HS2 Old Oak Common

[fishwomp]

The quicker connection to the EL is a benefit too

It's only quicker once the GWR stops, if it doesn't stop then PAD is the faster option. Obviously, but I mean to say: the journey time for something non-stop today and changing at PAD is going to be as quick possibly quicker than an EL change at OOC due to the speed difference of a non-stop. PAD also has slightly easier access as there is buffer-stop to one small flight of stairs/escalator down, rather than flights up and down. Adding 5 mins to everyone else's journey time (circle line, bakerloo, district) for a zero-sum EL change is not a great idea - millions have been spent removing 5 mins penalties..

IF and its a massive IF the line eventually reaches Manchester Liverpool and further north, then OOC may be worth having for the south of England and south Wales. But until those routes open, then no benefit in slowing GWR services down for the Birmingham connection.

Exactly.

It’s more likely than not that these services will be on HS2 from relatively early on.

It’s better to get the disruption out of the way whilst half of it is still being built rather than messing up two live operational railways.

Why - why disrupt people 10 years ahead of when it might be desirable. That's all for no benefit and for something you don't know will happen.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I don't think any existing WCML passengers wanted new stops at Birmingham International or Milton Keynes added to their schedule before the stations were built in 1976/1982 respectively, but it's obvious now that they were key developments on the route and for the wider regional economies.
The OOC station will be the same.

 

[stuu]

It's only quicker once the GWR stops, if it doesn't stop then PAD is the faster option. Obviously, but I mean to say: the journey time for something non-stop today and changing at PAD is going to be as quick possibly quicker than an EL change at OOC due to the speed difference of a non-stop. PAD also has slightly easier access as there is buffer-stop to one small flight of stairs/escalator down, rather than flights up and down. Adding 5 mins to everyone else's journey time (circle line, bakerloo, district) for a zero-sum EL change is not a great idea - millions have been spent
removing 5 mins penalties..

On the other hand changing at OOC means not having to sit at Royal Oak waiting for a platform, so swings and roundabouts... although no doubt it will turn into sitting at Acton ML waiting for a platform at OOC

 

[Agent_Squash]

Why - why disrupt people 10 years ahead of when it might be desirable. That's all for no benefit and for something you don't know will happen.

Because there’s no point disrupting both HS2 and the GWML in 10 years time because some MP in Plymouth didn’t like it.

The aim should be minimal disruption overall. It’ll also be cheaper…

It’s not an unusual approach. ICEs in Berlin will often stop at three stations in the city!

 

[swt_passenger]

Usual exaggeration. How long overall in years did the Reading remodelling take, that was much more complex as far as the GWML track changes were concerned, and for how many weekends were passengers from the West Country seriously affected? For how many days was the route via Reading actually fully closed? There was a lot of interest in the forum about diversions into Waterloo, but did they even add up to a fortnight spread out over a couple of periods?

 

[irish_rail]

Usual exaggeration. How long overall in years did the Reading remodelling take, that was much more complex as far as the GWML track changes were concerned, and for how many weekends were passengers from the West Country seriously affected? For how many days was the route via Reading actually fully closed? There was a lot of interest in the forum about diversions into Waterloo, but did they even add up to a fortnight spread out over a couple of periods?

The Reading work caused disruption over about 5 years and there was a big net gain in journey times for Western region passengers. Reading was well and truly transformed from an operational point of view and has been a massive benefit for the entire GWR network

 

[uglymonkey]

Exeter has an alternative - up to the smoke on the west of england in on a 159 - taking an hour longer to Waterloo. Points west of Exeter - choice but you change at Exeter ( 4 hours+ Plymouth/London?

I have yet to understand how HS benefits the far south west at all?

 

[irish_rail]

On the other hand changing at OOC means not having to sit at Royal Oak waiting for a platform, so swings and roundabouts... although no doubt it will turn into sitting at Acton ML waiting for a platform at OOC

The concern has to be the minute GWR trains are out of sync (no that never happens I know....), that the queue into OOC could be quite considerable, stretching back way way further than Acton Mainline. Just knowing what a bit of disruption an issue can cause say at Ealing, with trains being checked right back at say Slough, I'm not totally confident that in many cases OOC isn't just going to cause an enormous bottleneck. Heading into Paddington there is already a bottleneck, and that's with 6 approach lines plus the odd loop line. Going into OOC from the west there is just a 4 track railway. I'd say its a recipe for carnage unless trains always run bang on time (unlikely to happen).

