The Anonymous Widower

Jobs, Homes And The Economy: Bakerloo Line Upgrade And Extension To Be Transformational For London

The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on Rail Technology Magazine.

This is the sub-heading.

The government has been urged to use the upcoming spring budget to commit to upgrading and extending the Bakerloo line after a new impact assessment found its effects could be transformational.

These three paragraphs introduce the article.

The impact assessment – commissioned by Central London Forward, a partnership of 12 central London boroughs – finds that such a move would boost the economy, unlock new homes, create new jobs, and more.

The upgrade would centre around new trains and signalling, while the extension would take the terminus to Lewisham in the first phase, and eventually to Hayes – adding 14 new stations.

The impact assessment concludes that the extension and upgrade of the Bakerloo line would create 9,700 jobs, 190,000 square metres of commercial floorspace, as well as generate £1.5bn of GVA.

The article is a must-read and eloquently puts the case for the Bakerloo Line Extension.

I have a few thoughts.

A Loop At Brixton For The Victoria Line

This has been proposed and the Wikipedia entry for the Victoria Line has this paragraph.

Proposals have been made to extend the line one stop southwards from Brixton to Herne Hill, a significant interchange in south London providing access to Kent, Blackfriars, London Bridge and Sutton. The latter station would be on a large reversing loop with a single platform removing a critical capacity restriction eliminating the need for trains to reverse at Brixton and provide a more obvious route for passengers who look for the nearest tube station before any other transport options.

I like this idea.

  • It will make it easier to run the full frequency of 33 trains per hour (tph) between Brixton and Walthamstow Central stations.
  • Loops at Heathrow and Liverpool seem to work very well.
  • A single-platform with platform-edge doors has a high level of safety.
  • Only one tunnel boring machine (TBM) would be needed.
  • Large lifts could be used between the surface and the platform.
  • It is a more affordable option.

But perhaps most importantly, I am sure, the loop could be built whilst other services at Brixton and Herne Hill were running almost without disruption, as services did at Kennington, whilst the Battersea Extension of the Northern Line was built.

A Loop At Elephant And Castle For The Bakerloo Line

I have spent forty years involved in project management, writing software for project managers and generally listening to some of the thoughts and experiences of some of the best engineers from all over the world.

One common thread, which is best illustrated by how the size of lift possible increased in the North Sea in the 1970s, is that as time has progressed machines have got bigger and more capable, and the techniques of using them has improved immeasurably.

The Crossrail tunnel boring machines (TBM) make those used on the Jubilee Line extension or the Channel Tunnel look like toys. But not only are the TBMs bigger and faster, they have all the precision and control to go through the eye of the smallest needle.

If we look at the proposals for the Bakerloo Line Extension, there have been several differing ideas. Some envisage going under Camberwell and in others the trains terminate on the Hayes line.

Transport for London (TfL), obviously know the traffic patterns, but do we really want to take the chance of say connecting the Hayes line to the Bakerloo and then finding that it’s not the best solution?

What we should do is augment the services in the area, by providing a good alternative transport route, that links to some of the traditional rail lines to give even more flexibility. We certainly shouldn’t repeat the grave mistake that was made at Brixton in the 1960s by not connecting the Victoria line to the surface rail lines.

This is Transport for London’s indicative map of the extension.

Bakerloo Line Extension Map

I have reason to believe that the Northern Line Extension may be being built as an extension to the Kennington Loop.

So could we design the Bakerloo Line Extension as a loop starting and finishing at Elephant and Castle calling at important stations?

A possible route could be.

  • Elephant and Castle – Interchange with Northern Line and National Rail including Thameslink
  • Old Kent Road 1 – Proposed on Map
  • Old Kent Road 2 – Proposed on Map
  • New Cross Gate – Interchange with London Overground and National Rail
  • Lewisham – Interchange with Docklands Light Railway and National Rail including Hayes Line
  • Catford Bridge – Interchange with Catford station and National Rail including Hayes Line and Thameslink
  • Peckham Rye – Interchange with London Overground and National Rail
  • Camberwell – Interchange with National Rail including Thameslink
  • Elephant and Castle

The advantages of this simple design are.

  1. The tunnel would be excavated in one pass by a single TBM.
  2. The line could be deep under any existing infrastructure.
  3. Most stations would be simple one-platform affairs, with perhaps only large lifts and emergency stairs, to give unrivalled step-free access for all from the street to the train. Surely lifts exist, that are large and fast enough to dispense with escalators.
  4. For safety, passenger convenience and flows, and other reasons, the stations could have two entrances, at opposite ends of the platform.
  5. The simple station entrances would be much easier to position on the surface, as they wouldn’t need to be much bigger than the area demanded by the lifts.
  6. A  single loop would only need half the number of platform edge doors.
  7. At stations like New Cross Gate, Lewisham, Catford  and Peckham Rye the lifts would surface within the confines of the existing surface stations.
  8. The route has interchanges with the Brighton Main Line, East London Line, Hayes  Link, Thameslink and other services, so this would give lots of travel possibilities.
  9. Trains do not need a terminal platform, as they just keep going on back to Elephant and Castle.
  10. The loop would be operationally very simple, with no points to go wrong. TfL have aspirations to run twenty-seven trains per hour on the Bakerloo and a simple reversing loop , which would mean the driver didn’t have to change ends, must certainly help this. It would probably be a lot more difficult to get this capacity at the northern end of the line,where Harrow and Wealdstone doesn’t have the required capacity and the only possibility for a reversing loop would be north of Stonebridge Park.
  11. Elephant and Castle would need little or no modification. Although it would be nice to have lifts to the Bakerloo Line.
  12. Somewhere over two billion pounds has been quoted for the extension. A single loop with simple stations must be more affordable.

The main disadvantage is that the loop is only one-way.

But making even part of the loop two-way would create all the operational difficulties of scheduling the trains. It would probably be better, less costly and easier to make the trains go round the loop faster and more frequently.

But if a passenger went round the loop the wrong way and changed direction at Elephant and Castle that would probably only take a dozen minutes or so.

Alternatively, I’m sure some New Routemasters would step up to the plate and provide service in the other direction between the stations.

Future Rolling Stock For The Bakerloo Line

This has a section in the Wikipedia entry for the Bakerloo Line, where this is said.

In the mid 2010s, TfL began a process of ordering new rolling stock to replace trains on the Piccadilly, Central, Bakerloo and Waterloo & City lines. A feasibility study into the new trains showed that new generation trains and re-signalling could increase capacity on the Bakerloo line by 25%, with 27 trains per hour.

In June 2018, the Siemens Mobility Inspiro design was selected.[ These trains would have an open gangway design, wider doorways, air conditioning and the ability to run automatically with a new signalling system.[35] TfL could only afford to order Piccadilly line trains at a cost of £1.5bn. However, the contract with Siemens includes an option for 40 trains for the Bakerloo line in the future. This would take place after the delivery of the Piccadilly line trains in the late 2020s.

A loop from Elephant and Castle with a train every 2¼ minutes, is not going to be short of passengers.

The Catford Interchange

Catford and Catford Bridge stations are not far apart.

In An Opportunity At Catford, I talked about what could be done to create a full step-free interchange, which could be connected to the Bakerloo Line loop underneath.

Would It Be Possible For The Bakerloo And Watford DC Lines To Use The Same Trains?

I answered this question in a post with the same name and this was my conclusion.

