Northern City Line not fit for purpose

edwin_m · 4 Mar 2018

Class 170101 said:
Do we know that most CR2 services would turn back at New Southgate?

Class 170101 said:
Currently the Metro service to Welwyn is three per hour off peak and 6 per hour at peak times. I am surprised that is enough capacity today never mind in 10 to 15 years time.

I'm assuming firstly that the frequency of trains on this leg of CR2 would be much more than that of the existing Welwyn terminators (reasonable given the above figures and a core frequency similar to CR1 split between two branches). Secondly I assume that the ECML has no capacity for any extra trains. Therefore both the excess CR2 trains and the existing Welwyn terminators would have to turn back at New Southgate.

Class 170101 said:
However if some went through to Welwyn and some terminated at New Southgate why would the starters have to cross on the flat at New Southgate? Surely ther design of the new railway would build this constraint out? I would have thought a crossover tunnel could be constructed.

Well yes you'd have to have a crossover tunnel, or more likely a flyover like the one at Welwyn, or maybe even separate facilities for the two groups of terminators. The simple solution of a portal each side of the ECML suggested previously wouldn't work on its own.

RailUK Forums

DelW · 4 Mar 2018

goblinuser said:
How would you do this? Using the nature reserve Parkland walk?

Parkland Walk was not established until after the tracks were removed in (I think) the early 1970s. Reinstating the route as a railway would undoubtedly attract a lot of opposition in the area.

goblinuser · 4 Mar 2018

DelW said:
Parkland Walk was not established until after the tracks were removed in (I think) the early 1970s. Reinstating the route as a railway would undoubtedly attract a lot of opposition in the area.

Yes. I too would be opposed as the role it plays as a nature reserve is more valuable to the city than a transport connection which is served well by buses anyway.

Wirewiper · 4 Mar 2018

DelW said:
Parkland Walk was not established until after the tracks were removed in (I think) the early 1970s. Reinstating the route as a railway would undoubtedly attract a lot of opposition in the area.

As indeed there was when a campaign group advocated its use for a Finsbury Park - Highgate - Alexandra Palace Metro/Light Rail line in the 1990s.

Apparently they are still around: http://muswellhillmetrogroup.com/

Bald Rick · 4 Mar 2018

marcmck said:
... I would do this from just north of old street creating new longer accessible platforms at old street, then to divert in a new tunnel to create an interchange at Liverpool st, then onwards in tunnel to London Bridge where it would continue to a tunnel portal south to take over a suitable line southwards. I think you would close Essex road, and incorporate platform lengthening into a much needed rebuild of Highbury and Islington which the only other underground platforms with this constraint. Don’t imagine it would be cheap but it seems to me that like with the LO/East London line you would create a new, high capacity cross London link by joining existing bits of infrastructure. You would create a direct connection between liv st and London Bridge, relieve the northern line between LB/city and improve accessibility of the line. Little map to illustrate as wellView attachment 43454

That would be a long way down at Liverpool St, which will almost certainly need another big rebuild to deal with the passenger numbers. I dread to think what the land cost would be for digging the holes for vertical circulation.

edwin_m said:
There was incidentally a much earlier plan to extend the GN&C (as it then was) from Moorgate to Lothbury, which got as far as making a start on tunneling but was then abandoned. The tunnelling shield is still there in one of the Moorgate overrun tunnels.

Indeed it was abandoned before the rest of the NCL opened, when it was realised by the shareholders that the NCL wouldn't make any money (which was correct).

Class 170101 said:
Do we know that most CR2 services would turn back at New Southgate?

The Crossrail2 consultation in 2015 said 15tph would turn at New Southgate. As has been said upthread, every one of those that goes north can only replace an exsting service.

Fred26 said:
Isn't the New Southgate CR2 station planned to be underground? I'm sure it's planned as a separate entity to the current station (directly beneath it, I thought).

The 2015 consultation documents show it at the same level as the existing station and alongside (to the east).

Class 170101 · 4 Mar 2018

Bald Rick said:
The Crossrail2 consultation in 2015 said 15tph would turn at New Southgate. As has been said upthread, every one of those that goes north can only replace an exsting service.

Are the ECML slow lines really that busy?

simple simon · 4 Mar 2018

The Lothbury station would have been so close to Moorgate that trains travelling between them would have had one end inside each station! Yes, it would have been fantastic as an oddity and a question in a general knowledge quiz "where in London can a train be in two stations at the same time?". But I doubt that this extension would have been truly useful for passengers. Its a shame though, as a further extension to somewhere like Cannon Street would have created potential for the future joining of the two routes.

However, even before the coming of crossrail a southward extension became 'very challenging', as apparently there are bank vaults in the way.

DenmarkRail · 4 Mar 2018

The stations are that old, and rundown, they are genuinely quite scary if there alone at night. I know they're just as dangerous as any other platform in London (so not very), but the feel and look just gives it that horrible feel.