Exeter has an alternative - up to the smoke on the west of england in on a 159 - taking an hour longer to Waterloo. Points west of Exeter - choice but you change at Exeter ( 4 hours+ Plymouth/London?

I have yet to understand how HS benefits the far south west at all?

Indeed, why should south west people have already slow journey times slowed down further, just to give outskirts of London to outskirts of Birmingham a quicker railway. I'm sure I have also read somewhere, and apologies I cannot remember where, that Mark Hopwood isn't yet convinced on GWR trains all stopping at OOC, and that it was still up for discussion, so maybe there is hope!

 

[The Planner]

The Reading work caused disruption over about 5 years and there was a big net gain in journey times for Western region passengers. Reading was well and truly transformed from an operational point of view and has been a massive benefit for the entire GWR network

Was there? by how much, and how much was that from any recast and not specifically from the changes?

 

[lachlan]

Indeed, why should south west people have already slow journey times slowed down further, just to give outskirts of London to outskirts of Birmingham a quicker railway. I'm sure I have also read somewhere, and apologies I cannot remember where, that Mark Hopwood isn't yet convinced on GWR trains all stopping at OOC, and that it was still up for discussion, so maybe there is hope!

Old Oak Common will make it easier for those using GWR trains to reach Manchester, Scotland, Liverpool etc without having to transit through London so will speed up many journeys considerably.

 

[Agent_Squash]

The concern has to be the minute GWR trains are out of sync (no that never happens I know....), that the queue into OOC could be quite considerable, stretching back way way further than Acton Mainline. Just knowing what a bit of disruption an issue can cause say at Ealing, with trains being checked right back at say Slough, I'm not totally confident that in many cases OOC isn't just going to cause an enormous bottleneck. Heading into Paddington there is already a bottleneck, and that's with 6 approach lines plus the odd loop line. Going into OOC from the west there is just a 4 track railway. I'd say its a recipe for carnage unless trains always run bang on time (unlikely to happen).

OOC will be 4 platforms each on the mains and reliefs. That, if anything, gives more operational flexibility?

Again, in most of Europe trains stop quite close to the main terminus for connections. Easier Lizzy line (which is the way most people will go), potential future overground and HS2 is far better than just dumping at Paddington.

I’d also argue that the benefits to most passengers (Reading/wales) is far more than the negative of a few minutes longer into Paddington for trains from the South West.

 

[The Planner]

Also forgetting the OOC is/will be driving massive property speculation with high rises flying up all over the show (already happening to an extent). Not everyone living there will be going in to London.

 

[irish_rail]

OOC will be 4 platforms on the mains and reliefs. That, if anything, gives more operational flexibility?

Again, in most of Europe trains stop quite close to the main terminus for connections. Easier Lizzy line (which is the way most people will go), potential future overground and HS2 is far better than just dumping at Paddington.

I’d also argue that the benefits to most passengers (Reading/wales) is far more than the negative of a few minutes longer into Paddington for trains from the South West.

But what are these benefits you talk of? To get onto the Elizabeth Line is already extremely quick and easy at Paddington. There will be zero time saving there and zero journey enhancement. And as I said previously, until journeys to the likes of Manchester and Liverpool materialise, there is no juicy new journey opportunities for those in the south, with the possible exception of Heathrow being quicker and easier to get to. And it isn't just slowing down trains to the south west. Politicians in Wales probably need to wake up to the fact their trains are being slowed also. I'm sick of hearing people who do not use the lines from the West to London pontificate on the subject of slightly extended journey times. Once , Plymouth was looking at sub 3 hour journey times to London. That's out of the window now. It seems levelling up only matters if the location is up north. The rest should just make do with longer journey times and shut up.

OOC will be 4 platforms on the mains and reliefs. That, if anything, gives more operational flexibility?

Again, in most of Europe trains stop quite close to the main terminus for connections. Easier Lizzy line (which is the way most people will go), potential future overground and HS2 is far better than just dumping at Paddington.

I’d also argue that the benefits to most passengers (Reading/wales) is far more than the negative of a few minutes longer into Paddington for trains from the South West.

And no doubt with onerous slow approaches due to ATP and TPWS constraints, it will lead to a bottleneck trust me.

Old Oak Common will make it easier for those using GWR trains to reach Manchester, Scotland, Liverpool etc without having to transit through London so will speed up many journeys considerably.

