Easier said than done I imagine esp. at New Malden! Wonder if part of the Epsom line will be 4 tracked as once originally intended
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Crossrail 2
- Thread starter cjohnson
- Start date
- Status
Easier said than done I imagine esp. at New Malden! Wonder if part of the Epsom line will be 4 tracked as once originally intended
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Where does it mention Strawberry Hill depot?
Where does it mention terminating trains at Teddington? It says up to 8tph to Hampton Wick and 4tph all stations west of Hampton Wick. Although, Hampton Wick seems an odd place to turn around trains.
Brainstorming ideas - would be a bit odd to terminate trains at Hampton Wick, there isn't enough space to build any bay platforms or turn back points. Teddington on thr other hand could be enhanced and has a much higher footfall which would inevitably be considered as part of the consultation.
However, build Crossrail 2 and it will provide extra capacity on the SWML which could be used to provide more trains to Exeter (South West) and potentially beyond. Likewise on the other side of London it will allow more trains through Cambridge (East Anglia) and potentially beyond. Without building Crossrail 2 how would you propose to provide an increase in services?
Just because a scheme is in or close to London doesn't mean that it will not improve things further out.
Yes, there is a need for investment in the regions, however part of the problem is that there is often little point improving things a long way out of London as so many people want to travel to London that the extra improvements will not be able to reach their full capacity until works close to London are done.
As an example - the redoubling of the WofE line would enable all the current trains from Waterloo to Salisbury to get to Exeter as well as extending the Exeter Metro out to the east along it. However, the redoubling would also potentially also allow for more services into London which would currently have to stop short (Woking or Basingstoke) due to capacity constraints towards London. This would limit the benefit of running the extra services (i.e. they are unlikely to happen or be very limited in their scope) and therefore not get the best value out of undertaking the redoubling.
With Crossrail 2 there would be scope for more trains to London which in turn makes the benefit of the redoubling much greater and potentially makes it more likely to happen. It could also improve things so much that it could also tip the balance for electrification and speed enhancements for the whole route between Basingstoke and Exeter. It could even have an impact on the potential reopening of the line through Okehampton with new journey opportunities from Plymouth to the South and South East.
In short by investing in a "London" project it could lead to the need to invest more in the South West than would otherwise be needed.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Given the age of those fleets it maybe possible that is what will happen.
Another option is that the TOC's get new rolling stock (at some point, possibly even this next franchise) which could be used elsewhere on their (non Crossrail 2) network. This stock could then be used once Crossrail 2 is built to replace newer stock (bearing in mind that even some of SWT's newer trains, the 450's and 444's, would likely be about 25-30 years old by 2030) and/or to provide extra capacity (bearing in mind the extra services which could be run following the completion of Crossrail 2 and the need for extra EMU's following future electrification).
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,372
The SWT 455 retractioning has generally been assumed to keep that stock in service until Crossrail 2 was fast approaching. They mention in the consultation that Crossrail 2 stock will be 10 x 20m (or equivalent) so that does lend itself to introduction a few years earlier than needed though.
I think the stock cascade situation may well be completely different at either end?
I think the stock cascade situation may well be completely different at either end?
Personally would have preferred to have seen it routed via Tooting Broadway rather than Balham - the Wimbledon to Tooting corridor is very busy at the moment (I attended my secondary school for 7 years in Tooting) and the TL service is IMO inadequate.
Where do they plan on relocating the Tramlink platforms to?
Where do they plan on relocating the Tramlink platforms to?
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,372
Above worksites A, B and C, which are the south end of the below ground Crossrail 2 station. From the map in the Wimbledon fact sheet:
https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/crossrail2/october2015/user_uploads/s13.pdf
... that seems to be the area above where Tramlink curves away from the down side of the existing lines, across the road and south west of the existing station entrance. I'd be assuming loads of surface demolition, as shown by the red lined areas, so fitting in a separate tram terminus shouldn't be a huge problem.