A common fleet used by the Bakerloo and Watford DC Line would appear to give advantages and it has been done successfully before.

But what the Bakerloo Line, the Watford DC Line, the Abbey Line and the Bakerloo Line Extension need is a good dose of holistic design.

The current trains on the Watford DC Line would be moved to the London Overground. They could be ideal for the future West London Orbital Railway.

Would There Be Advantages In Creating The West London Orbital Railway And Extending The Bakerloo Line As One Project?

Consider.

  • The two lines will have an interchange station at Harlesden, which will need to be rebuilt.
  • The current trains on the Watford DC Line could be cascaded to the West London Orbital Railway.
  • As new trains are delivered to the Piccadilly Line, some of the current trains could be cascaded to the Bakerloo Line.
  • Major work for the Bakerloo Link Extension includes a new tunnel, updated signalling and at least seven underground stations.
  • Major work for the West London Orbital probably includes track refurbishment, new signalling and updated stations.

I believe that with good project management, that if these two lines were to be created together, this would be advantageous.

Conclusion

I have only outlined how the two projects might be done together.

But I am absolutely certain, that someone with full knowledge of both projects could build the two at a very affordable cost.

February 22, 2024 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Would It Be Possible For The Bakerloo And Watford DC Lines To Use The Same Trains? – 6th March 2023 Update

These two lines are very different.

Ten stations are shared between the lines, of which only one; Queen’s Park offers level boarding.

The Shared Stations

The nine shared stations often have considerable steps up and down, as at Willesden Junction station, which is shown in Train-Platform Interface On Platform 1 At Willesden Junction.

I am rather pleased and pleasantly surprised, that there are not more accidents at the shared stations, but using the line must be a nightmare for wheelchair users, buggy pushes and large case draggers.

If Transport for London proposed building a line like this, they would have to launch it at the Hammersmith Apollo, where comedians perform.

The One Train Type Solution

To my mind, there is only one solution. The two services must use the same type of trains.

These are a few thoughts on the trains.

Trains Would Be Underground-Sized

As the trains will have to work through the existing tunnels to Elephant & Castle station, the trains would have to be compatible with the tunnels and therefore sized for the Underground.

I suspect they would be a version of the New Tube for London, that are currently being built by Siemens for the Piccadilly Line.

New Tube For London And Class 710 Train Compared

This Siemens infographic summarises the New Tube For London.

These figures are from Wikipedia.

  • Cars – NTFL – 9 – 710 – 4
  • Car Length – NTFL –  12.6 metres – 710 – 20 metres
  • Train Length – NTFL – 113.4 metres – 710 – 80 metres
  • Seated Passengers – NTFL – 268 – 710 – 189
  • Total Passengers – NTFL – 1076 – 710 – 678
  • Passenger Density – NTFL – 9.5 per metre – 710 – 8.2 per metre
  • Speed – NTFL – 62 mph – 710 – 75 mph

Note.

  1. The figures for the Class 710 train are for a four-car train.
  2. The passenger density and speed are closer than I thought they’d be.
  3. I’m sure Siemens can design a longer and/or faster train if required for the Euston service.

I feel that the New Tube for London design could be adjusted , so that it could work the Watford DC service.

Platform Modifications

I suspect that the New Tube for London will be lower than the Class 710 train and all platforms would need to be lowered to fit the new trains.

I would also suspect that it would be easier to lower platforms, than modify them, so that they had dual-height sections to satisfy two classes of train.

It should be noted that the New Tube for London has shorter cars than the sixteen metre 1972 Stock trains currently used on the line, so there will be smaller gaps at stations with curved platforms like Waterloo.

I believe that with one class of train, all of the stations on the Bakerloo and Watford DC Lines could be made step-free between train and platform.

Platform Height On Platform 9 At Euston

I took these pictures on Platform 9 at Euston station.

Note that it is rather a high step into the train and there is a large gap.

But if say, a modern London Underground train from say the Victoria Line pulled into the platform would it be a better fit?

Platform Height At Kilburn High Road Station

These pictures show Kilburn High Road station.

I should have taken more pictures, but the step between the platform and train is similar to Platform 9 at Euston.

Platform Height At South Hampstead Station

These pictures show South Hampstead station.

I should have taken more pictures, but again the step between the platform and train is similar to Platform 9 at Euston.

Were The Platforms At Euston, South Hampstead And Kilburn High Road Built For Another Class Of Train?

This Wikipedia entry is for the London Underground Watford Joint Stock train, where this is said.

The Watford Joint Tube Stock was built for the service to Watford along both the Bakerloo tube and the London North Western Railway. As a result, the cars were owned by both the Underground and the London North Western Railway. To be able to operate on both lines, the car floors were 4+1⁄2 inches (110 mm) higher than other tube cars. This was a compromise height between the platform heights on the two lines.

The cars were ordered in 1914, but construction was delayed by The First World War. As a result, the first cars were not delivered until early 1920.

Note.

  1. The Wikipedia entry has links to some images of which this is one.
  2. They must have been rather cramped trains if they were built for deep tunnels and had a floor that was 110 mm higher, than other tube trains.

It certainly appears to be possible to design a train, that would fit both lines.

But would it fit modern regulations and give full step-free access?

Queen’s Park And Euston

This map from cartometro.com, shows the route between Queen’s Park and Euston stations.

Note.

  1. The Watford DC Line is shown in orange.
  2. Queen’s Park station is to the West of Kilburn High Road station.
  3. It appears that Watford DC Line trains always use Platform 9 at Euston station.

The route seems to be a self-contained third-rail electrified line into Euston station.

On the subject of electrification between Queen’s Park and Euston stations, there would appear to be a choice between the third-rail system and London Underground’s four-rail system.

But it is rumoured that the New Tube for London will have a battery capability.

As Euston and Queen’s Park stations are only 3.7 miles apart, perhaps the choice would be to use battery power into Euston station, which would remove electrified rails from Euston?

How Many Trains Could Run Into Euston?

Currently, four trains per hour (tph) run into Euston.

It is generally accepted that six tph can use a single platform. But would this be enough?

I suppose there is the possibility of tunnelling under Euston station to a pair of terminal platforms.

In that case the current platform could be used by other services.

Southern’s Milton Keynes And Clapham Junction Service

This service wouldn’t be affected as it uses the fast lines between Willesden and Watford Junction.

Advantages Of One Train Type On The Bakerloo And Watford DC Lines

I can think of these advantages.

  • Step-free access between train and platform, should be achieved.
  • A unified fleet.
  • A higher frequency between Euston and Willesden Junction stations.
  • Higher frequency where needed.
  • If trains had a battery capability, Euston could be free of third-rail electrification.

As only one type of train will be using the Watford DC line between Euston and Watford Junction, this could result in operational efficiencies.

Linking Of The Bakerloo And Abbey Lines

This could be the biggest advantage of all.

This map from cartometro shows the lines at Watford Junction station.

Note.

  1. The orange lines are the current Watford DC Line services of the London Overground, terminating in platforms 1 to 4 of Watford Junction station.
  2. These lines would be taken over by the unified Bakerloo/Watford DC Line services, running nine-car New Tubes For London.
  3. The next station to the South is Watford High Street.
  4. The West Coast Main Line goes through the station and uses platforms 5 to 10.
  5. At the North of the station is Platform 11 on the Abbey Line which leads roughly North East to St. Albans.

