Are You Annoyed By Noisy Trains At The Bottom Of Your Garden?
I have just found this document on the European Parliament web site, which is entitled Reducing Railway Noise Pollution.
It is a fascinating document and this is the abstract.
12 million EU inhabitants are affected by railway noise during the day and 9 million during the night. This study lists measures, funding and regulations to reduce it. The introduction of modern rolling stock will lower noise most significantly. In the short run, the replacement of cast iron by composite brake blocks on rail freight cars is most important. Developing a regulation scheme for a staged process towards low-noise rolling stock is the heart of a rail noise abatement strategy.
Many of us in the UK, would think that we suffer badly from the noise of trains, but it would appear that Germany and other Central European countries suffer badly from all freight trains passing through. The Rhine Valley which has over 400 freighs trains a day, suffers badly from noise.
So how can we reduce noise?
- As the abstract says new rolling stock is the best way to reduce noise and many of our trains have been replaced with new or refurbished ones in the last few years.
- The report says that most (approximately 75%) of UK freight wagons have disc brakes or composite brake blocks. So that is good.
- In my view one of things that gets most complaints is noisy and smelly diesel locomotives, like the dreaded Class 66 locomotives. They may be liked by the freight companies, but they are not favourites of drivers and those living by the railway. More friendly types of diesel locomotives like the Class 68 are starting to appear and it can’t be too soon.
- Surprisingly, with electric trains, pantograph noise is a problem. I’d hand that and any other aerodynamic problems over to the engineers in Formula One and aircraft design. I have read that Bombardier’s new Aventra will be very clean aeodynamically, which must make for a reduction in noise.
Let’s hope that these small improvements continue to reduce the noise by trains.
The report also says this about physical noise barriers.
Noise barriers are a visual intrusion, particularly since they are a target for graffiti; they have a high cost, and cause problems for track access. Their effectiveness depends on their absorption properties, their height, and the proximity of the barrier to the noise source and/or to the receiver.
I am not a fan, as they ruin my taking of photographs.
After The Northern Hub, Is Network Rail Planning A Midland Rail Hub?
The study on Network Rail’s web site is entitled West Midlands and Chilterns Route Study, proposes a concept of a Midland Rail Hub.
By adding the following infrastructure.
- Bordesley Chords and new platforms at Moor Street
- More tracks through Water Orton
- Kings Norton upgrade
- Snow Hill Platform 4
- Begin rollout of Digital Railway
Network Rail feel, it will bring the following benefits.
- Up to 10 extra trains every hour
- More freight trains
- New journey opportunities between East and West Midlands
- Unlocking new jobs
- Maximising benefits of HS2.
It doesn’t appear to be as radical as the Northern Hub.
These are my notes and thoughts on the various proposals.
Bordesley Chords
This Google Map shows the Bordesley area of Birmingham.
In the top-right or north-eastern corner of the map is Birmingham City Football Ground.
In the middle of the map is Bordesley Circus, which is a roundabout, that is one of the most dangerous for pedestrians in the country. When I was last there, it was being improved and I wrote My Least Favourite Roundabout Gets Pedestrian Lights. I hope they’re working on Tuesday, 13th December, when I’ll be going to see Ipswich play.
Bordesley station, which is one of the worst stations in the UK, lies to the South-West of this roundabout and is on the Chiltern Main Line into Birmingham Moor Street station, although services don’t stop.
Running almost North-South across the map is the Camp Hill Line, which incidentally passes behind the stands at the football ground.
Where it crosses the Chiltern Main Line, there is a chord allowing limited connection between North and East.
I would assume that as the report says Bordesley Chords, that there will be some extra connectivity between these two lines.
Under the future of the Camp Hill Line on Wikipedia, this is said.
The reinstatement of local rail services to the former Camp Hill Line has been a long term aspiration of the City, and during 2007, Birmingham City Council announced that they were looking into the possibility of reopening the line between Kings Norton and Birmingham Moor Street via the construction of a railway viaduct from Sparkbrook to Bordesley, where trains would be taken into the “old” Birmingham Moor Street station. In October 2007, a 1500-name petition was handed in to the council asking for the line to be re-opened. In 2013 the proposal was shelved indefinitely.
As Kings Norton is to the South, this would need a West to South connection at Bordesley.
These pictures show the area from a Chiltern Train going into Moor Street.
Salubrious it is not! There is certainly a lot of space on the North side, but there might be less on the South. This Google Map shows the area between the station and where the two lines cross.
Note the double-track chord between the Camp Hill Line to the North and the Chiltern Main Line to the East. This chord gives services from the Chiltern Main Line to access Birmingham New Street station. If you take a train from Oxford to Birmingham New Street, it will take this chord, if it doesn’t go via Coventry.
From what I have seen in Manchester and some parts of London, the area could surely be put to a better purpose, perhaps driven by a rebuilt Bordesley station, with regular services to Moor Street, Kings Noton and Solihull. The area does have the added factor of water in the shape of one of Birmingham’s numerous canals.
Hopefully, the first piece of development in a very run-down area, the sorting of a decent walking route between Bordesley station and Birmingham City Football Ground has been completed.
New Platforms At Birmingham Moor Street Station
This Google Map shows Birmingham Moor Street station.
The most northerly pair of platforms in the station are numbered 1 and 2 and are for the through lines to Birmingham Snow Hill station.
Over the last few years, work has opened the next pair of bay platforms 3 and 4. On my last trip to Birmingham in June, I arrived in Platform 4.
Platform 5 on the other side of Platform 4 may have been reinstated, but there doesn’t seem to be any trains using it, as yet!
The map shows that there would appear to be space to open Platforms 3, 4 and 5, but could a clever architect squeeze in a Platform 6?
These pictures show the space for a possible Platform 5 and 6.
There would certainly appear to be space to shoe-horn two tracks and a new Platform 6 between the current Platform 5 and the retaining wall.
As the pictures show, Platform 5 is a platform that is long enough for any train currently envisaged that might call at Moor Street station.
Looking at the map of the station, it might even be possible to make Platform 6 even longer, if this were thought to be needed.
More Tracks Through Water Orton
This Google Map shows Water Orton station and the lines through it.
If you look up services from Water Orton and Coleshill Parkway stations, they are certainly of the turn-up-and-wait-forever variety.
Water Orton has one train every two hours to Birmingham, but at least Coleshill Parkway has a train every half-hour.
Perhaps more lines through Water Orton will enable more trains through the area.
Looking at the rail map of Birmingham, it would be possible to go from Water Orton via the Camp Hill Line to Kings Norton and if the North to West chord was built at Bordesley to Moor Street.
It would certainly be the view of many, including myself, that a Parkway station needs a train or tram every fifteen minutes.
Kings Norton Upgrade
If the Camp Hill Line is reopened to passenger trains, then Kings North station will be the terminus.
This Google Map shows the station.
It is a large station with an unused island platform in the middle.
These pictures show Kings Norton station.
There is certainly work to be done.
But the station also has a lot of potential and space that can be utilised. It might even be possible to fit in a bay platform to turn trains back to Moor Street and New Street.
Birmingham Snow Hill Platform 4
Wikipedia says this about platforms at Birmingham Snow Hill station,
The present Snow Hill station has three platforms for National Rail trains. When it was originally reopened in 1987 it had four, but one was later converted in 1999 for use as a terminus by Midland Metro trams. The original tram terminus closed in November 2015, in order for the extension of the Midland Metro through Birmingham city centre to be connected. This includes a dedicated embankment for trams alongside the station, and will also include a new through stop serving Snow Hill. This will eventually allow the fourth platform to be returned to main-line use.