PS - This ought to solve that Tram related Oyster PAYG touch in/out issue that so many people allegedly have difficulty with...
Last edited:
Wimbeldon Trams:
Agreed they don't seem to understand local issues in the area (i.e. getting people of the roads (car/buses))
Compensation for Tooting with doubling to the Thamesink (or Wimbledon - London Bridge Services)???
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Agreed they don't seem to understand local issues in the area (i.e. getting people of the roads (car/buses))
Compensation for Tooting with doubling to the Thamesink (or Wimbledon - London Bridge Services)???
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
One of the government lines tripped out for funding HS2 was that from 2017 it would just pick up the rate of spend taken by Crossrail 1, and not cost any more annually.
Then Boris threatened to block HS2 plans in London unless Crossrail 2 was progressed (partly to cope with crowding at Euston).
Anyway, it took Crossrail 1 more than 20 years to get parliamentary approval so Crossrail 2 is a long way from going ahead.
We will face a funding clash if HS2 (probably the northern extensions) and Crossrail 2 are building at the same time.
Another factor is that Crossrail 2 is likely to attract private funding for the central section (eg for stations), whereas the HS2/3 scheme is not.
I remember the apocalyptic choice that a Labour government had to make in the 1970s.
They could only afford to fund one of three megaprojects:
- 3rd London airport (then proposed for Wing near Aylesbury)
- Channel Tunnel
- Concorde
Then they found they couldn't cancel Concorde because of the treaty with the French, so they scrapped the other two.
Forty years on, Concorde's time has been and gone.
The 3rd London airport eventually went to Stansted (sort of).
The Channel Tunnel got built, but with private money.
telstarbox
Established Member
Crossrail 1 has been partially funded by additional property taxes in Greater London - Mayoral Community Infrastructure Levy (for new developments) and Crossrail Business Rate Supplement (for existing properties). The "Crossrail 2 Funding and Financing Study" suggests raising funds in the same way.
Hopefully the additional peak services will be able to stop at Clapham Junction or the coating G services will. I know stopping at Clapham Junction in peak has been an aspiration.
Off peak I wasn't aware of any suburban trains that use the cast lines unless disruption occurs and they run the train fast to Waterloo after Surbiton.
Howvwer quite a few trains don't stop at Clapham Junction during this time. Hopefully more will be able to after Crossrail 2.
Must digest the documents later.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Try getting from Clapham Junction to Poole during the evening peak rush hour. Anything which improves such journeys can only be good in my opinion.
Feathers44
Member
- Joined
- 12 Aug 2014
- Messages
- 350
Which part? There goes my back garden...
Loudly echoed. I recommend all masochists to try and get on the first train 1827 to Exeter, as late as that, with two suitcases, having changed from Gatwick. Done it twice now and didn't get a seat until past Basingstoke.
Crossrail 2 will solve that one will it?
HarleyDavidson
Established Member
- Joined
- 23 Aug 2014
- Messages
- 2,529
You're not going to get additional calls at Clapham because you have trains through there every 3-4' on average during the peaks. And when you get the 1827 to EXD call there you end up with a queue of at least 3 non stop services behind it.
You won't get any extra calls at Wimbledon either for exactly the same reason, you already get thinning of service when low speed TSRs are imposed in the Wimbledon area, you already get trains miss out Wimbledon when congestion gets too much. So make of that what you will.
Not that I'm going to be worried, because I'll (hopefully) be retired before this rubbish gets underway.
You won't get any extra calls at Wimbledon either for exactly the same reason, you already get thinning of service when low speed TSRs are imposed in the Wimbledon area, you already get trains miss out Wimbledon when congestion gets too much. So make of that what you will.
Not that I'm going to be worried, because I'll (hopefully) be retired before this rubbish gets underway.
Well my understanding was Crossrail 2 would help with this.