Look at how the Abbey Line is more or less in line with the twin-tracks of the Watford DC Line.

Recently, during the Bank Station Upgrade, a 488 metre long single track tunnel was built to divert the Southbound Northern Line.

This tunnel was not dug with a tunnel boring machine, but traditionally by hand, using men, picks, shovels and I suspect a few small machines.

I believe, that a similar technique could be used to dig a tunnel, to connect the Abbey Line and the Watford DC Line.

  • It would only be single-track
  • It would probably be less than 500 metres long.
  • It would connect to the Abbey Line to the South of Platform 11.
  • It would be deep-level tube-sized.
  • It might be dug by hyperTunnel.
  • Geography wouldn’t allow the tunnel to terminate in the Watford DC Line platforms at Watford Junction station.

But where would the terminal be on the Southern side of the West Coast Main Line?

This map from OpenRailwayMap, shows the two routes between Watford Junction and Bushey stations.

Note.

  1. Watford Junction station is at the top of the map.
  2. The orange line is the West Coast Main Line.
  3. The yellow line looping to the West of the West Coast Main Line is the double-track Watford DC Line.
  4. Bushey station is at the bottom of the map, where the two rail lines meet.
  5. Watford High Street station is in the middle of the map on the Watford DC Line.

The new service could certainly take the Watford DC Line as far as Watford High Street station.

  • The station is close to the centre of Watford, the hospital and Vicarage Road stadium.
  • But there is no space for a terminal platform.

This second OpenRailwayMap shows the disused railways to the West of Watford High Street station.

Note.

  1. The yellow loop at the East of the map is the Watford DC Line.
  2. Watford High Street station is on this loop.
  3. There is a triangular junction, that connects the former Croxley Green branch to the Watford DC Line.
  4. The terminus at Croxley Green station is marked by a blue arrow.
  5. There used to be intermediate stations at Cassiobridge, Watford West and Watford Stadium.
  6. This route was used for the failed attempt to build the Croxley Rail Link.

But could a Western extension of the Abbey Line be built?

  • It would terminate at either Croxley Green or Cassiobridge.
  • There would be intermediate stations at Watford West, Watford Stadium and Watford High Street.
  • There would be two tph.
  • Trains would be nine-car New Tubes For London.
  • The current Abbey Line is 6.4 miles and would be run using battery power, with possible charging at St. Albans Abbey station.
  • The tunnel under the West Coast Main Line would be run on battery power.
  • The Western extension from Watford High Street station would be run using battery power, with possible charging at the Western end.

I believe, an extended Abbey Line could be a viable alternative to the ill-fated Croxley Rail Link.

  • I have used battery power, as I doubt Health and Safety would allow any new third-rail electrification.
  • I have used nine-car New Tubes For London for the extended Abbey Line, as their small cross-section would allow a smaller tunnel and they would be certified for running in tunnels.
  • Some platforms on the Abbey Line would need to be lengthened, but these would be the only modifications, other than the possible installation of the charging system.
  • The extended Abbey Line would serve Watford Hospital and Vicarage Road.

The capacity of the extended Abbey Line would be substantially more than the current line.

Conclusion

A common fleet used by the Bakerloo and Watford DC Line would appear to give advantages and it has been done successfully before.

But what the Bakerloo Line, the Watford DC Line, the Abbey Line and the Bakerloo Line Extension need is a good dose of holistic design.

March 6, 2023 Posted by | Design, Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Leading Transport Experts To Explore Innovative Options For The Watford To Croxley Link

The title of this post, is the same as that of this news item on the Watford Borough Council web site.

The news item starts with this sub-title.

A wide range of proposals to bring a long disused stretch of railway back to life as a key transport link between Watford and Croxley Green are to be explored…

These four paragraphs then outline what is to be done.

A wide range of proposals to bring a long disused stretch of railway back to life as a key transport link between Watford and Croxley Green are to be explored by three leading travel and transport consultancies.

Atkins, SYSTRA UK and Wood Group will work in partnership with Hertfordshire County Council, Watford Borough Council, Three Rivers District Council and Network Rail to provide innovative solutions to improve connectivity within the area.

The transport link will connect important areas of Watford like the town centre, hospital, Watford FC and Croxley Park with Croxley Green and Watford Junction and the travel network beyond.

Securing the right solution is an important part of the overall plans of the partnership and Network Rail for future cleaner, healthier and greener travel in the area for the benefit of residents, visitors and commuters.

Note.

SYSTRA UK and the Wood Group are respected consultancies.

The main railway station, town centre, football ground and the hospital should be connected together by decent public transport. In Watford, as in many towns, they currently are a long walk or a taxi.

Watford Junction and Croxley stations will be connected together.

These are my thoughts.

The Abbey Line

I believe that the Abbey Line, which links Watford Junction and St. Albans Abbey stations should be included in any proposals.

  • It has a rather unusual timetable with trains running every forty-five minutes.
  • Proposals exist for a passing loop, which would allow two trains per hour (tph)
  • All stations only have a single platform.

If it were updated to a modern railway, it would be a valuable asset with charm.

Connecting St. Albans Abbey And St. Albans City Stations

This map from OpenRailwayMap shows the two stations.

Note.

  1. The yellow line in the South-West corner  is the Abbey Line that terminates in St. Albans Abbey station.
  2. The orange line is the Midland Main Line passes through St. Albans City station.
  3. The dotted line crossing the Midland Main Line and linking to the Abbey Line is a disused railway that has been converted into the St, Albans Way.

Tram-trains with a tight turning circle might be able to use the Abbey Line and with selected use of street running be able visit the City Centre and terminate at St. Albans City station.

Connecting The Abbey Line And The London Overground

This map from OpenRailwayMap, shows the track layout at Watford Junction station.

Note.

  1. The orange tracks are the West Coast Main Line.
  2. The yellow track to the North of the West Coast Main Line is the Abbey Line.
  3. The yellow track to the South of the West Coast Main Line is the Watford DC Line of the London Overground.

If you were using tram-trains, like the Class 399 tram-trains on the Abbey Line, I suspect a single-track dive-under could connect the Abbey Line with the Overground tracks to Watford High Street station.

Why Tram-Trains?

Tram-Trains have advantages in a scheme like this.

  • They can run as trams on the streets.
  • They can run as trains on railway tracks.
  • They can use lightweight catenary, which is quicker and more affordable to erect.
  • They are narrower and lighter than trains.
  • They have a tighter turning circle than trains.

But most importantly, tram-trains have been running successfully in Sheffield for several years.

The Eastern Section Of The Croxley Rail Link

This map from OpenRailwayMap shows the Eastern section of the Croxley Rail Link.

Note.

  1. The yellow track is the Watford DC Line, which goes through Watford High Street station.
  2. A disused line runs via the Croxley Green Chord to the disused stations of Croxley Green, Watford Stadium and Watford West.
  3. Vicarage Road and Watford General Hospital are to the North of the disused line.

The original plan for the Croxley Rail Link would have seen a double-track along the line of the old railway with stations at Vicarage Road and Watford General Hospital.

I don’t see why tram-trains could join the Watford DC Line to the South of Watford Junction station, go through Watford High Street station and then continue along the reinstated track.

The Western Section Of The Croxley Rail Link

This map from OpenRailwayMap shows the Western section of the Croxley Rail Link.

Note.

