Crossrail 2

[hwl]

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...

Spot on, that is my understanding too. I think the St Johns bridge may also need bit of work to make it happen (especially the bit where the former link to the country end of P9/10 was.

 

[gtr driver]

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.

I'm a little concerned about more passengers trying to interchange at Balham...the platforms are narrow and there is already bad bunching by the stairs. Also it's already headlight to taillight going in and out of there even off peak so anything that causes a longer dwell time is going to ripple out on to other routes. Now if work was done on the station, and preferably Balham Junction too...golden opportunity to raise the speed over the junction to 30 was missed when they lengthened the slow platforms to 10 cars.

 

[Bald Rick]

...golden opportunity to raise the speed over the junction to 30 was missed when they lengthened the slow platforms to 10 cars.

It was looked at, couldn't be done unfortunately without dropping the speed on the slows. Geometry didn't work.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I'm a little concerned about more passengers trying to interchange at Balham...the platforms are narrow and there is already bad bunching by the stairs. Also it's already headlight to taillight going in and out of there even off peak so anything that causes a longer dwell time is going to ripple out on to other routes. Now if work was done on the station, and preferably Balham Junction too...golden opportunity to raise the speed over the junction to 30 was missed when they lengthened the slow platforms to 10 cars.

Somewhat amusingly, after reading your and Bald Rick's comments, I went on Google maps to see what the area looked like. Google satellite view shows trains in both platforms in Balham and a further train apparently waiting just outside, which rather matches your 'headlight to taillight' comment (although I'm sure it was a coincidence)

 

[swt_passenger]

Isn't the interchange potential at Balham aimed more at Northern Line <> Crossrail 2, rather than Southern <> Crossrail 2? Obviously the former is possible, but is it expected to be as significant as the latter?

 

[jopsuk]

As CR2 relives the Victoria Line, interchange at Balham will be better than interchange at Victoria, probably

 

[gtr driver]

It was looked at, couldn't be done unfortunately without dropping the speed on the slows. Geometry didn't work.

Ah, interesting. Can you elaborate please?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Somewhat amusingly, after reading your and Bald Rick's comments, I went on Google maps to see what the area looked like. Google satellite view shows trains in both platforms in Balham and a further train apparently waiting just outside, which rather matches your 'headlight to taillight' comment (although I'm sure it was a coincidence)

Definitely no coincidence! In fact it's a SPAD trap to be aware of there - you can be creeping up to the red protecting Balham and have to ensure you concentrate on the signal instead of the tail lamps receding towards Wandsworth Common.

 

[Chris125]

For people who'd like a summary of the latest changes, Diamond Geezer's blog is worth a look:

New Southgate: New Southgate will be the end of the northwest branch, and the location of a tunnel portal, and also the site of a large train depot. As a result a particularly lengthy strip of land is going to be swallowed up by Crossrail, including the current alignment of Station Road (which will be used for new platforms).

New Southgate to Seven Sisters: Previously it was assumed that the line would have stations at Alexandra Palace and Turnpike Lane, and this might still happen. But Haringey council would very much prefer the route to miss both of these in favour of the centre of Wood Green, because that's where all the shops are. This consultation will help to decide which route wins out. Both would relieve pressure on the Piccadilly line, but only the Ally Pally option fully interchanges with all local National Rail services. A Turnpike Lane station would swallow the bus station and BHS, while in Wood Green the Vue cinema would have to go. Could go either way.

Seven Sisters: This station'll be a double-ender, with one entrance at the existing Seven Sisters station and the other at South Tottenham (for the Overground). Some residential properties on Birstall Road would have to be demolished, as would the Jehovah's Witnesses' Kingdom Hall.

Broxbourne to Angel Road: This northern branch can expect a Crossrail train every five or six minutes. That's a lot of trains so the line would also need to be widened from two tracks to four, allowing fast services to Harlow and Stansted to speed through the middle. That's a long-long-awaited improvement! Meanwhile all the existing level crossings would need to be removed, and possibly replaced by bridges or underpasses (or in some places not replaced at all).

