Waterloo Platform Extensions, Station Platforms and Throat Remodeling.

[Class 170101]

'Over 60 tph' is the whole station number of arrivals across all 3 service groups, not just the Windsor lines, despite how they report it in the video. Capacity on the Windosr side after the changes is only increased to 20 tph.



There are no plans to reinstate four tracking, or demolish the flyover. If anything they intend to run the Windsor side service on only two tracks, as described in the Route Study. I attached the proposed track layout drawing in post #26 a few weeks ago.

There's a short summary of the four main parts of the Waterloo Capacity Improvement Project WCIP in the planning application:

I see Grade separation at Woking mentioned - I thought grade separation Basingstoke was also needed though?

 

[Bald Rick]

So what you're saying is, despite the fact that nothing uses it, nothing is ever likely to use it in the near or immediate future, NR is going to keep it in situ and pay to maintain it for no good reason, when you could disconnect it, demolish it and not have to pay for any maintenance to be carried out.

Yep.

Maintenance will cost a few thousand a year at most. It's a modern structure that will need an annual inspection.

Demolition - easily £10million.

 

[ic250]

Could they not run some of the Chatham/Kent services into Waterloo instead of Victoria – using the flyover – and use platform capacity there for suburban services towards Guildford?

Probably doesn't solve anything though, if it's technically feasible.

 

[swt_passenger]

Could they not run some of the Chatham/Kent services into Waterloo instead of Victoria – using the flyover – and use platform capacity there for suburban services towards Guildford?

Probably doesn't solve anything though, if it's technically feasible.

Definitely doesn't solve anything, because trains cannot run directly from Victoria onto the Southwestern main line side. The whole point of putting the entire Windsor side service into platforms 19-24 is so that the rest of the station can absorb more main fast services across about 11 of the other 18 platforms.

 

[Bald Rick]

Definitely doesn't solve anything, because trains cannot run directly from Victoria onto the Southwestern main line side. The whole point of putting the entire Windsor side service into platforms 19-24 is so that the rest of the station can absorb more main fast services across about 11 of the other 18 platforms.

Partly that, and partly due to the extensions to platforms 1-4, which technically reduces capacity in the throat. Therefore the main suburban service will in future be spread over more platforms for the same frequency.

 

[swt_passenger]

Partly that, and partly due to the extensions to platforms 1-4, which technically reduces capacity in the throat. Therefore the main suburban service will in future be spread over more platforms for the same frequency.

That's roughly why I thought at least 6 or 7 platforms for the main suburban side. It might be in the video but don't some platforms get reduced slightly as well, perhaps P5/6 down to 10 car, as part of the modifications to the approaches?

I assume there won't be much public info available for the track layout changes as they wont have to go through local authority procedures as they're within the existing boundary.

 

[FOH]

I always wondered if they could have used the eurostar flyover with a new ramp onto the fast lines to allow the long mainline services to use the international platforms and group all the suburban together in the main station. IIRC there was a proposal at one time to have 16 coach trains from Basingstoke.

 

[swt_passenger]

I always wondered if they could have used the eurostar flyover with a new ramp onto the fast lines to allow the long mainline services to use the international platforms and group all the suburban together in the main station. IIRC there was a proposal at one time to have 16 coach trains from Basingstoke.

No, because the approaches into Victoria off the Southern side from Clapham Jn also cross the SWML at the same height immediately beyond the flyover. The ramp would therefore need to achieve twice the height it does.

There were tentative proposals to do that change with mains into P20-24 a while ago, it was in the DfTs report on the international station (the one that also covered longer or double deck trains) but it would have used a completely new flyover between Clapham Junction and Queenstown Rd.

 

[Bald Rick]

That's roughly why I thought at least 6 or 7 platforms for the main suburban side. It might be in the video but don't some platforms get reduced slightly as well, perhaps P5/6 down to 10 car, as part of the modifications to the approaches?

I assume there won't be much public info available for the track layout changes as they wont have to go through local authority procedures as they're within the existing boundary.

Ther should be a network change, either out there now or ready to go soon, I would have thought.