  1. The blue track is the Metropolitan Line, which runs to  Watford station.
  2. The disused line runs West from the former Watford West station to the roundabout at Croxley Green on the A 412.

The original plan involved a large double-track viaduct, which is shown in this visualisation from the Watford Observer.

Note that the roundabout is the Croxley Green roundabout.

This Google Map shows the Croxley Green roundabout.

Note.

  1. The Metropolitan Line to Watford station runs across the North-West corner of the map.
  2. The Croxley Green roundabout is the roundabout in the West of the map.
  3. The disused railway runs from South of the roundabout to the South-East corner of the map.
  4. The proposed Cassiobridge station would be in the South-East corner of the map.

I wonder, if it would be possible to build a Croxley Green station to the South of the roundabout.

This would be an interim solution until it is worked out how to connect the Croxley Link to the Metropolitan Line.

Solutions could be.

  • The original solution of a massive flyover, which would be very expensive and disruptive to build.
  • Street-run the tram-train, which I feel are needed on the Croxley Link to Croxley station.
  • Build a Croxley Green station on the Metropolitan Line to the North of the roundabout.

I think that experienced transport planners can find an acceptable solution.

August 27, 2022 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Watford Junction Station’s Barrier Seats

I quite like these seats at Watford Junction station.

They would appear to give a nice perch to sit, whilst waiting for the train and also act as a crush barrier for the glass shelter behind.

They also give me something to hold, when a train goes through.

The train shown in the picture was a Tesco train between Tilbury and Daventry.

It went through the station at probably over 60 mph.

It had the usual smelly and polluting Class 66 on the front.

It took four hours 45 minutes for the journey, which included the Gospel Oak and Barking Line through London.

I did note earlier that the train seemed to be using modern wagons.

Are these wagons faster than those you generally see on UK railways?

Surely too, this is the type of train, that could be hauled by an electric locomotive with a Last-Mile capability, like a Class 88 Locomotive.

I would have thought, that Tesco could benefit, by using electric haulage, especially if the locomotive was appropriately liveried.

 

July 6, 2021 Posted by | Design, Transport/Travel | , , , | 2 Comments

The Met Line’s Croxley Rail Link May Be Resurrected

tThe title of this post,  is the same as that of this article on Ian Visits.

I wrote Is The Croxley Rail Link To Be Given Lower Priority? in December 2016, where I said this.

I think that it is time to take a short time of reflection to look at this project and see, if other developments in the future, can improve rail links to Watford sufficiently.

After reviewing projects that will happen in the area, I asked set out two sections with my ideas for improvement, which I will now repeat.

Could A Lower-Cost Link Be Built?

I ask this question, specifically because of the report that TfL had said no, because the project is over-budget.

Ideally, the link would be built as a double track line from Watford High Street station, to where it joins the double-track branch to the current Watford station.

I have flown my helicopter over the route and there would appear to be a fair bit of space for a double -track line.

But there might be a couple of problems.

This picture, which I took going South, shows the bridge, where the Croxley Rail Link will join the Watford DC Line.

It looks fairly sound, but is it large enough for two tracks? I could see the next bridge and that was a modern structure with a lot more space.

Note too, the evidence of clearing up decades of tree growth.

But look at this Google Map of where the Croxley Rail Link will connect to the branch to Watford station.

Note the branch to Watford station at the top left of the map and the remains of the old railway in the bottom-right, which can also be seen in the map of Cassiobridge station.

It could be difficult to thread a double-track viaduct through the area.

This visualisation from the Watford Observer shows current thinking.

So would money be saved and perhaps a better design be possible?

  • Could the viaduct be built with only a single-track between its junction with the branch to Watford station and the proposed Cassiobridge station? The route could revert to double track just to the East of Cassiobridge station.
  • A single-track design of Cassiobridge station could also save money, but it would probably rule out too many future options.

As most of the route will be double-track, I doubt that a few hundred metres of single-track would have much impact on the operation of the link. It’s not as if, the Croxley Rail Link will be handling 24 tph.

I suspect that engineers and architects are working hard both to cut costs and make the link better.

A Watford Junction To Amersham Service

I think that if there is a good service between Watford Junction and Amersham, this might  offer an alternative solution.

It would connect to London trains as follows.

  • Watford Junction – Bakerloo, London Midland, Southern, Watford DC and possible West Coast Main Line services.
  • Watford High Street – Cross-platform connection to Watford DC services.
  • Croxley – Same platform connection to Metropolitan services to the existing Watford station.
  • Rickmansworth – Chiltern for both London and all stations to Milton Keynes.

I believe that a train like London Overground’s new Class 710 train, which will be running on the Watford DC Line might be able to run the service without any new electrification, if it were to use onboard energy storage between say Watford High Street and Croxley stations.

Conclusion

I believe that Watford will get a better train service, whether the Croxley Rail Link is built or not.

Politics will decide the priority of the Croxley Rail Link, with the left-leaning South Londoner Sadiq Khan on one side and right-leaning Bucks-raised Chris Grayling on the other. In some ways, Watford is a piggy-in-the-middle.

My feeling is that on a Londonwide  basis, that the Bakerloo Line Extension to Watford, solves or enables the solution of a lot of wider problems and the Croxley Rail Link is much more a local solution.

I think it could turn out to be.

  • A mainly double-track route from Watford Junction to Amersham, but with portions of single track.
  • No new electrification.
  • Stations at Watford High Street, Watford Vicarage Road, Cassiobridge, Croxley and then all stations to Amersham.
  • Four Class 710 trains per hour (tph), running on existing electrification and batteries between Watford Junction and Amersham.
  • A redeveloped Watford station keeps its four tph to London.

It might even be simpler.

Conclusion – 10th November 2020

This is a new conclusion.

I feel something is possible, but it probably needs some of difficult negotiation, with some of the politicians excluded.

November 10, 2020 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , | 6 Comments

Could The Northern Section Of The Bakerloo Line And The Watford DC Line Be Combined?

The Bakerloo and Watford DC Lines to the North of Queen’s Park station annoy me.

There are two very different classes of trains.

Which are different sizes and ideally need different platform heights for step-free access between train and platform.

Often, you need to step up and down into the trains.

The pictures show a typical steps on Bakerloo Line and Class 710 trains.

They give a new meaning to Mind The Gap.

It would be so much easier, for passengers in wheelchairs or those pushing buggies or trailing heavy cases for there to be no step between train and platform.

I once remarked to a station guy, not in the first flush of youth, as he manhandled a ramp into place, that what he was doing must be the worst part of his job. He smiled and agreed.

Surely in this day and age, we can create a railway, where everything is as efficient as possible.

These are a few of my thoughts.

Could The Two Lines Be Run By A Unified Fleet Of Trains?

If the two lines were to be run using the same trains, this would give advantages.

  • All trains could be maintained together.
  • Platform-to-train access would be much easier to make step-free.
  • Staff would only deal with one type of train.
  • A certain amount of automatic train control could be used to increase frequencies.

Obviously, a National Rail-size train couldn’t use the Bakerloo Line tunnels, but a train built for the Underground could use the current Watford DC Line into Euston.

Siemens are designing a New Tube For London and this will be used on the Bakerloo Line.

I suspect, that they could design a train that would easily run into Euston.

Would An Underground Train Provide Enough Capacity Into Euston?

The current trains on both lines have the following capacity and length.