Angel Road to Tottenham Hale: This section is already scheduled to be doubled up from two tracks to four, in readiness for so-called STAR services running between Angel Road and Stratford. Consultation documents confirm that these services are scheduled to begin in 2017/18.

Tottenham Hale: This station is destined to become a major interchange, with a train every couple of minutes above ground and the Victoria line below. Crossrail trains will descend into tunnel to the south of the station, requiring the acquisition of a long strip of land alongside the existing railway all the way down to Markfield Park.

Tottenham Hale/Seven Sisters to Dalston: In the previous consultation, the idea was floated of adding intermediate stations at Stoke Newington and/or Clapton. Neither of these will happen, for reasons of cost, as the two Crossrail branches join together and whizz down to Dalston without stopping. For a proposed railway which started out in the 1970s as the 'Chelsea/Hackney line', Hackney isn't going to do very well out of Crossrail 2 fifty years later.

Dalston: Crossrail platforms are two football pitches long, so the stations are very long too. This one'll have one exit at Dalston Kingsland station and the other at Dalston Junction, creating a new station simply called Dalston. Planned worksites will require the demolition of shops along two 50m sections of Kingsland Road.

Angel: Crossrail 2 will bring a new railway line to busy Upper Street with a direct connection to the West End. Demolition of the Royal Bank of Scotland (beside the existing Angel station) is required, while Iceland (and other properties on White Lion Street) will bite the bullet for construction of a ventilation shaft.

Euston St Pancras: This key portmanteau station will serve HS1 and HS2, with one entrance near the taxi rank round the back of St Pancras, and the other in place of the Travelodge opposite Euston. An "underground passenger link" will be created to link Crossrail 2 to Euston station (but there's no news of any similar link from Euston to St Pancras direct, because that's an HS2 issue).

Tottenham Court Road: If you thought ten years of construction works here for Crossrail 1 were bad enough, expect another ten for Crossrail 2. The current TCR station isn't sufficiently future-proof, it seems, plus the two lines will actually cross beneath Soho Square (where a worksite will remain, for ground stabilisation reasons). One new station entrance will be built facing Oxford Street along the eastern side of Rathbone Place, while the other will be on Shaftesbury Avenue and requires the demolition of the Curzon cinema. You've not heard the last of this one.

Victoria: After swerving beneath Pall Mall and St James's Park, Crossrail 2's next stop is a game-changing interchange at Victoria, reducing congestion on several existing lines. The price is 5-8 years of construction work, including the removal of everything opposite the existing mainline station on Buckingham Palace Road, and yet another redevelopment of Terminus Place. A shaft is proposed on the site of Victoria Coach Station, regarding which "proposals about the future of the Victoria Coach Station are being considered" and will be "subject to further consultation by TfL".

King's Road Chelsea: The previous consultation raised the possibility of an alternative station at 'Chelsea West', nearer to new residential development, but this idea's now dead in the water. Plans to devour Dovehouse Gardens and Chelsea fire station have also been amended, with the proposed station entrance now facing onto Sydney Street opposite Heal's. Further land opposite M&S would also be required, a relatively small landgrab compared to most other stations, but expect the population of the King's Road to be vocally unhappy all the same.

Clapham Junction: One of the busiest stations in the country will be gaining a direct link to the West End and beyond, so expect a lot of southern commuters to alight here for interchange into central London. Much of the construction work will take place on existing sidings, but the bus station (and church) to the north on Grant Road are scheduled to disappear.

Tooting/Balham: Now the intriguing detour. Tooting was always the intended destination in south Wandsworth, but geological surveys have found awkward ground conditions, prompting a major rethink. Relocating the station to Balham would apparently be "faster, easier, less disruptive and cheaper", so I suspect we can assume the switch is a dead cert, and that Balham's Waitrose is consequently doomed. Swift interchanges to the Northern line are guaranteed either way.

