New International Rail Terminal

[Dan_Lockton]

My crayon-wielding dream (as someone living in the Netherlands but often travelling to south-west England by train) is a joined-up plan where the Elizabeth Line is extended from Abbey Wood to Ebbsfleet, and Ebbsfleet (suitably reconfigured and extended) becomes a calling point again for Eurostar or another international operator (including some services starting and terminating there).

There'd now be (kind of) two routes to and from different parts of London to the continent, with modern trains and a perception of ease and convenience because of how high-profile the Elizabeth Line is (even if it would be a slow, toilet-less journey for that section).

I wonder what proportion of Eurostar passengers (current and new) would choose Elizabeth Line + Ebbsfleet rather than straight to/from St Pancras? It could mean Reading or Heathrow to Amsterdam or Paris with a single change. Canary Wharf to Brussels-Midi with one change. Penzance to Amsterdam with just two changes. Newcastle to Paris with just two changes. And so on. TfL would get a useful extra income boost, and south-east London would suddenly have easier opportunities for cultural and business links across the channel.

 

[Jim Jehosofat]

HS1 is on the surface through Dagenham and freight trains can connect to Ripple Lane - which some do as the yard has some UIC cleared roads to allow transhipment.
However the connections are only allowed for passenger use in an emergency so would need upgrading, and they definitrly wouldn't be able to make a 400m platform at Barking Station without demolishing the whole thing and much around it and starting again, which may be a tad disruptive to deliver a station in a part of London that will be a very low percentage of travellers final destination when St Pancras offers so many more useful connections.

Doesn't need a new platform at Barking, just extend thr trains to Fenchurch Street!

 

[SynthD]

An Elizabeth line extension to Hoo junction is safeguarded. This route includes Northfleet, which just needs a direct walking route to Ebbsfleet. But it would be a long journey.

 

[Bald Rick]

My crayon-wielding dream (as someone living in the Netherlands but often travelling to south-west England by train) is a joined-up plan where the Elizabeth Line is extended from Abbey Wood to Ebbsfleet, and Ebbsfleet (suitably reconfigured and extended) becomes a calling point again for Eurostar or another international operator (including some services starting and terminating there).

I wonder what proportion of Eurostar passengers (current and new) would choose Elizabeth Line + Ebbsfleet rather than straight to/from St Pancras?

It could mean Reading or Heathrow to Amsterdam or Paris with a single change.

Heathrow to Amsterdam or Paris is possible with one change now- use the Piccadilly. Or no changes at all (and somewhat quicker) with BA or Air France / KLM.

Canary Wharf to Brussels-Midi with one change.

Opening Stratford International to international calls would enable that.

Penzance to Amsterdam with just two changes.

It’s two changes now.

Newcastle to Paris with just two changes.

It’s only one change now, and a rather quick and simple one at that!

 

[Route115?]

International platforms are not an issue - at a push you could use two for arrivals and four for departures and at the cost of a lot of shunting run eight trains per hour. Procesing space is an issue and Brexit hasn't helped. You might have to build a structure above the international platforms.

You could start a few trains at Stratford and run them half full to Ashford where they would fill up. Unfortunately Stratford Intl is not well situated - if it has been built below Stratford Regional it would be well placed to pick up interchange traffic from East Anglia & peole would use the Elizabeth Line. Yes you have DLR but having to use taht will put many people off. However our planning was not (and still isn't) up to that sort of thinking.

The biggest issue is East Midlands Trains which may soon need more than four platforms. I don't see a simple solution. A (very) expensive approach might be to have a flyover to a second deck. That approach was adopted at Tokyo Central for the line to Otsuki.

 

[JonathanH]

The biggest issue is East Midlands Trains which may soon need more than four platforms.

It isn't going to be able to run more than six trains an hour given the need to share the route with Thameslink. The use of one platform for Corby services and common rolling stock for the services running beyond Leicester should render it a straightforward matter to run the longer distance services out of three platforms.

 

[zwk500]

International platforms are not an issue - at a push you could use two for arrivals and four for departures and at the cost of a lot of shunting run eight trains per hour. Procesing space is an issue and Brexit hasn't helped. You might have to build a structure above the international platforms.

At which Station? Shunting at St P will take up more capacity than you'd gain. Stratford and Ebbsfleet only have 2 international platforms and the 2 domestic platforms can't be sensibly lengthened to 400m.

You could start a few trains at Stratford and run them half full to Ashford where they would fill up. Unfortunately Stratford Intl is not well situated - if it has been built below Stratford Regional it would be well placed to pick up interchange traffic from East Anglia & peole would use the Elizabeth Line.

The distance from Stratford Int'l to Stratford Regional is probably less than the distance between Platforms 5/6 at Ebbsfleet and the International terminal. And the amount of traffic on offer at Ashford is not going to be filling major percentages of multiple trains per hour. It's a big local interchange but it's reach is limited (especially if Ebbsfleet is open as well).

The biggest issue is East Midlands Trains which may soon need more than four platforms. I don't see a simple solution. A (very) expensive approach might be to have a flyover to a second deck. That approach was adopted at Tokyo Central for the line to Otsuki.

Do EMR have a pressing need to raise frequencies above the capacity gain the 810s will provide? I don't see that they really do. The EMR station is not a pleasant passenger experience at St P IMO, but Leicester, Derby, Nottingham and Sheffield arent Birmingham, Manchester or Leeds.
Don't get me wrong, it'd be nice to have a bit more breathing room at St Pancras for various reasons, but that's not the same as 'needing' it. Of course a lot of relief would have been given by HS2, but that's a different conversation.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

No and no.

Rather than the instant shut down of ideas with nothing else added, if it's not feasible might it not be a nice idea to explain to the OP why?

 

[The Planner]

Rather than the instant shut down of ideas with nothing else added, if it's not feasible might it not be a nice idea to explain to the OP why?

No and no.

 

[Bald Rick]

However our planning was not (and still isn't) up to that sort of thinking.

How do you know? Just because it didn‘t happen doesnt mean there wasnt thinking.

Actually - it was looked at, and discounted early on. It would have been impossible to build under the existing Stratford station without very significant disruption to the existing station and lines, complete rebuilding of the existing station, and demolition of many of the surrounding buildings. This would have increased the cost by multiples.

The biggest issue is East Midlands Trains which may soon need more than four platforms.

As has been said in other threads, repeatedly, EMR does not need more than four platforms under any forseeable service scenario.

 

[AlbertBeale]

Hello

With all the ideas and discussions about more international rail services could we see all of st pancras upstairs given to international use, i keep reading that its to small, could east midlands fit into kings cross or somewhere else?

No and no.

Rather than the instant shut down of ideas with nothing else added, if it's not feasible might it not be a nice idea to explain to the OP why?

No and no.

In fact - for those for whom it might not be obvious why the ideas would be unlikely to work, I did try to explain in more detail what I assumed the basis of the "No and No" was - See Post No 4.