  • The 1972 Stock on the Bakerloo Line are 113 metres long and have a capacity of 851 passengers
  • The Class 710 trains on the Watford DC Line are 82 metres long and have a capacity of 678 passengers.

Now there’s a surprise! The smaller Underground trains hold more passengers.

This picture shows the spare platform length at Euston, after a Class 710 train has just arrived.

I don’t think capacity or platform length will be a problem!

What Would Be The Frequency Into Euston?

Consider.

  • The current Watford DC Line service into Euston uses a double-track line terminating in Platform 9 at Euston station.
  • The service frequency on this route, has recently been increased from three trains per hour (tph) to four tph.
  • The Overground is soon to start to run six tph on routes with a similar track layout.

I believe that a six tph service could be run between Euston and Watford Junction stations.

What Would Be The Frequency In The Bakerloo Line Tunnel To Elephant & Castle And Lewisham?

Note that I’m assuming an extended Bakerloo Line runs to Lewisham, although, it could run to Hayes station.

Dear Old Vicky (aka the Victoria Line) handles a train every hundred seconds or thirty-six tph.

I can’t see any reason, why all parts of the Watford Junction to Lewisham route can’t be designed to handle this frequency.

If six tph went to Euston, then this would mean the service South of Queen’s Park station would be as follows.

  • Up to thirty tph or a train every two minutes between Queen’s Park and Lewisham stations.
  • It would connect the National Rail stations of Paddington, Marylebone, Charing Cross, Waterloo, Elephant & Castle, New Cross Gate and Lewisham.
  • A high capacity pedestrian link to Crossrail at Paddington, will be ready to open with Crossrail.
  • Connections to the Central, Circle, District, Hammersmith & City, Metropolitan, Northern, Piccadilly and Victoria Lines of the Underground.
  • Oxford Circus would have a high-capacity cross-platform interchange between the Bakerloo and Victoria Lines, both running in excess of thirty tph.

It would be a much needed capacity upgrade to the Underground.

Would Stations On The Combined Line Be Made Step-Free?

The combined route will have a total of 34 existing stations and four new stations.

I suspect the new stations will be step-free.

Of the existing stations, the following are fully or partially step-free.

  • Watford Junction
  • Bushey
  • Carpenders Park
  • Harrow & Wealdstone
  • Wembley Central
  • Willesden Junction
  • Queen’s Park – Scheduled to be made step-free.
  • Paddington – Will be step-free, when Crossrail opens.

The Bakerloo Line must be one of the worst lines for step-free access on the London Underground.

But then it has some of the oldest and least-capable trains and has been neglected for decades.

The station most in need of step-free access is probably Oxford Circus, where the Bakerloo and Victoria Lines have a cross-platform step-free interchange.

I lay out ideas for this station in Thoughts On Step-Free Access At Oxford Circus Station.

Upgrading The Lines

I think that Transport for London have a unique opportunity with the upgrading of the Bakerloo Line to Extension From upgrade the line as a series of separate projects, phased to be delivered in a continuous stream, rather than as one big launch, which was tried and failed with Crossrail.

Extension From Elephant & Castle To Lewisham Or Hayes

This project can be built independently, just like the Battersea Power Station Extension of The Northern Line. I detailed the latest thinking on this extension in TfL Moots Bakerloo Line To Hayes.

  • It is the only project that needs substantial tunnelling.
  • It probably needs a depot to be relocated.
  • Lewisham station would need some rebuilding.
  • It would need more trains to be delivered before it opens.

It could even be the last project to be delivered, which would allow time for the trains.

January 23, 2020 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , | 3 Comments

Hertfordshire County Council’s Aspiration For A Watford Junction And Aylesbury Service

This article on Ian Visits is entitled Watford Junction Station Could Become A “Super-Hub”.

This is the introductory paragraph.

A new Watford Junction to Aylesbury rail service, along with a new link between Stevenage and Luton are two of the proposals being put forward by Hertfordshire Council.

The proposals are contained in this document on the Hertfordshire County Council web site, which is entitled Rail Strategy.

In TfL Seeks New Procurement Plan For Metropolitan Line Extension, I proposed a service run by Chiltern Railways between Watford Junction and Amersham stations.

The rest of this article is a rewrite of part of that linked post, which explores the possibilities of a service between Watford Junction and Aylesbury stations.

This Was My Original Simple  Proposal

I think it would be possible to design a simpler link with the following characteristics.

  • Watford station would remain open.
  • A four trains per hour (tph) link would run all day between Watford Junction and Amersham stations.
  • Stops would be at Watford High Street, Vicarage Road, Cassiobridge, Croxley, Rickmansworth, Chorleywood and Chalfont & Latimer.

No-one would get a worse service than currently and the new stations of Cassiobridge and Vicarage Road, would make rail an alternative for many travellers.

The cross-Watford service would give access to these London services.

  • Chiltern at all stations between Croxley and Amersham.
  • London Midland at Watford Junction.
  • Metropolitan Line at Croxley, Rickmansworth and Amersham.
  • Virgin Trains at Watford Junction,
  • Watford DC Line at Watford High Street and Watford Junction

The Bakerloo Line at Watford Junction and Watford High Street, could possibly be added, if the line is extended. Which I doubt, it will be!

Hertfordshire is proposing the terminal is Aylesbury, which seems to be a good idea. But I’ll examine that later.

The next few sections, will cover various issues with the route.

New Track

There would need to be new track between Croxley and Watford High Street stations.

Will The New Stations Have Two Platforms?

All proposals have shown new stations on the new track at Cassiobridge and Vicarage Road.

I believe that money can be saved by creating two much simpler stations.

  • Only one platform, but probably an island platform with two faces like Watford High Street station.
  • No expensive footbridge if possible.
  • Only one lift.

Cassiobridge would be more complicated because of the viaduct connecting the line towards Croxley station.

This visualisation shows the viaduct and the location of Cassiobridge station.

croxley-rail-link-proposed-viaduct-connecting-the-existing-metropolitan-line-with-disused-croxley-green-branch-line

Cassiobridge station will be behind the trees towards the top-right of the image.

Would The New Track Be Single Or Double-Track?

There is space for double-track and the two ends of the route are already electrified double-track.

But surely the viaduct shown above would be much more affordable, if it were to be built for only one track!

Trains would need to pass at places East of Croxley station, but then if the line was double-track through and to the East of Cassiobridge station, trains could pass with impunity.

Consider.

  • The Borders Railway looks to have too much single-track
  • The Barking Riverside Extension is being built with a double track.

Too much single-track is often regretted.

Why Four Trains Per Hour?

Four trains per hour (tph) is becoming a standard, as it encourages Turn-Up-And-Go behaviour from travellers.

It also fits well with keeping the four tph Metropolitan Line service to Watford station, as this could give a same platform interchange at Croxley station.

Would The New Track Be Electrified?

The only part of the route that is not electrified is the about three miles of new track between  the Watford Branch and the Watford DC Line.

All current electrification is either third-rail or to the London Underground standard. and any future electrification would probably be to the London Underground standard, so that S Stock can work the route.

I believe that the Class 710 trains will have a limited onboard energy storage capability, which could enable the trains to bridge the cap in the  electrification between Watford High Street and Croxley stations.

How much would not electrifying the new track save?

How Long Will A Journey Take From Amersham Or Aylesbury To Watford Junction?

Consider.

