Waterloo Platform Extensions, Station Platforms and Throat Remodeling.

[Bigfoot]

It's soon to be underway...

Platforms 21-24 were taken out of use during the Christmas possession. AWS and signalling was disconnected.

13th February 2016 will be the last day of Platform 20's use.
14th February 2016 Platform 20 out of use and starter signal will be disconnected and removed.

April 2016 - June 2017. Waterloo International will be no longer be Network Rail infrastructure whilst construction takes place. Still physically connected to the rail network. Construction trains will run in and out of the station to carry out the required track and signal remodeling. Movements in and out will be under the control of Wimbledon Box and the Construction Manager. To be treated as a private railway during the works.

December 2016. Possession of Waterloo during Christmas to test and install interlocking for Waterloo International.

February 2017. Platform 20 handed back to Network Rail infrastructure.

June/July 2017. Platforms 21-24 handed back to Network Rail infrastructure.

August 2017. 21 day possession of Waterloo platforms 1-8 and South sidings. Platforms 21-24 in service. Reduced service into Waterloo during the possession. Once lifted platforms 1-6 will be available for 10 car workings. One of the sidingings in South sidings will be removed.

August 2017 - December 2018. Waterloo International closed again once platforms 1-8 are reopened to allow for station construction including shops, escalators and lifts level with road access.

December 2018. All works finished ready for the timetable change all platforms reopened.

All tallys up with the slightly sketchy information provided here http://www.networkrail.co.uk/wcip/

 

[Via Bank]

Is there another blockade of Paddington at Christmas 2016? If so I expect Christmas travel to most of the west and south west of England's going to be fun…

 

[Goldfish62]

Many thanks for the update. I shall follow progress with interest.

 

[Blindtraveler]

Would someone be good enough to tell me why new lifts etc are needed for the international side? I thought all this was already there from its previous usage.

 

[gswindale]

From memory; the international platforms don't (with the exception of p20) connect particularly well with the rest of the national rail station - they had better access to the underground.

Thus the work required would be to provide a much better passenger experience.

I also suspect that the platforms once back in use will actually see more intensive use than they did in Eurostar days, so capacity improvements to the platform/concourse interchange would be necessary?

 

[Philip Phlopp]

From memory; the international platforms don't (with the exception of p20) connect particularly well with the rest of the national rail station - they had better access to the underground.

Thus the work required would be to provide a much better passenger experience.

I also suspect that the platforms once back in use will actually see more intensive use than they did in Eurostar days, so capacity improvements to the platform/concourse interchange would be necessary?

And what is still there will be 25 years old by the time the station re-opens.

It doesn't seem like yesterday we were all stood round looking at images like this - I can hardly believe it's been built, used for Eurostar, made redundant and has sat mostly unused for 8 years now. Where, exactly, has the time gone ?

 

[Blindtraveler]

Hmm valid point, life expired lifts etc indeed would need replacing and things I guess. Was just concerned money was being spent without reason.

 

[MarkyT]

From memory; the international platforms don't (with the exception of p20) connect particularly well with the rest of the national rail station - they had better access to the underground.

Thus the work required would be to provide a much better passenger experience.

I also suspect that the platforms once back in use will actually see more intensive use than they did in Eurostar days, so capacity improvements to the platform/concourse interchange would be necessary?

At the inner end I understand the buffer line is being moved back by about 60m to create a new low level circulating space that should help to reduce overcrowding by moving those waiting for Windsor line trains away from the main concourse. The street level entrance adjacent to York Road will also be opened up again and passages between the former Eurostar terminal and London Underground will be reopened and improved to provide alternative routes and relieve the entrances on the main concourse.

The outer end the platforms are also being cut back a little to create room for a more complex remodelled throat junction with more simultaneous parallel movements possible to suit the more intensive suburban operation. The throat work is also why some of the bridge structures are to be modified. Although shortened, the platforms will still each be able to accomodate a 12x20m car or a 10x23m car train comfortably, with a good compliant stand-back from both the buffers and the starting signal.

 

[Ianno87]

At the inner end I understand the buffer line is being moved back by about 60m to create a new low level circulating space that should help to reduce overcrowding by moving those waiting for Windsor line trains away from the main concourse. The street level entrance adjacent to York Road will also be opened up again and passages between the former Eurostar terminal and London Underground will be reopened and improved to provide alternative routes and relieve the entrances on the main concourse.

The outer end the platforms are also being cut back a little to create room for a more complex remodelled throat junction with more simultaneous parallel movements possible to suit the more intensive suburban operation. The throat work is also why some of the bridge structures are to be modified. Although shortened, the platforms will still each be able to accomodate a 12x20m car or a 10x23m car train comfortably, with a good compliant stand-back from both the buffers and the starting signal.

Cutting back the distance between buffer stops and starter signal is also necessary to give a line of sight from the driver of a starting train to the starter train. With the original 400m platform lengths, the driver of a 4/8/10/12 car train sat at the original buffer stops wouldn't be able to see the starter signals at their original location, due to the distance and (primarily) platform curvature.