The 18.40 from Surbiton is often late, stuck behind the 18.27 Exeter services, as is the 18.32 Clapham Junction to Alton service. The 18.30 Waterloo to Portsmouth service has a longer gap before it departs so isn't usually so delayed around Clapham Junction.
Fortunately the 18.30 service to Portsmouth is booked for platform 5 at Woking. Were it platform 4, I reckon I'd miss my official connection more frequently, as the 18.40 is booked for platform 5.
Of course passengers from Gatwick Airport to Exeter could go up to Waterloo and down to avoid getting on the 18.27 at Clapham Junction but that probably requires a more expensive ticket. I'm not certain how the easements work in relation to Clapham Junction and Waterloo.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Currently Weybridge gets fast and slow services towards London via Wimbledon off peak. During the peak they only get semi fast services towards London via Wimbledon and nothing else.
So Crossrail 2 might convert the peak semi fast services into a mixture of fast and slow; semi-fast and slow or semi-fast and fast.
Exactly, just as Crossrail 1 at it's western ends will have semi-fast and ski stopping, on the Surbiton-Weybridge line, there is no reason why the same cannot be used to enable quicker journeys especially once the more metro branches are out of the equation.
Berrylands could easily be skipped on many services too for example, New Malden and Raynes Park too (and would anything need to stop at both? Surely a bus function...)
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,372
Yes, at the very least the '7 or 8 suburban trains' that currently run on the fast lines from Surbiton to Waterloo that will be transferred over to the main slow lines (as described earlier in the thread) will be able to stop at Clapham Jn.
However if they refill the ensuing gaps in the main fast frequency with more services from further out, they still won't be able to add any stops at Clapham Jn on the fasts.
But as the Wessex route study explains, as well as CR2 they intend to ultimately provide for a 5th track from Clapham Jn to Waterloo, and rebuild platforms 7 and 8, and that WILL allow fast line trains to stop.
I suggest HarleyDavidson is answering the question for the present time, not the end of CP6 or end of CP7 or whatever...
Older NR proposals (outside CR2) that surface from time to time to sort P7/8/9 at Clapham Jn so more fast services could call.
Note that the CR2 works site A at Clapham
Also from the Clapham Junction pdf
"Allow for a greater number of long-distance National Rail services to stop at Clapham Junction"
I was kind of hoping that Crossrail 2 and the 5th track might happen around the same time or in similar timescales or near enough.
Clapham Junction changes are definitely needed and in my opium on have been needed ever since South West Trains proposed modifying Clapham Junction over 10 years ago.
May be someone can present the view why such works are not important right now and can afford to wait. I'm aware the country isn't made of money and nor is Network Rail a bottomless pit of cash.
What is more useful to passengers, Crossrail 2 or the 5th track? I suspect Crossrail 2 as a lot of people live in London.
I thought it was 5th track or CR2, not both. However CR2 would allow slower services to use the slow lines and call at Clapham Junction. This could improve matters by allowing some medium distance services to call at Clapham Junction.
Depending on what metro services are left it may well be that they are run by trains with a top speed of 100 mph which could overcome some of the speed difference issues.
It is 5th track between Wimbledon and Clapham Jn or CR2.
CR2 includes 6 from new Malden to Wimbledon and 5 from Surbiton to New Malden.
NR are effectively pushing ahead with 5 from Clapham to Waterloo in the near future as it aligns with rebuilding the throat at Waterloo.
Class 170101
Established Member
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 7,932
To be honest I would think Balham is a better alternative than Tooting Broadway anyway. Interchange with the Northern Line is retained and National Rail Services are added to the interchange list.
I miss remembered it. I thought the HTC 5 tracks was all the way to Wimbledon not just Clapham Junction.
Anyway personally, from selfish point of view, I would like whatever enables fast trains to stop at Clapham Junction during the peak.
I often use Poole as an example of a place that is awkward to get to during the evening peak rush hour, if you solely hand south from Clapham Junction. To go via Waterloo is more expensive.