As the Midland Metro now has its own new platform outside the station, the fourth platform can soon be converted back to heavy rail use.
These pictures show the current state of the closed tram platform.
I don’t think that converting it back to heavy rail will be the most difficult of jobs.
Birmingham Station Connectivity
Although, not on the Network Rail infrastructure list, I feel that to gain the full benefits of HS2, then the line must be properly connected to Moor Street and New Street stations.
I can easily walk between Moor Street and New Street stations, but I do feel that Birmingham’s solution of using the Midland Metro as a link and to the Curzon Street HS2 station, is not the way to do it.
It needs some form of people mover. Perhaps a travelator would be better.
City Centre Ticketing
In Liverpool, a ticket to Liverpool stations, allows you to use the Underground to any of the other stations in the City Centre.
In London, many visitors by rail, add a Travelcard to their rail ticket.
Perhaps, in Birmingham, a ticket to Birmingham stations, should include the Midland Metro in the City Centre? Or a simple add-on for the Metro between Jewellery Quarter and Five Ways could be added for a few pounds.
At present, you have to buy a separate ticket. How visitor-friendly is that? At least a short journey is only a pound
If Birmingham is to make the most out of the opportunity of HS2, then they must use easy and understandable ticketing.
Chiltern’s Superb Trains
My trip down to Birmingham was in a Class 168 train, which although was a good experience for a diesel multiple unit, was spoilt as one engine went AWOL and we were late in to Moor Street.
But going home to London, I rode in what I think are one of the best long distance trains anywhere in Europe; Chiltern’s rakes of Mark 3 coaches pulled and pushed by a modern Class 68 locomotive.
- Nearly every seat gets a table and a window aligned to it.
- The seats are spcious and comfortable.
- The ride is the superb one, you always get from a Mark 3 coach.
- Trolley-service of drinks and a buffet on most services.
- Free wi-fi.
- London to Birmingham return for £19.20 with a Railcard.
- I’ve never travelled on Chiltern’s Mark 3 coaches and been unable to read my paper flat in front of me on the table.
The experience may be slower than Virgin’s, but give me Standard Class on Chiltern against First on Virgin every time between London and Birmingham.
The only problem, is that Marylebone station, isn’t as accessible as Euston from where I live. However, when Crossrail opens, times will be within a few minutes.
I can’t help feeling that Transpennine’s decision to use Class 68 locomotives and rakes of new CAF Mark 5 coaches across the Pennines, was influenced by the success of Chiltern’s flagship service and its superb rolling stock.
I’m looking forward to riding the CAF coaches in a few years, to see how they stand up to an almost forty year old British Rail coach.
I wonder how many Spanish engineers have ridden Chiltern’s trains?
I also feel that the Class 68 locomotive is an asset to a passenger service, in that so many diesel locomotives look dirty and smelly, but Class 68s seemed to have been designed to keep clean and also look how a locomotive should; powerful, purposeful and sleek.
For those, who don’t like that the trains are still diesel-hauled, there is even a Spanish solution for that, if the lines ever get electrified, in the shape of the new Class 88 electro-diesel locomotive, which is a sister of the Class 68 locomotive.
And of course, if Chiltern need some more trains and can’t find the Mark 3 coaches, they can always buy some new coaches from CAF.
Conclusions
It’s a very sensible plan and it will open up all sorts of possibilities for Birmingham.
The chords at Bordesley and the extra tracks through Water Orton would seem to open up a new route for trains across the city from Moor Street band Kings Norton to Water Orton and Nuneaton.
- New subsurban services could link Nuneaton and Kings Norton to Moor Street.
- Cross-country services might use Moor Street with a reverse, rather than New Street.
- Extra services from Moor Street to Nuneaton might take pressure off the heavily-loaded New Street to Birmingham route.
- How would the new station at Kenilworth station fit in?
But there are railways all over this area and I’m sure that the Bordesley and Water Orton improvements, will not be the last.
Already there is talk of reopening, the Sutton Park Line and the Stonebridge Railway.
I asked about Kenilworth station. I don’t know, but after Bordesley and Water vOrton are upgraded, there would be the possibility of a Warwickshire Circle, starting and finishing at Moor Street.
- Moor Street
- Solihull
- Warwick Parkway
- Warwick
- Leamington Spa with a reverse.
- Kenilworth
- Coventry
- Coventry Arena
- Bedworth
- Bermuda Park
- Nuneaton
- Coleshill Parkway
- Water Orton
- Moor Street
It would be a route, where several stations could be reopened or built from scratch. Leamington Spar incidentally already has a bay platform for the reverse.
I also think, that one of the biggest beneficiaries of all this will be Chiltern Railways.
Consider.
- Their two Birmingham termini of Show Hill and Moor Street are getting extra capacity.
- Moor Street will become a big terminal with two through and four bay platforms, all of which will be able to handle the longest Chiltern trains.
- Birmingham New Street station lacks capacity.
- The Birmingham New Street to Coventry route is seriously crowded.
- In Will Chiltern Railways Get A Second London Terminal At Old Oak Common?, I talked about Network Rail’s ideas to link the Chiltern route to the new station.
- Banbury station has been upgraded for more traffic.
- Chiltern will be running to Oxford station by the end of this year.
- Chiltern have plans in hand to run to Milton Keynes station.
We’ll certainly see extra services from London to Birmingham and possibly beyond, but will we see a triangular route going between London – Oxford – Birmingham – London?
It will depend on whether the passengers want it, but from Chiltern’s point of view, it might mean that their platforms in London, Oxford and Birmingham, and their trains, saw higher utilisation.
I suspect too, that the Oxford -Birmingham leg has more paths available and that Chiltern’s capacity problems are mainly at the London end of the Chiltern Main Line, especially now, that Banbury has been remodelled.
Chiltern Railways are an ambitious company and if they get a second terminal in London at Old Oak Common, they will certainly use it profitably.
I think that the Network Rail report shows that a few simple improvements, when thought through and executed with care can produce improvements not suspected in the original plans.
But all rail planning has to discount the London Overground Syndrome, where new stations, routes and trains, attract more passengers than originally expected.
Does Sheffield Need A Super High Speed Line To London?
I ask this question because HS2 was put forward in the days, when brute force and high speed was the only way to get fast journey times.
In this article on the BBC, which is entitled HS2 South Yorkshire route change threatens new estate, the following is stated.
- 120 mins – Fastest existing Sheffield to London service
- 79 mins – Fastest Sheffield to London service via HS2
I have not seen any details as to how fast conventional trains could do Sheffield to London, but we do have some useful figures from the Great Eastern Main Line, which I wrote about in Could Class 387 Trains Do Norwich In Ninety And Ipswich In Sixty? I came to the conclusion that a 200 kph Aventra with modest track improvements could reduce the current 120 minutes to ninety.
Compare the Great Eastern Main Line (GEML) with the Midland Main Line (MML)
The GEML is about 180 km long and fully electrified, with only two tracks except South of Shenfield and a 160 kph line speed.
The MML is about 250 km long and not electrified past Bedford, with generally more than two tracks and quite a bit of 200 kph running.
The MML has a lot of potential for improvement.
- In several places there is space to add extra tracks and improve junctions.
