The Crossrail 3 concept

[tbtc]

We really need a thread for "what will happen" and a thread for "what I'd like to happen".

Just my opinion.

 

[Stats]

So basically, Wimbledon to Epping is now dead, and has been replaced with a heavy rail tunnel from Liverpool Street to Waterloo via Euston?

Crossrail 2 wouldn't go near Liverpool Street or Waterloo. TfL currently have two options on the table for Crossrail 2. One is an automatic railway over the safeguarded route between Seven Sisters and Clapham Junction. The other is a regional railway. The routes in the North would commence from Hertford East via Tottenham Hale (tunnel portal at Tottenham Hale) and Alexandra Palace via Seven Sisters (all in tunnel). The two lines would join at Dalston Junction then proceed to Angel, Kings Cross, Euston then stations through Central London to Victoria, Kings Road Chelsea, Clapham Junction, Tooting Broadway and Wimbledon. They would emerge out of tunnel after Wimbledon and then take over SW services to Kingston, Shepperton, Woking, Chessington South and Epsom.

Maps in Appendix 2 (last 2 pages) of this TfL paper: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/corporate/Item05-ECPP-Nov-2011-HS2.pdf

 

[swt_passenger]

So basically, Wimbledon to Epping is now dead, and has been replaced with a heavy rail tunnel from Liverpool Street to Waterloo via Euston?

Er... no.

Divert services off the WA route into tunnel somewhere northeast of Hackney, then follow the Chelsea - Hackney safeguarded route under central London, (diverted via Euston) then pickup the route towards SW London but tunneled to somewhere between Clapham Jn and Wimbledon and extend onto the SW suburban network through Raynes Park.

Or, to put it another way, remove up to 24 tph of services from both Waterloo and Liverpool St and join them in the middle - in a very similar way to that of Crossrail 1 removing services from Paddington and from Liverpool St, and joining them up.

TfL have a bit of info about possibilites here, with maps:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/corporate/Item05-ECPP-Nov-2011-HS2.pdf

 

[Batman]

Er... no.

Divert services off the WA route into tunnel somewhere northeast of Hackney, then follow the Chelsea - Hackney safeguarded route under central London, (diverted via Euston) then pickup the route towards SW London but tunneled to somewhere between Clapham Jn and Wimbledon and extend onto the SW suburban network through Raynes Park.

Or, to put it another way, remove up to 24 tph of services from both Waterloo and Liverpool St and join them in the middle - in a very similar way to that of Crossrail 1 removing services from Paddington and from Liverpool St, and joining them up.

TfL have a bit of info about possibilites here, with maps:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/corporate/Item05-ECPP-Nov-2011-HS2.pdf

If it's running along the safeguarded route through central London, it sounds to me as if Chelsea-Hackney has been killed off. And I thought the safeguarded route went via Euston anyway?

 

[swt_passenger]

If it's running along the safeguarded route through central London, it sounds to me as if Chelsea-Hackney has been killed off. And I thought the safeguarded route went via Euston anyway?

No it didn't.

Why else would TfL keep referring to diverting it to Euston for HS2?

Here's the safeguarded route, unfortunately it's a relatively large file:

http://www.crossrail.co.uk/assets/l...safeguarding_directions_june_2008_part_11.pdf

The route goes directly from Kings Cross to Tottenham Court Rd, as can be seen.

 

[Batman]

No it didn't.

Why else would TfL keep referring to diverting it to Euston for HS2?

Here's the safeguarded route, unfortunately it's a relatively large file:

http://www.crossrail.co.uk/assets/l...safeguarding_directions_june_2008_part_11.pdf

The route goes directly from Kings Cross to Tottenham Court Rd, as can be seen.

OK, but there are only 10tph currently calling at Tottenham Hale, including the Stanstead express. So there will need to be 14tph on the Alaxandra Palace branch if it is to connect with 24tph from Wimbledon. Unless of course some trains from the south terminate at Euston or the tunnel portal is moved further south and the Chingford branch is incorporated into it.

