Fantasy Crossrail

[Helvellyn]

Crossrail 1 is progressing fast, and planning on Crossrail 2 is progressing well. I've wondered a few times though about a fantasy Crossrail linking Marylesbone/Baker Street and Fenchurch Street...

• Metropolitain Line services from Watford have to terminate at Baker Street.
• Metropolitain Line and Chiltern services towards Amersham/Aylesbury use the same infrastructure.
• LTS services are self contained, and connections to the Underground mean a walk to Tower Hill.

A tunnel to divert Aylesbury-Marylebone, Chesham/Amersham-Aldgate and Watford-Baker Street services to "shadow" the northern half of the circle line and then connect with the Fenchurch Street-Tilbury and Fenchurch Street-Southend services.

Have this tunnel serve Marylebone, Baker Street, Euston, King's Cross/St Pancras, Liverpool Street and then onto the LTS network.

Fenchurch Street and the surface platforms at Baker Street could be closed, with the land redeveloped.

It would free up additional platform space at Marylebone for Oxford/Banbury/Birmingham services.

Capacity on the northern part of the Circle line would be increased with no Amersham/Chesham services having to join/leave via the flat junction at Baker Street. This could allow: -

• more frequent services on the Hamersmith & City Line to Upminster;
• or an extenstion of Wimbledon - Edgware Road District Line services to Aldgate.

So, whilst a fantasy idea what are people's thoughts?

 

[CdBrux]

Surely, if this really does release useful capacity at the terminus stations, then the line should go through a more central area rather then just following the circle line - if you want to do that you would change and get on the circle line!

 

[Fred26]

I'd probably leave Fenchurch Street in place and use it as a DLR terminus and close Tower Gateway.

 

[Helvellyn]

Surely, if this really does release useful capacity at the terminus stations, then the line should go through a more central area rather then just following the circle line - if you want to do that you would change and get on the circle line!

What suggestions for a route would you have? It would still need to serve the City in my view so that existing Metropolitain Line users aren't inconvenienced. My thoughts would be a modified version of the original Fleet Line proposals: -

Marylebone - Green Park - Charing Cross - Aldwych - Ludgate Circus - Canon Street - Fenchurch Street

• Marylebone - would give Chiltern passengers a one-stop connection into the City as their only tube line is the Bakerloo.
• Fenchurch Street - I like the suggestion of diverting DLR services from Tower Gateway, so a connection here could be useful.

 

[LewFinnis]

While starting a tunnel near Marylebone might not be too difficult, where would it emerge in the east? The lines out of Fenchurch Street are a bit hemmed in for some way and land in that area is not cheap these days. I like then general idea, though.

 

[The Ham]

While starting a tunnel near Marylebone might not be too difficult, where would it emerge in the east? The lines out of Fenchurch Street are a bit hemmed in for some way and land in that area is not cheap these days. I like then general idea, though.

If you were to tunnel North west (Marylebone) through central London, it's not unreasonable that the other side would be coming out to link with lines which run out to Kent (although probably only being the metro services on those lines). That would then cover, with Crossrail 1, Crossrail 2 and Thameslink, quite a few of the metro services around London.

 

[Fred26]

There really isn't much need to run LTS services through central London. Metro services along that route already go into zone 1, via the District and Hammersmith & City lines.
If anything, I'd run from Barking to Startford and terminate at Liverpool Street.
The line between Barking and Fenchurch Street could be converted to DLR, run onto Dagenham and across the river.

 

[HSTEd]

I would prefer to transfer all the metro services remaining in Paddington to Crossrail (since for some reason total withdrawal is not projected?) and then use one of the platforms at Paddington to handle any intercity traffic into Marylebone.

You can then go Thameslink esque and transfer all the trains out of Marylebone into a tunnel through to somewhere in the vicinity of Clapham Junction and take over some South Western services.

But that is just me.

 

[Tobbes]

CR3? Let's get CR2 agreed....

In fantasy land, assuming CR2 connects Wimbledon to the Lea Valley lines, then linking an electrified Chiltern with something on the SE side would make sense. But I have to ask what problem would CR3 attempt to solve? Perhaps it would be more useful to build a tunnel to create lots of local capacity to support BML modernisation.

 

[swt_passenger]

I would prefer to transfer all the metro services remaining in Paddington to Crossrail (since for some reason total withdrawal is not projected?)

Perhaps the reason is that they don't want artificially forced changes at Reading for people crossing Reading from the Oxford direction, but not going all the way into London?

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

... assuming CR2 connects Wimbledon to the Lea Valley lines, then linking an electrified Chiltern with something on the SE side would make sense. But I have to ask what problem would CR3 attempt to solve? Perhaps it would be more useful to build a tunnel to create lots of local capacity to support BML modernisation.

I agree, logically CR3 would have to target the NW/SE gap in an otherwise balanced hub and spoke network where Thameslink and CR1 already provide for the cardinal points of N/S and E/W.

 

[Mikey C]

I've sometimes wondered about that, the dismal frequency of the trains west of Baker Street is a direct result of having to make capacity for all the Met train running though to Aldgate, made even worse by going across a horrible flat junction.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Can we have the Tring stoppers go into a Crossrail that has a station on Goswell Road in Islington?

 

[jopsuk]

I've sometimes wondered about that, the dismal frequency of the trains west of Baker Street is a direct result of having to make capacity for all the Met train running though to Aldgate, made even worse by going across a horrible flat junction.

The subsurface lines would be a much better system if the entire Circle was a four track railway, with Circle trains running on the inner and outermost tracks with cross platform interchange to H&C, District & Met trains running on the central pair, with all junctions fully grade separate. Mid-circle terminuses could be set up so that trains empty on an arrival platform, pick up the next driver (in the rear cab), go into a headshunt and reverse there- far more efficient than e.g. the Met platforms at Aldgate, but requires far more space.

Problem, of course, is that this crayon scrawling requires demolishing a lot of buildings and digging up a lot of roads, plus taking the existing railways out of action, in order to achieve it.

 

[HSTEd]

Perhaps the reason is that they don't want artificially forced changes at Reading for people crossing Reading from the Oxford direction, but not going all the way into London?

In other words, to allow for a relatively small passenger flow we cripple the system?
Crossrail should be 16tph Reading and 8tph Heathrow Airport.

As for CR3 how about linking the Uxbridge Branch of the Met with Gatwick Airport via a New Alignment.

Might be slightly long but it would likely have to be in tunnels between Gatwick and Marylebone.
Aylesbury Line would then transfer to the met, allowing the use of the Chiltern tracks between Marylebone Approach and Harrow.