- A fully-developed Erewash Valley Line, could possibly be used as a higher-speed diversion, avoiding the line through the Derwent Valley, which is a World Heritage Site.
- The MML is currently being electrified.
- Modern electric trains with regenerative braking would speed stops on the MML.
- Some of the stations on the MML, could be rebuilt to speed trains through.
- This is just the sort of line for which the Digital Railway could have a large positive affect.
I feel that after the line is fully electrified and upgraded between London and Sheffield, that there could be a big improvement in journey times.
I do wonder if the revised plan for HS2 to serve Sheffield, , has come about because engineers have been able to devise a plan to improve the MML, that has created enough capacity from Clay Cross to Sheffield, to allow HS2 to share.
In HS2 Does The Right Thing In Sheffield, I postulated that if the MML from Clay Cross, where it bis joined by HS2 to Sheffield, were to be built to HS2 standards, when it was electrified, then this would have benefits for both lines.
- HS2 trains could approach Sheffield, using the sort of speed profile, they’d use into other stations.
- 200+ kph trains on the MML would knock a few minutes off schedules.
- Any extra tracks would probably fit on railway land.
- Chesterfield station could be rebuilt to accept HS2 trains.
There would be a large saving in costs, as only two tracks would be built. They would also be built when the MML is electrified.
We might not see trains on the classic route between London and Sheffield do the trip in the 79 minutes of HS2, but they would certainly be some minutes quicker than the two hours of today.
HS2 Does The Right Thing At Sheffield
In HS2 Does The Right Thing At Leeds, I put my case for HS2 stations to be in City Centres, so that when passengers arrived, they could use all the current and often well-developed local trains and trams to get to their ultimate destination.
I said this.
I don’t like the concept of most of the HS2 stations.
Euston, isn’t too bad, as the HS2 platforms are alongside those for the main station and I suspect that when and if I see it in reality, I will be able to arrive in the station on perhaps a London Midland train from Bletchley or Tring and just walk across to the HS2 platforms.
At some of our better interchange stations like Reading, to change trains, you go up escalators to a wide overbridge and then walk across to the escalator for the platform of your departing train. The design also allows seats and cafes in a totally non-claustrophobic environment. I have a feeling that the new London Bridge will raise the bar of this type of station even higher!
To my mind the designs for HS2 station at Birmingham is absolute rubbish and truly terrible. Birmingham is developing a local train, tram and bus network centred on New Street station, so instead of HS2 arriving into this hub, it arrives at a separate station some distance away and many passengers will have to get a tram to connect to their ongoing service.
After seeing the light at Leeds and proposed something much more sensible, HS2 has now done a similar thing at Sheffield.
This article on the BBC explains it all.
- HS2 will now serve the main Sheffield station.
- HS2 will now pass to the East of Rotherham.
- HS2 will reach Sheffield on classic lines from a junction near Clay Cross and via Chesterfield.
- Sheffield City Council say the new route will create 6,500 more jobs in Sheffield.
- The old route might have created congestion around Meadowhall.
This map shows the new and the old routes.
The yellow route is the old one and the blue one is the new one.
Note how the on the map it says “Link to Sheffield Midland on Existing Railway”
I have followed this route on Google Maps and with the exception of perhaps Chesterfield station, there would appear to be space to get four tracks from the junction at Clay Cross to Sheffield station. There also appears to be few houses close to the line, which seems to be in a wooded corridor between industrial premises.
Good planning says that this line should be upgraded and Chesterfield station should be remodelled, when the Midland Main Line (MML) is electrified.
Is this one of the reasons, that HS2 has chosen this route and moved the station from Meadowhall to Sheffield?
Clay Cross to Sheffield is about twenty miles and if two tracks were rebuilt or added to the MML, to HS2 standards, it would have the following benefits.
- HS2 trains could approach Sheffield, using the sort of speed profile, they’d use into other stations.
- 200 kph trains on the MML would knock a few minutes off schedules.
- Any extra tracks would probably fit on railway land.
- Chesterfield station could be rebuilt to accept HS2 trains.
There would be a large saving in costs, as only two tracks would be built. They would also be built when the MML is electrified.
Unfortunately, this change of route will cause problems as the BBC article explains.
It’s a pity they didn’t lay down a few objectives at the start of the detailed design of HS2.
One of which would have been, that HS2 should access existing well-developed stations if possible.
A South London Metro
Some of my recent posts including.
- An Improved South London Line Is Proposed
- A New Station For Battersea
- The Lines At Battersea Power Station On the Way Into Victoria
- A Tunnel Under Brixton
Are leading me to the conclusion that it would be possible to create a South London Metro, that worked under similar principles to the East London Line.
The East London Line
If anybody doesn’t believe that the East London Line is one of the best creations on the world’s railways in recent years, then they should go and read something else now.
Consider.
- There is a core section between Dalston Junction and Surrey Quays stations, where sixteen trains per hour (tph) shuttle passengers under the river in modern trains.
- In Increased Frequencies On The East London Line, I indicated that TfL are planning to increase this frequency to 20 tph.
- At the Northern end four dedicated platforms at two different termini; Dalston Junction and Highbury and Islington give passengers choices of onward routes.
- At the Southern end, there are four separate termini; Clapham Junction, Crystal Palace, New Cross and West Croydon.
- Three of the southern termini have excellent onward connections and if the Tramlink is sorted at West Croydon, then that would be improved.
- The line has excellent connections to the Victoria and Jubilee Lines of the Underground and other rail lines.
It has been a marvellous success.
The North London Line
The North London Line is not as radical in its design as the East London Line, as it effectively just a a simple line across North London, that carries up to eight trains per hour and a lot of freight.
It has been successful, but not as successful as the East London Line.
The Future Of The Overground In North And East London
The success of removing, third-rate trains on the North and East London Lines is now being repeated on the Gospel Oak to Barking Line, where two-car diesel trains are being replaced with four-car electric ones.
But this is only the start, as other plans are being put together in North London.
- Will electrification be completed in North London by wiring the Dudding Hill Line?
- New stations like Brent Cross Thameslink, Old Oak Common and Angel Road are being created to support development.
- In the Walthamstow area, new curves will improve services on the Chingford Branch.
- Chiltern Railways have plans for a Chiltern Metro to West Ruislip station.
- The Metropolitan Line is being extended to Watford Junction.
- Thameslink will integrate and expand the suburban services out of Kings Cross and St. Pancras.
But to use the well-known phase – “You ain’t seen nothing yet!”
South London In The Slow Lane
South London is very second-rate compared to the North with respect to railways.
My mother always told me to never go South of the River, as I’d get lost.
Look at the historic radial routes out of East, North and West London termini like Euston, Fenchurch Street, Kings Cross, Liverpool Street, Marylebone, Paddington and St. Pancras and the lines have a simple structure that the average child of ten could understand. The Underground also follows a simple structure.
But if you look at trains South of the River, there is not even any logic as to which terminus you use to get your train, with the exception perhaps of Waterloo. Only South London’s crazy rules would mean that going to East Kent would be from the most western Southern terminus at Victoria.
It is mainly down to the fact that much of the rail network South of the River were developed by companies, whose idea of co-operation was stopping the other companies from expanding.
My mother was so very right!
There are problems galore of inadequate infrastructure.
- Some stations are in desperate need of more platforms.
- Lines often cross each other in flat junctions, which severely limit capacity.
- Many of the lines have heavy peak-hour use from commuters and infrequent services in the off-peak.
- Any electrification is non-standard third-rail.
