Crossrail central section

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Zoe

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2008
Messages
5,905
Never seriously in the 80 years Crossrail has been planned.
First definite reference to Crossrail seems to be 1974 although the 1940s London Plan discussed different options. I haven't seen any reference to a 1930s scheme though.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
24,771
The current incarnation was specified to relieve the overcrowding on the eastern Central Line, particular the stations near Liverpool St.

People often comment about how it doesn't include St Pancras, (especially since the Eurostar transfer), but that would have been relieving the Met & Circle - nothing whatsoever to do with the current Crossrail's aims and objectives.

It might as well be asked why the M1 motorway doesn't go to Bristol...
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
17,243
The current incarnation was specified to relieve the overcrowding on the eastern Central Line, particular the stations near Liverpool St.

People often comment about how it doesn't include St Pancras, (especially since the Eurostar transfer), but that would have been relieving the Met & Circle - nothing whatsoever to do with the current Crossrail's aims and objectives.

It might as well be asked why the M1 motorway doesn't go to Bristol...

Not strictly true, as it is intended to take Paddington > City traffic off the Circle / H&C.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
24,771
Fair point.

I suppose it would be better to say it doesn't actually have to be routed via St Pancras to have knock on benefits for the capacity there?
 

transmanche

Established Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
6,017
I suppose it would be better to say it doesn't actually have to be routed via St Pancras to have knock on benefits for the capacity there?
Indeed. I imagine that in future many passengers who currently arrive at Liverpool Street and use the Circle/H&C/Met to reach Kings Cross or St Pancras, will use Crossrail instead and change to Thameslink at Farringdon. Thus reducing overcrowding on the Circle/H&C/Met.
 

SwindonPkwy

Member
Joined
2 Aug 2011
Messages
273
Location
Swindon.
swt_passenger said:
I suppose it would be better to say it doesn't actually have to be routed via St Pancras to have knock on benefits for the capacity there?

Yes, good point. I wasn't sure how many iterations of the central section had existed over the years and how Thameslink and HS1 may have influenced them.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
16,577
Location
Yorkshire, Yorkshire, Yorkshire
Indeed. I imagine that in future many passengers who currently arrive at Liverpool Street and use the Circle/H&C/Met to reach Kings Cross or St Pancras, will use Crossrail instead and change to Thameslink at Farringdon. Thus reducing overcrowding on the Circle/H&C/Met.

All depends on where they are coming from.

If you are coming from Stratford/ Docklands or other Crossrail places then thats a possibility. But if you were coming from (say) Ipswich to (say) Derby, would you want to change at Liverpool Street, Farringdon and St Pancras?
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,568
no, but that's probably a smaller flow than GE-Metro to MML/GN Suburban. And you'll still have the Circle for your Ipswich-Derby passenger.
 

transmanche

Established Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
6,017
no, but that's probably a smaller flow than GE-Metro to MML/GN Suburban. And you'll still have the Circle for your Ipswich-Derby passenger.
That's exactly what I was hinting at. Those who will be on Crossrail already can change to Thameslink at Farringdon - thus avoiding the tube altogether.
 

Bedpan

Established Member
Joined
4 Feb 2010
Messages
1,248
Location
Harpenden
I'd have thought that an extra change at Farringdon would in many cases be preferable to arriving at Kings Cross/St Pancras by way of the Circle Line and then having that long walk through St Pancras - whether arriving at Farringdon via Inderground or Crossrail, depending of course on how convenient the Crossrail/Thameslink interchange is goint to be.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
24,771
I'd have thought that an extra change at Farringdon would in many cases be preferable to arriving at Kings Cross/St Pancras by way of the Circle Line and then having that long walk through St Pancras - whether arriving at Farringdon via Inderground or Crossrail, depending of course on how convenient the Crossrail/Thameslink interchange is goint to be.

Crossrail to northbound Thameslink at Farringdon seems OK - the Thameslink platform (new southern extension just opened) will be a continuous area with the intermediate level of the escalators up from the Crossrail lower level. If you weren't already aware, the west side wall of the recently opened Thameslink ticket hall and the level below is temporary, it will be wide open once Crossrail is in use.

Southbound from Thameslink to Crossrail seems the poorer interchange, you appear to have to go up before going down again, unless using the lifts.