Bald Rick · 4 Mar 2018

Class 170101 said:
Are the ECML slow lines really that busy?

Indeed they are (from the 2019 TT)

A0wen · 5 Mar 2018

DelW said:
That was not only planned, but construction was begun, by LT before World War 2. It was deferred during and after the war, and finally abandoned much later - maybe as late as the 1960s. The unused steelwork for the platform on the east side of Finsbury Park station was only finally removed around then. It was originally intended to run via Highgate and Edgware to a new terminus near Watford. IIRC what became the LT bus works at Aldenham was planned as the line's depot.
At that time the line between Moorgate and Finsbury Park was of course operated as an unconnected branch of the Northern Line. The line between FP and Highgate was retained for stock transfers for many years.

You're talking about the Northern Heights plan - some details here and if you know where to look around Edgware and Stanmore you can find some of the works that were done.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_line#The_Northern_Heights_plan

Two things happened to the NCL after that was abandoned - the tunnels between Drayton Park and Finsbury Park were taken out of use and part given over to the Victoria Line. From that point the NCL only ran Drayton Park to Moorgate.

The line to Highgate closed in the late 60s after which the stock transfers ran from Drayton Park to Finsbury Park - using the part of the link which had been built for the Northern Heights plan, then onto Finsbury Park, down to Kings Cross, onto the Widened Lines and then onto LT metals at Farringdon and up to Neasden......

Ronnie268 · 5 Mar 2018

marcmck said:
With funding environment at the minute difficult and priorities for new investment being Crossrail 2, bakerloo line extension etc - this is blue sky (crayon) thinking...
But I’ve always thought the way to increase the utility of this link and to overcome the problems of short platforms, the limited turnaround capacity of Moorgate, the barriers of Crossrail & Bank of England vaults at the southern end was to re route the line, cutting holes into the exiting tunnels as done recently at Kennington for the NLE. I would do this from just north of old street creating new longer accessible platforms at old street, then to divert in a new tunnel to create an interchange at Liverpool st, then onwards in tunnel to London Bridge where it would continue to a tunnel portal south to take over a suitable line southwards. I think you would close Essex road, and incorporate platform lengthening into a much needed rebuild of Highbury and Islington which the only other underground platforms with this constraint. Don’t imagine it would be cheap but it seems to me that like with the LO/East London line you would create a new, high capacity cross London link by joining existing bits of infrastructure. You would create a direct connection between liv st and London Bridge, relieve the northern line between LB/city and improve accessibility of the line. Little map to illustrate as wellView attachment 43454

I would have thought the full 'crayons' solution would involve rebuilding platforms to twelve car length, then extending (as you said) from Old St to Liverpool St, then Cannon St (for Bank), then London Bridge, then providing a limited stop version of the Northern Line (E&C, Kennington, Stockwell, Clapham Common, Balham, Tooting Broadway, Wimbledon). That would solve a lot of the Morden branch's capacity problems.

BelleIsle · 5 Mar 2018

DelW said:
Parkland Walk was not established until after the tracks were removed in (I think) the early 1970s. Reinstating the route as a railway would undoubtedly attract a lot of opposition in the area.

Dealing with the locals is one thing. Dealing with the protected bat colony at Highgate is something else.

edwin_m · 5 Mar 2018

Ronnie268 said:
I would have thought the full 'crayons' solution would involve rebuilding platforms to twelve car length, then extending (as you said) from Old St to Liverpool St, then Cannon St (for Bank), then London Bridge, then providing a limited stop version of the Northern Line (E&C, Kennington, Stockwell, Clapham Common, Balham, Tooting Broadway, Wimbledon). That would solve a lot of the Morden branch's capacity problems.

You get a gold star for each of the WW2 bomb shelters you manage to incorporate.

jellybaby · 5 Mar 2018

DenmarkRail said:
The stations are that old, and rundown, they are genuinely quite scary if there alone at night.

The Macmillian Cancer Support adverts across the tracks at Moorgate, which have been up for at least 6 years, have just been taken down. I'm hopeful the Moorgate platforms are going to be refurbished.

Failed Unit · 5 Mar 2018

In terms of passenger numbers we don’t know how Thameslink will help.

At the moment lots of people change at Finsbury Park for Moorgate.

In the future will they change at Farringdon? Will they walk to their ultimate destination for city Thameslink or Blackfriars? Will London Bridge help?

Irrespective as I have said on other threads I have no idea 4 franchises later why the stations are still NSE branded. I have noticed the morning peak is hit more by signal / train failures as well. It is certainly exceeding expectations and lots of people from Welwyn / Hertford stay on the trains as they pass through Finsbury Park

Mikey C · 5 Mar 2018

I'm not convinced anything needs to be done other than the planned replacement of the trains and signalling etc, and sprucing up the stations a bit.

