|
Post by greenboy on Mar 27, 2020 7:36:23 GMT
I think Crossrail should takeover the current Thameslink service to Rainham and possibly the Strood to Maidstone West service. Maidstone is even further away than Reading is, this shows that CrossRail should never have been operated by TfL, it should be more like how Thameslink was planned out It's only slightly further and I really can't see why it would be a problem. I would imagine most people will be making journeys lasting less than a hour.
|
|
|
Post by route53 on Mar 27, 2020 7:43:26 GMT
Maidstone is even further away than Reading is, this shows that CrossRail should never have been operated by TfL, it should be more like how Thameslink was planned out It's only slightly further and I really can't see why it would be a problem. I would imagine most people will be making journeys lasting less than a hour. Because it’s TfL not TfSEofE. Medway is a push and a massive push but CrossRail to Maidstone as a TfL service is a step too far for me,
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Mar 27, 2020 7:45:34 GMT
It's only slightly further and I really can't see why it would be a problem. I would imagine most people will be making journeys lasting less than a hour. Because it’s TfL not TfSEofE. Medway is a push and a massive push but CrossRail to Maidstone as a TfL service is a step too far for me, Timewise Maidstone West is about five minutes further than Rainham.
|
|
|
Post by Dillon95 on Mar 27, 2020 8:52:21 GMT
I think the line should be split into two. The Elizabeth Line being a TFL ran tube like service between Slough/Heathrow and Shenfield/Dartford. Then Crossrail can be a longer distance National Rail service providing Reading, Gravesend, Medway, Maidstone West etc with fast links to Central London.
|
|
|
Post by route53 on Mar 27, 2020 10:20:20 GMT
I think the line should be split into two. The Elizabeth Line being a TFL ran tube like service between Slough/Heathrow and Shenfield/Dartford. Then Crossrail can be a longer distance National Rail service providing Reading, Gravesend, Medway, Maidstone West etc with fast links to Central London. It definitely should’ve been built that way but unfortunately due to shortsightedness CrossRail will just be another tube line albeit a glorified hybrid of the Central, District and Piccadilly lines. I’m wary of TfL going further beyond it’s boundaries because sooner or later towns (city in Reading’s case) will loose their identity and simply become “another part of London” this Was why TfL couldn’t get their hands on Thameslink because the line goes a fair bit away from London and it serves other cities
|
|
|
Post by Dillon95 on Mar 27, 2020 11:33:00 GMT
I think the line should be split into two. The Elizabeth Line being a TFL ran tube like service between Slough/Heathrow and Shenfield/Dartford. Then Crossrail can be a longer distance National Rail service providing Reading, Gravesend, Medway, Maidstone West etc with fast links to Central London. It definitely should’ve been built that way but unfortunately due to shortsightedness CrossRail will just be another tube line albeit a glorified hybrid of the Central, District and Piccadilly lines. I’m wary of TfL going further beyond it’s boundaries because sooner or later towns (city in Reading’s case) will loose their identity and simply become “another part of London” this Was why TfL couldn’t get their hands on Thameslink because the line goes a fair bit away from London and it serves other cities Thameslink should be split into two as well. TFL should get the Sutton, Orpington, Sevenoaks and Dartford services and run them north as far as St Albans like a tube line. Then the services out to Brighton, Rainham, Bedford, Peterborough, Stevenage etc should be fast services within TFL territory.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Mar 27, 2020 14:08:17 GMT
My alternative proposals for the Elizabeth line: To the west, I would retain services to Reading, and both Heathrow branches. I would add additional branches to the west rather than terminating a number of services at Paddington - this would include taking over the branch to Windsor & Eton Central. I would also extend over the Greenford branch, though with fewer stations, continuing onwards via South Ruislip to High Wycombe - this would replace Chiltern services to Gerrards Cross & High Wycombe, relieving some platform capacity at Marylebone. At Heathrow, Crossrail would also replace Heathrow Express, extending the remaining Paddington-terminating services. These would remain as fast services, though with the option of an additional call at Ealing Broadway. To the east, I would keep the two core branches, but extend some Abbey Wood services to Ebbsfleet, with the option of continuing some to Gravesend or Rainham. I would also extend some Shenfield services to Southend Victoria, to serve Southend Airport. The service pattern could be as follows, with varying calling patterns: 3tph Reading to Shenfield 3tph Windsor to Shenfield 3-4tph High Wycombe to Southend Victoria 4tph Heathrow T4 to Abbey Wood 6tph Heathrow T5 to Ebbsfleet Interesting idea about High Wycombe via the Greenford branch. Windsor & Eton branch would be great as it can be very busy but there is the problem of crossing the fast lines.