Drawing here:
http://www.crossrail.co.uk/assets/library/image/w/large/west_ticket_hall_with_changes_edited-1.jpg
 

Waddon

Member
Joined
15 Sep 2009
Messages
469
All the above threads discuss using Crossrail as a convenient way to get from one London rail terminal to another, but surely the primary purpose of Crossrail (despite it's name) is not for people crossing in and out of London en route to somewhere else, but for people with final destinations or communting journeys within central London? It will have advantages for journeys via London but essentially it has never been designed with this as a primary purpose
 

DXMachina

Member
Joined
24 Oct 2011
Messages
652
it seems possible to me that mainline service patterns could change to facilitate through travel via Crossrail, in order to reduce crowds at terminal stations.

If we assume that in future some WCML suburbans could be routed underground to take pressure off Euston it'd make sense for express services to London to drop-off at Harrow & Wealdstone, likewise on other lines interchanges just outside central london could put cross-london travellers straight into crossrail and relieve circle/met line congestion

That said - as a WCML user myself I wouldn't really want to lose our 100mph Desiros in exchange for 90mph Crossrail stock.. I still don't get why the Crossrail stock is being specced for a lower top speed than existing units
 
Last edited:

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
16,577
Location
Yorkshire, Yorkshire, Yorkshire
as a WCML user myself I wouldn't really want to lose our 100mph Desiros in exchange for 90mph Crossrail stock.. I still don't get why the Crossrail stock is being specced for a lower top speed than existing units

If we accept that the Crossrail stock is being designed to spend all of its life on Crossrail (which, at the moment, is the plan) then there's not a lot of scope on the frequently stopping route (with fairly short distances between stations) for anything like 100mph.

People talk of Crossrail running to places like Oxford, but these are going to be toiletless trains designed to cope with large numbers of people standing - you wouldn't want to be on one for an hour at a time (but you would appreciate the design on a short journey).
 

DXMachina

Member
Joined
24 Oct 2011
Messages
652
Accepted, but all rumour suggests they will run to Reading which is a good way out, and Network Rail's RUS suggests they could also run to MK, which is even further.

If correct both runs give timing benefits for 100mph stock over 90...
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
24,771
I'm sticking with the view that Crossrail probably won't go beyond Maidenhead on the GW.

The Tfl response to the London and SE RUS that I looked at a couple of days ago seems at first glance to be suggesting that Reading would be a good idea, but when you read a little way further on, it seems to back track to preferring other options such as an EMU shuttle between Reading and Paddington. They explicitly raise the point that the rolling stock design would be 'less suitable for journeys of that length'.

Section 2 of this:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downlo...ndon-south-east-rus-consultation-response.pdf

The finalised London & SE RUS can also be read both ways, as although it does recommend Crossrail to Reading to pick up intermdiate flows - it then says it won't actually solve the Rdg - Pad capacity gap, because they don't expect passengers would use it for the through journey.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
16,577
Location
Yorkshire, Yorkshire, Yorkshire
no, but that's probably a smaller flow than GE-Metro to MML/GN Suburban. And you'll still have the Circle for your Ipswich-Derby passenger.

That's exactly what I was hinting at. Those who will be on Crossrail already can change to Thameslink at Farringdon - thus avoiding the tube altogether.

Ah, okay, yes, it'd be better for those already on Crossrail to do this. I thought you were on about longer distance travellers.

Accepted, but all rumour suggests they will run to Reading which is a good way out, and Network Rail's RUS suggests they could also run to MK, which is even further.

If correct both runs give timing benefits for 100mph stock over 90...

If they run beyond Maidenhead then they'd still be stopping at every station from there to Reading (etc).

If you can take a GWML service from London to Reading in under half an hour, but a Crossrail stopper taking a good hour, you'd find the majority of people would be prepared to change at Paddington.
 

Minstral25

Established Member
Joined
10 Sep 2009
Messages
1,335
Location
Surrey
Initially I thought Reading a sensible option but in reality it is not. Crossrail is a metro service similar to the District and Metropolitan lines of the Underground and not intended for long distance travelling and the surprise is that it is going to Maidenhead not finishing at Slough.

I suspect after Crossrail there will be no services from Paddington to the slow lines except for the Greenford Branch and those on the fast lines that stop before Reading,then the first stop will be Slough (probably crossing to the slow lines just before the station) before calling all stations to Reading.

The regular nature of the Crossrail Trains will mean that there will be no need to GW locals to call before then. It is also a likely reason why some Crossrail trains will terminate at West Drayton.

