Crossrail central section

[Minstral25]

I can't see Crossrail extending to either Reading or Milton Keynes.

Reading because their will be regular fast EMU's from Reading calling at Twyford, Maidenhead, Slough and Paddington by the time Crossrail is in place. Crossrail will pick up at Taplow and Burnham and then be responsible for all local services from Slough/Heathrow to Paddington. The Greenford Branch which won't be able to take Crossrail trains due to short platforms will be a big question mark.

Milton Keynes because it is too far away. Crossrail trains will take about 40 to 50 minutes from Milton Keynes to Watford Junction which on a no toilet high capacity train is plain silly. Taking over local services from Willesden to Watford Junction is possible but the Bakerloo line is earmarked for this as it already has surplus capacity right through London.

Of the 14tph terminators I can see 4 going to Heathrow to replace HEx which Crossrail really makes redundant (23 minutes from Paddington to Heathrow on Crossrail and 15 by HEx - 8 extra minutes and probably avoid change at Paddington as most passengers will pick up at a connecting point in central London).

The others I can't really see an obvious service to pick up that won't be covered elsewhere unless they take over the Amersham/Aylesbury branch of Chiltern (unlikely - distances) or the Ruislip branch of the Central Line

 

[swt_passenger]

...The Greenford Branch which won't be able to take Crossrail trains due to short platforms will be a big question mark.

The Greenford Branch platforms are the least of the problem really. The branch cannot take Crossrail, or through services from Paddington, because of the reason it is being cut back to West Ealing - to eliminate conflicting crossing moves between the branch and the relief lines. The more Crossrail frequency rises (eg to Heathrow), the less the possibility of through trains to/from Greenford - unless someone forks out for an underpass or flyover - which doesn't seem likely.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

I can't see Crossrail extending to either Reading or Milton Keynes.

Milton Keynes because it is too far away. Crossrail trains will take about 40 to 50 minutes from Milton Keynes to Watford Junction which on a no toilet high capacity train is plain silly. Taking over local services from Willesden to Watford Junction is possible but the Bakerloo line is earmarked for this as it already has surplus capacity right through London.

Bakerloo plan to extend south to Hayes and Beckenham after resignalling and new trains which will serve new markets and use up spare central capacity. Watford Jn too far out for a tube operation , when other parallel options are available

Of the 14tph terminators I can see 4 going to Heathrow to replace HEx which Crossrail really makes redundant (23 minutes from Paddington to Heathrow on Crossrail and 15 by HEx - 8 extra minutes and probably avoid change at Paddington as most passengers will pick up at a connecting point in central London).

The others I can't really see an obvious service to pick up that won't be covered elsewhere unless they take over the Amersham/Aylesbury branch of Chiltern (unlikely - distances) or the Ruislip branch of the Central Line

Crossrail 1 in the early 1990's had a Chesham / Amersham and Aylesbury leg which was extensively worked up and timetabled. Maximum 10 tph was agreed (4 semi AY , 4 Amersham and 2 Chesham) , the costs of splitting off from the Met was incredibly high , not least the narrow right of way north of Harrow on the Hill.

 

[DXMachina]

of course, it might be that while the NR RUS says Euston suburbans should go into Crossrail, there's no intention to use crossrail stock for that: a 12-car Class 350 probably hits all the required specs to go down the Crossrail route and back again. Probably has doors at the same spacing as the doubtless Desiro-derived CR stock will have too.

 

[swt_passenger]

of course, it might be that while the NR RUS says Euston suburbans should go into Crossrail, there's no intention to use crossrail stock for that: a 12-car Class 350 probably hits all the required specs to go down the Crossrail route and back again. Probably has doors at the same spacing as the doubtless Desiro-derived CR stock will have too.

The 12 car 350's doors won't necessarily line up with the PEDS, because 6 of their carriages will have cabs and couplers, and I suspect that will stretch the whole train compared to a fixed formation equivalent anyway. However Crossrail trains will be only 10 car, so you run into the problem of the PED operation having to vary with train length as well. IIRC LU decided that was too risky for the Jubilee line, which is why they closed it to deal with the 7 car lengthening, rather than having a mixed fleet.

 

[SwindonPkwy]

For the novices on here, myself included, could somebody explain PED and what is difficult about having trains of different length on the network?

 

[Zoe]

could somebody explain PED

Platform Edge Doors.

 

[ainsworth74]

For the novices on here, myself included, could somebody explain PED and what is difficult about having trains of different length on the network?

