Bakerloo Line extension to Watford Junction.

[LU_timetabler]

Elephant sidings is 2 trains, then you put a 3rd train in one of the platforms.

 

[edwin_m]

New Met extension on part of the Croxley line, is expected to include a new Met depot between Moor Park and Croxley, as well as using the old Watford Met station for stabling trains overnight. Obviously more Met trains needed nowadays because a) Met extension; b) higher service level possible with the 4LM, modernising the signalling on all the sub-surface LU lines.

Have they ordered these trains - I thought the full fleet of S stock had been delivered? If so then where, in the absence of the Met extension, are they stabled? When all these things happen is there any remaining ex-railway land in the Croxley area that could become a Bakerloo depot?

 

[LU_timetabler]

Neasden for now, but when the extra Jubilee trains arrive, which have been ordered, they'll need the space at Neasden. Hence the extra stabling for Met stock up around Watford and Croxley.

I've no idea about whether Croxley would have space for a potential Bakerloo depot, but then at the moment, so far as I know, no one is looking at that idea.

If it were done, they'd have to ensure cross-running capability for the new Bakerloo trains with the S-stock new signalling system. That may not be so tricky, as the new Pic trains will need to have that for the Uxbridge branch, and I'm fairly certain Pic and B'loo are supposed to be getting the same trains.

 

[edwin_m]

If it were done, they'd have to ensure cross-running capability for the new Bakerloo trains with the S-stock new signalling system. That may not be so tricky, as the new Pic trains will need to have that for the Uxbridge branch, and I'm fairly certain Pic and B'loo are supposed to be getting the same trains.

That would be needed anyway if the Bakerloo was extended to Watford Junction, which is where we started from on this thread. If it isn't then there's no need for compatibility but also much less need for extra train stabling!

 

[bluegoblin7]

Signalling of course though is one of the points of contention of the whole extension. It's outside the remit of 4LM at this time, so will be getting conventional signalling at least initially.

 

[LeeLivery]

You may not agree with my posting, but I won't be churlish because I think you're spot-on with this.

Thank you, glad you agree

 

[LeeLivery]

TfL have opened another consultation for the Lewisham extension. Personally not happy there are only three stations proposed between Elephant and Lewisham. Have suggested there should be one at Walworth as there is a proposal for a ventilation shaft there. No interchange with Queen's Road Peckham, New Cross or Deptford Bridge either as proposed by some

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/tube/bakerloo-extension/consultation/subpage.2015-09-03.3976631085/

 

[Busaholic]

TfL have opened another consultation for the Lewisham extension. Personally not happy there are only three stations proposed between Elephant and Lewisham. Have suggested there should be one at Walworth as there is a proposal for a ventilation shaft there. No interchange with Queen's Road Peckham, New Cross or Deptford Bridge either as proposed by some

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/tube/bakerloo-extension/consultation/subpage.2015-09-03.3976631085/

It's particularly ironic when you consider the close spacing of stations from Elephant northwestwards. I know that modern thinking doesn't allow for too many stations, with rare exceptions, but, even so, it will be like a tube line from two different ages. Lambeth North and Regent's Park, for two, would never be looked at for one second these days. The people of SE London (of which I am still one, spiritually) deserve better than this though.

 

[MikeWh]

TfL have opened another consultation for the Lewisham extension. Personally not happy there are only three stations proposed between Elephant and Lewisham. Have suggested there should be one at Walworth as there is a proposal for a ventilation shaft there. No interchange with Queen's Road Peckham, New Cross or Deptford Bridge either as proposed by some

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/tube/bakerloo-extension/consultation/subpage.2015-09-03.3976631085/

It's particularly ironic when you consider the close spacing of stations from Elephant northwestwards. I know that modern thinking doesn't allow for too many stations, with rare exceptions, but, even so, it will be like a tube line from two different ages. Lambeth North and Regent's Park, for two, would never be looked at for one second these days. The people of SE London (of which I am still one, spiritually) deserve better than this though.

If you look at the spacing of the stations beyond Queens Park it is not all that different. It's certainly better than the Vic line between Kings Cross and Seven Sisters.

Not sure about Walworth, but the line doesn't actually run close enough to any of Queens Road Peckham, New Cross or Deptford Bridge. Moving it would make it longer. Half the ELL core trains call at New Cross Gate so that is clearly the better interchange of the three ELL stations. More SE trains call at Lewisham than New Cross which again knocks that stations credentials, and Lewisham is a much better interchange for the DLR with trains stationary for a few minutes and the station being under cover.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Wouldn't a southern extension be better off ending at Croydon?

