Second North London line

Status
Not open for further replies.

Waverley125

Member
Joined
2 Sep 2008
Messages
1,003
Location
Leeds, West Yorkshire
Just an idea here

Electrify both the Dudding Hill line (reopening stations at Dudding Hill & Harlesden) and the Goblin-then run Barking-Ealing Broadway as part of London Overground via West Hampstead Thameslink and Cricklewood.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
17,245
No paths on the MML, so would need another bore to Belsize tunnel from West Hampstead to Junction Road Jn, which would also have to dive under the MML.
Also no paths (post Crossrail) on the GWML so would need extra tracks there. Also not much spare capacity at Acton Wells, so some form of grade separation likely there.

But anything is possible!
 

OxtedL

Established Member
Associate Staff
Quizmaster
Joined
23 Mar 2011
Messages
2,475
Tunnels (or similar solution) which are capable of taking freight off the GOBLIN and safely onto the goods lines of the MML would be potentially quite useful in the ever advancing cross London freight crisis. The Dudding Hill branch also probably has lots of potential in the future, if only as a diversionary route for WLL freight, which could head out to Kew and then get access to the WLL and MML avoiding Willesden (I think, don't quote me).

However, diverting GOBLIN services away from the Gospel Oak would be a bit of a nuisance as this is a very important interchange for the line. You're not realistically going to cram any more trains down the line.

Getting a GWML connection is also going to be a problem - I suppose you could hope that some kind of connection to the mystery Old Oak Common interchange is possible, but any kind of access to the actual main line is very optimistic.

This might be a success, given as it links to Thameslink and maybe a couple of other useful places, but it's quite unlikely and won't happen due to the fact it would cost a lot and that it doesn't serve any current central London flows usefully.
 

alexjames

Member
Joined
2 Dec 2009
Messages
90
And whilst we are at it, why not electrify it (along with the Aylesbury branch out of Marylebone) so that I can get a direct train from Harrow to Heathrow. Picc line from South Harrow with a U turn at Acton is wearisome as is the 140 bus.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
17,245
A new tunnel there is not a new plan - There were well advanced plans for a tunnel from West Hampstead adjacent to the MML to Primrose Hill in the 1960s. For the North Cross route motorway. A big junction with an extended M1 was to be located where Sainsburys Finchley Road is now.
 

OxtedL

Established Member
Associate Staff
Quizmaster
Joined
23 Mar 2011
Messages
2,475
And whilst we are at it, why not electrify it (along with the Aylesbury branch out of Marylebone) so that I can get a direct train from Harrow to Heathrow. Picc line from South Harrow with a U turn at Acton is wearisome as is the 140 bus.

The OP has already suggested it be electrified. Hence the use of the word "electrify" at the start of the second line. I'm staggered you missed it.

You're not going to get direct trains on that route as it doesn't serve any useful purpose. Not that many people want to travel from Harrow to Heathrow on a daily basis, and far more would prefer it if you didn't cripple capacity into Paddington and Marylebone.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
A new tunnel there is not a new plan - There were well advanced plans for a tunnel from West Hampstead adjacent to the MML to Primrose Hill in the 1960s. For the North Cross route motorway. A big junction with an extended M1 was to be located where Sainsburys Finchley Road is now.

I can see a rail tunnel from the GOBLIN to Primrose Hill being very useful for freight, and just as unlikely to happen as the Cricklewood option...

You have to be slightly glad they managed not to turn London into a massive motorway junction in the end.
 

alexjames

Member
Joined
2 Dec 2009
Messages
90
Deleted - duplicate
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Oops - OP did indeed suggest electrification - I was thinking of those noisy Chiltern DMUs that need to be replaced by something sensible.

Not sure that there is not a decent flow between Harrow and Heathrow. Try a 140 bus if you want some evidence.

But we both know it aint going to happen any time soon.

BTW, what traffic uses the Dudden Hill line at the moment? All I've ever seen from passing Met trains is the occasional maintenance train.
 

OxtedL

Established Member
Associate Staff
Quizmaster
Joined
23 Mar 2011
Messages
2,475
A local bus route operating at a high frequency and serving lots of intermediate places is a very different offering from anything the railway could offer realistically. I accept there may be demand, but not enough to warrant anything in the foreseeable future, as you admit.

On a slightly related note, can anyone enlighten me on this: http://www.opentraintimes.com/schedule/W62339/2012/4/20 ? Is this the service that they never ran and weren't going to?
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
12,970
Surely the "Cross London Freight Crisis" would be better solved by a railway built largely outside the M25 crossing the thames somewhere near the HS1 crossing? Electrified and cleared to such a gauge as to allow the potential movement of doublestack containers. (Is the Chunnel itself cleared for that even if the lines at the other end aren't?)

EDIT:
No, it appears the Chunnel is not cleared for double stack containers.... which is annoying to say the least.
 

Schnellzug

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2011
Messages
2,926
Location
Evercreech Junction
there was once a similar idea to that to the north of London, of course, between Oxford, Bletchley and Cambridge. Wouldn't that have been useful for freight nowadays.
 

ushawk

Established Member
Joined
5 Nov 2010
Messages
1,965
Location
Eastbourne
On a slightly related note, can anyone enlighten me on this: http://www.opentraintimes.com/schedule/W62339/2012/4/20 ? Is this the service that they never ran and weren't going to?

Yes it is, but i dont believe it has ever run. Was supposed to be a Southern 171 running it but i think there was concerns about it breaking down as its outside the Southern area and the nearest "rescue" train would be at Selhurst - so the line would be blocked for sometime until it would get there, which i think FGW werent happy with.