  • Amersham to Croxley takes about 30 minutes, but it does involve a change to a bus.
  • The Overground takes three minutes between Watford Junction and Watford High Street stations.
  • Chiltern Railways achieve a twelve minute time between Amersham and Rickmansworth.

I suspect that a modern train like one of London Overground’s Class 378 trains could do the journey in a few minutes under half-an-hour.

As Amersham to Aylesbury takes about sixteen minutes, that looks like a trip between Aylesbury and Watford Junction would take about forty-five minutes.

Amersham Or Aylesbury?

My original plan used Amersham, as it has a turnback facility.

But Aylesbury looks to have space as this Google Map shows.

It should also be noted that the forty-five minute journey time between Aylesbury and Watford Junction stations, would give a two hour round trip, with relaxed fifteen minute turnround times.

This would allow time to top-up the batteries.

What Class Of Train Could Be Used?

Four-car Class 378 trains or the new Class 710 trains would be ideal. As the Class 378 train is out of production, it would have to be Class 710 trains or something similar from Bombardier. But other manufacturers might have a suitable train.

Battery power would be required, but that is becoming a standard option on metro trains like these.

How Many Trains Would Be Needed?

If the trains could do an Out-and-Back journey in an hour, then four trains would be needed to provide a four tph service.

A two-hour time would need eight trains.

Will The Link Have Any Other Services?

I have seen to plans to use the line for any other passenger or freight services.

Will There Be Infrastructure Issues At Existing Stations?

As all of the trains, I’ve mentioned and the London Underground S Stock trains, share platforms all over North West London, the answer is probably no, with the exception of a few minor adjustments to signs and platforms.

Croxley Station

Croxley station would be unchanged.

But in addition to the 4 tph between Baker Street and Watford, there would be 4 tph between Watford Junction and Amersham.

Platform 1 would handle.

  • Baker Street to Watford
  • Amersham to Watford Junction

Platform 2 would handle.

  • Watford to Baker Street
  • Watford Junction to Amersham

This would mean that if the trains alternated, the maximum wait for a connection would be about 7.5 minutes.

What I feel would be the two most common connections, would just involve a wait on the same platform.

I suspect that those, who timetable trains, would come up with a very passenger-friendly solution.

Watford Station

A property developer once told me, that the most profitable developments, are those where a railway station is involved.

The Platforms At Watford Station

So would the development of the extension involve a rebuild of Watford station to provide the following?

  • A modern future-proofed station, with all the capacity that might be needed in the next forty years or so.
  • Appropriate housing or commercial development on top of the new station.
  • Sensible amounts of parking for travellers.

With four tph to and from London in the basement, it would surely be a profitable development.

Watford Junction Station

Watford Junction station has four bay platforms 1-4, that handle the three tph service on the Watford DC Line.

At stations like Clapham Junction, Crystal Palace, Dalston Junction, Highbury and Islington and New Cross, single platforms handle four tph with ease for London Overground services.

This means that handling four tph to Amersham in addition to current services would not be difficult.

The only work, that I think should be done, is make sure that these platforms are long enough to take two of the future Class 710 trains working as an eight-car train.

There could even be two platforms left for Bakerloo Line services, if it were to be decided, that these services would go to Watford Junction.

Elton John Plays Vicarage Road Stadium

This or some football matches at Vicarage Road Stadium, would be the biggest test of the Link.

Note the following.

  • Some stations  like Watford High Street can already handle longer trains than the hundred metre long, five-car Class 378 trains they currently do.
  • Some stations like Croxley can handle the 133 metre long S Stock trains used on the Metropolitan Line.

So to future-proof the Link for massive one-off events would it be sensible to make the platforms long enough for eight-car trains or two Class 710 trains working as a pair?

Benefits

The benefits of this approach are as follows.

  • Watford station keeps its current service to London.
  • Watford gets a four tph link across the South of the town, serving the Shopping Centre, the Hospital and the Stadium.
  • Amersham or Aylesbury to Croxley stations get a link to the West Coast Main Line.
  • It could be built as a single track line without electrification.
  • Trains to run the services could be more easily available.
  • Simple island platform-based stations could be built at Cassiobridge and Vicarage Road.

In addition, Chiltern Railways, London Midland, London Overground and Underground, all gain a feeder railway bringing travellers to their services to and from London.

Cost Savings

Note.

  1. Transport for London needs cost savings on this project.
  2. Redevelopment of Watford station as a station with oversite development could raise a lot of money.
  3. The Croxley Link could be built as a single-track link without electrification and run initially using battery-electric trains.

I also feel, that building the line this way would deliver it earlier, thus improving cash-flow.

The simple link would need at the minimum.

  • A single- or double-track railway without electrification between Croxley and Watford High Street stations.
  • Two stations with island platforms at Cassiobridge and Vicarage Road
  • A viaduct to connect Cassiobridge station to the Watford Branch.
  • Some Class 710 trains or similar.

If skates were worn, the link could probably open in 2025.

December 20, 2019 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

A London Overground Replacement For Southern’s East Croydon And Milton Keynes Service

In July 2017, I discussed this suggestion by Chris Gibb in Gibb Report – East Croydon – Milton Keynes Route Should Be Transferred To London Overground.

In an article, in the July 2019 Edition of Modern Railways, , which was entitled ‘710s’ Debut On Goblin, this was this last paragraph.

On the West London Line, TfL is curremtly working with the Department for Transport on options for the devolution of services originally suggested in Chris Gibb’s report on the Govia Thameslink Railway franchise, which could lead to ‘710s’ being deployed here.

It made me think, that further investigation was called for.

An Apology

I apologise, if you think I’m repeating myself.

What The Gibb Report Says

The Gibb Report, says this about the current service between East Croydon and Milton Keynes Central stations.

I believe there is an option to transfer the East Croydon – Milton Keynes operation to TfL and it’s London Overground concession in 2018.

TfL may decide to change the service, for example by not running it north of Watford Junction, or running it to an alternative southern destination other than East Croydon. They could also develop the combined West London line service to better match available capacity to demand.

They would have a number of crewing and rolling stock options, but should be able to operate the service more efficiently than GTR in the longer term, without the involvement of Selhurst.

Selhurst TMD is the depot in South London, where the current Class 377 trains are based.

A few of my thoughts.

The Trains

Using Class 710 trains  as suggested in the Modern Railways article, would surely offer a suitable  crewing and rolling stock option for the route, if they were based at the convenient Willesden TMD, where the fleet of up to twenty-five dual-voltage Class 710/2 trains are stabled.

The Northern Terminus

Chris Gibb suggested the service might not go past Watford Junction.

I think that could be difficult.

  • The longitudinal seating of the Class 710 train, is probably not suitable for outer suburban services North of Watford.
  • East Croydon to Watford Junction takes 69 minutes, which is not a good journey time to create an efficient service.

It would also appear to be tricky for a train to transfer between the West London Line and the Watford DC Line.

This map from carto.metro.free.fr shows the complicated track layout in the Willesden Junction area.

Note.

  1. The two Willesden Junction stations, labelled High Level and Low Level.
  2. The Watford DC Line, which is shown in black and orange, passing to the North of Willesden TMD. and through the Low Level station.
  3. The four tracks shown in black are the West Coast Main Line, with Watford to the West and Euston to the East.
  4. The North London Line to Richmond and the West London Line to Clapham Junction splitting at Wilesden High Level Junction.