 

[Ianno87]

TfL have opened another consultation for the Lewisham extension. Personally not happy there are only three stations proposed between Elephant and Lewisham. Have suggested there should be one at Walworth as there is a proposal for a ventilation shaft there. No interchange with Queen's Road Peckham, New Cross or Deptford Bridge either as proposed by some

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/tube/bakerloo-extension/consultation/subpage.2015-09-03.3976631085/

It's a consultation for that very reason. If enough people suggest it, it will get looked at for its feasibility.

 

[Ianno87]

Wouldn't a southern extension be better off ending at Croydon?

No-one would get it from Croydon as it would take forever, and the extra tunnelling required would be significantly more expensive in an area generally already with a high density of railway stations. Extend too far and you also get the 'Victoria Line problem' - i.e. overloading the line in Zone 1 with full trains of passengers from further out.

The whole scheme now seems to be focused on opening up access to the Old Kent Road area to enable housing growth to help address London's housing issues (and thus probably provide some third party funding for the scheme).

There was a rather excellent article on London Reconnnections about it last year - worth a read.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

There was a rather excellent article on London Reconnnections about it last year - worth a read.

This one? http://www.londonreconnections.com/2016/extending-bakerloo-not-transport/

 

[Busaholic]

If you look at the spacing of the stations beyond Queens Park it is not all that different. It's certainly better than the Vic line between Kings Cross and Seven Sisters.

Not sure about Walworth, but the line doesn't actually run close enough to any of Queens Road Peckham, New Cross or Deptford Bridge. Moving it would make it longer. Half the ELL core trains call at New Cross Gate so that is clearly the better interchange of the three ELL stations. More SE trains call at Lewisham than New Cross which again knocks that stations credentials, and Lewisham is a much better interchange for the DLR with trains stationary for a few minutes and the station being under cover.

Sorry, I regard Queen's Park as the 'true' Northern terminus.

The Vic Line spacing was deliberate so as not to just duplicate Piccadilly Line stations, LT being keen to avoid the likes of the Picc/District duplication west of South Ken. So if you want to travel from Seven Sisters to Manor Park by tube, you have to double back from Finsbury Park: LT doubtless considered that the approx. 40 to 50 buses per hour they were operating between SS and MH in the early 1960s adequately catered for the numbers, Spurs home games excepted.

 

[Railguy1]

No-one would get it from Croydon as it would take forever, and the extra tunnelling required would be significantly more expensive in an area generally already with a high density of railway stations. Extend too far and you also get the 'Victoria Line problem' - i.e. overloading the line in Zone 1 with full trains of passengers from further out.

The whole scheme now seems to be focused on opening up access to the Old Kent Road area to enable housing growth to help address London's housing issues (and thus probably provide some third party funding for the scheme).

There was a rather excellent article on London Reconnnections about it last year - worth a read.

You seem to have a contradictory view. On the one hand you suggest no one would take the trains from Croydon, but on the other hand, you suggest that the trains could be full before reaching zone 1, which implies people would take it. The overground also goes there and I would imagine its already well loaded having taken other overground routes (before and after they became the overground). Once a route is on the tube map, it becomes well loaded. Not enough people know about the existing rail routes other than the local commuters.

I believe if the Bakerloo line had a few termini along the route, the crowding would not be an issue if it went as far as Croydon. In fact, it may have some financial backing given the regeneration going on in the area.

 

[Busaholic]

You seem to have a contradictory view. On the one hand you suggest no one would take the trains from Croydon, but on the other hand, you suggest that the trains could be full before reaching zone 1, which implies people would take it. The overground also goes there and I would imagine its already well loaded having taken other overground routes (before and after they became the overground). Once a route is on the tube map, it becomes well loaded. Not enough people know about the existing rail routes other than the local commuters.

I believe if the Bakerloo line had a few termini along the route, the crowding would not be an issue if it went as far as Croydon. In fact, it may have some financial backing given the regeneration going on in the area.

When serious consideration was being given to extending the Bakerloo to Hayes, I suggested on this forum that Tramlink be extended from New Addington the relatively short distance to Hayes Station, thus giving the residents of that railless suburb (NA) the alternative to a ride to East or West Croydon for a train connection. I still think that's far more viable than a roundabout direct route to Croydon for the Bakerloo, regardless of the level of service proposed.