There is already no need to go through London to get from the south west or south Wales to the north. XC may not be great, but with a little investment in some longer trains, it would be a perfectly pleasant way to get up north, and indeed still is the way most folk travelling north will go. Not many go via London from South west to the north west.

Was there? by how much, and how much was that from any recast and not specifically from the changes?

Well as a driver, it's far superior. The days of inevitably having to wait outside Reading for a platform are gone, it's a joy to work through. A big well done to the team on that project (though not so keen on the "open air wind swept" footbridge!)

 

[Snow1964]

I’d also argue that the benefits to most passengers (Reading/wales) is far more than the negative of a few minutes longer into Paddington for trains from the South West.

If going to take that approach there is little to be gained (apart from operational convenience) of the Old Oak - Paddington section for long distance trains. In reality very few people actually start/finish at Paddington, rather than use tube etc to another part of London.

And to some extent operationally Paddington is treated as a train cleaning shed where they let passengers onto the trains just few minutes before departure, not as a terminus where can settle into your seat and get comfortable 10-30 minutes or whenever you arrive before your journey.

A lot will depend on if Old Oak replaces the Reading stop, or is in addition, and there is case for many trains not needing both.

 

[irish_rail]

If going to take that approach there is little to be gained (apart from operational convenience) of the Old Oak - Paddington section for long distance trains. In reality very few people actually start/finish at Paddington, rather than use tube etc to another part of London.

And to some extent operationally Paddington is treated as a train cleaning shed where they let passengers onto the trains just few minutes before departure, not as a terminus where can settle into your seat and get comfortable 10-30 minutes or whenever you arrive before your journey.

A lot will depend on if Old Oak replaces the Reading stop, or is in addition, and there is case for many trains not needing both.

Reading would be a huge loss. It is a genuinely useful interchange station for a very wide area (unlike OOC! ) so I'd hope the idea of dropping Reading is a none starter.

 

[The Planner]

Reading wouldn't be dropped, that's barking mad.

 

[Agent_Squash]

But what are these benefits you talk of? To get onto the Elizabeth Line is already extremely quick and easy at Paddington. There will be zero time saving there and zero journey enhancement. And as I said previously, until journeys to the likes of Manchester and Liverpool materialise, there is no juicy new journey opportunities for those in the south, with the possible exception of Heathrow being quicker and easier to get to. And it isn't just slowing down trains to the south west. Politicians in Wales probably need to wake up to the fact their trains are being slowed also. I'm sick of hearing people who do not use the lines from the West to London pontificate on the subject of slightly extended journey times. Once , Plymouth was looking at sub 3 hour journey times to London. That's out of the window now. It seems levelling up only matters if the location is up north. The rest should just make do with longer journey times and shut up.

HS2 will certainly end up having services to Manchester on it. It’s just a case of when.

Passengers will be on the Elizabeth line sooner, with more chance of getting a seat. As I also said (and you ignored, again), it’s highly likely an overground interchange will be added.

It also speeds up going to Heathrow (which is again probably more important than the headline journey time). Part of me thinks they will advertise the headline journey time as to/from OOC anyway.

And no doubt with onerous slow approaches due to ATP and TPWS constraints, it will lead to a bottleneck trust me.

It’ll be likely be ETCS by the time OOC opens - so no AWS/TPWS constraints to speak of!

If going to take that approach there is little to be gained (apart from operational convenience) of the Old Oak - Paddington section for long distance trains. In reality very few people actually start/finish at Paddington, rather than use tube etc to another part of London.

And to some extent operationally Paddington is treated as a train cleaning shed where they let passengers onto the trains just few minutes before departure, not as a terminus where can settle into your seat and get comfortable 10-30 minutes or whenever you arrive before your journey.

A lot will depend on if Old Oak replaces the Reading stop, or is in addition, and there is case for many trains not needing both.

Trains should stop at both. Reading is important for connections, and so will be OOC.

Change the headline journey time figure to OOC (where most people will change anyway), and keep Paddington as what it is now - a train cleaning shed.

Most of Europe operates this way - connections are far more important than a fastest possible journey achieved once a day.

 

[uglymonkey]

That's alright then.

 

[irish_rail]

HS2 will certainly end up having services to Manchester on it. It’s just a case of when.

Passengers will be on the Elizabeth line sooner, with more chance of getting a seat. As I also said (and you ignored, again), it’s highly likely an overground interchange will be added.

It also speeds up going to Heathrow (which is again probably more important than the headline journey time). Part of me thinks they will advertise the headline journey time as to/from OOC anyway.


