Why Grayling’s Proposal For The East-West Rail Link Could Be Right?
I’m not saying it’s right that one company will build the line and then operate it, but I do think it could have advantages.
Track
With the exception of a few short lengths of existing track, most of the construction is a green field site or one where there is just rusty worthless track from decades ago.
This must give opportunities to design a future-proofed route, that in say the 203os or 2040s could run trains much faster, frequent, heavier and longer, than envisaged today.
The route can also be optimised for what is mow believed to be the likely scheduled service.
Stations
This line could have stations optimised for the modern level of working, that the line will.use.
Nothing should be ruled out in station design, if it makes for a more efficient railway.
I would also hope that stations could be modular, so that improvements and new stations could be added by the operator as ttaffic changes.
Get the design right and the company, passengers and staff will benefit.
It would be easier to get the design right, if all stakeholders are in the same team.
Electrification
Parts of the route are electrified and it will have connections to existing electrified lines at Bedford, Cambridge, Milton Keynes, Oxford and Reading.
I believe that there could be considerable savings to be made, by designing the electrification so that it is integrated with the trains bought for the line.
For instance, I believe in a few years time that all new trains will have on-board energy storage, so could this be taken advantage of to perhaps?
- Enable regenerative braking on trains, rather than trackside
- Not put overhead wires in stations.
It could be difficult for freight trains and other electric trains, but there could be scope to simplify the electrification.
Signalling
Go digital to save money.
Operation
I have sat in the cab of a High Speed Train as it went between Edinburgh and Inverness. You see a lot and surely some that drivers see could be safety related.
Surely, if the same company is responsible for both trains and track, reporting and fixing problems must be much more direct.
Conclusion
Good design could really.make the railway cheaper to build and operate.
So if it’s one company, with everybody working to the same objectives, it must benefit that company, if someone has a good idea at any point.
If they have a bad idea, then hopefully it will.be ignored.
Should The Overground Be Extended To Gatwick?
With no end in sight f the Southern dispute and Govia seeming incapable of managing their way out of a paper bag, surely the time has come to explore the possibility of making Gatwick Airport a terminus of the East London Line?
A service could stop at all stations to New Cross Gate, Anerley (for my friend Nick), Norwood Junction, East Croydon, South Croydon and Gatwick Airport.
I know I’m being selfish, but it would create a valuable route to the East of Thameslink.
Gatwick have ambitions to be a massive rail hub and are putting millions where their mouth is.
So why shouldn’t they become a terminus for a two trains per hour (tph) service from Highbury and Islington, that alternates with a two tph service to West Croydon?
- At present you can get to Gatwick from Highbury and Islington, with a single change at New Cross Gate.
- It takes 26 minutes to New Cross Gate and after a three minute wait, 44 minutes from New Cross Gate to Gatwick.
- So total time is 73 minutes.
By comparison getting to Heathrow by Piccadilly Line takes about 70 minutes, so it’s not that slow.
I started this post on holiday, as a bit of a light-hearted post, but it does strike me, that it would be feasible.
Consider.
- It gives the whole of East London from Walthamstow to Croydon, through Hackney, Tower Hamlets, New Cross a direct route to Gatwick.
- There is no new infrastructure required.
- Highbury and Islington is a well-connected terminal.
- Whitechapel gives a good connection to Crossrail.
I think that although it wouldn’t be something that some companies would welcome, it is the sort of idea, that an innovative Gatwick could fund to steal business from Heathrow.
A Good Idea For The Railways?
I’ve just read this article on the BBC, which is entitled Trains and Track Come Together In Rail Management.
It could be a good idea.
If I take the railway I know best, the London Overground, the track and stations, may still be owned by Network Rail but TfL work strongly with NR in deciding what gets done and when it gets done. You could almost say that LO is the tenant and NR is the landlord, but that both bofies sit together on the same management structure. It seems to work well however they do it. But it’s mainly good management and probably good people too.
You might ask, why doesn’t LO own the tracks and have their own maintenance teams! But do you do all the work on your house yourself or call in a specialist?
But as with a block of flats having a central.focus gives all owners and tenants a central point to get something fixed.
As the BBC article says, Network Rail has split itself into the various routes. So in East Anglia, NR’s local team are responsible for tracks and Greater Anglia for trains.
I can see interesting possibilities opening up. Say you are a developer and you have obtained planning permission to build a large industrial park or thousands of houses on an old military site, that lies alongside the railway.
As the joint management now has all the assets and permissions to fit a new station into their network, the developer might get the new station they need to make their development very successful.
Some will argue that trains and track should be in one enormous nationalised industry, but how would the little man on the Felixstowe Class 153 get a handle on that?
The Anonymous Widower 