 

[Railguy1]

When serious consideration was being given to extending the Bakerloo to Hayes, I suggested on this forum that Tramlink be extended from New Addington the relatively short distance to Hayes Station, thus giving the residents of that railless suburb (NA) the alternative to a ride to East or West Croydon for a train connection. I still think that's far more viable than a roundabout direct route to Croydon for the Bakerloo, regardless of the level of service proposed.

The current problem with trams, as far as I know, is that there is a limit to how many trams can get through Croydon. So whilst that would be a good idea, I think eventually they may need to think about the frequency of trams through Croydon.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

You seem to have a contradictory view. On the one hand you suggest no one would take the trains from Croydon, but on the other hand, you suggest that the trains could be full before reaching zone 1, which implies people would take it. The overground also goes there and I would imagine its already well loaded having taken other overground routes (before and after they became the overground). Once a route is on the tube map, it becomes well loaded. Not enough people know about the existing rail routes other than the local commuters.

That's not really a contradiction. It's resolved as: Noone in their right mind would take a Bakerloo train from Croydon all the way into central London when you can get almost non-stop trains from East Croydon to Victoria - which is going to be far quicker for almost any zone 1 destination. However, Bakerloo trains arriving in zone 1 would nevertheless be full as a result of people boarding at places like Lewisham and Old Kent Road. You wouldn't need to extend anywhere near as far as Croydon to completely pack out the trains with people travelling from zones 2 and 3 into central London.

(And for what it's worth, I agree with Ianno87 that extending to Croydon would not be a sensible thing to do). Extend it to somewhere like Lewisham - that'll easily be far enough to pack out the Bakerloo trains. Then if you still need to improve services along the existing rail lines further out than Lewisham, you can start worrying about finding some alternative means to improve capacity on them.

 

[jopsuk]

you can argue over the route all you want, it's been an aspiration of TfL to take the Bakerloo to Lewisham (and possibly on to Beckenham and Hayes) for a very long time

 

[Ianno87]

You seem to have a contradictory view. On the one hand you suggest no one would take the trains from Croydon, but on the other hand, you suggest that the trains could be full before reaching zone 1, which implies people would take it. The overground also goes there and I would imagine its already well loaded having taken other overground routes (before and after they became the overground). Once a route is on the tube map, it becomes well loaded. Not enough people know about the existing rail routes other than the local commuters.

I believe if the Bakerloo line had a few termini along the route, the crowding would not be an issue if it went as far as Croydon. In fact, it may have some financial backing given the regeneration going on in the area.

I think the point i'm trying to make is that:
-Nobody would take it from Croydon, as the journey time would be ridiculous compared to main line services
-It would no doubt be popular from the Zone 2/3/4 suburbs, filling it up. But this would be largely abstractive from the main line suburban network, which would be under utilised with significantly more overall transport capacity than the areas really need
-The BLE should be targeted at those areas that have limited or no rail connectivity today, triggering regeneration, development and new transport demand

 

[Busaholic]

TfL have opened another consultation for the Lewisham extension. Personally not happy there are only three stations proposed between Elephant and Lewisham. Have suggested there should be one at Walworth as there is a proposal for a ventilation shaft there. No interchange with Queen's Road Peckham, New Cross or Deptford Bridge either as proposed by some

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/tube/bakerloo-extension/consultation/subpage.2015-09-03.3976631085/

Having looked at the consultation proposals I'd have thought a station at Bricklayers Arms, where a ventilation shaft is also proposed, would be better than at the Walworth site which is situated closer to one of the proposed stations. Someone on here will know if there ever was a passenger station at BA - I know about the old goods depot.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Just looking at the wider area, if it were to keep to a south-easterly direction, what about calling at Bromley and ending at Orpington?

 

[Busaholic]

Just looking at the wider area, if it were to keep to a south-easterly direction, what about calling at Bromley and ending at Orpington?

A year or two back the proposal was to go down the Hayes line, with a split there at Beckenham and a branch to Bromley, but no mention of Orpington.

 

[LU_timetabler]

BLE will not go further than Lewisham, and the reasons are obvious:-
they don't want already packed trains entering the central area.

