Aylesbury electrification - how would this happen?

[Zomboid]

It was mentioned that OOC might turn 4tph from Chiltern (HW, Banbury, Oxford, Aylesbury/MKC) - I'd think 2x 2tph better personally - but this would free up a decent amount of paths out of Marylebone

Is there going to be capacity at OOC for that much? I don't know what space there will be for platforms, but I had the impression that it was going to be just the one for the Ruislip line, and how much of the route that way will be doubled?

If you're going to go for 4tph to a variety of destinations then the line really needs to be doubled throughout and 2 or 3 platforms provided at OOC.

 

[A S Leib]

Only option that makes logical sense to me is cutting the Met back to Watford and Uxbridge, and maybe Rickmansworth at an absolute push if you could justify rebuilding it and extending the four tracks from Watford south junction to it (which I think you would struggle with, IMHO), though you would need at least a single track to the stabling there unless you recreated new provision elsewhere, such as reinstating the sidings at Watford Junction, or something at Watford Met.

Chiltern then provides the Amersham service, and Chesham goes back to a shuttle.

I think I've already said this elsewhere in this thread, but that doesn't seem like a desirable outcome given the loss of direct City services and the change from a direct service to walking from Marylebone to Baker Street; even if frequent options are available from Harrow-on-the-Hill, Uxbridge peak services aren't quiet enough for those to provide enough capacity.

TfL's statistics put Chesham to stations north of Moor Park inclusive at 417 passengers per day (counting "less than 10 passengers" as 9); it's 439 for stations between Great Portland Street and Euston inclusive.

My preferred option would be putting Chalfont & Latimer on the Elizabeth line if not keeping it on the Met. That would keep the current connections with everything except mainline services at Euston (some passengers would go to Watford Junction anyway), King's Cross and St. Pancras and the Victoria line. The negatives would be cost and adding in the possibility of delays from the Met (and by extension other sub-surface lines) in addition to those from the Great Western Main Line.

With the current infrastructure, would 4 tph as a Chesham shuttle be sustainably reliable? Admittedly if the plan is to run 6 tph to Amersham, it might be better to run 3 tph to Chesham and make sure connections match each way anyway.

 

[Zomboid]

Putting the Met north of Watford and the line to Aylesbury onto a crossrail type service would be operationally quite good (let's just park the bit where the tunnel gets built, but it could offer a service through to the city and better tube interchanges than Marylebone can), but would a tube train with ideas above it's station be popular with the outer end? I don't believe the Crossrail service was necessarily welcomed with open arms at places like Twyford because of the reduction in interior quality (though the GWR 38whatevers aren't exactly a lesson in comfort themselves).

 

[HSTEd]

Putting the Met north of Watford and the line to Aylesbury onto a crossrail type service would be operationally quite good (let's just park the bit where the tunnel gets built, but it could offer a service through to the city and better tube interchanges than Marylebone can), but would a tube train with ideas above it's station be popular with the outer end? I don't believe the Crossrail service was necessarily welcomed with open arms at places like Twyford because of the reduction in interior quality (though the GWR 38whatevers aren't exactly a lesson in comfort themselves).

I think they might complain a bit in the abstract, but once they understand what they are getting they will not regret it afterwards.

Even from Amersham the passenger split is approximately even-even, about the same as the number of trains provided. I don't think there is any great preference for the existing diesel trains as is, even versus literal S-Stock.

 

[150219]

And don't forget, they only have to get to Neasden. Tons of capacity between there and Harrow on the Hill.

Not with the current signalling there's not.

If there was a significant investment and change of the infrastructure to the point that OHLE and changes to signalling and points maybe, but not as it currently stands.

 

[cle]

Is there going to be capacity at OOC for that much? I don't know what space there will be for platforms, but I had the impression that it was going to be just the one for the Ruislip line, and how much of the route that way will be doubled?

If you're going to go for 4tph to a variety of destinations then the line really needs to be doubled throughout and 2 or 3 platforms provided at OOC.