- The main lines don’t have enough capacity.
- Commuters are also often very vocal opponents of even the smallest change.
Even new lines like the Channel Tunnel Rail Link at Ebbsfleet International and Crossrail at Abbey Wood are only partly integrated into the existing network and don’t share a station.
The engineers are doing their best with innovative schemes like the Bermondsey Dive-Under, but the railways in South London need a whole new philosophy to meet the challenges of the twenty-first century.
North London may have a long list of projects in the pipeline, but after the upgrading of Thameslink and the Northern Line Extension to Battersea, South London’s future plan is very thin.
In some ways Crossrail 2 sums up the South. North London will be affected by this line’s construction, but all of the protests are from Chelsea, which can probably be ignored, and South London.
The Centre For London Proposals
In the June 2016 Edition of Modern Railways, there was an article entitled Turning South London Orange, which is a radical set of proposals from an organisation called the Centre for London, with the aim of improving rail services in South London.
This is a summary of their proposals, as they affect the lines across South London from Victoria to Peckham Rye, Herne Hill and Surrey Quays.
- A tunnel should be built from Battersea to South of Herne Hill under Brixton to remove fast services from Victoria to Kent from the area.
- The four-track South London Line should be reconfigured so that London Overground services use the Northern rather than the Southern pair of tracks.
- A new station is built at Battersea linking the Northern Line Extension to the South London Line.
One of the consequences of this, is that it would be possible to create three modern step-free stations at Wandsworth Road, Clapham High Street and Brixton, with the latter two connected to the Northern and Victoria Lines of the Underground using escalators and/or lifts.
A South London Metro
So what would a South London Metro look like?
I will assume the following.
- The fast line tunnel under Brixton is built.
- The South London Line is reconfigured to put the London Overground service on the Northern pair of tracks.
- A new interchange station is built at Battersea.
In the next few sections, I will look at the various parts of the South London Metro.
The Brixton Tunnel
Although not actually part of the South London Metro, the Brixton Tunnel must be built before the Metro can be created, as it removes all the fast Chatham Main Line services between Victoria and Kent, from the lines across South London.
Trains will use a tunnel between Battersea and South of Herne Hill.
So what Southeastern Mainline services, that serve Victoria could use the tunnel?
- 1 tph to Ramsgate via Chatham with a first stop at Bromley South.
- 1 tph to Dover via Chatham with a first stop at Bromley South.
- 1 tph to Dover via Chatham with a first stop at Orpington and a second at Bromley South.
- 1 tph to Canterbury West via Maidstone East with a first stop at Bromley South.
- 1 tph to Ashford International via Maidstone East with a first stop at Bromley South.
There are another nine trains per day running in the peak.
The question has to be asked, if extra services can be provided through a fast tunnel, as the current number of trains might even be within the capacity of a single-track tunnel.
But I suspect that for redundancy and safety reasons that the five-kilometre tunnel would probably be built as double track or a twin-bore tunnel.
At present non-stop services take sixteen minutes between Victoria and Bromley South stations, which is a distance of 20.4 kilometres, which gives a start-to-stop average speed of about 75 kph. At that speed the trains would take around four minutes to pass through the tunnel. So even if the Class 375 trains, that generally work the line went through at full speed of 160 kph, not much would be saved on the journey.
But given the transit time through the tunnel of four minutes or less and the generally low number of trains through the tunnel, I suspect that a single-track tunnel is under serious consideration.
But I would future-proof the line by providing a double-track tunnel.
As Bombardier have said, that the Class 375 trains could be retro-fitted with on-board energy storage, I suspect too that the tunnel could even be left without electrification, as an electrically-dead tunnel must be safer in the unlikely event of a train needing to be evacuated. Evacuation will probably be through the side doors of the trains onto a walkway, as is proposed for Crossrail.
I think that the developments in infrastructure creation and the powering of trains in the last few years could enable a very radical and affordable approach to building this tunnel.
I think there’s a chance we’ll see this five kilometre tunnel bored as a single bore, with either one or two tracks, but no electrification.
Remember that the Severn Tunnel, which is the longest main line rail tunnel in the UK and was built by the Victorians, is seven kilometres long.
London’s latest tunnel which is the Lee Tunnel for sewage is just under seven kilometres long, seven metres in diameter and at a depth of over seventy-five metres under East London. It is probably big enough for a third-rail electrified double-track railway. According to Wikipedia, the Lee Tunnel cost an estimated £635 million.
As we’re moving towards a Golden Age of Tunnelling, I think we’ll be seeing more tunnels proposed.
The Core Section
I would define the core section of the South London Metro as between Wandsworth Road and Peckham Rye stations, so it would also include the following intermediate stations.
- Clapham High Street
- Brixton
- Denmark Hill
If fast services from Victoria to Kent are in a tunnel under Brixton and Herne Hill, the Centre for London Report says that it would be possible for London Overground services to use the Northern pair of tracks rather than the Southern ones. Freight, empty stock movements and other non-stopping services would continue to use the Southern tracks.
At present there are just four tph each way on the Overground along the current line, but as the East London Line core is currently handling sixteen tph, I would think it possible, subject to some reorganisation of the tracks at the two ends of the core section, that all Metro and Overground services could share the Northern tracks and platforms.
Similar sharing has been done successfully between New Cross Gate and Norwood Junction on the Overground, since the East London Line was extended to West Croydon in 2010. On that existing route, the fast trains have their own separate tracks out of the way, just as under the Centre for London proposals, fast trains between Victoria and Kent will be separated in a tunnel under Brixton.
As to the ultimate capacity of the core section, who knows? Figures of 24 tph have been quoted as possible for the East London Line, but twenty through the core will do well for several years.
I suspect that as the only trains on the Northern pair of tracks through South London will be slow Overground/Metro trains, that any routing problems could be solved by simple flat junctions, of which there are many already.
So how would this affect the stations on the core section?
- Wandsworth Road would have two new Northern platforms. As the lines split for Victoria and Clapham Junction just after the station, would each pair of lines and platforms be for appropriate destinations?
- Clapham High Street would have two new Northern platforms for Metro/Overground services. As the Northern platforms are closer to Clapham North station, it might be sensible to create an escalator connection between the two stations and not generally use the Southern platforms.
- East Brixton is a station, that has been discussed for rebuilding.
- Brixton would have reopened Northern platforms for Metro/Overground services. Services via Herne Hill would still use the current platforms and as no trains on the high-level lines over the station would stop, providing step-free access between the Victoria Line and Metro/Overground services would be much easier.
- Many believe that Loughborough Junction station should be connected to the Overground. If Metro/Overground services are moved to the Northern tracks as they go over Loughborough Junction station, I believe that step-free connection between new Metro/Overground platforms and Loughborough Junction is now possible.
- Denmark Hill station would need some reorganisation, but it is already step-free.
- Peckham Rye station would need some reorganisation and it is on the list of being made step-free.
The list of projects to create a core section of the South London Metro would include.
- Build the Brixton Tunnel
- Add the extra platforms and station infrastructure at Wandsworth Road station.
- Add the extra platforms and station infrastructure at Clapham High Street station.
- Create an escalator/lift connection between Clapham High Street and the Northern Line at Clapham North station.
- Reopen the Northern platforms at Brixton station.
- Create an escalator/lift connection between the low-level platforms at Brixton with the Victoria Line.
- Add two high-level platforms at Loughborough Junction station on the Metro/Overground lines.