It’ll be likely be ETCS by the time OOC opens - so no AWS/TPWS constraints to speak of!



Trains should stop at both. Reading is important for connections, and so will be OOC.

Change the headline journey time figure to OOC (where most people will change anyway), and keep Paddington as what it is now - a train cleaning shed.

Most of Europe operates this way - connections are far more important than a fastest possible journey achieved once a day.

Sorry but so much of what you say is as if you simply don't care about downgrading the service from the West provided we are modernising and keeping up. Even if it makes the journey experince worse. I wonder how people in the North West would like Euston to be removed from the HS2 program and it just terminate at Old Oak instead (as you suggest should happen with Paddington for GWR users).
The Elizabeth Line really isn't any kind of selling point. As I have already alluded to, the current interchange of being whisked into Paddington on an intercity train followed by an excellent interchange there onto Crossrail really isn't any hardship. The idea that passengers will prefer to change at OOC due to greater chance of a seat is fanciful, and again is a fault with poor train design on the EL where the trains contain so few seats. Quite simply, OOC will not improve the interchange from GWR to EL, it just won't, accept for Heathrow. Heathrow is the one and only area where passengers may be better off from the West, but Heathrow isn't really the be all and end all, indeed how many people from the West and Walea actually use Heathrow more than a couple of times a decade. Decent transport links to Newquay, Exeter and Bristol airports would all be of far more use to anyone down here and frankly would be a better way of spending all this money that HS2 continues to consume.

 

[Topological]

With Elizabeth Line interchange, is the selling point not that it is the same station and just a short trip across the bridge? Paddington is fairly easy, but you are going through the main concourse area which has a lot of people looking lost waiting for platforms to be announced etc. I am not saying Paddington is too hard, but I could see that changing at OOC would be more straightforward.

Heathrow is a bit more of a mixed one for me. Going to Heathrow I could see OOC working, but going West I would still want to board at Paddington and would pay the time penalty. Suitcases and potentially full trains do not make for a fun connection (see also when the fares mean Hayes and Harlington then Reading connections onto GWR)

Provided there are two platforms per fast line (which is my understanding) then it seems like a no-brainer to stop all GWR at OOC.

 

[stuu]

Sorry but so much of what you say is as if you simply don't care about downgrading the service from the West provided we are modernising and keeping up. Even if it makes the journey experince worse. I wonder how people in the North West would like Euston to be removed from the HS2 program and it just terminate at Old Oak instead (as you suggest should happen with Paddington for GWR users).
The Elizabeth Line really isn't any kind of selling point. As I have already alluded to, the current interchange of being whisked into Paddington on an intercity train followed by an excellent interchange there onto Crossrail really isn't any hardship. The idea that passengers will prefer to change at OOC due to greater chance of a seat is fanciful, and again is a fault with poor train design on the EL where the trains contain so few seats. Quite simply, OOC will not improve the interchange from GWR to EL, it just won't, accept for Heathrow. Heathrow is the one and only area where passengers may be better off from the West, but Heathrow isn't really the be all and end all, indeed how many people from the West and Walea actually use Heathrow more than a couple of times a decade. Decent transport links to Newquay, Exeter and Bristol airports would all be of far more use to anyone down here and frankly would be a better way of spending all this money that HS2 continues to consume.

I'll definitely be changing at OOC inbound. It's going to be much quicker, it's less than half the walking distance from the ends of the trains and even less if you are in the middle. I wouldn't describe the change at Paddington as an excellent interchange, it's average at best

 

[Agent_Squash]

Sorry but so much of what you say is as if you simply don't care about downgrading the service from the West provided we are modernising and keeping up. Even if it makes the journey experince worse. I wonder how people in the North West would like Euston to be removed from the HS2 program and it just terminate at Old Oak instead (as you suggest should happen with Paddington for GWR users).
The Elizabeth Line really isn't any kind of selling point. As I have already alluded to, the current interchange of being whisked into Paddington on an intercity train followed by an excellent interchange there onto Crossrail really isn't any hardship. The idea that passengers will prefer to change at OOC due to greater chance of a seat is fanciful, and again is a fault with poor train design on the EL where the trains contain so few seats. Quite simply, OOC will not improve the interchange from GWR to EL, it just won't, accept for Heathrow. Heathrow is the one and only area where passengers may be better off from the West, but Heathrow isn't really the be all and end all, indeed how many people from the West and Walea actually use Heathrow more than a couple of times a decade. Decent transport links to Newquay, Exeter and Bristol airports would all be of far more use to anyone down here and frankly would be a better way of spending all this money that HS2 continues to consume.