I don't know about double tracking, but did recall two bays at OOC in the plan - which is more than enough. I think having two 2tph services would be easier for interworking/turns, but perhaps not.

I don't really know that the Amersham route is worth a Crossrail type set-up, it's quiet and very peak heavy. Crossrail works because it has multiple nodes, but also counter-peak demand (Stratford, Romford, Shenfield connections east, Slough/LHR/Reading west) so it does a lot of different journeys. And offers a ton of connections. The Amersham route is a one way street.

There aren't really jobs or bigger towns out on the Met line (Watford itself has some inbound demand but would never compete with Euston services) - - - it's sort of suburbia.

Whereas these investments work where either there is multiple use of capacity (airports, outer centres/counter-commutes/rail hubs) - OR - mass homebuilding like the Lea Valley. And that isn't happening in Metroland!

 

[GraphitProjekt]

Most o

Not with the current signalling there's not.

If there was a significant investment and change of the infrastructure to the point that OHLE and changes to signalling and points maybe, but not as it currently stands.

Electrification quite often comes along with re-signalling and other enhancements. I think the MML is right now the only significant electrification project that doesn't have a resignalling component - and that makes it a bit unusual.

 

[Zomboid]

I don't know about double tracking, but did recall two bays at OOC in the plan - which is more than enough. I think having two 2tph services would be easier for interworking/turns, but perhaps not

2 platforms is probably enough, but you're not getting 4tph each way all the way to Ruislip without doubling a decent chunk of it. There's probably more margin if they didn't go to 4 different destinations as you wouldn't get a delay at Islip causing another delay at Aylesbury because of a stretch of single track or not having enough flexibility at OOC.

 

[cle]

I think 2tph to High Wycombe and 2tph to Oxford would be best, the Oxfords are more semi-fast now anyway - and it doesn't necsssarily need a Marylebone service. The Paddington is too competitive, and will get to OOC quicker!

But Bicester Village and Oxford Parkway will need their Marylebone - so potentially that could be peak only, or a 1tph on top of 2tph semi. The Village/tourists are counter-flow and off peak so we have to factor that in.

 

[Zomboid]

As a user of OXP, I'd probably prefer Marylebone. For each individual it'll depend on the final destination, but in general the faff of getting to the city centre more than offsets the slower journey time from Parkway, plus Baker Street is better connected than Paddington or OOC would be.

Be interesting to see if the Cowley branch traffic for London changes at OXF or if the single seat ride to MYB is more appealing. Will depend on the connection times I'd guess.

 

[The Planner]

2 platforms is probably enough, but you're not getting 4tph each way all the way to Ruislip without doubling a decent chunk of it. There's probably more margin if they didn't go to 4 different destinations as you wouldn't get a delay at Islip causing another delay at Aylesbury because of a stretch of single track or not having enough flexibility at OOC.

You could do 4tph on one platform if you can keep a 5 minute reoccupation and 10 minute turnaround.

 

[Zomboid]

Assuming they're evenly spaced and there's a passing place close by. All seems a bit too PSR to me when we're talking about a megaproject like OOC - a second platform for the Ruislip line must be a pretty marginal cost in the scheme of things.

 

[MarkyT]

Assuming they're evenly spaced and there's a passing place close by. All seems a bit too PSR to me when we're talking about a megaproject like OOC - a second platform for the Ruislip line must be a pretty marginal cost in the scheme of things.

If you're building a platform with access (and all that), you might as well put another track on the other side, even if there's a single lead junction in the throat serving both.

 

[Dstock7080]

With the current infrastructure, would 4 tph as a Chesham shuttle be sustainably reliable? Admittedly if the plan is to run 6 tph to Amersham, it might be better to run 3 tph to Chesham and make sure connections match each way anyway.

Currently 8½min running time each way on the Chesham branch, not including stand time, 3tph at best.

 

[A S Leib]

Currently 8½min running time each way on the Chesham branch, not including stand time, 3tph at best.

Was it ever 6½ minutes each way or is that a case of false memory on my part?