The current service between East Croydon and Milton Keynes, is only one train per hour (tph) and uses a succession of flat junctions to take the slow lines to and from Watford.

This is not a good operational procedure and I suspect Network Rail and various train operators, would like to see it discontinued.

So if trains in a new London Overground version of the service, don’t go up the Watford DC Line or the West Coast Main Line, where do they turn back?

Note the siding to the East of the High Level platforms, which is labelled Willesden Junction Turnout.

This is regularly used to turnback London Overground services on the West London Line.

I feel that London Overground will be turning their replacement service in Willesden Junction High Level station.

Current train services at the station include.

  • For passengers, who want to go further North, there is a good connection to the Watford DC Line for Wembley Central, Harrow & Wealdstone and Watford Junction stations.
  • The Watford DC Line can also take you to Euston.
  • The Bakerloo Line between Stonebridge Park and Elephant & Castle via Central London.
  • Frequent North London Line services between Stratford and Richmond.

The station has kiosks, coffee stalls, toilets and waiting rooms.

There are certainly worse places to change trains.

The Southern Terminus

Obviously, existing travellers on the route would like to see as few changes as possible.

East Croydon station must be a possibility for the Southern terminus, as it is the currently used.

But East Croydon is a busy station and perhaps it is not a convenient station for trains to wait in the platform.

On the other hand, West Croydon station offers some advantages.

  • The station has a long bay platform, which might be long enough for nine or ten cars.
  • There is a separate turnback siding.
  • It has space to add another bay platform, but this may have been sold to a developer.
  • It already has a four tph London Overground service to Highbury & Islington station.
  • Using West Croydon avoids the crowded lines to the North of East Croydon station.

It is also managed by London Overground, so the landlord would be co-operative.

How Many Trains Would Be Needed For A West Croydon And Willesden Junction Service?

West Croydon station has two possible routes, that trains could take to Willesden Junction.

  • Via Norwood Junction and Clapham Junction in 55 minutes.
  • Via Selhust and Clapham Junction in 45 minutes.

These times mean that a two-hour round trip between West Croydon and Willesden Junction should be possible.

Trains required for various frequencies would be as follows.

  • One tph – Two trains.
  • Two tph = Four trains.
  • Four tph – Eight trains.

They would need to be dual voltage Class 710/2 trains, as are now running on the Gospel Oak to Barking Line.

Compare the figures with those for the current East Croydon and Milton Keynes service, which needs four pairs of four-car trains for an hourly service.

What Would Be The Frequency?

I think one, two and four tph are all possibilities!

One tph

One tph would be a direct replacement for the current service. But is it enough?

Services at West Croydon could probably share the bay platform with the existing Highbury & Islington station service.

Two tph

Two tph could be a compromise frequency.

Two tph could probably still share the current bay platform with the Highbury & Islington service.

Four tph

Four tph would be a full Turn-Up-And-Go service,

  • It would probably be London Overground’s preference.
  • It would give a very passenger-friendly eight tph between Willesden Junction and Clapham Junction stations.
  • The two services would call at opposite sides of Clapham Junction station.
  • It would give a four tph link between Croydon and High Speed Two.
  • Westfield wouldn’t mind all the extra shoppers at Shepherds Bush!

But there could be downsides.

  • The service could need an extra bay platform at West Croydon.
  • Would it be possible to turn four tph at Willesden Junction?
  • Will the train paths be available through South London.

But four tph would probably would be London Overground’s preference.

It will be interesting to see the reasons, why Transport for London choose a particular frequency.

A Trip Between Imperial Wharf And East Croydon Stations

Today, I took a trip between Imperial Wharf and East Croydon stations at around 11:30.

  • The train was  two four-car Class 377 trains working as an eight-car train.
  • After Clapham Junction it wasn’t very busy.
  • I was in the last car, which was empty, except for myself.

I came to the conclusion, that an eight-car train was too much capacity for the Southern section of the journey.

I suspect that Transport for London have detailed passenger estimates for this route, so they should be able to determine the frequency and length of replacement trains required.

The Upgraded Norwood Junction Station

In Major Upgrade Planned For Norwood Junction Railway Station, I talked about a plan to upgrade Norwood Junction station.

The idea behind the upgrade is to improve connectivity and capacity in the crowded Croydon area.

If the West Croydon and Willesden Junction service, was routed via Norwood Junction station, the upgraded station would give easy access to both East and West Croydon stations.

Conclusion

I’ve always liked Chris Gibb’s suggestion of the transfer of the service between East Croydon and Milton Keynes stations to the London Overground and I can now start to see flesh on the bones!

At the present time and until better data is available, I think the replacement service should be as follows.

  • The Northern terminus should be Willesden Junction.
  • The Southern terminus should be West Croydon station, where there are good tram and train connections.
  • The route would be via Shepherds Bush, Kensington Olympia, West Brompton, Imperial Wharf, Clapham Junction, Wandsworth Common, Balham, Streatham Hill, West Norwood, Gipsy Hill, Crystal Palace and Norwood Junction.
  • Going via Gipsy Hill, rather than the current route via Selhurst, would give access to the connectivity at Norwood Junction.
  • The frequency should be four tph.
  • Trains will be four- or five-car Class 710 trains.

The benefits would be as follows.

  • The rail hubs of Clapham Junction, Norwood Junction, West Croydon and Willesden Junction would be connected together by a Turn-Up-And-Go service.
  • The proposed four tph service would need eight Class 710 trains, whereas the current one tph service needs eight Class 377 trains. Would this be better value?

In the future with a connection to High Speed Two in the Old Oak Common area, the benefits would increase.

  • There would be a simple interchange with High Speed Two.
  • South London from Clapham to Croydon, would get a direct service to High Speed Two.
  • There would also be a better connection to Heathrow Airport and other rail services through Old Oak Common.

I think that the connection to High Speed Two trumps everything else.

July 1, 2019 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

‘710s’ Debut On Goblin

The title of this post is the same as an article in the July 2019 Edition of Modern Railways.

The article is mainly about the introduction of the Class 710 trains on the Gospel Oak to Barking Line.

But the last sentence of the article is worth more investigation.

On the West London Line, TfL is curremtly working with the Department for Transport on options for the devolution of services originally suggested in Chris Gibb’s report on the Govia Thameslink Railway franchise, which could lead to ‘710s’ being deployed here.

I investigate it fully in A London Overground Replacement For Southern’s East Croydon And Milton Keynes Service.

This was my conclusion.

At the present time and until better data is available, I think the replacement service should be as follows.

  • The Northern terminus should be Willesden Junction.
  • The Southern terminus should be West Croydon station, where there are good tram and train connections.
  • The route would be via Shepherds Bush, Kensington Olympia, West Brompton, Imperial Wharf, Clapham Junction, Wandsworth Common, Balham, Streatham Hill, West Norwood, Gipsy Hill, Crystal Palace and Norwood Junction.
  • Going via Gipsy Hill, rather than the current route via Selhurst, would give access to the connectivity at Norwood Junction.
  • The frequency should be four tph.
  • Trains will be four- or five-car Class 710 trains.

The benefits would be as follows.

  • The rail hubs of Clapham Junction, Norwood Junction, West Croydon and Willesden Junction would be connected together by a Turn-Up-And-Go service.
  • The proposed four tph service would need eight Class 710 trains, whereas the current one tph service needs eight Class 377 trains. Would this be better value?