- Make Loughbrough Junction station fully step-free.
- Make various changes to the tracks, so that all required routes are possible.
There would obviously be other small projects, but I can’t see anything major except for the building of the Brixton Tunnel, that would be needed to create a sixteen train-per-hour route from Victoria across South London.
All projects and that includes the Brixton Tunnel could be carried out without large disruption of the existing train services, which in my view is a tribute to the Centre for London proposals.
I think that without any further major infrastructure after the Brixton Tunnel has been built, and some other smaller projects that are already being planned, the core section of the South London Metro could be a run of step-free stations interchanging with the Northern and Victoria Lines, Thameslink and other services out of Victoria and London Bridge.
Reversal Stations
I also wonder if any of the core stations could be created with an island platform, so that passengers can reverse direction without going up and down stairs. This can already be done at Queens Road Peckham station if say you are on a Dalston Junction to Clapham Junction train and want to go to South Bermondsey or London Bridge.
Never underestimate passengers’ ability to duck and dive!
Connectivity just encourages passengers to take more outrageous, faster and convenient routes.
The Western Termini
At present there are two western termini for the services along the South London Line; Victoria and Clapham Junction and Victoria.
There is probably not enough platforms, if it is desired to run sixteen tph or more through the core, as is done on the East London Line.
Clapham Junction As A Western Terminus
At present 4 tph run to Clapham Junction and as I wrote in Increased Frequencies On The East London Line, this will be increased to 6 tph in 2019.
I suspect that despite the rather unusual platform arrangements at Clapham Junction, which I call The Clapham Kiss, that 6 tph can be handled at the station.
So I think it will be very much Carry On Clapham!
Victoria As A Western Terminus
At present, the following services serve Victoria along the South London Line.
- 4 tph to Orpington, which turn off at Brixton.
- 2 tph to Dartford via Bexleyheath, which turn off at Peckham Rye.
Combined with the 6 tph from Clapham Junction, between Wandsworth Road and Brixton, there are 12 tph.
Given that Victoria is crowded and needs more platforms, would it be possible to handle the South London Metro from a dedicated platform or pair of platforms in Victoria?
Assigned platforms at Dalston Junction certainly helps passengers, as you know where your train to the various destinations will call.
- Through Platform 1 for Highbury and Islington
- Bay Platform 2 for New Cross
- Bay Platform 3 for Clapham Junction
- Through Platform 4 for Crystal Palace and West Croydon
This is certainly what is happening today as I write.
I think it would be a great advantage if you went to a particular platform or pair of platforms to pick up the South London Metro.
This mini sub-station concept is used at.
- Cheshunt for the Lea Valley Lines
- Clapham Junction for the East London Line.
- Crystal Palace for the East London Line.
- Liverpool Street for the Lea Valley Lines.
- Richmond for the North London Line.
- Stratford for the North London Line.
Usually, you just look for the orange!
Battersea As A Western Terminus
Given that Victoria is crowded and probably needs more platforms, an alternative terminus is probably needed.
Just as when Dalston Junction was rebuilt for the East London Line, two bay platforms were incorporated, could the same thing be done at the new Battersea station?
Certainly, the system works well at Dalston Junction, so why wouldn’t a similar arrangement work at Batttersea?
- Passengers needing to get to Victoria on a train terminating at Battersea would just walk across the platform and wait a couple of minutes for the train to Victoria.
- Passengers from Victoria on a train going to a wrong destination would only have to go to Wandsworth Road to get a train to any destination, including those served from Clapham Junction.
It is a system, where to do any journey you either do it direct, or with a single same-platform change.
Old Oak Common As A Western Terminus
Because of the capacity problems and the unusual layout at Clapham Junction station, it might also be possible to use somewhere on the West London Line as a Western terminus.
Old Oak Common station with its connections to the West Coast Main Line, HS2, Crossrail and the North London Line would be an obvious choice.
The Eastern Termini
At present services from Victoria and Clapham Junction, go although the South London Line to the following destinations.
- Dalston Junction – 4 tph from Clapham Junction – 6 tph from 2019
- Dartford – 2 tph from Victoria via Bexleyheath
- Orpington – 4 tph from Victoria
Even with Dartford services raised to 4 tph, that is probably still below the capacity of the core section of the line.
Dalston Junction As An Eastern Terminus
I would assume that the current Dalston Junction to Clapham Junction service will continue.
Currently there are 4 tph, but this will go to 6 tph in 2019 as I wrote about in Increased Frequencies On The East London Line.
As TfL’s predictions in the document I found for 2016 and 2017 have already happened, I would think the 6 tph is likely, if the new Class 710 trains are delivered to boost the fleet.
With the increase in service frequency, London Overground Syndrome means that the passengers using the service will increase.
Dartford As An Eastern Terminus
At present, 2 tph go between Victoria and Dartford via Bexleyheath.
But is Dartford, the best terminal in the area for the South London Metro?
Consider.
- A Crossrail extension to Gravesend has been safeguarded, which goes through Dartford.
- Crossrail surely should connect directly to HS2.
- If Crossrail served Dartford, some of the other services would be simplified.
- Dartford will probably come under TfL control.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see 4 tph service along a South London Metro to a Dartford station, where Crossrail calls to give a direct link to HS2 at Ebbsfleet International.
London Bridge As An Eastern Terminus
As London Bridge station used to be linked along the South London Line to Victoria, this important station must be added.
Especially, as there were a lot of passengers, who objected to losing the direct service along the South London Line between London Bridge and Victoria.
On the East London Line, there is a short 4 tph service between Dalston Junction and New Cross which is used as a short direct service through the core, perhaps to boost train frequencies there.
So could a service with a similar frequency be run on the South London Line between Victoria and London Bridge? It could call at.
- South Bermondsey
- Queen’s Road Peckham
- Peckham Rye
- Denmark Hill
- Loughborough Junction
- Brixton
- Clapham High Street
- Wandsworth Road
- Battersea
It would have step-free connections to the Northern and Victoria Lines and Thameslink, if the appropriate stations were upgraded.
Orpington As An Eastern Terminus
I think that Orpington has the greatest potential as a terminal.
This map from carto.metro.free.fr shows the route from Kent House station via Beckenham Junction and Bromley South to Orpington.
It has very good connectivity.
- Beckenham Junction connects to the Tramlink.
- Bromley South connects to Thameslink, the Chatham Main Line and the Maidstone East Line.
- Orpington connects to the South Eastern Main Line and the Hastings Line.
Because of all this connectivity, Bromley and Orpington might be able to provide enough passengers for more than four trains per hour going to Victoria and/or Battersea.
Remember there will still be the five fast trains per hour through the Brixton Tunnel in addition to the stopping ones of the Metro.
Bellingham As An Eastern Terminus
When the Overground took over the line, there was some discussion about a service between Victoria and Bellingham.
So could Bellingham station be a terminus?
This Google Map shows the area around Bellingham station.
There doesn’t seem to be much of importance in the area, except the leisure centre.
In addition.
- The station doesn’t seem to have a suitable bay platform, but there may be space to build one.
- The station would provide a link to Thameslink.
- It only handles a couple of trains an hour most of the day, so perhaps the terminating of trains was to be slipped in the large gaps.
Perhaps it was all to stimulate development in the area.
An HS1 to HS2 Link
If Old Oak Common is chosen as a Western Terminus with a 4 tph service down the West London Line and the core route of the South London Metro, what would be a suitable terminal in the East?
