• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Possible Crossrail capacity upgrades

Status
Not open for further replies.

absolutelymilk

Established Member
Joined
18 Jul 2015
Messages
1,242
The amount of demand for Crossrail is very hard to predict - if it turns out that it is immediately full, as some have predicted, what are the options for upgrades? Obviously the seven-car trains will be extended to nine-car, but what can be done beyond this? I read somewhere that the platforms are long enough to take eleven-car trains, but not sure if this is true.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

306024

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2013
Messages
3,946
Location
East Anglia
It is true, so far as the central section is concerned, but would need an awful lot of upgrade on the GE and particularly at Heathrow.
 

Non Multi

Member
Joined
11 Dec 2017
Messages
1,117
Will certainly be full during the the summer, a 'no-brainer' considering the stiflingly hot Central Line.
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
The Central Section stations have passive provision for 11 car trains and technically the signalling capability for higher than 24tph.

However, works on the GEML, GWML and Heathrow for 11 car trains, including stabling sites, would be pretty colossal.
 

absolutelymilk

Established Member
Joined
18 Jul 2015
Messages
1,242
The Central Section stations have passive provision for 11 car trains and technically the signalling capability for higher than 24tph.

However, works on the GEML, GWML and Heathrow for 11 car trains, including stabling sites, would be pretty colossal.
What about the south eastern section (Abbey Wood)?
 

theking

Member
Joined
30 Sep 2011
Messages
626
Someone from tfl has already said that it will be at capacity from its opening no doubt SDO will be seen in future.
 

adamedwards

Member
Joined
4 Apr 2016
Messages
796
The most obvious western upgrades are:

- Extend beyond Heathrow to the south west via Staines.
- Extend north west from Old Oak Common on Chiltern routes or to Tring on the WCML.

I'm sure one of these will happen as the new service will, as with Thameslink, be a huge success.
 

absolutelymilk

Established Member
Joined
18 Jul 2015
Messages
1,242
The most obvious western upgrades are:

- Extend beyond Heathrow to the south west via Staines.
- Extend north west from Old Oak Common on Chiltern routes or to Tring on the WCML.
I've changed the title to clarify that I meant capacity upgrades - if it is extended that will presumably make overcrowding in the core even worse.
 

D365

Veteran Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
11,449
The most obvious western upgrades are:

- Extend beyond Heathrow to the south west via Staines.
- Extend north west from Old Oak Common on Chiltern routes or to Tring on the WCML.

I'm sure one of these will happen as the new service will, as with Thameslink, be a huge success.

Those aren’t capacity upgrades, those are extensions. If the central section in this scenario is full, how do you propose adding more passengers without setting up frequency upgrades first?
 

matt_world2004

Established Member
Joined
5 Nov 2014
Messages
4,504
I thought the signalling system could take 32 tph and 11 car trains in the core. I think the capacity upgrades we will see first would be more and more trains going in the GWML this reduce crowding caused by people same platform interchanging.
 

Wirewiper

Member
Joined
14 Nov 2017
Messages
612
Location
BET & TQY
I am not convinced it will be immediately full, not given the way the UK economy is tanking and the way European banks are moving staff out of London.
 

Jordeh

Member
Joined
18 Aug 2010
Messages
372
Location
London
I am not convinced it will be immediately full, not given the way the UK economy is tanking and the way European banks are moving staff out of London.
Please present some evidence of this happening? The UK economy is not tanking and unemployment is not increasing.

At the time of the Brexit vote yes there was a lot of talk of whole banks moving out of London but their position has softened significantly. It is now just talk of moving small divisions in major banks to other parts of Europe.
 

Maurice3000

Member
Joined
9 Apr 2013
Messages
61
Location
London
Considering the tunnels are made with a typical 6 metre diameter I can image it would be far cheaper to change the overhead lines and some other lineside infrastructure and run double decker trains than to extend underground platforms in central London to run longer trains.

The train design would require some good research into double decker carriages that keep dwell times at an acceptable level for such a crowded section but it might be an issue than can be solved.
 

plcd1

Member
Joined
23 May 2015
Messages
788
Please present some evidence of this happening? The UK economy is not tanking and unemployment is not increasing.

At the time of the Brexit vote yes there was a lot of talk of whole banks moving out of London but their position has softened significantly. It is now just talk of moving small divisions in major banks to other parts of Europe.

The demand for TfL's services is declining at present. Advertising revenues on the tube are also down - a sure sign that economic activity is not where it should be. TfL's recently revised business plan reflects much more pessimistic assumptions, using data from the Greater London Authorities economic unit and other sources, about patronage levels. This has removed hundreds of millions of pounds from the revenue element for TfL's services over several years and that includes Crossrail. I don't believe Crossrail will be literally full to bursting upon opening. It will be busy for a load of reasons including people just taking a look at it. The fact the service builds up over 2 years and will almost certainly have some element of disruption affecting services means it logically cannot be at capacity on day one. TfL's assumptions on revenue show it continuing to build up for Crossrail to 2020 when it plateaus - that shows what TfL think will happen.