 

[swt_passenger]

Would someone be good enough to tell me why new lifts etc are needed for the international side? I thought all this was already there from its previous usage.

The international platforms were accessed from below, via escalators, so there were lifts from the existing concourse level going down to the vacant areas below, rather than up to the slightly higher international platforms. And then more lifts and escalators further along the lengths of the platforms to go back up again.

The international services were operated via a departure lounge, and immigration areas, situated on two levels, with controlled access to the platforms.

There is a new planning application on Lambeth's website about the changes to the concourse and platform areas:

Planning reference 15/07331/FUL "Development of land between the Waterloo Station roof and former Waterloo International Terminal roof, involving the demolition of existing concourse and ramp structure; installation of new concourse bridge deck structure, concourse, lifts and stairs, balustrades and other fittings." There are various staging drawings for the four different levels involved but they don't give much away on the finished article.

As discussed in earlier threads, the P20-24 buffer stops are moving well away from the main concourse, and the platforms are being shortened at the country end to allow for parallel moves in and out of the platforms to the Windsor lines, replacing the existing single connection.

The planning application for that work (mainly bridge alterations) was discussed in this earlier thread: http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=118869

All the existing lifts and escalators are being removed and shafts and openings filled in.

 

[jopsuk]

also, whilst it will upset certain swedish forum members obsessed with the length of the 1953 summer saturday Royal Scot, the simple fact is that the South Western is a max 250/200m railway. If platforms can be cut back to improve speed and capacity in other ways that's a good thing.

 

[The Ham]

also, whilst it will upset certain swedish forum members obsessed with the length of the 1953 summer saturday Royal Scot, the simple fact is that the South Western is a max 250/200m railway. If platforms can be cut back to improve speed and capacity in other ways that's a good thing.

Where's the like button when you need it?!

 

[swt_passenger]

also, whilst it will upset certain swedish forum members obsessed with the length of the 1953 summer saturday Royal Scot, the simple fact is that the South Western is a max 250/200m railway. If platforms can be cut back to improve speed and capacity in other ways that's a good thing.

There's also those who for some strange reason insist on moving the sleepers from Euston to Waterloo. They must be really upset too...

 

[HowardGWR]

There's also those who for some strange reason insist on moving the sleepers from Euston to Waterloo. They must be really upset too...

I'm also annoyed that little girls can't take teddy down to the cess and gaze up at the driver of the ACE.

 

[fgwrich]

Is there another blockade of Paddington at Christmas 2016? If so I expect Christmas travel to most of the west and south west of England's going to be fun…

Victoria? I have heard that mooted and given the amount of charters that start from Waterloo but terminate in Vic I shouldn't see it as too impossible!

 

[Blaahh]

All i can say is... A year and a half????!!!!

Why does everything take so long in this country these days...

 

[swt_passenger]

All i can say is... A year and a half????!!!!

Why does everything take so long in this country these days...

It's three years altogether, if you read the first post fully...

 

[Dr_Paul]

Following on from the rejigging of the International station, are there any plans to do anything with the two junctions that took the Eurostar services off the route from Waterloo?

The connection with the line out of Victoria doesn't seem to have been used for ages, the rails are pretty rusty, and there doesn't really seem to be any use for it these days. It also reduces the Windsor lines down from four to three tracks, thus causing operational problems. Are there any plans to remove it?

The spur for empty stock workings down to the West London Line just east of Clapham Junction also does not appear to have been used for some time. Although this does not cause any operational bother, I imagine that it does increase maintenance costs just by its being there.

 

[Class 170101]

Is there another blockade of Paddington at Christmas 2016? If so I expect Christmas travel to most of the west and south west of England's going to be fun…

Victoria? I have heard that mooted and given the amount of charters that start from Waterloo but terminate in Vic I shouldn't see it as too impossible!

There is another blockade at Paddington currently proposed for Christmas 2016. Some services may go to Marylebone again. Note that Waterloo is only closed on 25 and 26 December (no trains), and 27 December with Platforms 1 - 10 closed on which a reduced service will probably run as its a Bank Holiday due to Christmas Day falling on a Sunday this year.

Can't see HSTs being allowed at Victoria. The Class 171s were not allowed in Victoria so the Uckfields were terminated at London Bridge. Can't see it being any different for HSTs therefore.

 

[jopsuk]

Victoria? I have heard that mooted and given the amount of charters that start from Waterloo but terminate in Vic I shouldn't see it as too impossible!

Looking at this I'm pretty sure only the Windsor lines have any sort of connection to Victoria. They'd need to from there access the Ludgate Lines (used by Overground) to Longhedge Junction, onto the Battersea Reversible (single track!) and from there would have access to the Chatham lines (SE) platforms and Brighton Slow (SN) platforms at Victoria.

It might also be possible to reach the Ludgate Lines from Platform 7 on the SWML, but a Down train would have to run "wrong line" along the Up Fast to beyond Wimbledon(!) before it could reach a crossover to access the Down.