Wimbledon: As the point where Crossrail 2 trains emerge from deep tunnel and then split in two directions along existing suburban lines, the centre of Wimbledon totally gets it. There'll be worksites across either end of the existing platforms, and on the site of Centre Court Shopping Centre, and along the other side of Wimbledon Bridge. This is majorly significant disruptive stuff, all for the long-term good, but a lot of properties look like becoming 'unavailable'. The Odeon will be safe, but as for anything north of that, check the map. As a bonus, however, expect the tram terminus to be raised to street level and integrated into the town centre... and the big prize is of course 30 Crossrail trains an hour.

Wimbledon to New Malden/Motspur Park: Here's the big southwestern split, with some additional tracks required on the way to New Malden. More frequent trains will also require "a small number" of existing level crossings to be closed, and Network Rail "will work closely with local communities and the local authority to find an appropriate resolution for each". The big payback here is that diverting suburban trains into a brand new tunnel creates considerable additional capacity on the existing mainline into Waterloo, where services can (eventually) be enhanced.

Motspur Park to Epsom: This branch would retain some existing Waterloo services as well as four Crossrail trains an hour.

Motspur Park to Chessington South: This branch would become Crossrail only, with four trains an hour (rather than the existing two).

New Malden to Hampton Court: This branch would become Crossrail only, with four trains an hour (rather than the existing two).

New Malden to Shepperton: This branch would retain some existing Waterloo services as well as four Crossrail trains an hour. The number of trains from Kingston into central London would double. Previous plans to send Crossrail trains to Twickenham have been withdrawn, leaving these services unchanged.

Chris

 

[gtr driver]

As CR2 relives the Victoria Line, interchange at Balham will be better than interchange at Victoria, probably

Hopefully they know what they're doing in predicting the interchange flows. There could be some new interchange there for passengers travelling from, say, Surbiton to Streatham, or, West Norwood to Wimbledon, perhaps.

 

[Feathers44]

Holy smokes! Wimbledon town centre (or at least all of the worthwhile bits) basically get demolished. Ironically, that includes all the bits they protected when building the shopping centre in the first place by the looks of it.

That could provoke a bit of local discussion I think.

 

[swt_passenger]

Holy smokes! Wimbledon town centre (or at least all of the worthwhile bits) basically get demolished. Ironically, that includes all the bits they protected when building the shopping centre in the first place by the looks of it.

That could provoke a bit of local discussion I think.

As they are commercial properties I would suspect the freeholders will see it as an opportunity to improve the quality of their offering in the medium term. I suppose where people shop in the meantime is the real question, and whether they'll come back!

The block across the road from the station doesn't seem to have much architectural merit anyway. If the planners get it right they could make major improvements to the whole area.

 

[Feathers44]

As they are commercial properties I would suspect the freeholders will see it as an opportunity to improve the quality of their offering in the medium term. I suppose where people shop in the meantime is the real question, and whether they'll come back!

The block across the road from the station doesn't seem to have much architectural merit anyway. If the planners get it right they could make major improvements to the whole area.

Mostly true but the site of the new bridge and associated work-site encompasses the church that was moved in the 80s when the shopping centre was built and a number of houses.

The issue with the commercial stuff is that it was only the creation of that shopping centre that made Wimbledon worth shopping in in the first place. Before that, all we locals went to Kingston and Croydon for everything but the basics.

The Fridge-on-the-Bridge doesn't have a lot going for it architecturally, but the shops beneath (W H Smith, Waterstones, Next etc) would be a big loss when taken in conjunction with the content of Centre Court.

Assuming it all goes, of course. I'm slightly confused whether this is all for the chop of whether the 10m underground reference means they'll be tunnelling beneath it all.