Interesting anomaly on the Crossrail web site for timetabling. It says there will be 24 trains per hour at Paddington with 14 terminating and 10 continuing West but that there will be 10tph to Heathrow, 4tph to Maidenhead and 2tph to West Drayton which is 16 tph???

I think they are assuming the 4tph HEx is being subsumed into Crossrail???
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
24,771
Interesting anomaly on the Crossrail web site for timetabling. It says there will be 24 trains per hour at Paddington with 14 terminating and 10 continuing West but that there will be 10tph to Heathrow, 4tph to Maidenhead and 2tph to West Drayton which is 16 tph???

I think they are assuming the 4tph HEx is being subsumed into Crossrail???

I think it's just a typo and the 10 should read 4. As you say the numbers don't work out otherwise. I don't think it's a clue to eventual changes, unless (or until) the 14 terminating was to show a corresponding reduction to 8 tph.

I've sent them a query via their website, they are usually quick to answer.
 

transmanche

Established Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
6,017
I suspect after Crossrail there will be no services from Paddington to the slow lines except for the Greenford Branch
IIRC, the Greenford branch will lose its through service to Paddington and become a simple West Ealing-Greenford shuttle. This is to eliminate conflicting junction movements.
and those on the fast lines that stop before Reading,then the first stop will be Slough (probably crossing to the slow lines just before the station) before calling all stations to Reading.
I agree, although there will probably be an Old Oak Common station at some point and they might also call there too.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
16,577
Location
Yorkshire, Yorkshire, Yorkshire
Initially I thought Reading a sensible option but in reality it is not. Crossrail is a metro service similar to the District and Metropolitan lines of the Underground and not intended for long distance travelling and the surprise is that it is going to Maidenhead not finishing at Slough

I thought the same. Reading appeared to be a logical place for Crossrail to run to.

But that was when I thought it was going to be a horizontal Thameslink, rather than a pimped-up Central Line.

If we are getting the trains that are suggested then Maidenhead makes much more sense.

The only question is what to do about the Reading - Twyford - Maidenhead service (slow down some longer distance services by stopping there?)
 

Rational Plan

Member
Joined
3 Aug 2011
Messages
235
But the RUS suggests a mix of services eventually. 10 of which would go to Heathrow and then Westwards through a new tunnel to rejoin the GWML or to Staines. There is mention of skip stop services as well to maintain journey times. In effect Crossrail will become a Thames Valley Metro linking all the big destination points between Ealing and Reading.

As it nears London the proportion of passengers to central London will soar.

Also, to bare in mind is those passengers who can get to their final destination from a central London Crossrail station, a slightly longer journey time from the start point to Paddington point can be traded off with the gain from not spending 10 to 15 minutes interchanging at Paddington and from much more frequent trains from their local station, thereby meaning a shorter average wait time. Plus people will also trade off a slightly journey for a one seat ride as not only does it take less time it is also less stressful as you don't have to worry about missing connections.

For people as far out as Reading then an interchange penalty is worth the time saved.

If there is a link for West coast services. It's most likely most of them will go only as Far as Tring with maybe some peak services beyond. As these will be diversion of existing services, where commuters can't access Intercity services there won't be the same trouble as on the Reading services.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
16,577
Location
Yorkshire, Yorkshire, Yorkshire
At the moment the slow train from Paddington to Reading takes 63 minutes (despite not stopping at every station), the non-stop HSTs take 24 minutes.

If Crossrail is going to be a toiletless train serving every station then even if I were on a westbound Crossrail service from Liverpool Street I'd rather change at Paddington (bearing in mind that there'll be a high speed Reading service every eight minutes or so, so not long to wait at Paddington).
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
8,548
Location
Somewhere, not in London
If it is the case that Crossrail will only mainly serve West Drayton and some services to Maidenhead, this re-enforces the WCML feed proposal, since the services out as far as Maidenhead will only take up what, 12tph paths max IIRC from the Heathrow Connect, West Drayton and Maidenhead services. 16tph in the peaks if I'm thinking right.