Given what I said about Dartford as an Eastern terminus, surely a four tph service across South London linking HS1 and HS2 must enter into the route planners’ thinking.
As Crossrail does the business linking HS1 and HS2 for North and Central London, a South London Metro could be configured to do a similar job for a whole swath of South and West London.
A Brockley Interchange
The Centre for London report proposes a new pair of platforms on the South London Line between Nunhead and Lewisham stations, providing interchange with the existing Brockley station.
I gave my views on Brockley station in A Report On The Bakerloo Line Extension, which I now repeat in an edited form.
This Google Map shows Brockley station.
The Bexleyheath Line between Nunhead and Lewisham stations crosses the East London Line and Brockley station at a high level.
I wrote A Four-Poster Station about connecting these two lines.
It would appear that Transport for London have advanced this project from one word in their 2050 Infrastructure Plan to a proposal.
If the South London Metro included the services to Dartford via Bexleyheath, then this interchange at Brockley station might make some passengers journeys a lot easier.
A Penge Interchange
The Centre for London report proposes an interchange between Penge East station on the Chatham Main Line with Penge West station on the East London Line.
This Google Map shows the lines and the two Penge stations.
The report suggests that it would be possible to reduce the walking distance between the two stations from 650 to 400 metres and there might be potential to move Penge West station to the North of the High Street.
As the walking appears substantially to be flat, I wonder if a section of travelator would be possible!
I recently walked from East to West station and took these pictures.
One of the station staff said that they need step-ladders to access the Crystal Palace line, that runs over the top.
The walk incidentally took me fifteen minutes, so if it decreases from 650 to 400 metres, by moving the station North of the High Street that should reduce the time to under ten minutes.
Will a travelator be added.
As with the extra platforms at Brockley station, this interchange has the potential to ease some passengers journeys.
My Proposed Schedule
I will give my view of the trains on a South London Metro.
- 6 tph between Dalston Junction and Clapham Junction.
- 4 tph between Dartford and Old Oak Common.
- 4 tph between Victoria/Battersea and London Bridge
- 6 tph between Victoria/Battersea and Orpington
This gives a total of 20 tph, which would be the same as the East London Line will be in 2019.
The Rolling Stock
Due to platform restrictions on the East London Line, I would envisage that the trains between Dalston Junction and Clapham Junction will probably still be the same five-car Class 378 trains.
The trains on the other destinations can probably be anything suitable and would include Class 375, Class 377 or even some new Class 710 trains.
But as there is no platform restrictions to the other destinations, the trains could probably be any desired formation between four and twelve cars.
Any new platforms would of course be built to accept twelve-car trains.
Getting To Heathrow
At the present time, getting to Heathrow can be a bit of a problem from some places in South London.
But after Crossrail and Old Oak Common station are opened, it would just be a matter of getting one of a 4 tph South London Metro train to Old Oak Common and changing for Crossrail.
It may of course be easier to use one of the other possible routes to Crossrail.
- Take the Northern Line to Tottenham Court Road from Battersea or Clapham North.
- Take Thameslink to Tottenham Court Road.
- Go via Whitechapel.
We’ll all develop our favourite routes.
Getting To Gatwick
At the present time, Thameslink haven’t published their full route yet, but anybody on the South London Metro should be able to do one of the following.
- Go to Clapham Junction and get a direct train.
- Go to Victoria and get Gatwick Express.
- Go to London Bridge and get Thameslink.
Unfortunately, it looks like I might lose my option of going to New Cross Gate and getting a direct train.
Conclusion
A South London Metro running 16 tph or more between Wandsworth Road and Peckham Rye stations, with multiple termini at either end, must be a feasible and affordable possibility, if the following is done.
- The Brixton Tunnel is built to give fast Victoria to Kent services a by-pass.
- The Overground/Metro services are moved to the Northern pair of tracks on the South London Line.
- Various station and track improvements are carried out.
It looks to me, that this project could transform South London and improve the lot of people like me, who live on the East London Line.
Expanding Manchester Piccadilly Station
This announcement on the Government web site is entitled Put HS3 at the heart of a High Speed North – Adonis.
This is an extract.
Recommendation six: Proposals for the redevelopment of Manchester Piccadilly station should be prepared jointly by TfN, Transport for Greater Manchester, Manchester City Council, Network Rail, DfT and HS2 Ltd.
These organisations should work to together to deliver:
a) Detailed plans for the new east-west platforms 15/16 to facilitate delivery early in Control Period 6 and unlock the development potential of the Mayfield site;
b) A masterplan for the longer-term development of Manchester Piccadilly station as a whole, incorporating capacity for HS2 services and options for the delivery and timing of platform capacity for HS3; and
c) Proposals for funding and financing the station redevelopment, including for private sector and local contributions.
I know Manchester Piccadilly station well and it has multiple space problems. These pictures illustrate some of the problems on the North side of the station.
You have lots of short trains and long platforms, which means the following.
- Passengers have to walk long distances.
- There is confusion of which train to take with more than one in the platform.
- It must be a nightmare for train operators and their staff.
Surely some reorganisation could improve this mess, that was probably designed by Topsy.
On the South side of the station, there are two of the most crowded platforms in the UK. Platforms 13/14 need a serious sorting out.
Currently, services from Platform 13 seem to go to the following.
- Huddersfield
- Leeds
- Manchester Airport
- Norwich
- Scarborough
- Sheffield
- York
And from Platform 14 to the following.
- Blackpool
- Edinburgh
- Liverpool
- Southport
Most of the services seem to be provided by TransPennine Express and I think it is true to say, that when and if the Ordsall Chord is opened, there will be a sorting out of services on these two platforms.
But I do feel that the solution is Network Rail’s preferred one of adding platforms 15/16. They can’t be built soon enough, to ease the overcrowding.
This Google Map shows the layout of Manchester Piccadilly station.
The current Platforms 13/14 are along the bottom of the station, connected to the main station by the two small bridges. I would assume that the two new platforms will go on the south side of 13/14.
Wikipedia gives more details of developments related to the Northern Hub and HS2.
It is going to be a tight fit to get all the lines and platforms into the area.
The more I look at the station, the more I tend to think that the Picc-Vic Tunnel might have been a good solution.
It makes me wonder if it would be more efficient for HS2 and HS3 to share a route through Manchester from the Airport to Victoria and on to Huddersfield and Leeds. It would need to be mainly in tunnel and could go right under the city with underground stations. I wrote about it in Rethinking HS2 And HS3.
Surely, if two high speed lines are to go through Manchester, they should share a route?
I have also received this image from a reader; Ben.
Ben’s plan illustrates some advantages of a cross-city tunnel, which probably include.
- Less demolition at stations served by HS2.
- HS2 and HS3 could probably share platforms.
- Release of platforms at Piccadilly.
- A station in the centre of the city.
- Better links to the trams and local train services
- Ability to continue in tunnel towards Huddersfield and Leeds.
Remember that we’ve improved our tunnelling capability by a large amount in recent years.
Crossrail in London has also developed station designs and layouts, that could be used in Manchester.
- Massive double-ended stations to effectively serve two separate locations.
- Lines and station layouts to ease and encourage same platform interchange.
- Moving walkways and inclined lifts, where necessary to ease passenger movement.
- Island platforms to ease interchange between directions and branches, as at Whitechapel.
So could the most passenger friendly station, just called Manchester, be built under the city?
I don’t think that the current plans for Piccadilly, which are just so much conservative dross will be realised, as someone will come up with something much better. But then recommendation six encourages that!
