Goblin - Watford DC line link

[Sprigibax]

Would it be possible/at all useful to add a curve connecting the Gospel Oak to Barking line (or Suffragette line now I guess) and the ECML, allowing a service to run between Barking Riverside and Queen’s Park? It would run as normal between Barking Riverside and Harringay Green Lanes, then divert onto the ECML, calling at Finsbury Park, run on to the North London line, calling at Camden Road, and then use the Primrose Hill link to run on to South Hampstead, Kilburn High Road and Queen’s Park.
This would allow the Queen’s Park to Watford Junction section to become fully Bakerloo line, and would also free up capacity at Euston for HS2. However, it would rob Kilburn High Road and South Hampstead of their link to central London (although Kilburn Park could be used in place of Kilburn High Road and Swiss Cottage instead of South Hampstead).
Sorry for the long read!

 

[Magdalia]

Would it be possible/at all useful to add a curve connecting the Gospel Oak to Barking line (or Suffragette line now I guess) and the ECML, allowing a service to run between Barking Riverside and Queen’s Park?

How would the trains going from Queens Park to Barking cross the ECML?

How many houses do you think you would need to demolish?

 

[The Planner]

Would it be possible/at all useful to add a curve connecting the Gospel Oak to Barking line (or Suffragette line now I guess) and the ECML, allowing a service to run between Barking Riverside and Queen’s Park? It would run as normal between Barking Riverside and Harringay Green Lanes, then divert onto the ECML, calling at Finsbury Park, run on to the North London line, calling at Camden Road, and then use the Primrose Hill link to run on to South Hampstead, Kilburn High Road and Queen’s Park.
This would allow the Queen’s Park to Watford Junction section to become fully Bakerloo line, and would also free up capacity at Euston for HS2. However, it would rob Kilburn High Road and South Hampstead of their link to central London (although Kilburn Park could be used in place of Kilburn High Road and Swiss Cottage instead of South Hampstead).
Sorry for the long read!

What is the benefit? The DC line suddenly loses 4tph to Euston and its interchange. The Bakerloo isnt really any better. It wouldnt really free up any capacity at Euston unless its for short trains in the centre platforms, it doesnt benefit HS2 at all.

 

[cle]

A real civils investment would be at Gospel Oak - a new through platform and a through road.

Then all the GOBLINs could run through to at least Willesden Junction (could go LL) or send them all to Clapham @ 4-5tph, with Richmond staying at 5-6tph from Stratford.

That would be a heavy cut from Stratford to Gospel Oak in tph - so I suspect it’d need a third Camden solve, or more of a mixture in the split.

 

[30907]

A real civils investment would be at Gospel Oak - a new through platform and a through road.

Then all the GOBLINs could run through to at least Willesden Junction (could go LL) or send them all to Clapham @ 4-5tph, with Richmond staying at 5-6tph from Stratford.

That would be a heavy cut from Stratford to Gospel Oak in tph - so I suspect it’d need a third Camden solve, or more of a mixture in the split.

The idea is worth pursuing in the medium term.

You would need to maintain the frequency of Stratford-Camden Road (8tph offpeak, 10 peak), so for every Goblin on the NLL you would need to divert an existing NLL service via Primrose Hill to Willesden Jn LL bay (or beyond).

I don't think you could safely increase the offpeak frequency, given the need to keep freight paths through both Hampstead Heath and Camden Rd AND to allow for pathing (stops/allowance as current WTT) on the Primrose Hill section, but a peak service of 12tph is probably workable.

My tentative suggestion is to run only 2tph offpeak through off the Goblin and 2 via Primrose Hill, leaving 6tph Stratford-Willesden (and another 2 GOBLINs terminating at Gospel Oak). In the peaks you would run 4, 4 and 8 respectively (obviously given sufficient units!) or 2,2 and 8. The question is, does that cover Gospel Oak-Camden Rd adequately? It's years since I last did that section!

 

[AlastairFraser]

The idea is worth pursuing in the medium term.

You would need to maintain the frequency of Stratford-Camden Road (8tph offpeak, 10 peak), so for every Goblin on the NLL you would need to divert an existing NLL service via Primrose Hill to Willesden Jn LL bay (or beyond).

I don't think you could safely increase the offpeak frequency, given the need to keep freight paths through both Hampstead Heath and Camden Rd AND to allow for pathing (stops/allowance as current WTT) on the Primrose Hill section, but a peak service of 12tph is probably workable.

My tentative suggestion is to run only 2tph offpeak through off the Goblin and 2 via Primrose Hill, leaving 6tph Stratford-Willesden (and another 2 GOBLINs terminating at Gospel Oak). In the peaks you would run 4, 4 and 8 respectively (obviously given sufficient units!) or 2,2 and 8. The question is, does that cover Gospel Oak-Camden Rd adequately? It's years since I last did that section!