I didn’t suggest trains from the west should terminate at OOC. Rather the headline journey time should be from OOC, and Paddington is just the ‘end of the line’.

Empty EL trains will start from OOC. Long distance passengers will be able to get on the seats before the tube passengers do. Seems quite logical to me. It’ll also be a quicker interchange because you aren’t having to go through two sets of barriers - it’ll be across the bridge.

Newquay, Exeter and Bristol will never have the demand to justify the routes that Heathrow has. We should be encouraging passengers to use Heathrow, rather than flying abroad to connect.

I have yet to see any legitimate reason against stopping at OOC other than ‘it’ll take years to build.’. Which is absolutely valid, but has stopped so much in this country that it really shouldn’t be an excuse.

 

[irish_rail]

I'll definitely be changing at OOC inbound. It's going to be much quicker, it's less than half the walking distance from the ends of the trains and even less if you are in the middle. I wouldn't describe the change at Paddington as an excellent interchange, it's average at best

Yes you'll be changing when OOC opens, as the alternative will be a slower journey time than present. Your hand is forced somewhat. But if OOC never opened the current setup really isn't bad , in my view it's very good , and the changes that are coming are really not worth the disruption being caused to those heading to central London and not the EL.

I didn’t suggest trains from the west should terminate at OOC. Rather the headline journey time should be from OOC, and Paddington is just the ‘end of the line’.

Empty EL trains will start from OOC. Long distance passengers will be able to get on the seats before the tube passengers do. Seems quite logical to me. It’ll also be a quicker interchange because you aren’t having to go through two sets of barriers - it’ll be across the bridge.

Newquay, Exeter and Bristol will never have the demand to justify the routes that Heathrow has. We should be encouraging passengers to use Heathrow, rather than flying abroad to connect.

I have yet to see any legitimate reason against stopping at OOC other than ‘it’ll take years to build.’. Which is absolutely valid, but has stopped so much in this country that it really shouldn’t be an excuse.

Advertising OOC as the new alternative London destination will not wash. I'm confident of that. People will never see OOC as London. It is also very poorly connected road wise , I confidently predict many people will continue to stick with Paddington. The argument about getting a seat on EL is also irrelevant, as most journeys from Paddington at present on the EL would be under 10 minutes anyway. Of course going forward people will be able to enjoy longer journeys on metro stock with few seats and inward facing ones at that. Not quite sure I'd see that as a journey improvement. And as for saying we should be encouraging use of Heathrow? Are you crazy? Last thing we need is more congestion there, and if anything we should be actively discouraging flying, there is an environmental crisis don't you know.

 

[Agent_Squash]

Yes you'll be changing when OOC opens, as the alternative will be a slower journey time than present. Your hand is forced somewhat. But if OOC never opened the current setup really isn't bad , in my view it's very good , and the changes that are coming are really not worth the disruption being caused to those heading to central London and not the EL.


Advertising OOC as the new alternative London destination will not wash. I'm confident of that. People will never see OOC as London. It is also very poorly connected road wise , I confidently predict many people will continue to stick with Paddington. The argument about getting a seat on EL is also irrelevant, as most journeys from Paddington at present on the EL would be under 10 minutes anyway. Of course going forward people will be able to enjoy longer journeys on metro stock with few seats and inward facing ones at that. Not quite sure I'd see that as a journey improvement. And as for saying we should be encouraging use of Heathrow? Are you crazy? Last thing we need is more congestion there, and if anything we should be actively discouraging flying, there is an environmental crisis don't you know.

Berlin’s ‘central’ station isn’t actually in the centre. Neither is Vienna. So long as it’s well connected, which OOC will be, then it doesn’t really make a difference.

The roads to OOC haven’t been built yet, so I don’t get how you can say there’s no road connections (which doesn’t matter that much as it’s largely a public transport interchange, not a parkway)

Seats on empty trains is absolutely relevant. Being able to get your luggage on and take a seat is a far bigger benefit than the mediocre interchange at Paddington.

And finally, you mentioned investing in three airports! Improved access to Heathrow, which already has the flights, is far better than just encouraging airlines to add connecting flights to hubs from SW England.