Is HS2 At Risk Of Derailing?
There is an article in The Telegraph entitled HS2 at risk of derailing at top speeds, report finds.
I have read the article and the report by Professor Woodward at Heriot-Watt University is obviously, based on sound mathematics and enginering principles.
We have a problem with HS2, which is not unlike the problem with the new Hinckley Point nuclear power station.
There is a big need for extra capacity, but it will cost an awful lot of money.
In both projects too, there is a lot of opposition.
Professor Woodward’s research has one serious consequence, even if the high design speed of the line doesn’t make the trains derail.
It is that if you reduce the speed of the line, the economic case for HS2 is shot to pieces.
If you decide that there could be a safety problem with the embankments, you have to strengthen them and that ruins the economic case too.
If we look at Hinckley Point C nuclear power station, not building it, is not as serious as not building HS2.
We have several other ways to generate power and also lots of ways to save it. Also, the widely quoted strike price of £92.50/MWh would make a lot of other much cheaper schemes like tidal power viable.
But this doesn’t solve the problem of creating more capacity on the rail lines between north and south for both passengers and freight.
HS2 doesn’t carry freight, but hopefully, it will free up paths on traditional routes to the north, that could be used by freight trains.
If you think we don’t, travel between Euston and Glasgow on Virgin Trains and look at the passenger loading.
At present, Network Rail are carrying out various schemes to squeeze more capacity out of the current lines and it is hoped that in the short term, this will help.
But in some ways all it will do is create more demand for travel on the routes.
So at some time we’re going to have to build a new line, which will allow faster speeds than the current lines.
If you look at Phase 1 to the West Midlands, this will have the following effects.
- Extra capacity between London and the West Midlands.
- Journey times of around fifty minutes.
- Making Birmingham Airport, a viable one for those living in North London.
- Paths released for freight on the West Coast Main Line.
- Reorganisation of traditional services on the West Coast Main Line to serve more places.
In Phase 1, there would probably be no more than half-a-dozen trains in both directions on the southern section of HS2, south of Birmingham International station.
On the other hand, when Phase 2 to Manchester and Leeds opens there will be upwards of twenty trains per hour both wayson the same southern section.
I can understand, why those in the Chilterns are getting angry.
So to the protesters, Professor Woodward’s research could be manna from heaven.
For some time, my view has been that we need new tracks between London and the North via Birmingham, as even if all existing lines were upgraded, there wouldn’t be enough capacity.
I think we’re going to need some radical thinking.
For instance, suppose you made Birmingham International a hub, where the lines from the North met a line to London and one into Birmingham city centre.
This might help in the design of HS2 to the north of Birmingham, but that is not the area, where there is major opposition to the line. That is between Birmingham International and London, where land is limited and wherever you build it, you’ll annoy someone.
I suspect, a lot of people working on the project, sometimes feel like going and working elsewhere.
But whatever we do with HS2, we must improve the traditional routes.
- Electrify the Midland Main Line to Derby. Nottingham and Sheffield,
- Electrify the Chiltern Main Line to Birmingham.
- Electrify the routes across the Pennines from Preston and Liverpool to Hull, Leeds and Newcastle via Manchester.
- Sort out the Digswell Visduct on the East Coast Main Line.
- Improve speeds to as high as possible on all routes to the North.
The only trouble, is that the more we improve traditional routes, the more people will travel by train and the need for HS2 will become more urgent.
Does London Need To Get A Grip On Rail Connectivity?
This article in the Standard has a title of Old Oak Common regeneration scheme ‘risks being London’s worst cock-up in 50 years’. This is the first three paragraphs.
Boris Johnson’s flagship regeneration scheme at Old Oak Common is in danger of turning into London’s “worst cock-up in 50 years”, a leading government adviser warned today.
Urban planner Sir Terry Farrell said the £10 billion development, the biggest in Britain, is heading for disaster because of the rush to finish Crossrail.
He blamed politicians for ducking key decisions and said the Mayor was partly responsible for a shortsighted “pass the parcel” approach. Sir Terry said: “If a tenth of the energy he put into the Boris island airport idea had gone into Old Oak Common I feel sure it would have happened without a problem.”
Old Oak Common is going to be a major development of 25,000 homes and 55,000 jobs created over the next fifteen years. A major transport hub will be created at Old Oak Common station will be created, linking some or all of the following lines together.
- Bakerloo Line
- Central Line
- Crossrail
- Dudding Hill Line
- Great Western Main Line
- HS2
- North London Line
- Watford DC Line
- West Coast Main Line
- West London Line
This map shows the plans for Option C of TRfL’s Old Oak Common proposals.
I wrote about this option in Should An Overground Station Be Built At Hythe Road?
Terry Farrell has said that there is no space between the rail lines to put the piling to support the homes, offices and other developments that will built over the top.
I also believe that the walking routes between the various stations will be far to long and tortuous.
The developers, Transport for London and the rail companies involved all seem to be planning their own parts in isolation.
It seems to echo what I documented in Searching For What Is Going To Happen On The East London Line After The Thameslink Programme Opens, where I was trying to find out how Thameslink will improve my journeys from Dalston Junction using the East London Line.
My correspondence on that issue, would seem to indicate that Thameslink and Transport for London don’t talk to each other and calmly go their own ways.
Someone needs to get a grip on all these big projects at a high level.
Small-Scale Connectivity To Crossrail
I live about twenty-five minutes from my nearest Crossrail station at Moorgate on a 141 bus and as I walked around today, I just wondered what will be the best way to access London’s new East-West rail line when it opens in a few years time.
So what do I mean by small-scale connectivity?
I think it is best defined as any method that isn’t more than perhaps ten stations on heavy rail, light rail, the Underground or trams.
And of course, you might substitute Thameslink for Crossrail! Or if you don’t live in London, it could be your major cross-city line.
So in my case, the following would be small-scale connectivity to Crossrail.
- Walking
- Cycling
- Car
- Taxi
- Bus
I do have a heavy rail link to Crossrail in the form of the East London Line between Dalston Junction and Whitechapel, so that will be included as it is only a short stretch of line of four stations.
These are the methods available to me in Dalston.
Walking
For good connectivity, the walking routes around a station should be properly mapped and signposted on a physical wayfinding system, like Legible London used all over the capital.
I also think it is essential that a common format is used, along a line.
So this probably means that London will decide how walking maps and signposts at Crossrail stations in Essex and Berkshire will look.
Will that be acceptable to towns and cities, that have called in consultants to design their ideal wayfinding system?
One problem with wayfinding systems, is that in some places the locals who know the city or area well, say they don’t need the system and think it a waste of money.
You also have the problem in areas with more than one local authority, that each go their own way, rather than agree on a common system.
Remember too, that London is so large, that the average resident finds themselves regularly in an area of the city they don’t know. So Londoners on the whole are very pro-Legible London.
I feel that we need to impose the same wayfinding system all over the UK.
Cycling
Just as there should be good walking routes to a station, the cycling routes should be obvious and well-signposted.
And if bikes are provided for hire at the station, the payment system must be compatible with London’s.
Perhaps we need a nationwide bike hire system?
Car
Many people will want to drive to their local Crossrail station and park their car before they get the train.
i have a feeling that when Crossrail opens, the biggest complaint will be the lack of car parking at stations.
Taxi
For about the last three months, I’ve been suffering badly from plantar fasciitis and because of the limited mobility, it gives me at times, I now feel very strongly that every Crossrail station, should have a proper black taxi rank.