I assume you mean you want a deffinition of PED? In which case:

Platform Edge Doors

Which are exactly what they sound like, doors at the edges of platforms which open when a train is in the platform. They can be seen on some stations on the Jubilee line (and I'm sure elsewhere but I'm not sure where exactly right now). The reason that different length trains are an issue (and especially different types of trains) is that the doors are fixed so you need the train doors to match up with the platform doors otherwise people won't be able exit/enter the train. If the trains are different lengths (or have different door layouts) then it becomes a nightmare trying to get the two sets of doors to match up.

 

[Minstral25]

Press release below shows the PED test they mocked up for Crossrail

http://www.crossrail.co.uk/news/press-releases/glimpse-future-as-mock-up-crossrail-station-revealed

 

[cle]

I think the PED are a bit pointless on Crossrail. Flexibility of fleet (and train lengths if an issue) would be helpful. And they'd save money.

Platforms won't be that narrow, so the wind tunnel effect shouldn't be worse than the tube.

 

[Minstral25]

I think PED is a good idea as it keeps the passengers away from the platform edge and the dangers that has (suicides etc) plus it means that the passengers on a busy section will queue at the door and means that there is such a big bundle getting on/off trains.

The Jubilee line at London Bridge is an example of queuing neatly

 

[tbtc]

I think the PED are a bit pointless on Crossrail. Flexibility of fleet (and train lengths if an issue) would be helpful. And they'd save money.

Platforms won't be that narrow, so the wind tunnel effect shouldn't be worse than the tube.

It'll make boarding a lot faster, which is a big plus. In Sheffield there are clear markings on the tram platforms to show where the doors will line up, and people know exactly where on the platform to wait - rather than the scrums that you can get at some train stations.

If the trains are intended to spend their whole lifes on Crossrail (as is speculated) then it makes sense to tailor the PEDs to the trains.

 

[Chris125]

If i remember rightly the main reason for PED's on the jubilee line extension was ventilation, and i expect that applies to Crossrail too - while it does restrict the rolling stock that can be used, the need for ATO equipment and trains with near-identical performance to minimise headways rule out anything but Crossrail EMU's anyway.

Chris

 

[Bald Rick]

For crossrail They are to make boarding quicker, improve safety, and stop people ending up in front of trains intentionally or otherwise.

 

[jopsuk]

Will they therefore have them on the surface stations, or will they not have them so that the platforms (eg on the Shenfield branch) can still be use by other trains if needed?

 

[TEW]

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

90mph is the maximum line speed that Crossrail units will run at. The GWML relief lines are 90mph only and the GEML slow lines are 75mph I believe. No point having 100mph units if they can't go that first, lower top speed means greater acceleration.

 

[Nym]

Proberbly not on surface stations, since they will still be used by other stock, releif lines on the GW, slow lines will also have Liv St services still on Shenfeild...

 

[Zoe]

the GEML main lines are 75mph I believe.

Although Crossrail will be using the Electric, not Main lines.

 

[DXMachina]

90mph is the maximum line speed that Crossrail units will run at. The GWML relief lines are 90mph only and the GEML slow lines are 75mph I believe. No point having 100mph units if they can't go that first, lower top speed means greater acceleration.

Surely the GWML R lines 90mph limit is a factor of that being the top speed of the 166 and upgraded 165 units? The slam-door units I remember running out to Reading in the 80s certainly didn't go that fast.

I'd be extremely surprised if the limit isn't upped to 100mph for the introduction of Cl.319 units there in a few years time.

 

[Domeyhead]

I believe Crossrail is currently planned to terminate at Maidenhead which is more sensible than Reading IMHO as others have already pointed out. However is it planned to install flyovers to avoid messy 4-track crossovers at Maidenhead station throat? Any Crossrail train arriving on the downside has to cross 2 other down and 2 up lines to get right side and vice versa which could severely disrupt the numerous non stop and freight services that go through at speed.

 

[jopsuk]

Crossrail will be using the Relief lines with no need to cross the Mains. There's mention of "turnback facilities" to the west on what I've read, so I'd guess trains from London will arrive at the Down Relief, empty, proceed to a siding (potentially between the the Releif lines) and reverse there, filling up and dpearting from the Up Relief.

 

[swt_passenger]

There are two central reversing sidings, and four north side stabling sidings at Maidenhead, and an extra bay platform 6 for the branch. P3 will be on the down relief, P4 and P5 will be bi directional, with the up relief's 'natural route' being through P5.

Potentially, and depending on the exact timetable, terminating Crossrail trains could turnback in P4?

See drawing attached, from the ORR website.

 

[jopsuk]

They could, but I think the idea both here and for terminating ar Paddington is that, barring trains going out of service, the trains arriving use a different one to the trains departing. I'm sure I've seen claims this is more efficient/less prone to delays than having two or three bay platforms- but obviously it does require more land!