Does this mean you could perhaps reopen Primrose Hill station at the same time?
Could take pressure off Camden Road - Camden Town interchanges (Chalk Farm is close by) and serve Primrose Hill itself/the southern end of Belzize Park.

 

[30907]

Does this mean you could perhaps reopen Primrose Hill station at the same time?
Could take pressure off Camden Road - Camden Town interchanges (Chalk Farm is close by) and serve Primrose Hill itself/the southern end of Belzize Park.

Logically, yes, though I'm not sure how we'll used it would be, especially with only 2tph. I am sure our forum Cricklewood resident would say the 4tph is the minimum useful frequency in inner suburbia, and I am inclined to agree.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Logically, yes, though I'm not sure how we'll used it would be, especially with only 2tph. I am sure our forum Cricklewood resident would say the 4tph is the minimum useful frequency in inner suburbia, and I am inclined to agree.

If it helps support Camden's transport needs during the planned Camden Town rebuilding, that could tip the balance in its favour.

 

[cle]

I would think you need at least 4tph through Primrose Hill (which I would name/market as Chalk Farm inc OSI) - for it to be successful. It's a very densely populated area, close to a lot of bars, Roundhouse, Primrose Hill/Zoo side of RP - I'd expect good usage.

It was always ear-marked for ELL but I think NLL is simpler.

4tph Stratford-Willesden via Queens Park (in theory could go to Harrow/Watford as needed / if DC changes happened)
6tph Stratford-Richmond
4tph Barking R-Clapham Junction via Gospel Oak

+ 2tph Watford Junction-Clapham Junction, for WLL frequency.

 

[30907]

I would think you need at least 4tph through Primrose Hill (which I would name/market as Chalk Farm inc OSI) - for it to be successful. It's a very densely populated area, close to a lot of bars, Roundhouse, Primrose Hill/Zoo side of RP - I'd expect good usage.

4tph Stratford-Willesden via Queens Park (in theory could go to Harrow/Watford as needed / if DC changes happened)
6tph Stratford-Richmond
4tph Barking R-Clapham Junction via Gospel Oak

My concern was - does that allow enough paths for freight?

+ 2tph Watford Junction-Clapham Junction, for WLL frequency.

Had to think twice - you mean via the underpass as at present? Agree.

 

[PeterC]

My concern was - does that allow enough paths for freight?

I was wondering about that. I have used Camden Road on a number of occasions and it was not uncommon to see a freight being held on the Primrise Hill line awaiting a path through Camden Road.

 

[swt_passenger]

I was wondering about that. I have used Camden Road on a number of occasions and it was not uncommon to see a freight being held on the Primrise Hill line awaiting a path through Camden Road.

Proposed NLL via Primrose Hill reopenings come up fairly regularly here. AIUI there’s no capacity on the WCML for the services without losing the Euston DC lines service. It’s one or the other. The eastern end of the NLL also runs at full capacity, so any diversions off it at Camden Road reduce the service through Gospel Oak. And as you say the connection via Primrose Hill is a valuable regulating point for freights.

 

[cle]

Had to think twice - you mean via the underpass as at present? Agree.

Yes. I don't think we'll be able to thread those through Willesden, ever, sadly. But the Watofrod route (2tph out of P10) might be a better option than 1tph up top Tring and all sorts. Especially as EWR are confirming 2tph right into MKC from Oxford on launch, so I think 'Southern' is done up there.

May as well re-market Watford-Clapham as London Overground, and as a single line from Clapham-Shepherds Bush, which then has two branches.

Proposed NLL via Primrose Hill reopenings come up fairly regularly here. AIUI there’s no capacity on the WCML for the services without losing the Euston DC lines service. It’s one or the other. The eastern end of the NLL also runs at full capacity, so any diversions off it at Camden Road reduce the service through Gospel Oak. And as you say the connection via Primrose Hill is a valuable regulating point for freights.

I think it's only between South Hampstead and Willesden Junction (which should be two islands at lower level - and inners turning either LO or more Bakerloos from Lewisham in future!) - and I very rarely see freight going through Queens Park p1/4. I think 4tph to Euston can still work.

 

[30907]

Proposed NLL via Primrose Hill reopenings come up fairly regularly here. AIUI there’s no capacity on the WCML for the services without losing the Euston DC lines service.

I make it 8tph Bakerloo and 4tph NR so another 4 on the DC lines should work.....

The eastern end of the NLL also runs at full capacity, so any diversions off it at Camden Road reduce the service through Gospel Oak. And as you say the connection via Primrose Hill is a valuable regulating point for freights.

....but as you say that causes other problems!