Recently Transport for London have announced that one of my local stations; Highbury and Islington, is going to have a taxi rank. I have yet to find a taxi driver who is against the idea and I believe this could be a winner for both passengers and black cab drivers.
Bus
Every London rail and tube station is a bus hub with its own spider map, which details all of the buses and their routes from the area. This is my lovcal bus spider map for Dalston.
Venture outside of London and in many places, bus mapping is often missing or very bad to give it the benefit of the doubt.
As with walking maps, local authorities outside of London with a Crossrail station, will have to adopt London’s system.
Other Rail Lines
Crossrail does connect to quite a number of heavy rail, Underground and Overground Lines.
- Bakerloo Line
- Central Line
- Circle Line
- District Line
- East London Line
- Great Eastern Main Line
- Great Western Main Line
- HS1 – After extension to Gravesend
- HS2 – After Old Oak Common
- Jubilee Line
- Metropolitan Line
- North Kent Line
- Northern Line
- Northern City Line
- North London Line
- Thameslink
- West Anglia Main Line
- West Coast Main Line – After extension to West Coast Main Line
- West London Line
I have included links to extensions to Gravesend and the West Coast Main Line and Old Oak Common in this list.
Small Branch Lines
But it also connects with several smaller branch lines or perhaps in the future, some tram and light rail lines.
- Abbey Line – After extension to West Coast Main Line
- Brentford Branch Line
- Croxley Rail Link – After extension to West Coast Main Line
- Greenford Branch Line
- Henley Branch Line
- Marlow Branch Line
- New North Main Line
- Reading to Basingstoke Line
- Romford to Upminster Line
- Shenfield to Southend Line
- Slough to Windsor and Eton Line
- Staines and West Drayton Railway
- Waterloo to Reading Line
I believe that Local Authorities will develop these smaller lines and create others to maximise their benefit from Crossrail,
A Metro In The East
The two lines that I think have the most likely chance of being developed, are the Romford to Upminster and Shenfield to Southend Lines.
- The main line rail company; c2c, is very ambitious.
- In the next couple of decades, South East Essex will be an important economic growth area.
- Better links are needed to Southend Airport and the London Gateway.
- There is substantial development of jobs, housing and leisure opportunities in the areas the lines serve.
- Give the people of Essex an opportunity and they embrace it fully.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see a substantial metro network created in the area, based on Billericay, Shenfield, Southend and Thurrock.
A Metro In The West
If a metro network can be successfully developed at the eastern end of Crossrail, is there the potential of creating something similar at the western end?
Consider.
- Heathrow dominates thinking in West London and feels that everybody should jump to its tune.
- Heathrow should wake up to the fact that it will never get a third runway, as London’s electorate will always vote to block this.
- There will always be a Heathrow, but in time, it will cease to dominate the air travel market in the UK, as it does now!
- Heathrow has very limited rail connections to Basingstoke, Reading and the West.
- If you look at the list of small branch lines, several are clustered around the western end of Crossrail, with its two hub stations of Slough and Reading.
A metro in the west could be developed based on hubs at Basingstoke, Heathrow, Slough and Reading. The Windsor Link Railway is surely thinking along those lines.
A Metro In The South East
Of all the stations on Crossrail, Abbey Wood is one of the most disappointing.
As a terminus for Crossrail, that connects to the North Kent Line and to services to South East London and the Dartford area, four platforms doesn’t seem enough, when you compare the station to the other terminals of Reading and Shenfield.
Transport for London have proposed that the Gospel Oak to Barking Line could cross the river to serve Abbey Wood and if this should happen, there must be opportunities to create another metro system based on Abbey Wood.
A Metro In The North
There are proposals to extend Crossrail to Milton Keynes from Old Oak Common.
This would surely, bring in the possibility of a network of local lines based on Watford.
- The Abbey Line is one of those difficult-to-run lines, that needs substantial improvement.
- The Croxley Rail Link could be expanded to serve Amersham.
- Local services on the West Coast Main Line and the Watford DC Line are very crowded.
This will only be developed once Crossrail serves Watford.
Conclusion
Crossrail in 2030, will be an entirely different line to that being created today.
Capturing The Benefits Of HS2 On Existing Lines
This is the title of a report written in 2011 by Greengauge 21.
This is how the report starts.
When High Speed Two (HS2) is complete, the longer distance, non-stopping trains on the West Coast Main Line (WCML) will in the main transfer to the new, quicker, route, freeing up valuable capacity. However, until now plans for services on the WCML once HS2 is open have been broad brush assumptions made for the purposes of completeness in the economic appraisal. This report looks ahead in more detail to consider what services should operate on the existing rail network once HS2 is open. The aim is to help kick start the development of this wider strategy in which the benefits of HS2 are maximised, not just for those using the new line, but for travellers on the existing railway. The effective re-use of the capacity released by HS2 is a key project benefit. It will allow new local and regional passenger and new freight trains to operate: services that are and will continue to be prevented by network capacity constraints.
It is well worth reading the full document, even though it was written in 2011,, as I think it explains how HS2 could benefit those other than those, who want to get quickly between London and Birmingham.
Places With Better Services To And From London
The report singles out three areas, that could benefit from a freed-up West Coast Main Line between London and Birmingham.
It says that the following places.
- Walsall
- Shropshire
- Mid and North East Wales.
Could all gain new direct services to and from London.
Feeders To The West Coast Main Line
The report talks about how three new or improved lines and schemes will act as feeders to the services on a West Coast Main Line, that will have more capacity for semi-fast services, connecting London with Birmingham, Liverpool, Manchester and Scotland.
- The Croxley Rail Link will link Watford to a wide area of Hertfordshire and Buckinghamshire.
- The East-West Rail Link intersecting the WCML at Milton Keynes would improve services from a lot of the South Midlands and East Anglia.
- Improvements between Leamington and Nuneaton (Nuckle) would improve connections for Warwickshire.
These three schemes are now progressing and will be fully working by the time HS2 opens in 2026.
Chiltern Electrification
The three feeder schemes mentioned above all contain two ambitious words Chiltern Railways.
Consider the following.
- The Croxley Rail Link could and probably will be extended to Amersham via Rickmansworth.
- TheEast West Rail Link will deliver a Chiltern service from Marylebone to Milton Keynes via Aylesbury.
- The Greengauge 21 report talks of a Marylebone to Coventry service via Leamington and Kenilworth.
- Oxford to Milton Keynes will be electrified.
- Chiltern use some rather elderly but excellent diesel trains.
- Coventry, Milton Keynes and Watford are already electrified.
I can’t believe that there is not more talk about electrifying the Chiltern Railways network.
I don’t think that Chiltern Railways would need full electrification, if they were to use IPEMU technology in conjunction with some limited electrification.
- The Snow Hill Lines in Birmingham, perhaps as far south as Leamington.
- The southern section of the Chiltern Main Line, perhaps between Marylebone and High Wycombe.
Electrification is a future aspiration of Chiltern Railways and it could give a second 125 mph line between London and Birmingham.
This would mean that a much increased number of towns would have a high speed connection to both major cities and many places in between and North of Birmingham.
I think that enabling electric trains to use the Chiltern Main Line and the Snow Hill Lines, should be given a high priority.



















