 

[stuu]

Yes you'll be changing when OOC opens, as the alternative will be a slower journey time than present. Your hand is forced somewhat. But if OOC never opened the current setup really isn't bad , in my view it's very good , and the changes that are coming are really not worth the disruption being caused to those heading to central London and not the EL.

Why is walking the length of the train, across the concourse, out of the building, round the corner, and down two escalators a good interchange? A good interchange is cross-platform, or Waterloo with it's mid-platform subway to the Tube

 

[Sly Old Fox]

There is very little benefit in calling at OOC for passengers travelling to the south west, but potentially a lot more for passengers in west London looking to travel to destinations on the great western.

It would be mad not to have an interchange between HS2/Elizabeth Line/GWML as they’re all right there together.

Why is walking the length of the train, across the concourse, out of the building, round the corner, and down two escalators a good interchange? A good interchange is cross-platform, or Waterloo with it's mid-platform subway to the Tube

Ok that’s not what you’re getting at OOC though.

 

[stuu]

Ok that’s not what you’re getting at OOC though.

There are going to be four sets of stairs to each platform, two in the middle and one at each end, so the maximum walking distance is about 50m to get off the platform, then a 20m walk to get to the steps to the EL platform. It's about as good as it could be without being cross-platform

 

[Benjwri]

which OOC will be

When you say it will be, it's currently not firmly planned, or even officially indicated that is will be, connected to anything but the GWML and EL. In my opinion that's very poorly connected. From a tube map perspective it'll look as well connected as Acton Mainline (i.e. unconnected). The only planned lines running through it are the GWML, the Elizabeth Line and HS2. Sure there are lines in the vicinity, but Willesden Junction is nearly a mile away, and unless they build a new bridge North Acton is also nearly a mile away. There are buses, but unless you're looking to get somewhere in the local area, that is adding significant journey time. There are a two proposed Overground stations, but right now those are a dream, there is no funding, and the overground doesn't have the capacity, or go to the Central London destinations that the tube from Paddington does.

Compare this to Paddington. It has the GWML, Elizabeth Line, the Circle line (Twice in both directions), the District Line, the Hammersmith and City Line and the Bakerloo Line. I don't see how this is at all comparable. Paddington is clearly vastly better connected, and it only takes standing at Paddington for 10 minutes to see the notion that everyone is changing to the Elizabeth line is plainly wrong.

 

[Agent_Squash]

When you say it will be, it's currently not firmly planned, or even officially indicated that is will be, connected to anything but the GWML and EL. In my opinion that's very poorly connected. From a tube map perspective it'll look as well connected as Acton Mainline (i.e. unconnected). The only planned lines running through it are the GWML, the Elizabeth Line and HS2. Sure there are lines in the vicinity, but Willesden Junction is nearly a mile away, and unless they build a new bridge North Acton is also nearly a mile away. There are buses, but unless you're looking to get somewhere in the local area, that is adding significant journey time. There are a two proposed Overground stations, but right now those are a dream, there is no funding, and the overground doesn't have the capacity, or go to the Central London destinations that the tube from Paddington does.

Compare this to Paddington. It has the GWML, Elizabeth Line, the Circle line (Twice in both directions), the District Line, the Hammersmith and City Line and the Bakerloo Line. I don't see how this is at all comparable. Paddington is clearly vastly better connected, and it only takes standing at Paddington for 10 minutes to see the notion that everyone is changing to the Elizabeth line is plainly wrong.

Firstly, you’ve missed a key connection - OOC will be connected to HS2, which will allow vastly improved connections to the North West. Don’t forget that the current opposition to HS2 to Euston is largely Rishi’s pet project - he’ll most likely be gone in a few months time.

OOC isn’t a traditional London interchange - it’s far closer to a German Hbf. In that respect, the tube map connections don’t matter - it’s the main line connections it makes a lot easier.

Paddington will always be the place to go for the Tube. But it was always considered disconnected without the EL - and it still is without it. The Circle, H+C and District are basically the same thing through there - and aren’t exactly winners for capacity. The EL will be taking the vast majority of passengers for sure.

Overground will need to happen eventually due to population growth. And it’s a perfect fit for OOC - a National Rail interchange. We should build more like it, like the rest of Europe already has.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

OOC will be 4 platforms on the mains and reliefs. That, if anything, gives more operational flexibility?

8 GWML platforms altogether (both sides of 4 island platforms).
6 low-level HS2 platforms.
14 in total.
Broadly, the relief line platforms will be built to the north of the current 4-track layout, and the mains will expand to fill the vacated relief line space.