Past remarks about "full on day one" were made at a time when TfL were lobbying Govt hard for more money for investment and also Crossrail 2. Sir Peter Hendy's remarks should be seen in that context. Things have changed since then.
 

D365

Veteran Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
11,449
Considering the tunnels are made with a typical 6 metre diameter I can image it would be far cheaper to change the overhead lines and some other lineside infrastructure and run double decker trains than to extend underground platforms in central London to run longer trains.

Considering the platforms are almost 250m in length it would be far cheaper to lengthen platforms than to totally rip up the GWML and GEML for the necessary gauge enhancement works.
 

plcd1

Member
Joined
23 May 2015
Messages
788
Considering the tunnels are made with a typical 6 metre diameter I can image it would be far cheaper to change the overhead lines and some other lineside infrastructure and run double decker trains than to extend underground platforms in central London to run longer trains.

The train design would require some good research into double decker carriages that keep dwell times at an acceptable level for such a crowded section but it might be an issue than can be solved.

The two areas of potential upgrade that are in the public domain are

a) lengthening 9 car trains to 11 cars
b) increasing service frequencies to levels higher than 24 tph. AIUI the signalling system is capable of 30 tph.

As others have said there are other consequential issues arising from these possible upgrades including lengthening platforms and sidings, depot capacity and also ensuring that things like junction capacity is maintained with longer trains, power supplies can cope with more trains etc. I have not seen any detailed exposition on how TfL and Network Rail would pursue either upgrade path or a combination of both. The recent decision to "sell and lease back" the class 345 fleet may pose additional complications in future if TfL wish to expand the train fleet.
 

absolutelymilk

Established Member
Joined
18 Jul 2015
Messages
1,242
To clarify, when I said "immediately full", I should have said by 2021, i.e. when there is a full service running and people have started to move to areas which benefit from Crossrail.

I have not seen any detailed exposition on how TfL and Network Rail would pursue either upgrade path or a combination of both. The recent decision to "sell and lease back" the class 345 fleet may pose additional complications in future if TfL wish to expand the train fleet.

Would they not have something in the contract to say that they are sold on the understanding that TfL can pay for them to be lengthened if necessary?
 

ijmad

Established Member
Joined
7 Jan 2016
Messages
1,810
Location
UK
Personally, I think 12tph on the Eastern branches will prove pretty paltry, one train every 5 minutes is going to be quite frustrating for your average impatient commuter waiting on the platform at Stratford and seeing three Central Line trains pass at 36tph in the morning peak. A Central Line 92TS has a capacity of 1047 vs a Crossrail 345 train at 1500, (source), so Crossrail can carry 18,000 passengers per hour to the core, vs 37,692 for the Central Line.

Already TfL is running more trains to Liverpool Street high level, but I still imagine even more capacity will be needed on the Eastern branches before long. 11 carriage trains and 32tph will boost to about 29,000 passengers per hour which starts to look more 'competitive', but will even more be required? How could this be achieved I wonder? The Crayonista in me wonders if at some point in the distant future, we might see a second east-west core route taking one of the eastern branches, linking it to some other commuter railway, like the Chiltern main line or the West London route or WCML, with a big interchange at Whitechapel or under Limehouse.
 
Last edited:

samuelmorris

Established Member
Joined
18 Jul 2013
Messages
5,121
Location
Brentwood, Essex
At the Eastern end it'll be fine to begin with. 315s doubled up will take about 1000 people tops versus 1500 on a 9-car 345. Then consider that 12tph is a lot better than what you currently get - at present, select stations like Ilford, Romford and Gidea Park get 14tph versus the 16 they'll get with Crossrail, but Harold Wood and Brentwood only currently get 8tph in the peak rather than 12, so for some stations it's a 50% frequency increase and a 50% capacity-per-train increase.
The Western end should be covered by the considerable increase in capacity from 165s to 345s. Really it's only the core section that's in any doubt for meeting the capacity requirement. It'll take a fair bit of load off the Central line for passengers using Liverpool Street, Bond Street, Tottenham Court Road and Farringdon instead of Chancery Lane, as well as a small handful who'd be willing to use Bond Street or TCR as an alternative to places like Oxford Circus and Marble Arch off the back of getting less cramped trains. It'll also take load off the North Circle for Whitechapel to Farringdon inclusive and Paddington, as well as reroute all sorts of other two-stage journeys like, for example, Canary Wharf to Willesden Junction routing people off the Jubilee Line. It'll also be taking some demand off the DLR from journeys to/from Custom House and Woolwich to Central London. Trains will be less horrifically crowded outside Central London during peak hours but I can easily envisage the core section in Zone 1 being pretty much 'full' from within a month of the system opening once everybody who uses the tube regularly has worked out how best to route their journey.