In the future with a connection to High Speed Two in the Old Oak Common area, the benefits would increase.

  • There would be a simple interchange with High Speed Two.
  • South London from Clapham to Croydon, would get a direct service to High Speed Two.
  • There would also be a better connection to Heathrow Airport and other rail services through Old Oak Common.

I think that the connection to High Speed Two trumps everything else.

I will keep returning to this vital link down thw West London Line.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

June 30, 2019 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Abbey Line Passing Loop Proposed

The title of this post is the same as that of an article in the June 2019 Edition of Modern Railways.

Bricket Wood station used to be an important station on the Abbey Line, with grand buildings and a passing loop to allow trains to run a teo trains per hour (tph) service as opposed to the current inconvenient train every forty-five minutes.

Consultants have now said that a traditional passing loop, with a second platform and a bridge would cost up to £10million, which is probably not viable.

The Penryn Solution

The article says this about the consultants’ alternative solution.

The platform at Bricket Wood be lengthened such that trains stop at different ends of a single platform, similar to the solution adopted in Penryn on the branch line from Truro to Falmouth, which would help to minimise costs.

This Google Map shows Penryn station.

Note the long single platform in the station.

This section in the Wikipedia entry called Signalling, gives a full explanation of the method of operation at Penryn.

Truro-bound trains use the northern end of the station (Platform 2), arriving before the Falmouth-bound train, which will pass through the new loop and to the southern end of the platform (Platform 1), allowing the Truro-bound train to continue its journey north. This gives a rare situation in the United Kingdom where trains run on the right, instead of on the left as is usual in this country. Trains are scheduled to depart simultaneously for Truro and Falmouth.

Bricket Wood station already has a platform, that can take a comfortably take a four-car Class 319 train, as this Google Map shows.

Consider.

  • I estimate from Google Maps, that the single platform at Bricket Wood station is currently around 190 metres long.
  • Looking at the map, it might be possible to add another ten metres or so to the platform length.
  • The current Class 319 trains are 79.5 metres long or 159 metres for a pair.
  • It wouldn’t matter, if for reasons of safety, the front of the trains were allowed to extend for perhaps ten metres past the end of the platform.
  • There also appears to be space to put a second track alongside the current single track.

I also suspect, that Network Rail have track design software, that can precisely calculate the size and position of the points, so that the manoeuvre can be safely executed every time.

I very much feel, that a design can be produced, that will staff, passengers and regulators.

Can This Proposal Handle More Than Two tph?

If you look at the timings of the train, it takes eight minutes to run these legs.

  • Watford Junction and Bricket Wood
  • Bricket Wood and St. Albans Abbey

The times are identical, irrespective of direction.

If times are the same after installation of the novel loop. A train will take sixteen minutes plus however much time, it takes to turnback the train to get back to Bricket Wood.

As trains will be running every thirty minutes and both trains will leave Bricket Wood at the same time, the train must be able to run the out-and-back journey from Bricket Wood in thirty minutes or less.

  • The out and back legs both take eight minutes.
  • This means that the turnback time must be less than fourteen minutes.

Currently, turnback times are fourteen minutes or less.

  • If you look at four tph, there is a train every fifteen minutes. As each leg is eight minutes long, it would appear another method of operation will have to be used.
  • If you look at three tph, there is a train every twenty minutes. Would it be possible to turn back the trains in under four minutes? It might be possible, but it would be a tough call.

I would suspect, that for a reliable service, the proposed method of operation has a maximum frequency of two tph.

I suspect, that the only way to get more than two tph, would be to fully double track the route, with two platforms at all stations on the route.

Does The New Track Need To Be Fully-Electrified?

There would be around two hundred metres of new track and if electrification were to be installed, a pair of the current Class 319 trains could provide a two tph service.

Surely Network Rail can manage to put up this amount of new electrification without massive cost and time overruns?

Despite being over thirty years old, the Class 319 trains scrub-up well as these pictures show.

But what could be done if electrification was deemed to be outside the budget? Or it was decided that new zero-carbon trains should be used on the Abbey Line?

Battery trains are coming and there are several trains that can use both electric and battery power under development, in the UK, Europe, China and Japan.

Battery Power On The Abbey Line

Bricket Wood station is 3.5 miles from the Watford Junction end of the Abbey Line and perhaps three miles from the St. Albans end.

In an article in the October 2017 Edition of Modern Railways, which is entitled Celling England By The Pound, Ian Walmsley says this in relation to trains running on the Uckfield Branch, which is not very challenging, as is the Abbey Line.

A modern EMU needs between 3 and 5 kWh per vehicle mile for this sort of service.

So if a four-car electric-battery hybrid train was to handle the whole of the 6.5 mile route, it would need a battery of between 156-260 kWh to go between Watford Junction and St. Albans Abbey stations and back. It would also need charging at one or both ends of the route.

But supposing trains used the current electrification between Watford Junction and Bricket Wood stations to both power the train and charge their batteries.

  • The trains would only be doing six miles on batteries, so the battery would be between 72-120 kWh.
  • Trains would raise and lower their pantographs at Bricket Wood station.
  • No new electrification would be required.
  • If trains needed to top-up their batteries, they would do this using the electrification in the two terminal stations.

It might even be preferential to remove electrification between St. Albans Abbey and Bricket Wood stations to save maintenance costs and improve safety.

Could West Midlands Trains’ Class 730 Trains Be Used?

The current franchise holder; West Midlands Trains has ordered a large fleet of Class 730 trains for services between London and the West Midlands and for local electric services in the West Midlands.

Included are thirty-six three-car trains for working suburban services across Birmingham. These have twenty-four metre long cars, so are eight metres shorter than the four-car Class 319 trains, so they are another possibility, unless their longer car length would cause problems in the Bricket Wood manoeuvre.

Should The Abbey Line Be Transferred To Transport for London?

There have been suggestions in the past, that the route be transferred to Transport for London.

I’ll leave the politics aside, but electric-battery hybrid versions of London Overground’s Class 710 trains, which will soon be serving Watford Junction station would probably be ideal.

As they are dimensionally similar to the Class 319 trains, they may also be able to work the route under electric power.

Conclusion

There are certainly, several affordable ways to improve the Abbey Line.

My preferred solution would be go for the Penryn solution, using a fleet of Class 319 trains.

  • Penryn seems to be working well.
  • Track would need to be re-laid through Bricket Wood station, to add the passing loop.
  • About two hundred metres of extra electrification would need to be erected.
  • There would probably need to be some modification to the signalling, as there was at Penryn.
  • Three trains as a minimum, would be needed, two for the service and one as a spare or as maintenance cover.
  • West Midlands Trains already have fifteen Class 319 trains, so finding a viable fleet in top-class condition, shouldn’t be difficult.
  • If slightly shorter trains could be needed, the trains might be able to be shortened to three-car trains.
  • Staff training would be minimal.
  • The current trains are liked by drivers.
  • The trains would be zero-carbon.
  • The current trains are in very good condition.
  • The current trains even have toilets, which are probably not needed on a six-and-a-half mile journey
  • If say in ten years time, new trains are needed, I suspect there will be fleets of suitable electric multiple units, less than eighty metres long.

It is probably the most affordable solution.

 

 

May 24, 2019 Posted by | Transport/Travel | , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

« Previous Entries