 

[swt_passenger]

Ther should be a network change, either out there now or ready to go soon, I would have thought.

If only they included the details on the public version. The few that have had drawings included, such as the London Bridge CPPN, are very much in the minority. Normally they only provide a covering letter, sometimes a text description but not always.

 

[NotATrainspott]

So what you're saying is, despite the fact that nothing uses it, nothing is ever likely to use it in the near or immediate future, NR is going to keep it in situ and pay to maintain it for no good reason, when you could disconnect it, demolish it and not have to pay for any maintenance to be carried out.

NR will have worked out how much it (as a modern structure) will cost to maintain each year, and how much it would cost to demolish it. The act of demolishing it would provide no immediate capacity relief, so the return on investment involved would be low. It would be better value to spend the money on some other worthwhile improvement somewhere else on the network. When it is necessary to increase capacity further, the whole series of works can be done simultaneously to give the best return on investment.

 

[Goldfish62]

Most of the trackwork in WIT has now been lifted and the temporary wooden bridge to platforms 21 and 22 dismantled.

 

[WWTownEnth]

NR will have worked out how much it (as a modern structure) will cost to maintain each year, and how much it would cost to demolish it. The act of demolishing it would provide no immediate capacity relief, so the return on investment involved would be low. It would be better value to spend the money on some other worthwhile improvement somewhere else on the network. When it is necessary to increase capacity further, the whole series of works can be done simultaneously to give the best return on investment.

Although I have seen nothing to corroborate this, there are persistent rumours that Queenstown Road station may close in 2020 after the nearby Northern Line station opens. Maybe the flyover will be tackled if/at the time the station is demolished.

 

[hwl]

Although I have seen nothing to corroborate this, there are persistent rumours that Queenstown Road station may close in 2020 after the nearby Northern Line station opens. Maybe the flyover will be tackled if/at the time the station is demolished.

I think the flyover may have been part funded with a European grant which would have to be repaid (with inflation adjustment etc) if demolished before a certain date (presumably 40 years given other Channel Tunnel / BR dates???)

I can't see Queenstown Road being closed unless the Northern is extended to Clapham Jn to maintain the link to the west.

 

[jopsuk]

I think the flyover may have been part funded with a European grant which would have to be repaid (with inflation adjustment etc) if demolished before a certain date (presumably 40 years given other Channel Tunnel / BR dates???)

That sounds like fokelore/"tsk, the EU eh?" myth to me.

 

[The Ham]

I see Grade separation at Woking mentioned - I thought grade separation Basingstoke was also needed though?

IIRC, it is, but it is less needed than Woking and is more to do with freight paths than passenger paths.

 

[Ianno87]

I think the flyover may have been part funded with a European grant which would have to be repaid (with inflation adjustment etc) if demolished before a certain date (presumably 40 years given other Channel Tunnel / BR dates???)

I can't see Queenstown Road being closed unless the Northern is extended to Clapham Jn to maintain the link to the west.

Arguably, that link can be provided by exosting trains from Battersea Park station, which is a weak man's stones' throw away from Queenstown Road.

 

[swt_passenger]

I can find no mention of a possible closure of Queenstown Rd in any NR documents. The Wessex route study drawings show how the platforms are to be rebuilt for an eventual new layout that allows more trains to call, but why bother if closure is being contemplated?

 

[Goldfish62]

I can find no mention of a possible closure of Queenstown Rd in any NR documents. The Wessex route study drawings show how the platforms are to be rebuilt for an eventual new layout that allows more trains to call, but why bother if closure is being contemplated?

Indeed. At a time when London's railways are unlikely to be able to cope with the ever-growing demand as it is it would surely be utter madness to close an inner London station and push usage towards other stations which themselves are likely to come under increasing pressure. In fact, given the immense scale of the Nine Elms/Battersea development I wouldn't be surprised if the Windsors were stopped at Queenstown Road as well.