For example if travelling in peak evening rush hour, one can catch the 17.12 stopping service to Surbiton, this arrives at 17.26. You then wait 13 minutes for the 17.39. This is a fast train to Woking.
You get out here at 17.51 and now wait another 13 minutes for the 18.04 to Winchester. Once there at 18.43 you then wait 17 minutes for a direct train to Poole. Arriving in at 20.18. That's waiting at stations for 43 minutes!
That journey is 3 hours 6 minutes.
Were you to leave on the 17.02, you would only need to catch at Woking and Winchester and this brings the time down to 2 hours 31 minutes. The 17.02 is the last fast train to stop at Clapham Junction, which is why it's lower.
The trains between 16.00-17.00 are even quicker. 2.09 hours and 2.16 hours respectively, with just one change at Winchester or Woking.
Incidentally the 18.27 journey requires 2 changes but only takes 2.06 hours, so a whole hour less in time. In fact it gets you in just 15 minutes later than the 17.12, despite leaving an hour later.
An off peak single for this journey is £47.90. If you go via Waterloo the cost becomes £56.30, so an extra £8.40. Going via London means that you can leave Clapham Junction 27 minutes later and get the 17.39. That journey involves going to and from Waterloo and even a 16 minute wait at Waterloo. It works becomes from Waterloo you are then on a non stop service.
That is why I'd like more trains to stop at Clapham Junction or at least an easement that allows passengers on long journeys to travel via Waterloo to reach their destination during peak rush hour or all the time, if it's to complicated to understand.
However I admit there may not be enough people travelling to Poole for this to be worth doing. However overall I'd hope their would be enough passengers to make it worth while.
Last edited:
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
Wasn't there some aspiration for putting in an extra platform at Clapham to allow most SWT fasts to stop there? Or have I completely mis-remembered? Presumably doing so would be a completely separate project from CR2 - so in principle could happen before CR2 is running.
Alternatively, if CR2 means more semi-fast trains can use the slow lines, would that mean you could have reasonably regular service with a calling pattern something like Waterloo - Clapham Junction - Wimbledon - Surbiton - Woking, thus making it realistic for long-distance passengers to change at Woking to reach Clapham Junction?
On a separate note, how do these plans make the Nine Elms Northern line extension look? As I recall, the main argument against running that extension to Clapham Junction would be that the Northern line wouldn't be able to cope with the numbers of passengers that would bring in. But it looks to me like CR2 would take a lot of pressure off the Northern line, removing that problem. And with interchange to Crossrail2 possible at Clapham Junction, not extending the Northern line to Clapham Junction would look very silly.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Agreed. I'd imagine running CR2 to Balham will take some pressure off Clapham Junction, since it'll mean a fair few people interchanging between Southern metro services and CR2 will do so at Balham rather than at Clapham Junction.
Alternatively, if CR2 means more semi-fast trains can use the slow lines, would that mean you could have reasonably regular service with a calling pattern something like Waterloo - Clapham Junction - Wimbledon - Surbiton - Woking, thus making it realistic for long-distance passengers to change at Woking to reach Clapham Junction?
On a separate note, how do these plans make the Nine Elms Northern line extension look? As I recall, the main argument against running that extension to Clapham Junction would be that the Northern line wouldn't be able to cope with the numbers of passengers that would bring in. But it looks to me like CR2 would take a lot of pressure off the Northern line, removing that problem. And with interchange to Crossrail2 possible at Clapham Junction, not extending the Northern line to Clapham Junction would look very silly.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Agreed. I'd imagine running CR2 to Balham will take some pressure off Clapham Junction, since it'll mean a fair few people interchanging between Southern metro services and CR2 will do so at Balham rather than at Clapham Junction.
Last edited:
Just before Worcester Park. I suppose you could in theory install a bay on the south side at Motspur.
Interesting to see if/how they widen the track at Raynes Park, plus I'm guessing the large gap between train and platform would be looked at.