If this is the case then one can see a significant level of sense in providing 8tph out onto the WCML slows, taking over the Tring terminators and possibly adding more services to terminate at Watford Junction, not nessesarrally from the DC Lines, but possibly have 4tph up to Watford Junction calling at:
Old Oak Interchange, Willesden Junction, Wembley Central, Harrow & Wealdstone, Bushey and Watford Junction (Terminating here). Forming the 'slow' services.
Then an additional 4tph, flighted directly in front of the 'slow' services calling...
Old Oak Interchange, Willesden Junction, Watford Junction, All Stations to Tring, 2tph Extending all Stations to Milton Keynes Central.
Then the current LM Services to Birmingham, Northampton and the TV Stoppers will run limited stop between Milton Keynes Central and Euston, calling only at Milton Keynes Central, Bletchley, Watford Junction and Euston. With Project 110 it may be entirely possible to route most or all of these services on the fast lines, freeing up the space needed for the additional services on the slow lines.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
16,577
Location
Yorkshire, Yorkshire, Yorkshire
Would you really want to travel all they way to Milton Keynes on a toiletless train designed for high capacity standing (so fewer seats per coach than a normal EMU)?
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
8,548
Location
Somewhere, not in London
No, but I'm not too fermilliar with the current stopping patterns between Tring and Milton Keynes Central, or how many LM services run over this section of route.

I would personally have Tring as the outer limit for any Crossrail services, but it does also seem that Watford Junction with all it's potential terminating capacity and space should be the logical end point for any crossrail services. But it would leave us with capacity problems in finding space for the Tring stoppers, hence extending them to Tring. (Fast between Willisden and Watford Junction).

Just looking into it slightly, it appears to be 1tph between Tring and MKC calling at all stations, so one if this where retained and ran into Euston then it would satify that, but one is attempting to increase service provisions for all stations on route.

So would this TT for example work better?

2tph MKC - Euston Calling: local stations between MKC and Tring then some stations to Watford Junction, express to Euston (Provided by LM)
2tph Tring - Crossrail Calling: all stations Tring - Watford Junction, Fast to Willesden, Old Oak Int, Crossrail
4tph Watford Junction - Crossrail Calling: Watford Junction, Bushey, Harrow, Wembley C, Willsden, Old Oak Int, Crossrail

There would then be an additional 2 or 4tph paths for Fast LM services into Euston, the services from MKC could be being extended from Northampton or Birmingham New Street, "Fast" LM Services would be an additional 2tph from MKC calling at: MKC, Tring, Watford Junction, Euston. Formed of Class 350 units.

So between these and London, there would be:

Milton Keynes: 4tph Euston
Tring: 4tph Euston, 2tph Crossrail
Watford Junction: 4tph Euston, 6tph Crossrail

Or possibly just keep it simple and terminate all Crossrail services at Watford Junction and stipulate that all LM services run Fast between Euston and Watford Junction, but it wouldn't improve things for those between Watford Junction and Milton Keynes.

However, with a little bit of re-build work at Watford Junction it could be a rather good terminating point for Crossrail.

That being:

Steal some car park, and have...

Platforms 6, 7 and 8 dedicated to the fast lines, with 7 being provided as a central reversing siding kind of road, or an overtaking road for non stop services on the fast lines, IIRC Southern services use the fast lines, if not, ignore that requirement and just have 6 and 7, adjust the following accordingly.

If providing the Fast Island:
Steal the car park and forget the current Platform 11 for a moment, Platforms 9 and 10 would become a single island platform and a new 11 and 12 built as another island platform, 9 and 10 for Northbound, 11 and 12 for Southbound, 11 becomes 13, or gets facility to join into the mainline and passing loops put in to move up to 2tph.

If not:
Platform 10 gets extended through the car park, and services for Crossrail will terminate on Platform 9, reversing in here, with all Northbound traffic using Platform 8. If a platform 11 is added and 11 becomes 12 for fast Southbound traffic it would provide 2 platforms for Crossrail to terminate between the slow running lines that would be allocated to platforms 8 and 11. 8 for Northbound and 11 for Southbound.
 
Last edited:

DXMachina

Member
Joined
24 Oct 2011
Messages
652
I would personally have Tring as the outer limit for any Crossrail services, but it does also seem that Watford Junction with all it's potential terminating capacity and space should be the logical end point for any crossrail services. But it would leave us with capacity problems in finding space for the Tring stoppers, hence extending them to Tring. (Fast between Willisden and Watford Junction).

Crossrail to Watford Jn has an additional side benefit in that Metropolitan line commuters from north of Harrow on the Hill would have a second viable route to london via the Croxley Rail Link to Watford Jn then Crossrail to the centre

This adds operational flexibility AND takes passengers away from the over-capacity Baker St station
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top