BML2 is back

[ushawk]

There are some people who will not consider mixed mode travel. Others simply won't use a bus but will travel by train. Then there is the issue of through ticketing. Finally, it's not just about Uckfiedl, but improving access for other towns along the line.

That's true, but there are benefits to reopening Lewes - Uckfield apart from diverting Brighton trains.

There was a "link" bus which ran until about 2001 between Uckfield and Lewes, which met the trains to/from London, not sure how well used this was though. It all depends on the flows and is there a flow from Lewes to Edenbridge for example ?

If anything was to be done, i would suggest electrifying it in its current form and then see how it goes from there, would possibly mean quicker journey times to/from London and off-peak trains could possible be attatched/detatched to East Grinstead trains at Oxted, which would free up an extra path each hour in and out of London bridge, would increase capacity, free up some 171's for another TOC/move the 4-car 171's to the Marshlink and less units would be required than it running as its own service.

 

[Clip]

Forgetting the line from Uckfield to Brighton for a second, how about the tunnel from Croydon to Canary Wharf and Stratford? I feel that has some potential. It would certainly relieve the crush on the Jubilee line, DLR and the Overground if various commuter lines could send trains direct to Canary Wharf.

.

Im not sure there is anymore room left at Canary wharf to build anything else if im honest now that Crossrail is going through there. And if they could it would be one hell of an expensive bit of engineering to work around crossrail and the Jubilee line that you would just not build it.

 

[Minstral25]

The major issue here is that you would still require trains to both Victoria and London Bridge (Thameslink), but there is only a limited amount of room on tracks south of Croydon, so all you're doing is diverting capacity away from central London where it's currently needed most of all.

Canary Wharf remains a mainly commuter destination, and thus doesn't offer a good use of off peak capacity. Stratford is starting to be a draw on demand, but probably more for Londoners rather than people travelling from Sussex.

The incredible expense of a tunnel means they wouldn't want to have a large number of spurs - this would be even more expensive and also reduce the number of trains you can force through the further reaches of the new infrastructure, damaging the business case.

Jubilee overcrowding can be much better solved through other projects. Such as Crossrail, which serves London and is thus actually useful to more than a handful of people.

If you build a tunnel it would be for one destination not several with the existing services continuing on the existing lines - this makes Canary Wharf a Good destination or head the other side of London to Old Oak Common where good connections are being built. Either way they would need extensions to another route to capture the trains arriving rather than build termini in London.

Jubilee overcrowding will not be fixed as the key reasons are commuters from East London getting to London Bridge, Waterloo area and Westminster (none of which are on Crossrail) and arriving commuters at London Bridge and Waterloo going to Canary Wharf (again no alternative with Crossrail). Crossrail relieves the Central line only.

What's really needed is fix Windmill Junction so that trains don't cross on the flat which will increase capacity, 8 platform East Croydon and additional lines to Windmill Jnct so that Victoria & London Bridge trains have separate routes north of ECR and lastly a flyover at Stoats Nest again to ensure trains don't cross on the flat.

 

[Rational Plan]

Im not sure there is anymore room left at Canary wharf to build anything else if im honest now that Crossrail is going through there. And if they could it would be one hell of an expensive bit of engineering to work around crossrail and the Jubilee line that you would just not build it.

Canary Wharfs problem is all those Docks and Skyscrapers, plus the underground stations built are huge.

There is only one more dock left for another East West Line. For a North South line a station would have to be built North around Poplar or South near Millharbour, I can't see how it would be built under the estate.

 

[tbtc]

You can't really count Parkway Stations in the same way though. Ebbw Vale etc are lines linking stations serving traditional settlements generating traffic in the traditional way (as would be the Uckfield re-instatement).

Parkway stations on the other hand are designed to bring motorists to the railway from further afield, hence why they're usually in the middle of nowhere. This is a completely different business prospect to a traditional station, or lines serving traditional stations for the local population, and it's not surprising that they take a while to catch on sometimes.

It's a shame Challenge Anneka isn't still on. Frankly she'd have more likelihood of getting anything done than the DfT.

All new stations are built with an expected passenger number in mind (some higher than others, of course).

Some (like Alloa, Ebbw Vale) are constantly mentioned for beating that expectation (which is then used as evidence that the flimsy case for other reopenings makes good business sense because Alloa got twice as many passengers as expected etc).

Some stations are never mentioned (e.g. nobody boasts about the numbers for new stations on the Airdrie - Bathgate line, I can't recall anyone using Lawrencekirk to justify further reopenings).

It's not about "Parkways" versus "town" stations.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Im not sure there is anymore room left at Canary wharf to build anything else if im honest now that Crossrail is going through there. And if they could it would be one hell of an expensive bit of engineering to work around crossrail and the Jubilee line that you would just not build it.

I agree.

If you were starting from scratch then I could see the logic in an Easter London Line (i.e. to the east of the current East London Line), linking Stratford/ Canary Wharf to "out of town" destinations (maybe even linking Stansted and Gatwick?).

But given the muddle of existing routes that we already have, it'd be incredibly expensive to engineer something between the river/ docks and the other routes in the area - the whole thing is in the "fantasy" realm to me.

 

[Stats]

A new station could be built at Wood Wharf, the next development area once the Canary Wharf estate is completely let.

I actually think the idea of a through north-south line through Canary Wharf is not a bad idea in principle though the practicalities of such a line are problematic without significant infrastructure enhancements on the existing network.

 

[yorksrob]

All new stations are built with an expected passenger number in mind (some higher than others, of course).

Some (like Alloa, Ebbw Vale) are constantly mentioned for beating that expectation (which is then used as evidence that the flimsy case for other reopenings makes good business sense because Alloa got twice as many passengers as expected etc).

Some stations are never mentioned (e.g. nobody boasts about the numbers for new stations on the Airdrie - Bathgate line, I can't recall anyone using Lawrencekirk to justify further reopenings).

It's not about "Parkways" versus "town" stations.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

According to Transport Scotland, the three new stations are on target to meet passenger forecasts:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-16545053

Maybe respectable rather than spectacular, but it doesn't sound like being a problem in the long run.

What is also interesting is the boost to traffic on the existing sections of the line, due to the improvement in services and no doubt the increased transport opportunities provided by the link. This is precisely the sort of effect that one would expect on the Wealden Line as a whole, because it is about more than just the link between Uckfield and Lewes.