Would help the layman (me!) if you used the existing names. This looks like XR1, XR2, Thameslink plus three new mainline tunnels. XR2 by 2030 alone will be a push.
Is there an easier way to distinguish between current/planned lines and stuff that you are proposing as new?
A few key things that are not quite explicit in my docs are:
- The scale and timeframe are intended to be provoking - quite right, at current pace, we wouldn't see this until 2099. My own view is a step-change in the planning, funding and execution is needed if London's serious about this.
- There were a couple of reasons I haven't used the existing Crossrail and Thameslink names. The first one is that when there are 6 similiarly functioning lines providing rail service across London, I don't see why they'd have their own specific scheme names - consistency and integration is key for me
- Second is I don't want to use the Crossrail name at this stage so that it's not construed as being "official", nor it being suggested that we'd have to to through the same kind of agonising process that Crossrail took to off the ground
Euston-St Pancras doesnt exist as an interchange - there is too big a gap. Euston and St-Pancras-Kings Cross should be show separately.
It doesn't exist currently however it already forms part of the preferred plans for Crossrail 2 which TfL has taken through consultation in 2013 and 2014, see documents here:
https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/crossrail/2 - these plans transfer to directly to Line C in the London Crosslink scheme. Euston-St Pancras will be a double-ended station which is possible given the platform lengths needed. Double-ended stations already feature on Crossrail at Farringdon (towards Barbican) and Liverpool Street (towards Moorgate).
The pink line in from Welwyn doesnt go anywhere near Kentish Town. The merge between Thameslink and the Great Northern route planned will be through the newish Canal Tunnels which are a relatively long way south of Kentish town.
You're quite right about Kentish Town, it is positioned wrongly on the network map, it needs to move to the next branch to the left on MML.
Ludgate Circus is City Thameslink. Its not on the underground network and using it as an intermediate station from Leicester Square to Liverpool Street looks really odd. It would be better to route via Westminster->Blackfrairs, and there would be the existing district/circle line tunnels to follow. Blackfriars -> Liverpool Street -> Tower Gateway then looks exceedingly odd too. (Draw it on a real map and youll see why) Blackfriars -> Fenchurch Street -> Tower Gateway might work.
You're correct that Ludgate Circus is City Thameslink. It's one of the only (if not the only?) station I've taken the liberty of renaming, which follows the rationale of removing the Thameslink brand. In this scheme it would be served by more than just the Thameslink route so the name becomes doubly archaic. Ludgate Circus is formed at the road intersection of Fleet Street, Farringdon Street, Ludgate Hill and New Bridge Street and the existing City Thameslink station is adjacent.
I accept the routing is not quite direct but I'm definitely not trying to follow with existing tube lines, but rather provide new rail interchanges and serve new areas where possible. Having worked just off Fleet Street I know this area could use a little help here. I was also keen to serve the Liverpool Street/Bank areas of the square mile and what I had in mind was curves from Leicester Square to run underneath Fleet Street, then after Ludgate Circus, curve up to run under London Wall. After Liverpool Street the curve back down to Tower Gateway would be quite sharp, however I think there's a real opportunity to provide a proper interchange between the existing DLR station and the District Line at Tower Hill, with the new Line F platforms passing in between before joining back onto the line towards Limehouse.
I'd propose that Fenchurch Street would be used only for a few peak hour services for city commuters and all other times the Essex Thameside routes would be served solely by Line F. For this route (along with all others), demand would need to be evaluated and determine whether these additional peaks are even necessary or whether Fenchurch Street could be closed all together.
We certainly wouldn't want stations at both Fenchurch Street and Tower Gateway, the existing stations are only 300 metres apart! Perhaps there could be an exit near the existing mainline station.