 

[swt_passenger]

OK, but there are only 10tph currently calling at Tottenham Hale, including the Stanstead express.

Or the train frequency there is constrained further down the route, or at Liverpool St. In which case the diversion to Crossrail might allow more trains in total to run.

What happens now does not mean frequency can't increase in the future. You seem to be searching for problems that don't exist, and in any case, CR2 is a project for about 12 years time - much can change, so why worry about today's basic timetable?.

 

[ert47]

You idea is a good one, but I would make further changes, the tunnels from Euston and Maryboune would link at Tottenham Court Road and go to Charring Cross, the current station will become a concourse and a new underground station below it would be built, the tunnel would then reaches under the South Bank where it splits in 2, one going towards Waterloo and another emerging at Waterloo East

As swt mentioned, its a bad idea messing around with the current Charing Cross mainline station. Although the front of the station is at ground level, the other end is at least a floor and a half above ground level. Add Embankment station into the mix and you have a huge muddle. (also there is the old abandoned Northern Line loop on the eastern side of Embankment - not sure of the state of it)

Also I suggest buiding a station at Leicester Square between Tottenham Court Road and Charring Cross and stations at Portland Place (between MaryBourne and Tottenham Court Road) and Bloomsbury (between Euston and Tottenham Court Road)

Turning Leicester Square into a major interchange is ill-advised as there is very little space available for passenger dispersal above ground (try walking along Charing Cross Road in a hurry one day and you'll find out! )

 

[tbtc]

OK, but there are only 10tph currently calling at Tottenham Hale, including the Stanstead express. So there will need to be 14tph on the Alaxandra Palace branch if it is to connect with 24tph from Wimbledon. Unless of course some trains from the south terminate at Euston or the tunnel portal is moved further south and the Chingford branch is incorporated into it.

Then again, Crossrail "One" is quote lopsided in terms of frequent services to Abbey Wood/ Shenfield, but only a handful to Maidenhead/ Heathrow (based on current plans, assuming Heathrow Express remains).

Will be interesting to see how that works out

 

[Chris125]

Doing what I suggested (linking the DC/WCML slows at West Hampstead and the Chiltern Main Line outside Marylebone to the SE side of Victoria) would probably require the partial demolition of the Grosvenor Road Carriage shed, but then there will be less trains requiring stabling at Victoria......

As i think i've said before, a tunnel emerging at Victoria would be rather pointless as well impractical given the gradients and lack of room for a worksite.

The problem isnt so much Victoria but the capacity of the lines heading into it, especially the BML by the time CR3 could be considered - it would need to go a lot futher into South London to make a real difference. As the existing lines serve inner London quite well, an 'express' tunnel might be the way to go to remove longer distance services, reducing the cost of stations and providing more of a Thameslink-type service (perhaps combined with LM services north of the capital) than a Crossrail-type metro service.

Chris

 

[HSTEd]

Well if you only had two underground stations (at Marylebone and Victoria) and then extended the tunnel most of the way to Clapham Junction that would probably be a low cost solution compared to Crossrail 1.

You could probably route all the trains from the Chiltern adn the WCML slows into it and connect with SN/SE commuter trains.

 

[tbtc]

Well if you only had two underground stations (at Marylebone and Victoria) and then extended the tunnel most of the way to Clapham Junction that would probably be a low cost solution compared to Crossrail 1.

You could probably route all the trains from the Chiltern adn the WCML slows into it and connect with SN/SE commuter trains.

That'd be a lot of money spent but as there's not a huge market for (say) Hemel Hempsted/ High Wycombe to Sevenoaks/ East Grinsted would it be worth it?

If you are going to build a "Thameslink" / "Crossrail" type of service then you are going to introduce delays from one side onto the other side (so that a breakdown at Watford means delays at Clapham etc)...

...so, you need to give both sides some benefit to justify it, like a station or two in the centre of London. Running non-stop from Marylebone to Victoria doesn't give *that* much benefit (in my eyes).