 

[AM9]

Somewhat amusingly, after reading your and Bald Rick's comments, I went on Google maps to see what the area looked like. Google satellite view shows trains in both platforms in Balham and a further train apparently waiting just outside, which rather matches your 'headlight to taillight' comment (although I'm sure it was a coincidence)

Actually I think that it is a different type of coincidence. If you look closely, the train proceeding eastwards is comprised of 2 x 3-car 377s and a 2 1/2 car one with a fuzzy end. Also the trailing end of it appears to be derailed. The station with the two 10-car 377s at its platforms is in sunshine whereas the track east of Bedford Hill is overcast. I think that it's a typical case of two separate aerial shots, 'pasted' to complete the map.

 

[hwl]

Mostly true but the site of the new bridge and associated work-site encompasses the church that was moved in the 80s when the shopping centre was built and a number of houses.

The issue with the commercial stuff is that it was only the creation of that shopping centre that made Wimbledon worth shopping in in the first place. Before that, all we locals went to Kingston and Croydon for everything but the basics.

The Fridge-on-the-Bridge doesn't have a lot going for it architecturally, but the shops beneath (W H Smith, Waterstones, Next etc) would be a big loss when taken in conjunction with the content of Centre Court.

Assuming it all goes, of course. I'm slightly confused whether this is all for the chop of whether the 10m underground reference means they'll be tunnelling beneath it all.

Chop.

The big change will be the 2nd road bridge (where the "new" church currently is) which will enable the demolition and rebuild of the existing one. This should improve traffic lots after it is all done.

 

[Feathers44]

Chop.

The big change will be the 2nd road bridge (where the "new" church currently is) which will enable the demolition and rebuild of the existing one. This should improve traffic lots after it is all done.

Thanks.

I like the fact that they still seem to be keeping the old town hall (that should have been demolished when the shops were built in my view). I can't imagine what they want if for.

Contrary to my previous post, the outline could be interpreted as keeping the existing preserved frontages along Queens Road. Again, I hope not.

 

[Bald Rick]

Ah, interesting. Can you elaborate please?

Without going into the laws of physics... essentially because of the curve round towards Streatham Commin, and the need to keep cant (and negative can't) through the S&C to acceptable limits for ride quality and maintenance. In very simple terms, the maximum speed of the 2 routes added together needs to be 60mph. So you could have 30 to the branch, but the slows to Streatham Cm would need to drop to 30. Or 40/20 the other way. The current layout is that which works best for the services that use it.

 

[mr_jrt]

And all of these to be straight, level and 250m long?

Ideally, yes. The tunnels should be a lot easier to align, and the surface could possibly lose a platform or two to straighten them up...

 

[Bald Rick]

Before Crossrail 2 creates a subsurface obstacle...how about a double decker Clapham Junction?

That's £3 billion; what's the benefit?

 

[mr_jrt]

That's £3 billion; what's the benefit?

You can stop absolutely everything at Clapham Junction whilst giving them reasonable dwell times, vastly improving capacity and connectivity.

 

[Bald Rick]

You can stop absolutely everything at Clapham Junction whilst giving them reasonable dwell times, vastly improving capacity and connectivity.

Forgive me if I'm a bit slow, but don't approx 80% of services already stop at Claphan Jn? In a post Crossrail 2 world this would be nearer 10%. And of the 20% / 10% that don't, how many would SWT stop if they could, given that it would increase journey time to Waterloo by 3 mins for very high value longer distance services?

And if this scheme was done on its own, how would it increase capacity given that the fast lines are full in the peak?

And what if there are much cheaper methods of increasing capacity and/or enabling more trains to stop?

 

[MotorcycleAlan]

Completion 2025/2030 maybe 3030. We have talked and talked about HS2 for 10 years now and any work started? Perhaps there are many years of talking ahead on this too. Pie in the sky perhaps?

 

[glbotu]

Completion 2025/2030 maybe 3030. We have talked and talked about HS2 for 10 years now and any work started? Perhaps there are many years of talking ahead on this too. Pie in the sky perhaps?

