be converted to light rail operations and be extended to Highgate, with new platforms at Finsbury Park and a new station called Crouch Hill (in between the closed Crouch End and Stroud Green; to allow interchange with the nearby LO station) and Highgate.

Problem is that none of the stations between Moorgate and Drayton Park don't connect with the rest of the DLR's network.

I like the idea of reopening the line to Highgate, but what would happen to the Moorgate-Welwyn/Hertford/Stevenage trains if you converted the Moorgate branch to DLR?

 

[sprunt]

I like the idea of reopening the line to Highgate, but what would happen to the Moorgate-Welwyn/Hertford/Stevenage trains if you converted the Moorgate branch to DLR?

Quite - there's no demand for reopening of the Finsbury Park to Highgate line, and the current Moorgate service is heavily used by commuters. Would there be sufficient capacity between Finsbury Park and Kings Cross for them all to go there in the peak? It seems unlikely. Or would they all terminate at Finsbury Park and the NCL passengers try to cram on to the lower capacity service that now has Highgate passengers on it as well?

 

[swt_passenger]

Problem is that none of the stations between Moorgate and Drayton Park don't connect with the rest of the DLR's network.

A double negative that wrecks your second point...

 

[LUYMun]

A double negative that wrecks your second point...

Apologies about that, I've corrected the sentence.

 

[si404]

I would have the ends as loops so the service could be more frequent

Given you've split the service in two, why are loops necessary? After all, each branch could get, at most 20 (almost certainly more like 16) trains each hour - something that a standard terminus can deal with easily.

Add in that the current turnback at Bank is not the limiting factor wrt frequency there, deboarding and reboarding passengers is, despite the one-way platforms.

 

[Bevan Price]

I like the idea of reopening the line to Highgate, but what would happen to the Moorgate-Welwyn/Hertford/Stevenage trains if you converted the Moorgate branch to DLR?

Might be easier to have a separate "Light Railway" starting from Finsbury Park, but extended beyond Highgate to Muswell Hill, and maybe Alexandra Palace, reinstating / clearing the old alignment where necessary.

 

[ijmad]

TFL's 2040 map of peak crowding is pretty revealing as to where extra capacity will be needed.

Even with Crossrail 2 getting built, the Jubilee Line looks very crowded, and the western branches of the District Line coming in to Earls Court / Victoria are pretty 'red' as well.

Clearly more East-West capacity needed nearer the river than the Elizabeth Line is going to run, and more capacity from Victoria/Soho to the Docklands.

(Bigger version)

So, if the Horizon study itself looked at bringing the DLR to Victoria, why couldn't we extend it just a little further West to give West London some much-needed love?

The Victoria branch (as stated already) that was considered was City Thameslink, Aldwych, Charing Cross, Green Park and Victoria. The curve from Green Park to Victoria leaves the line pointing in a pretty useless southerly direction for going anywhere usefully West, so I wondered if a more useful alignment would either miss Green Park (allowing East/West-orientated platforms under Victoria) or miss Victoria (allowing East/West-orientated platforms at Green Park).

Crayonista Idea 1

• Victoria
• Brompton Road (rebuild + reopened for interchange with the Piccadilly)
• High Street Kensington
• Kensington Olympia

Why?

Because this makes High Street Kensington a far more attractive proposition for District Line customers, meaning you can run more Wimblewares because more people will use them. You'd need more turnback capacity than Edgware Road can provide if you boost that frequency, but you have High Street Kensington itself.

It might be nice to get more of these extra trains District Line through Notting Hill Gate for the Central Line and up to Paddington for Elizabeth Line interchange making them even more attractive, more turnback capacity would be needed though, perhaps at Paddington itself with a new District Line terminal station adjacent to the Crossrail station. With some improvements to Earls Court junctions you'd be able to run 24tph to both Wimbledon and Ealing Broadway/Richmond.

I added Kensington Olympia not because the station is busy, but more for interchange with the Overground.

Further extension towards Old Oak Common would beckon.

Crayonista Idea 2

• Green Park
• Marble Arch (interchange with Central Line)
• Paddington
• take over Hammersmith branch of the SSR

Why?

Again this is ultimately about running more District Line Wimblewares. Since you would no-longer have an H&C line, you could run 24tph up to Edgware Road via High Street Kensington and turn back 16tph of them there, the remaining 8tph + 8tph Circles would continue on as today, the Wimblewares essentially taking over from the H&C all the way around the top of the Circle to Barking.

The existing Hammersmith branch isn't that heavily used, I suspect the smaller DLR trains would do just fine, and could be run at higher frequency than the existing 16tph of Circle + H&C.

This could be fairly cheap to build in shallow cut-and-cover tunnels along the edge of Hyde Park, if this was allowed (you'd restore the grass afterwards!).

Crayonista Idea 3

This would involve the DLR directly taking over from the District Line to Richmond (Piccadilly gets Ealing Broadway when it's running at 36tph). May not be feasible as DLR and Overground trains likely cannot share track (incompatible shoe gear). If the Overground was diverted to Kew Bridge / Hounslow as per the West London Orbital ideas though, perhaps it could work?

Construction leans on an uplifted Piccadilly Line service to West London filling the gaps while the District tracks are rebuilt.

Smaller trains than the S7, but you have the capacity uplift from higher frequencies and a much strengthened Piccadilly Line. You can then send the entire 24tph District Line services from Upminster to Wimbledon, and possibly create a permanent 4tph Kensington Olympia to Edgware Road service to replace the lost Wimbleware services.