With the nearby Overground, Thameslink and Northern Line options, it's not as if there are no other routes available for passengers wanting to go further south than Moorgate.

Indeed if TfL put it on the Tube Map again, maybe more people will use it just though that!

cle · 5 Mar 2018

I agree - it should become self-contained and treated like a metro. So a dedicated route - be it Stevenage (once bay is done) or Welwyn - but not both, and then be the only service on that line, 7 days a week - with only freight to share. That is the best way to keep it neat and run higher frequencies.

I'd be tempted to say Hertford, with the Welwyn route served from Kings Cross/Thameslink only - which has the semi fasts and the need to serve Knebworth and Welwyn North also on the two track section - hence maybe better with the skip-stop semi fast pattern, rather than being standardised.

However the Welwyn route must have much higher counter flow and off-peak demand, given that it serves bigger centres.

bramling · 5 Mar 2018

Class 170101 said:
Are the ECML slow lines really that busy?

Sort of. Off-peak currently there is 3tph Moorgate-Welwyn GC. However on top of this there is 2tph King's Cross-Peterborough or Cambridge North, both of which require to use the slow lines between Potters Bar and Digswell, although there is the option to use the fast line inwards of Potters Bar. The latter services have to be timetabled subject to bottlenecks elsewhere, such as the double track section between Digswell and Woolmer Green, through Hitchin, and between Hitchin and Cambridge. So whilst on paper the slow lines aren't that busy, the mix of services and stopping patterns over a very congested route means there's little slack in reality.

Lee_Again · 5 Mar 2018

Given that Finsbury to the City can soon be done via TL Core, it seems there's little reason to invest in the NCL. If I was spending money in that area I'd make the Finsbury Park tube connection far easier to use (and thus take the H&I connection out the equation) and then, and this is the BIG one, I'd improve the connection to the NLL. Welwyn/Hertford direct to H&I, Stratford and SE London. That's almost a new Cross Rail route in itself.

adamedwards · 5 Mar 2018

Wirewiper said:
As indeed there was when a campaign group advocated its use for a Finsbury Park - Highgate - Alexandra Palace Metro/Light Rail line in the 1990s. /

A better solution here would be a Piccadilly Line branch to Crouch Hill, Crouch End and Muswell Hill. This assumes CR2 has taken some of the load off the Piccadilly Line north of FP.

ChiefPlanner · 5 Mar 2018

bramling said:
Sort of. Off-peak currently there is 3tph Moorgate-Welwyn GC. However on top of this there is 2tph King's Cross-Peterborough or Cambridge North, both of which require to use the slow lines between Potters Bar and Digswell, although there is the option to use the fast line inwards of Potters Bar. The latter services have to be timetabled subject to bottlenecks elsewhere, such as the double track section between Digswell and Woolmer Green, through Hitchin, and between Hitchin and Cambridge. So whilst on paper the slow lines aren't that busy, the mix of services and stopping patterns over a very congested route means there's little slack in reality.

Nicely put - there have often been "unused bits" on the GN slow lines in the peaks , but difficult to use due to the odd platforming constraints at Hatfield and the junction locations south of Welwyn (not to me mention the interface issues with the fasts over Digswell) ....in retrospect , an GN upgrade ought to maybe have considered some of these issues , - though the new 7xx fleet on the inners will help a bit , compared to the hardworking , if old, 313 old stagers.

bramling · 6 Mar 2018

cle said:
I agree - it should become self-contained and treated like a metro. So a dedicated route - be it Stevenage (once bay is done) or Welwyn - but not both, and then be the only service on that line, 7 days a week - with only freight to share. That is the best way to keep it neat and run higher frequencies.

I'd be tempted to say Hertford, with the Welwyn route served from Kings Cross/Thameslink only - which has the semi fasts and the need to serve Knebworth and Welwyn North also on the two track section - hence maybe better with the skip-stop semi fast pattern, rather than being standardised.

However the Welwyn route must have much higher counter flow and off-peak demand, given that it serves bigger centres.

Hertford route is definitely busier I'd say. The Welwyn route is generally busy from Welwyn GC, Hatfield and (less so) Potters Bar to London, but these stations all have 2tph fast service to King's Cross. The Welwyn 313s can be quite empty during the day. Many of the stations at the London end have the Northern Line nearby.

For the Hertford line trains are generally fairly empty off-peak north of Gordon Hill, with only Hertford North and Cuffley contributing any great numbers. Inwards of Gordon Hill things pick up. Palmers Green, Winchmore Hill, Enfield Chase and Gordon Hill are all very busy right through the day.

jon0844 · 6 Mar 2018

bramling said:
Hertford route is definitely busier I'd say. The Welwyn route is generally busy from Welwyn GC, Hatfield and (less so) Potters Bar to London, but these stations all have 2tph fast service to King's Cross. The Welwyn 313s can be quite empty during the day. Many of the stations at the London end have the Northern Line nearby.