Think it would of just been a parly for the section between Shepherds Bush and Ealing Broadway, as no regular passenger services have operated over the route since the XC from Brighton was withdrawn.
 

Class377/5

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,594
Yes it is, but i dont believe it has ever run. Was supposed to be a Southern 171 running it but i think there was concerns about it breaking down as its outside the Southern area and the nearest "rescue" train would be at Selhurst - so the line would be blocked for sometime until it would get there, which i think FGW werent happy with.

Think it would of just been a parly for the section between Shepherds Bush and Ealing Broadway, as no regular passenger services have operated over the route since the XC from Brighton was withdrawn.

The Southern service was put on the back burner as NR couldn't provide paths for the service.
 

LE Greys

Established Member
Joined
6 Mar 2010
Messages
5,389
Location
Hitchin
there was once a similar idea to that to the north of London, of course, between Oxford, Bletchley and Cambridge. Wouldn't that have been useful for freight nowadays.

If you include Braintree-Stansted using a section of the old Braintree-Bishop's Stortford line, provided there is enough capacity through the Stansted Tunnel, then traffic from Felixstowe and Thamesport would have a means to avoid London. It would require a reversal at Cambridge, and there are plenty of problems between there and Bedford, but I reckon that it's doable with sufficient political will.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Surely the "Cross London Freight Crisis" would be better solved by a railway built largely outside the M25 crossing the thames somewhere near the HS1 crossing? Electrified and cleared to such a gauge as to allow the potential movement of doublestack containers. (Is the Chunnel itself cleared for that even if the lines at the other end aren't?)

EDIT:
No, it appears the Chunnel is not cleared for double stack containers.... which is annoying to say the least.

That's an alternative, but once again the useful connections, Palace Gates-Hertford Loop, Hatfield-St Alban's Abbey, Welwyn-Luton, Welwyn-Hertford East and so on, are all gone. An all-new line following the M25 might be possible, but seems unlikely to me.
 

Chris125

Established Member
Joined
12 Nov 2009
Messages
2,807
While i cant see any justification for the expense of running services through to Barking, perhaps TfL's experience with the WLL/NLL/GOBLIN upgrade will lead to renewed interest in running services over the Dudding Hill line in the coming years, especially with the development around OOC planned to follow the HS2/Crossrail interchange.

Chris
 

philjo

Established Member
Joined
9 Jun 2009
Messages
2,676
I recall that there was a proposal to run a service form Heathrow via the Dudding Hill Line into St Pancras to connect with Eurostar. I think it was dropped due to lack of platform space in St Pancras high level.
Maybe 2tph could run on the Thameslink route north from St Pancras then via the Dudding Hill Line to Heathrow, I assume it would need a flyover or something to connect the Thameslink slow lines to the Dudding Hill line without affecting MML fast lines. Would also provide useful connections for North London from West Hampstead etc.
 

Chris125

Established Member
Joined
12 Nov 2009
Messages
2,807
Maybe 2tph could run on the Thameslink route north from St Pancras then via the Dudding Hill Line to Heathrow, I assume it would need a flyover or something to connect the Thameslink slow lines to the Dudding Hill line without affecting MML fast lines. Would also provide useful connections for North London from West Hampstead etc.

Nice idea but thanks to Crossrail passengers on Thameslink will only be one change away from Heathrow when its finished, and there wouldnt be enough spare capacity through the Thameslink core or the GWML relief lines anyway.

Chris
 
Last edited:

DownSouth

Established Member
Joined
10 Dec 2011
Messages
1,545
Surely the "Cross London Freight Crisis" would be better solved by a railway built largely outside the M25 crossing the thames somewhere near the HS1 crossing? Electrified and cleared to such a gauge as to allow the potential movement of doublestack containers. (Is the Chunnel itself cleared for that even if the lines at the other end aren't?)

EDIT:
No, it appears the Chunnel is not cleared for double stack containers.... which is annoying to say the least.
Is there anywhere in Europe where double stacking is used?

I'm guessing the answer is no, so any double stack container usage would require a transshipment facility on each end of the segment where stacked containers would be used. That transshipment process would require extra manpower for no benefit (compared to running longer trains or more short trains) and force goods transported by rail to take extra time for no benefit. Freight transport is not a government/union jobs program, it's about efficiently shifting stuff from one location to another.

Just make the container trains longer or run more of the current short ones. Problem at least partially solved, a lot of money saved that can be spent on something useful and I'll send you a modest invoice (compared to the amount of money I saved you) for my consultation expertise.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
12,970
Is there anywhere in Europe where double stacking is used?

I'm guessing the answer is no, so any double stack container usage would require a transshipment facility on each end of the segment where stacked containers would be used. That transshipment process would require extra manpower for no benefit (compared to running longer trains or more short trains) and force goods transported by rail to take extra time for no benefit. Freight transport is not a government/union jobs program, it's about efficiently shifting stuff from one location to another.

Just make the container trains longer or run more of the current short ones. Problem at least partially solved, a lot of money saved that can be spent on something useful and I'll send you a modest invoice (compared to the amount of money I saved you) for my consultation expertise.

Yes..... I wasn't proposing to actually use double stacking any time soon.

I was proposing to make the bridges and wiring sufficiently high above the track to allow it to happen at some point or other, just in case in 30 years we discover we really want to use double stacking.
This doesn't really cost that much more, especially since tunnel cross sections are not such a large linear determinant of price any more.

EDIT: Having a larger gauge would also allow the extension of many tunnel shuttles to the M25 or the like, which would remove most of the load from the M20 and allow proper facilities to be built to avoid operation stack having to recur any time soon.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top