No, the level of detail in the planning suggests this is getting good to go, construction due to start 2020 I think. It's technically been in discussion since around 1956.........

 

[telstarbox]

Apart from in Chelsea this will be much less controversial than HS2.

 

[infobleep]

Forgive me if I'm a bit slow, but don't approx 80% of services already stop at Claphan Jn? In a post Crossrail 2 world this would be nearer 10%. And of the 20% / 10% that don't, how many would SWT stop if they could, given that it would increase journey time to Waterloo by 3 mins for very high value longer distance services?

And if this scheme was done on its own, how would it increase capacity given that the fast lines are full in the peak?

And what if there are much cheaper methods of increasing capacity and/or enabling more trains to stop?

They delay services from Guildford to Waterloo during the leaf fall period. I understand why its done but it's an increase in service time all the same. So why would they mind about an extra 3 minutes into Waterloo for fast services?

 

[hwl]

They delay services from Guildford to Waterloo during the leaf fall period. I understand why its done but it's an increase in service time all the same. So why would they mind about an extra 3 minutes into Waterloo for fast services?

Stopping SWML Fasts at Clapham Jn would also mean less than 20minutes between any stops so more standing would be permitted in DfT crowding calculations, potentially a massive benefit for the TOC when it happens.

 

[Bald Rick]

They delay services from Guildford to Waterloo during the leaf fall period. I understand why its done but it's an increase in service time all the same. So why would they mind about an extra 3 minutes into Waterloo for fast services?

Every little counts!

 

[infobleep]

Every little counts!

If every little counts, why don't they remove Clapham Junction completely from fast services all day and every day?I believe there was a time when fast services didn't call at Clapham Junction at all and even some slow services too. If I've understood my 1949 Southern Region timetable correctly.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Forgive me if I'm a bit slow, but don't approx 80% of services already stop at Claphan Jn? In a post Crossrail 2 world this would be nearer 10%. And of the 20% / 10% that don't, how many would SWT stop if they could, given that it would increase journey time to Waterloo by 3 mins for very high value longer distance services?

And if this scheme was done on its own, how would it increase capacity given that the fast lines are full in the peak?

And what if there are much cheaper methods of increasing capacity and/or enabling more trains to stop?

Of cheaper methods exist then I'd like to actually see them be implemented. Let's not spend another 10 years talking about the reasons why fast gating cannot stop at Clapham Junction during the evening peak and make it possible.

I mean the reason they cited for Southern not being able to run more trains was due to them having to miss out Clapham Junction completely and this wasn't considered a good option.

Yet it's considered a good option on the South West Trains mainline.

 

[swt_passenger]

I mean the reason they cited for Southern not being able to run more trains was due to them having to miss out Clapham Junction completely and this wasn't considered a good option.

Yet it's considered a good option on the South West Trains mainline.

You'd have to remove 6 or 7 tph from the SWT peak timetable to get down to the lower number of fast trains operated by SN and GX combined, and then you'd be able to add some stops.

Hasn't this been established in previous threads? We do seem to go round in circles on this subject.

The thing is, nothing about the Crossrail 2 proposals (which we are supposedly discussing) is designed to allow more fast line stopping capacity at Clapham Jn. What they've said is that a number of current outer suburban trains that presently run on the fast lines inbound from Surbiton will be transferred to the slow lines, and the unwritten implication is that they'll all be in the queue of slow trains to Waterloo, and will be able to stop in their normal course at most stations especially for interchange at Wimbledon, Clapham Jn and Vauxhall.

But the 6 or 7 paths in question will then be back filled with additional longer distance trains, so we'll still have the 24 tph through P8 that we have now. It seems to me that when the headlines refer to Crossrail 2 allowing 'more services to call at Clapham Jn' then that includes the 30 tph through the underground platforms with their significant capacity in addition to the existing P10/11 capacity, but that's all.