For the Hertford line trains are generally fairly empty off-peak north of Gordon Hill, with only Hertford North and Cuffley contributing any great numbers. Inwards of Gordon Hill things pick up. Palmers Green, Winchmore Hill, Enfield Chase and Gordon Hill are all very busy right through the day.

Indeed, the WGC stoppers are very empty for a lot of the day and even in the peaks a fair few people have got off at Potters Bar and Hatfield, leaving not that many people to get off at WGC. Only if a faster service is caped will people resort to using the slow service.

I don't know how this will change when a) there are 4 trains per hour and more are quicker than waiting for the next 'fast' train, and b) when KGX and STP are both used and people may choose to get to Finsbury Park to get a train, whereby the increased service frequency will once again make the stoppers more popular.

jon0844 · 6 Mar 2018

Deleted (duplicate post)

OxtedL · 6 Mar 2018

jon0844 said:
Indeed, the WGC stoppers are very empty for a lot of the day and even in the peaks a fair few people have got off at Potters Bar and Hatfield, leaving not that many people to get off at WGC. Only if a faster service is caped will people resort to using the slow service.

They may not be very busy north of Potters Bar, but they are busy (and will be even busier with 4 tph) from New Barnet southwards.

A0wen · 6 Mar 2018

jon0844 said:
Indeed, the WGC stoppers are very empty for a lot of the day and even in the peaks a fair few people have got off at Potters Bar and Hatfield, leaving not that many people to get off at WGC. Only if a faster service is caped will people resort to using the slow service.

I don't know how this will change when a) there are 4 trains per hour and more are quicker than waiting for the next 'fast' train, and b) when KGX and STP are both used and people may choose to get to Finsbury Park to get a train, whereby the increased service frequency will once again make the stoppers more popular.

I assume off peak the faster services are also that bit quieter, hence you'll get a seat, which in turn means you can get to Finsbury Park in about 18 minutes rather than 35.

It's worth remembering that at electrification the GN services were all standardised - where previously the inner suburbans had a mix of start and destinations the GN electrification standardised this on WGC and Hertford North - which largely survives to this day. And in the case of WGC there were infrastructure changes implemented - notably the flyover on the south side of the station - which allowed the inner suburban services to return from London into the west-side platform (I think that's now P1 ?) and then return south without having to cross the fasts on the level.

adamedwards · 7 Mar 2018

From the WGC route roughly 2/3rds of demand am is to Moorgate, hence the chaos when it fails. I don't think Thameslink will make much difference as Moorgate is a short walk to workplaces, where as City Thameslink is on the western fringes. What will help is 6 car trains without the 313s mega sized cabs.

Bald Rick · 7 Mar 2018

adamedwards said:
From the WGC route roughly 2/3rds of demand am is to Moorgate, hence the chaos when it fails. I don't think Thameslink will make much difference as Moorgate is a short walk to workplaces, where as City Thameslink is on the western fringes. What will help is 6 car trains without the 313s mega sized cabs.

There’s a lot of workplaces near Farringdon and City Thameslink too!

Having done it daily for years, it’s less than a mile from City TL or Farringdon to Moorgate, so if an individual’s workplace is in between them then they may well choose TL.

ChiefPlanner · 7 Mar 2018

Bald Rick said:
There’s a lot of workplaces near Farringdon and City Thameslink too!

Having done it daily for years, it’s less than a mile from City TL or Farringdon to Moorgate, so if an individual’s workplace is in between them then they may well choose TL.

For a while , I used to walk from Farringdon to Old Street , to avoid paying the LUL surcharge for the season ticket - not more than 25 mins , and a variable and interesting walk. Several neighbours do much the same - a walk as opposed to a crushed tube / subsurface journey. London is actually not a bad city for walking if you learn your routes and avoid the congested , polluted main roads.

(though walking say from Blackfriars towards Waterloo can be a pain , due to the a++hole joggers around , and not just in the peaks...)

Class 170101 · 7 Mar 2018

adamedwards said:
A better solution here would be a Piccadilly Line branch to Crouch Hill, Crouch End and Muswell Hill. This assumes CR2 has taken some of the load off the Piccadilly Line north of FP.

I would say that Crossrail 2 is too far east to have an effect on the Piccadilly line north of Finsbury Park. Possibly only relieving pressure at Wood Green / Turnpike Lane depending upon which option is chosen. I cannot see people changing at those stations to reach Central London as changing trains adds a time penalty probably not eqivalent to the time saved between those stations and Central London.

Northern City Line not fit for purpose

Veteran Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

On Moderation

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

On Moderation

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member