 

[cle]

I think only Kentish Town West might go down to 6tph, which is fine.
Gospel Oak would benefit from through Barking-Willesden - (CJ) services on that second 'core'.

Camden-Stratford would be 10tph still. Not sure how even they'd all remain. Would LOVE that third Camden Rd platform to enable a few peak extras.

I no longer see a melding with the ELL being valuable at all. Anything via Queens Park (Primrose Hill reopened or otherwise) - I think is another NLL routing.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Camden-Stratford would be 10tph still. Not sure how even they'd all remain. Would LOVE that third Camden Rd platform to enable a few peak extras.

There were serious issues back in the late 90's with the integrity of the disused bridge span over the Camden Road. A couple of peak-busters used to reverse at CR via the Primrose Hill lines and shuttle to Stratford LOw Level (as was) a long time ago.

 

[cle]

I remember those. Also weekend Willesden-QP-Stratford services which were of course so much faster for end to end journeys. It's far more direct.

And some of the stations have catchment overlap - QP/Brondesbury Park definitely, Brondesbury/Kilburn High Road is a little further but still all Kilburn. 31 bus hard to beat though, vs going around Hampstead on the LO. South Hampstead is pretty underused/unknown.

 

[mr_jrt]

Dusting off one of my old hobby-horses, how about that new tunnel from the Hendon lines at West Hampstead to east of Gospel Oak?

Effectively four-tracks the NNL through Hampstead (hijacking the very eastern end of the existing MML chord, which would go away) and then linking the Goblin into the WLO scheme? Keeps the NLL and Goblin routes separate (well, at least until you hit Acton Wells), meaning fiddling with capacity on one doesn't affect the other. Also means you can get freight across the MML to the Hendon lines (and all their connections) without impacting Thameslink as you are effectively grade separating the connection to the MML. Underground platforms at Gospel Oak maintain the passenger interchange, and if you're feeling rich, another set at Belsize Park creates a new handy interchange to the Northern Line's Edgware branch.

Very expensive, yes, but potentially highly stategic if you can route more freight over it and free up some MML capacity whilst also creating new orbital passenger links. I suspect the gradients might be a little on the steep side, but manageable?

Another chord at Forest Gate junction might even permit a load of the freight that currently uses the NLL to run on the Goblin instead, freeing up capacity there for more passenger services (though getting to Wembley Yard would require a reversal at Acton Yard, so that's no ideal). Not much point now, but if a Goblin-WLO tunnel existed, I think there might be a much stronger argument for such a chord.

All this doesn't link the Goblin to Queens Park as the OP wanted, but arguably OOC would be much more useful for passengers, and Acton Wells would be for freight.

 

[cle]

I just don't see it, ever ever. Whatever may come, it would have to be growth with existing infrastructure. We can't even get a fourth platform at Gospel Oak! Or a proper Willesden LL (let alone any Northampton line platforms!)

 

[The Planner]

I make it 8tph Bakerloo and 4tph NR so another 4 on the DC lines should work.....

....but as you say that causes other problems!

Not with a 4 minute headway it won't, 16 x 4 is 64 minutes in the hour.

 

[30907]

Not with a 4 minute headway it won't, 16 x 4 is 64 minutes in the hour.

But the present DC timetable has headways down to 3min as far as Stonebridge Park. The nominal headway would be 3m 45s.

 

[Nippy]

The entire DC line from Kilburn High Road to Watford is controlled manually by one signaller. admittedly, mostly in auto, except around Queen’s Park, Stonebridge Park, Harrow and Watford. So at any one time, the signaller will have 7 DCs on the patch and 5-8 LULs all constantly requiring attention, throwing in the line blockages every weekday between trains for patrolling and any faults that crop up (we get a lot of those). I think trying to add extra trains onto that will hammer reliability and punctuality. Automatic Route Setting would be hugely beneficial to this line as taking Line Blocks at Watford can easily mean you check trains at Stonebridge Park or Queen’s Park - this would assist the signallers greatly in keeping stuff moving when attention is diverted to the extremities of the Work Station.

 

[cle]

Now that we look to a Labour government and re-upped Mayor, there is a fair chance the BLE goes ahead, I would say.

In that case, and as part of a long overdue stock order (likely off the back of the Picc) - I would expect that we'll need to look at how more than the current frequency can work at QP and north. In other words, NXG and Lewisham (+ Hayes/Beckenham one day maybe) - will require far more than 18tph or whatever the Bakerloo now limps as. It was once 24tph but I suspect those would be full fairly swiftly and you want to aim for 28-30tph.

It's probably too complex to aim much higher than 30-32tph - and to my earlier point, where to send them after QP.

 

[The Planner]

But the present DC timetable has headways down to 3min as far as Stonebridge Park. The nominal headway would be 3m 45s.

North of there its 4 and 4½