A good design for the extension would leave options open to take the line down the Hayes line in the future, but it is not going to happen with this extension.

The Lewisham connection will relieve pressure on southeastern services. It will also mean passengers from Lewisham and New Cross can get into Charing Cross on trains that arrive empty instead of already full, which is pretty nice.

 

[Busaholic]

BLE will not go further than Lewisham, and the reasons are obvious:-
they don't want already packed trains entering the central area.

A good design for the extension would leave options open to take the line down the Hayes line in the future, but it is not going to happen with this extension.

The Lewisham connection will relieve pressure on southeastern services. It will also mean passengers from Lewisham and New Cross can get into Charing Cross on trains that arrive empty instead of already full, which is pretty nice.

From the consultation papers, I'd say that they still have the Hayes line in mind for any further extension. Put it this way, Bexleyheath bound it ain't!

 

[LeeLivery]

Having looked at the consultation proposals I'd have thought a station at Bricklayers Arms, where a ventilation shaft is also proposed, would be better than at the Walworth site which is situated closer to one of the proposed stations. Someone on here will know if there ever was a passenger station at BA - I know about the old goods depot.

I was thinking BA too if the ventilation shaft does indeed go that way.

 

[LeeLivery]

If you look at the spacing of the stations beyond Queens Park it is not all that different. It's certainly better than the Vic line between Kings Cross and Seven Sisters.

Not sure about Walworth, but the line doesn't actually run close enough to any of Queens Road Peckham, New Cross or Deptford Bridge. Moving it would make it longer. Half the ELL core trains call at New Cross Gate so that is clearly the better interchange of the three ELL stations. More SE trains call at Lewisham than New Cross which again knocks that stations credentials, and Lewisham is a much better interchange for the DLR with trains stationary for a few minutes and the station being under cover.

North of Queen's Park shares with a suburban rail service I don't expect close stations. Look at Paris and Madrid as examples. Stations very close together, such distances apart proposed is unthinkable. As for Walworth, one of the proposed shafts its at Faraday Gardens, if the alignment goes that way, it'll be 1 min from the Walworth Road which is rammed with buses. Whilst I agree about New Cross, the developments at Deptford makes me think it will be a missed opportunity. If it was a Crossrail proposal then I would just agree with whats proposed.

 

[Bletchleyite]

-Nobody would take it from Croydon, as the journey time would be ridiculous compared to main line services

And nobody takes the Overground from Watford into London today unless they are mad or specifically want to ride on it. But that doesn't mean it serving Watford is pointless - it provides connectivity. People don't just go to London, you know.

Similarly I doubt many will take Crossrail from Reading into London, but that doesn't mean having it serve Reading is pointless.

 

[LeeLivery]

You seem to have a contradictory view. On the one hand you suggest no one would take the trains from Croydon, but on the other hand, you suggest that the trains could be full before reaching zone 1, which implies people would take it. The overground also goes there and I would imagine its already well loaded having taken other overground routes (before and after they became the overground). Once a route is on the tube map, it becomes well loaded. Not enough people know about the existing rail routes other than the local commuters.

I believe if the Bakerloo line had a few termini along the route, the crowding would not be an issue if it went as far as Croydon. In fact, it may have some financial backing given the regeneration going on in the area.

No one takes London Overground from zone 1 to Croydon unless they can't quickly get to London Bridge or London Victoria. The usage LO gets into West Croydon is nothing compared to what Southern/Thameslink fasts get into East Croydon from zone 1.

That being said, I do believe a Underground line should reach Croydon. Running from say Cricklewood through to Brondesbury-Kilburn, Edgware Rd, Marble Arch, Park Lane/Hyde Park, Victoria, Vaxuhall, Brixton, Streatham, Norbury, W & E Croydon.

 

[rebmcr]

BLE will not go further than Lewisham, and the reasons are obvious:-
they don't want already packed trains entering the central area.

A good design for the extension would leave options open to take the line down the Hayes line in the future, but it is not going to happen with this extension.

The Lewisham connection will relieve pressure on southeastern services. It will also mean passengers from Lewisham and New Cross can get into Charing Cross on trains that arrive empty instead of already full, which is pretty nice.

From the consultation papers, I'd say that they still have the Hayes line in mind for any further extension. Put it this way, Bexleyheath bound it ain't!

I would expect TfL to put zero effort into freeing up paths into London Bridge, at least until there is a chance of it going orange again!