|
|
|
Post by route53 on Mar 27, 2020 14:24:37 GMT
It definitely should’ve been built that way but unfortunately due to shortsightedness CrossRail will just be another tube line albeit a glorified hybrid of the Central, District and Piccadilly lines. I’m wary of TfL going further beyond it’s boundaries because sooner or later towns (city in Reading’s case) will loose their identity and simply become “another part of London” this Was why TfL couldn’t get their hands on Thameslink because the line goes a fair bit away from London and it serves other cities Thameslink should be split into two as well. TFL should get the Sutton, Orpington, Sevenoaks and Dartford services and run them north as far as St Albans like a tube line. Then the services out to Brighton, Rainham, Bedford, Peterborough, Stevenage etc should be fast services within TFL territory. Maybe this is some rail bosses should consider: CROSSRAIL: 1: Oxford to Maidstone/Medway 2: High Wycombe to Southend Airport 3: Milton Keynes to Colchester 4: Reading to Southend Airport ELIZABETH LINE: 1: Slough to Chelmsford 2: Heathrow T4 to Gravesend 3: Heathrow T123 to Dartford THAMESLINK: 1: Brighton to Bedford 2: Brighton to Cambridge 3: Ashford Intl to Bedford 4: Medway to Luton (via Woolwich/Lewisham) 5: Guildford to Peterborough TFL THAMESLINK (HOLBORN LINE? After Holborn Viaduct) 1: Gravesend to St. Albans City (via Sidcup) 2: Orpington to Welwyn Garden City (via Penge) 3: Sevenoaks to St. Albans City (via Catford) 4: Gatwick Airport to Welwyn Garden City 5: Sutton to St. Albans City 6: Epsom to Welwyn Garden City
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Mar 27, 2020 14:26:48 GMT
I think the line should be split into two. The Elizabeth Line being a TFL ran tube like service between Slough/Heathrow and Shenfield/Dartford. Then Crossrail can be a longer distance National Rail service providing Reading, Gravesend, Medway, Maidstone West etc with fast links to Central London. I think this would be too complicated to have two types of service going through the same platforms and tunnels. I would suggest for all Crossrail-style services to be the equivalent of Paris's RER, and to go a moderate distance beyond the M25 to serve airports and key commuter towns. With Thameslink as an example, longer distance services to Brighton or Cambridge would go into terminal stations, swapping paths with more metro-style services. But interchange could still be available between longer and shorter distance stations before reaching central London. For example, if a passenger wanted to travel from Bedford to London Bridge, they would be able to change at West Hampstead.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Mar 27, 2020 16:40:31 GMT
As a compromise, maybe extend CrossRail to Medway but Woolwich line services run semi fast out to Medway rather than curtail SE services at Abbey Wood. So you could have this: CROSSRAIL: 1: Paddington to Gillingham, 2tph, semi fast, not calling at Stone, Swanscombe and Northfleet 2: Heathrow to Gravesend, 2tph 3: Reading to Gravesend 2tph, semi fast, not calling at Stone, Swanscombe and Northfleet, also semi fast west of Paddington, With peaks starting from Abbey Wood to various western destinations SOUTH EASTERN: Charing Cross to Maidstone West via Lewisham & Woolwich, fast to Lewisham, then all stations to Abbey Wood then falls only at Dart, Greenhithe, Gravesend, Strood then 1tph all stations to Maidstone, 1tph semi fast calling only at Snodland LONDON OVERGROUND: Cannon Street to Abbey Wood (if space available otherwise Plumstead) 6tph I see your point about not wanting TfL to take over the whole of the South East but what I would do for the Abbey Wood branch is seek to extend it to Ebbsfleet, creating a hub. People will be able to change from Eurostar/Southeastern services on to Crossrail to go to destinations such as on the Crossrail route.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Mar 27, 2020 16:56:18 GMT