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,372
We need to make sure we're referring to the correct project here. When they refer to 5th track OR Crossrail 2, the 2011 London and SE RUS version of '5th tracking' started at Hampton Court Jn and continued all the way to Waterloo.
Shown on Fig 7.5 on page 134 of: http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse...and south east route utilisation strategy.pdf
As I understand it that is still the fall back position but Crossrail 2 is now assumed to be almost guaranteed to happen and therefore cancel 5th track over all that distance, and go for 6 track as far as Wimbledon only
However there is a separate plan for enough 5th tracking to give a 3 fast line final approach to Waterloo, and the Wessex route study has this starting either country side of Vauxhall or from the London end of Clapham Jn - the implication here being that Wimbledon to Clapham Jn would remain 4 track.
This is shown on Fig 5.5 on page 79 (for Vauxhall to Waterloo) of: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/Publi...ssex-route-study/Wessex-Route-Study-Final.pdf
I think 'extra platform' at Clapham Junction translates as altering track layout, platform length, curvature and signal overlaps to allow 7, 8 and 9 to all be used in normal service. So it means an extra usable platform, but no numerical increase, IYSWIM...
Shown on Fig 7.5 on page 134 of: http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse...and south east route utilisation strategy.pdf
As I understand it that is still the fall back position but Crossrail 2 is now assumed to be almost guaranteed to happen and therefore cancel 5th track over all that distance, and go for 6 track as far as Wimbledon only
However there is a separate plan for enough 5th tracking to give a 3 fast line final approach to Waterloo, and the Wessex route study has this starting either country side of Vauxhall or from the London end of Clapham Jn - the implication here being that Wimbledon to Clapham Jn would remain 4 track.
This is shown on Fig 5.5 on page 79 (for Vauxhall to Waterloo) of: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/Publi...ssex-route-study/Wessex-Route-Study-Final.pdf
I think 'extra platform' at Clapham Junction translates as altering track layout, platform length, curvature and signal overlaps to allow 7, 8 and 9 to all be used in normal service. So it means an extra usable platform, but no numerical increase, IYSWIM...
Last edited:
Before Crossrail 2 creates a subsurface obstacle...how about a double decker Clapham Junction?
Dig new platforms and re-jig things to enable every line to have two platforms, i.e.
Underground:
...or...
Route the fast or slow lines into the new platforms, (I suspect this would create massive interchange issues though as many people would want to continue their journeys on slower services, hence the previous proposal), i.e.
Underground:
...unless Crossrail 2 can subsume all SWML slow line services, in which case you end up with the opposite, to some degree (and hoping for another line to take over the BML slows):
Underground:
Dig new platforms and re-jig things to enable every line to have two platforms, i.e.
Underground:
- 2 up fast SWML
- 2 up slow SWML
- 2 up fast BML
- 2 up slow BML
- 1 up WLL
- 2 down fast SWML
- 2 down slow SWML
- 2 down fast BML
- 2 down slow BML
- 1 down WLL
...or...
Route the fast or slow lines into the new platforms, (I suspect this would create massive interchange issues though as many people would want to continue their journeys on slower services, hence the previous proposal), i.e.
Underground:
- 2 up fast SWML
- 2 down fast SWML
- 2 up fast BML
- 2 down fast BML
- 2 up slow SWML
- 2 down slow SWML
- 2 up slow BML
- 2 down slow BML
- 1 up WLL
- 1 down WLL
...unless Crossrail 2 can subsume all SWML slow line services, in which case you end up with the opposite, to some degree (and hoping for another line to take over the BML slows):
Underground:
- 2 up slow SWML
- 2 down slow SWML
- 2 up slow BML
- 2 down slow BML
- 2 up fast SWML
- 2 down fast SWML
- 2 up fast BML
- 2 down fast BML
- 1 up WLL
- 1 down WLL
And all of these to be straight, level and 250m long?
- Status