As an example, in the evening peak it may even be viable for people travelling to stations covered by the Gidea Park stoppers (e.g. Romford) from, say, Farringdon, to board an Abbey Wood service, which I imagine will be quite a lot less crowded in that direction, and change at Liverpool Street onto the high-level terminus to board a quieter train and get a seat the rest of the way, who knows. It'll certainly be something fun to experiment with.

One thing's for sure, if I'm still working near Farringdon when the core opens at the end of the year, I'll definitely switch to using a 345 to get to Liverpool Street rather than the surface lines. They may be a lot more comfortable than the Central line, but punctuality is pretty mediocre to say the least.
 
Last edited:

Class 170101

Established Member
Joined
1 Mar 2014
Messages
7,933
I think the service provided to Liverpool Street High Level at 4tph will prove insufficient due to the number of city workers who walk to / from Liverpool Street and don't use the tube for onward journeys. I think these services in particular will be overcrowded from the start.
 

Wirewiper

Member
Joined
14 Nov 2017
Messages
612
Location
BET & TQY
I think the service provided to Liverpool Street High Level at 4tph will prove insufficient due to the number of city workers who walk to / from Liverpool Street and don't use the tube for onward journeys. I think these services in particular will be overcrowded from the start.

A great number (I would hazard the majority) of these passengers will use the new Moorgate-Liverpool Street station, which will have more convenient exits for many.
 

Class 170101

Established Member
Joined
1 Mar 2014
Messages
7,933
Arriving London yes but not departing as they would be able to get a starter at Liverpool Street High Level and either get a seat or secure a bit of personal space rather than cram in with people already on board from Farringdon and beyond.
 

class26

Member
Joined
4 May 2011
Messages
1,125
I am not convinced it will be immediately full, not given the way the UK economy is tanking and the way European banks are moving staff out of London.

Report in today`s papers saying the loss of banking jobs is highly exaggerated and that comes from german bankers who are acknowledging bankers actually WANT to stay in London rather than move to Paris or Frankfurt
 

Maurice3000

Member
Joined
9 Apr 2013
Messages
61
Location
London
Considering the platforms are almost 250m in length it would be far cheaper to lengthen platforms than to totally rip up the GWML and GEML for the necessary gauge enhancement works.
Ah, I stand corrected. I wasn't aware the station tunnels were already that much longer than the trains.
 

plcd1

Member
Joined
23 May 2015
Messages
788
To clarify, when I said "immediately full", I should have said by 2021, i.e. when there is a full service running and people have started to move to areas which benefit from Crossrail.

Would they not have something in the contract to say that they are sold on the understanding that TfL can pay for them to be lengthened if necessary?

OK re the demand build up. I can understand why people may feel the service will be under pressure in the early days but I really don't see a service running in three sections with lots of enforced interchange being a miracle transport solution. People will experiment with all sorts of different options and as patronage shifts between lines we will see all sorts of shifting back and forth before it settles. The phased introduction of the Thameslink service also adds a different dimension to what may have been previously expected. I actually think the relative attractiveness / speed / frequency of both Crossrail and Thameslink are pretty crucial in how tube demand changes (or not) from 2018 to 2020/21.

I think the issue with the second point is multi-faceted. To do a "sell and lease back" you have to own the asset first off. Where will TfL get the money from for extra complete trains and / or carriages? If it has the cash why would it then do a further "sale and lease back"? Also what on earth happens with an asset that is partly "sold and leased back" and partly bought (e.g. a 9 car train extended to 11 cars)? Sounds like a recipe for complication to me. The only saving grace is that the maintenance arrangements are in a long term deal with Bombardier and outwith the direct influence of the lessor (as things appear today). I am sure lawyers could concoct some form of words for a future scenario but this is not the same sort of arrangement as a normal TOC has with a ROSCO where rolling stock ownership (almost) always rests with the ROSCO and maintenance / upgrade responsibilities are pretty well understood.

Obviously the TfL deal is not yet done with whoever it is who's raising the money nor do we know what, if any, provision TfL may have made in respect of extra Crossrail stock. Given the parlous state of TfL's finances now and the bigger mess they will be in come 2020/21 I can't see TfL being in the market for extra Crossrail rolling stock before something like 2024/25 regardless of how demand stressed Crossrail might be by then. Passengers will just have to lump the overcrowding for years until TfL can start raising fares again and may be able to get a better investment settlement from Government and we may have got rid of the lunacy of tube operating surplusses having to pay for the upkeep of the TfL road network.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top