 

[infobleep]

Indeed. At a time when London's railways are unlikely to be able to cope with the ever-growing demand as it is it would surely be utter madness to close an inner London station and push usage towards other stations which themselves are likely to come under increasing pressure. In fact, given the immense scale of the Nine Elms/Battersea development I wouldn't be surprised if the Windsors were stopped at Queenstown Road as well.

Well given they demolished an old signal box and extended the platforms over the site of it, it would be rather odd to then close it the station.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[rj90]

Couple of points:
Getting rid of the flyover does nothing to add the 4th Windsor track, the VTB1 bridges at QTR will need to be replaced as they have a pier where the track Bed would be. the tenderers for the Waterloo work had to produce construction staging for said bridge replacement as a case study.

QTR station will be upgraded in CP6 and platform 1 reopened. Was CP5 but cut in Hendy review

ECS line from Clapham will be in CP6.

Working flyover was meant to be GRiP4 in CP5, but cut back to GRIP3 or maybe nothing. Costs hugely underestimated, minimal signalling work assumed when in fact it will need a relock and a fair few new signals. Knock on is no delivery in CP6 due to the very long process for planning and possible compulsory purchase.

WIT had its first track delivered his week. Most bottom ballast down and whacked last week.

Station about 60% stripped internally

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Does keeping the flyover offer any useful potential diversion routes?

Has the roof of the old Waterloo International now been repainted? Last pictures I saw a couple of years ago had lots of rust visble

 

[infobleep]

Couple of points:
Getting rid of the flyover does nothing to add the 4th Windsor track, the VTB1 bridges at QTR will need to be replaced as they have a pier where the track Bed would be. the tenderers for the Waterloo work had to produce construction staging for said bridge replacement as a case study.

QTR station will be upgraded in CP6 and platform 1 reopened. Was CP5 but cut in Hendy review

ECS line from Clapham will be in CP6.

Working flyover was meant to be GRiP4 in CP5, but cut back to GRIP3 or maybe nothing. Costs hugely underestimated, minimal signalling work assumed when in fact it will need a relock and a fair few new signals. Knock on is no delivery in CP6 due to the very long process for planning and possible compulsory purchase.

WIT had its first track delivered his week. Most bottom ballast down and whacked last week.

Station about 60% stripped internally

Will any of that impact on capacity plans that South West Trains had or are those solely based on existing infrastructure?

The problem that exists is that we have more and more people wishing to use the trains. If only there was away to slow it down uptake, so that it grew at the pace we can afford to build at.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[Bald Rick]

If only there was away to slow it down uptake, so that it grew at the pace we can afford to build at.

There is, and BR did it routinely (eg almost every year in the decade before privatisation)

Put the prices up in real terms by 3-5% a year.

 

[swt_passenger]

Does keeping the flyover offer any useful potential diversion routes?

Not really. It was looked at a few years ago as part of the London Bridge and Thameslink works and never acted upon.

 

[infobleep]

There is, and BR did it routinely (eg almost every year in the decade before privatisation)

Put the prices up in real terms by 3-5% a year.

Well that's the solution then.

Perhaps they would make more money and be able to spend less of infrastructure.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[D Foster]

Will any of that impact on capacity plans that South West Trains had or are those solely based on existing infrastructure?

The problem that exists is that we have more and more people wishing to use the trains. If only there was away to slow it down uptake, so that it grew at the pace we can afford to build at.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

The early (Victorian) GWR faced the same problem... In my years of research I stumbled on a quote from one senior GW manager to another raising the issue of the problem of the unexpected high demand for passenger services getting in the way of the company's real business of moving freight.

In more recent times the move away from rail was facilitated by more cars and more roads - and look where that got us!

In between the rise of the electric tram impacted the suburban services - and that was killed off by "policy"... Getting trams back is also drastically impacted by weird policies.

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

Was in London yesterday and took these of the international platforms from the upper balcony

 

[SpacePhoenix]

What's going to happen to all of the space that used to be passport control, security x-raying, waiting area/longe, etc?

 

[hwl]

What's going to happen to all of the space that used to be passport control, security x-raying, waiting area/lounge, etc?

I think the plan is lower level concourse for Windsors and lots of retail!