There are separate proposals for later control periods to do something about Clapham Jn fast line platforming, but they are not imminent.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

No, the level of detail in the planning suggests this is getting good to go, construction due to start 2020 I think. It's technically been in discussion since around 1956.........

Crossrail 2 seems to have been mentioned as one of the priority schemes in today's announcement by Osborne of the new Infrastructure Planning Commission, under Adonis. I see John Armitt formerly of NR is one of the members.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Apart from in Chelsea this will be much less controversial than HS2.

Oh dear, looking at some of the comments below that article this opposition group looks to be a few well off celebrities deciding for the area that it doesn't need or want a fast and reliable link to the centre of London. No matter that some people who live in Chelsea and work in the city might want better transport links, WE don't want it because of the disruption of construction and the loss of a 'Village feel' of an area that is in suburbs of a major global city. :roll:

 

[infobleep]

You'd have to remove 6 or 7 tph from the SWT peak timetable to get down to the lower number of fast trains operated by SN and GX combined, and then you'd be able to add some stops.

Hasn't this been established in previous threads? We do seem to go round in circles on this subject.

The thing is, nothing about the Crossrail 2 proposals (which we are supposedly discussing) is designed to allow more fast line stopping capacity at Clapham Jn. What they've said is that a number of current outer suburban trains that presently run on the fast lines inbound from Surbiton will be transferred to the slow lines, and the unwritten implication is that they'll all be in the queue of slow trains to Waterloo, and will be able to stop in their normal course at most stations especially for interchange at Wimbledon, Clapham Jn and Vauxhall.

But the 6 or 7 paths in question will then be back filled with additional longer distance trains, so we'll still have the 24 tph through P8 that we have now. It seems to me that when the headlines refer to Crossrail 2 allowing 'more services to call at Clapham Jn' then that includes the 30 tph through the underground platforms with their significant capacity in addition to the existing P10/11 capacity, but that's all.

There are separate proposals for later control periods to do something about Clapham Jn fast line platforming, but they are not imminent.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---



Crossrail 2 seems to have been mentioned as one of the priority schemes in today's announcement by Osborne of the new Infrastructure Planning Commission, under Adonis. I see John Armitt formerly of NR is one of the members.

Yes you would have to remove services but then you'd have to miss out Clapham Junction for Southern services to stop there and they didn't want to do that.

If South West Trains fast services stopped at Clapham Junction, with less trains running, would the conclusion be reached, we can't run more services because that would mean not stopping at Clapham Junction. As that was the conclusion reached for Southern services.

Perhaps if Southern services were already running as many services as South West Trains does, they would say no we can't stop trains at Clapham Junction as it would mean running less services. In other words they don't want to change the status quo at this point in time, which ever way it is.

During the evening peak there are some fast services from London that use the slow trains south of Surbiton, would this be able to then fill the fast gaps?

In the evening the slow trains run 4 minutes apart from Surbiton to Woking but in the morning they are more spread out.

However this is getting away from Crossrail 2. I thought Crossrail 2 would enable fast trains to stop at Clapham Junction but I was wrong. It's only about allow more fast trains not to stop at Clapham Junction.

Of course I do wonder if it bothers South West Trains that people can't get out at Clapham Junction as they might be more likely to buy a season ticket to Waterloo or travel card to include zone 1. Clapham Junction is in zone 2 so cheaper.

However I like South West Trains so can't believe they would think like that.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
If people can't join Crossrail 2 from a fast service then I imagine it will only be of benefit to London based commuters or anyone other than South West Trains customers currently travelling on fast services into Waterloo, as whose going to want to join a slow train at Woking and then another slow train at Surbiton or Wimbledon. Might as well all pile into Waterloo and fill up the underground services as already happens.

Where as at Reading there is a connection to Crossrail and also a connection to it at Paddington.

If you could get a fast train to Wimbledon or even better, Clapham Junction, then commuters might use it.