Charters starting from Waterloo and terminating at Victoria can have taken wildly different routes on the way out and back. They're also just one train, not an attempt at running a regular service!

 

[swt_passenger]

Following on from the rejigging of the International station, are there any plans to do anything with the two junctions that took the Eurostar services off the route from Waterloo?

The connection with the line out of Victoria doesn't seem to have been used for ages, the rails are pretty rusty, and there doesn't really seem to be any use for it these days. It also reduces the Windsor lines down from four to three tracks, thus causing operational problems. Are there any plans to remove it?

The spur for empty stock workings down to the West London Line just east of Clapham Junction also does not appear to have been used for some time. Although this does not cause any operational bother, I imagine that it does increase maintenance costs just by its being there.

None of the various route studies issued recently have mentioned removing the flyover and approach ramp. Neither have they ever mentioned more than 3 tracks for the Windsor Lines. In fact the latest proposals effectively reduce the Windsor side to 2 tracks through that area, with a reversible carriage line to be provided for mainline ECS to/from Clapham Yard utilising a track between up main fast and down Windsor slow

 

[HarleyDavidson]

The route up over what was the international flyover has had the current turned off for quite a while now as it shows on the maps in the mess rooms at Waterloo, in the describer boxes NO DC.

If it's not going to be used in the future, then it should be demolished and the former Windsor line formation restored.

 

[swt_passenger]

If it's not going to be used in the future, then it should be demolished and the former Windsor line formation restored.

Perhaps they have better things to spend the millions on? In an ideal world it would come down, but there's no evidence that it would result in a nice and neat four track Windsor side formation, with up and down fast and slow.

What was the situation before the Eurostar flyover was built, does anyone have a link to a layout drawing from the early 1990s?

 

[hwl]

Perhaps they have better things to spend the millions on? In an ideal world it would come down, but there's no evidence that it would result in a nice and neat four track Windsor side formation, with up and down fast and slow.

What was the situation before the Eurostar flyover was built, does anyone have a link to a layout drawing from the early 1990s?

Wasn't the flyover part EC grant funded so if it is demolished before a certain date the grant would be to be repaid hence making it extremely unlikely?

 

[Dr_Paul]

None of the various route studies issued recently have mentioned removing the flyover and approach ramp. Neither have they ever mentioned more than 3 tracks for the Windsor Lines. In fact the latest proposals effectively reduce the Windsor side to 2 tracks through that area, with a reversible carriage line to be provided for mainline ECS to/from Clapham Yard utilising a track between up main fast and down Windsor slow

Cutting back the Windsor lines to two isn't going to help things, as I've been on several trains that have been held at Clapham Junction (up services) or after Vauxhall (down) under the existing arrangement. However, I think that fixing the bottleneck by having two up and two down lines -- the best solution for the Windsor lines -- all the way from Vauxhall to Clapham Junction will be very difficult, as it would require the rebuilding of Queenstown Road station, and, if the junction flyover is not removed, extending the viaduct sideways, and I'm not sure whether this is feasible.

 

[swt_passenger]

Cutting back the Windsor lines to two isn't going to help things, as I've been on several trains that have been held at Clapham Junction (up services) or after Vauxhall (down) under the existing arrangement.

Nonetheless that is the aim of the layout shown in fig 5.5 on page 79 of the Wessex route study published a few months ago.

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/Public...ssex-route-study/Wessex-Route-Study-Final.pdf

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

I had the opportunity on Saturday to inspect the platforms at Waterloo International... Jesus H Christ do they look awful! In my own humble opinion, Ardwick looks in a better state then they do

 

[swt_passenger]

I had the opportunity on Saturday to inspect the platforms at Waterloo International... Jesus H Christ do they look awful! In my own humble opinion, Ardwick looks in a better state then they do

I'd agree. Its remarkable that the international station was ever really considered a good building architecturally, because as a normal station it is pretty poor.

I'd rather they'd matched and extended the existing roof sideways to be honest. Perhaps Grimshaw at Waterloo was told to be different with his new bit, like the way they were prevented from extending St Pancras with a matching design.

Will be interesting to see how Waterloo turns out with all the planned changes though.

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

The parts of the platform that were under the roof looked very suitable and care for

The parts outside the roof, however, made me have to ask a member of staff if the platforms had been abandoned!

 

[tsr]

Can't see HSTs being allowed at Victoria. The Class 171s were not allowed in Victoria so the Uckfields were terminated at London Bridge. Can't see it being any different for HSTs therefore.

That only applies to the Southern (Central) side. Diesel and, with regards to charters, steam services can run into the Southeastern (Eastern) side. That said, it all depends on how many services Southeastern need to run, and whether HSTs and other GWR stock can be cleared for the route (probably more about short swing link / long swing link issues than other dimensions; believe it or not, the lines via Grosvenor Rail Bridge into London Victoria were originally designed to accept GWR broad gauge freight anyway).