If there was a second Western branch to, say, Euston, or Moorgate, I'd imagine you'd want about 20tph on each of them to make them worth the money. This would mean rebuilding Tower Gateway as an underground DLR station on the Bank branch, and pushing capacity on the core section up to 40tph. I suspect the DLR's signalling system might just cope...


I'm sure these back of envelope plans could be ripped to shreds by many of you, please have at if you wish!

 

[ijmad]

I think I'd be reluctant to extend the DLR anywhere in central London: Aside from the problem of little room for new tunnels there, DLR trains are shorter - and therefore presumably have a lower capacity than - tube trains. And if you are going to find a way to tunnel anywhere in Zone 1, you'll probably want that tunnel to be used by the highest capacity trains you've got. And those aren't going to be DLR trains.

A 3-unit DLR train is 84m, an S7 is 117m, so around three quarters as long, more or less the same height and width.

A future walkthrough 6-carriage DLR train is nothing to sniff at in terms of capacity.

Especially when you factor in the signalling system and their very decent acceleration, if you could get up to 36tph, for example, you'd likely be in excess of the capacity of many of the deep tube lines.

 

[edwin_m]

When developing what become Crossrail 2, one option that was considered was a Metro line on the central part of the same route (similar to the previous Chelsea-Hackney idea). Rather than being another Tube line this was based on DLR-type trains stretched to about 120m long. Despite using heavier technology the Crossrail option won out, mainly because it could run through to the suburbs and therefore release capacity for both trains and passengers at the main termini.

It may well be that the same would apply for any future cross-London links that don't have to be compatible with an existing route like the Bakerloo. Arguably better to build them to main line standard and maximise capacity and connectivity rather than use something lighter even though it might also be cheaper.

 

[SteveOfTheStow]

I think taking the DLR too far into Zone 1 is a non-starter. Depot space for trains is already lacking; Beckton is having to be extended, and partly to infill for lack of trains on the eastern branches. You also don't want the Bank branch to get overcrowded - not sure how much Crossrail will ease the DLR's burden, but you don't want to have to send Tower Gateway trains down to Bank to cope, leaving TG unused with no decent exit or interchange in that area.

Much as London Underground really want the lines between Farringdon and Moorgate, I'd do a (comparatively) simple extension from Bank to Barbican of the DLR.

- This would avoid tipping out at Bank, and wouldn't increase the demand on number of trains too much.
- It'd also give a north westerly route out of Bank, which is lacking. It might take some patronage from the Northern line.
- Barbican offers Crossrail connectivity and the Sub Surface lines, and Thameslink if you're willing to walk.
- Tunnel cost aside, you've already got platforms and a station built.
- The DLR shouldn't be overwhelmed by such an extension either.
- The DLR is probably the only railway in the Bank area that can actually go anywhere now because of its ability to tightly curve - the land underground is too crowded for anything else to be introduced.
- LU would retain the BedPan platforms at Moorgate for sidings (would require breaking through somewhere between Barbican and Moorgate. Hmmm.....), and the tunnel between Farringdon and just before Barbican station too. Not too much of a loss.

However there would never be a business case for building it, so I'll have to keep it as my crayon fantasy.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Much as London Underground really want the lines between Farringdon and Moorgate, I'd do a (comparatively) simple extension from Bank to Barbican of the DLR.

- This would avoid tipping out at Bank, and wouldn't increase the demand on number of trains too much.
- It'd also give a north westerly route out of Bank, which is lacking. It might take some patronage from the Northern line.
- Barbican offers Crossrail connectivity and the Sub Surface lines, and Thameslink if you're willing to walk.
- Tunnel cost aside, you've already got platforms and a station built.

I like that idea. But if you're going to do that, wouldn't it make sense to extend to Farringdon. After all, the platforms at Barbican that you're proposing using already have unused track in place heading straight to Farringdon! That would give direct interchange with Thameslink.

 

[SteveOfTheStow]

I like that idea. But if you're going to do that, wouldn't it make sense to extend to Farringdon. After all, the platforms at Barbican that you're proposing using already have unused track in place heading straight to Farringdon! That would give direct interchange with Thameslink.

Alas I've never been convinced there's enough space post-Thameslink extending the platform around toward City Thameslink: https://goo.gl/maps/1wi66fnKF6K2

Any new station platform will need to be straight as per the rules (only existing stuff gets grandfathered, I believe), and whilst a fag packet measurement using Google Maps's measuring tool suggests there's a chance you could fit in a single curved platform for a 3 car unit + buffer stop (lack of overrun may affect run-in, run-out times, take note), it'd be a somewhat tight radius and I doubt you could get permission to build it.
Otherwise you have to start knocking out walls, which is going to add extreme cost.

Barbican's not the perfect end destination, but you've got two straight platforms and potential for overrun, so you can run in at a decent pace (I know that ATO systems don't need quite as much overrun as manual, but it's still desirable to have some AIUI; happy to be persuaded otherwise). Having two platforms also means that if you get a failure in one platform for any reason, one platform is still open. A weakness with the Bank branch at present (though I don't know how much of a problem it is with DLR trains) is that if a train somehow failed anywhere, there's nowhere to park it because every bit of infra is required to make the branch work (both platforms, and the turnback siding).

Having Barbican as a 'quieter' terminus would give some breathing room at Bank, IMO.