 

[HSTEd]

That'd be a lot of money spent but as there's not a huge market for (say) Hemel Hempsted/ High Wycombe to Sevenoaks/ East Grinsted would it be worth it?

If you are going to build a "Thameslink" / "Crossrail" type of service then you are going to introduce delays from one side onto the other side (so that a breakdown at Watford means delays at Clapham etc)...

...so, you need to give both sides some benefit to justify it, like a station or two in the centre of London. Running non-stop from Marylebone to Victoria doesn't give *that* much benefit (in my eyes).

So perhaps one station between Marylebone and Victoria with underground interchanges, such as at Green Park.

 

[tbtc]

So perhaps one station between Marylebone and Victoria with underground interchanges, such as at Green Park.

That would be a lot better.

Most of the NR termini around London aren't popular destinations in their own right, only as places to change trains (I'd be interested in the number of East Coast* passengers who alight at Kings Cross and stay within just a ten minute radius of the station, for example).

If you can offer some central London stop that'd be much more attractive for passengers.

(* - as in the TOC, not just all passengers on the ECML which would include those from Finsbury Park etc!)

 

[Chris125]

Nice idea, but you also have to bear in mind the impact of all the extra passengers you get from commuter trains from both north and south of the river - if you only have one central london station you run the risk of overloading the existing station and the tube lines that run through it especially if there's disruption.

Any such proposal would probably need at least two large interchanges to avoid causing chaos, and i doubt Marylebone would even justify a station given its relatively low use and single tube line connection.

Chris

 

[HSTEd]

Marylebone would be on the route and it has relatively low use at present, unlike the other obvious alternative for the northern tunnel terminus station (Euston) which will be loaded to death by HS2 and a dozen other things.

Green Park and Victoria might work relatively well, but Marylebone allows load spreading.

 

[LE Greys]

Marylebone would be on the route and it has relatively low use at present, unlike the other obvious alternative for the northern tunnel terminus station (Euston) which will be loaded to death by HS2 and a dozen other things.

Green Park and Victoria might work relatively well, but Marylebone allows load spreading.

As Chris says, its Tube connections are pretty horrendous, but a travolator or some other link to Edgware Road Circle might sort that out (although the names would be a bit confusing).

 

[STEVIEBOY1]

I Seem to recall reading ages ago that in the 19th Century, I K Brunel had a plan to extend by tunnels from all the London Terminals to have one huge central London station which was going to be in the Holborn area. Wether this was going to be for terminating or through trains I don't remember, perhaps a mix of both. It could have be interesting.

 

[Domeyhead]

Most people arriving into Waterloo from the southwest during morning or afternoon peaks are headed for the city or west end. The only other notable Eastern destinations from the southwest would be a) Stansted and b) Eurostar which suggests something like Wimbledon (for Xrail 2 link) -Clapham Jct (for Sussex coast + WIndsor lines) - Leicester Square - Liverpool Street - Stratford (for Xrail 1 link + Eurostar + Stansted)
Not sure what additional use cases from the north east of London would justify Crossrail 3 though (apart from the returns of course).

 

[ntg]

Most people arriving into Waterloo from the southwest during morning or afternoon peaks are headed for the city or west end. The only other notable Eastern destinations from the southwest would be a) Stansted and b) Eurostar which suggests something like Wimbledon (for Xrail 2 link) -Clapham Jct (for Sussex coast + WIndsor lines) - Leicester Square - Liverpool Street - Stratford (for Xrail 1 link + Eurostar + Stansted)
Not sure what additional use cases from the north east of London would justify Crossrail 3 though (apart from the returns of course).

A Stansted connection would exist if Crossrail 2 is taken to Hertford East and EWR gets its most comprehensive and most-favoured central section plans approved.

Which of course will involve the nasty business of demolishing a bit of central Hertford, but I doubt a few NIMBYs and NIM-Living-Rooms would stand in the way of a strong business case of connecting Stansted to Luton and Heathrow...