My alternative proposals for the Elizabeth line: To the west, I would retain services to Reading, and both Heathrow branches. I would add additional branches to the west rather than terminating a number of services at Paddington - this would include taking over the branch to Windsor & Eton Central. I would also extend over the Greenford branch, though with fewer stations, continuing onwards via South Ruislip to High Wycombe - this would replace Chiltern services to Gerrards Cross & High Wycombe, relieving some platform capacity at Marylebone. At Heathrow, Crossrail would also replace Heathrow Express, extending the remaining Paddington-terminating services. These would remain as fast services, though with the option of an additional call at Ealing Broadway. To the east, I would keep the two core branches, but extend some Abbey Wood services to Ebbsfleet, with the option of continuing some to Gravesend or Rainham. I would also extend some Shenfield services to Southend Victoria, to serve Southend Airport. The service pattern could be as follows, with varying calling patterns: 3tph Reading to Shenfield 3tph Windsor to Shenfield 3-4tph High Wycombe to Southend Victoria 4tph Heathrow T4 to Abbey Wood 6tph Heathrow T5 to Ebbsfleet A Windsor branch is a fantastic idea to offer faster Windsor-London trains than currently offered by SWR or changing at Slough. I like your idea for 3tph from Windsor to Shenfield, I'd have the Windsor adopt the same stopping pattern as the Reading-Paddington trains between Slough and Paddington because the Windsor services need to only stop at select stations if they're to attract serious custom of people travelling to Windsor, for those who are unaware, the stops I propose for a Windsor service would be Slough, Langley, Iver, West Drayton, Hayes & Harlington, Southall, Ealing Broadway, then stopping through the core section. I suppose issues with this are trains crossing the fast lines at Slough to get from the relief lines to the Windsor branch and the other issue is civil engineering that would be required at Windsor & Eton Central station to accommodate nine-car trains, with the potential pressure this could pile on to what is not a very large station. Previously I had been in favour of having 8 car GWR services splitting at Slough with only four cars heading to Windsor and Eton Central for this very reason. Very interesting proposal with the High Wycombe branch. Freeing up terminating capacity at Marylebone is essential and I do think that you've conceived a great way of doing so, my alternative would have been to bring the New North Mainline back in to enable both Chiltern Railways trains to terminate at Old Oak Common and to allow Crossrail trains to use the NNML although the elephant in the room is of course the lack of electrification which would be a drawback of sending Crossrail up to High Wycombe. Don't really see any point is having High Wycombe services go via West Ealing, the Greenford branch was truncated to free up mainline capacity for Crossrail so I don't see why this should be squandered with trains bound for High Wycombe having to cross over the Up Slow to get on to the Greenford branch only to not stop at any of the stations. I suppose you could argue that trains need to go via West Ealing so they can stop at Ealing Broadway which could encourage less people to drive up the A40 but I think that faster journey times should be prioritised at the expense of people having to change at Old Oak Common.
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Mar 27, 2020 17:53:26 GMT
My alternative proposals for the Elizabeth line: To the west, I would retain services to Reading, and both Heathrow branches. I would add additional branches to the west rather than terminating a number of services at Paddington - this would include taking over the branch to Windsor & Eton Central. I would also extend over the Greenford branch, though with fewer stations, continuing onwards via South Ruislip to High Wycombe - this would replace Chiltern services to Gerrards Cross & High Wycombe, relieving some platform capacity at Marylebone. At Heathrow, Crossrail would also replace Heathrow Express, extending the remaining Paddington-terminating services. These would remain as fast services, though with the option of an additional call at Ealing Broadway. To the east, I would keep the two core branches, but extend some Abbey Wood services to Ebbsfleet, with the option of continuing some to Gravesend or Rainham. I would also extend some Shenfield services to Southend Victoria, to serve Southend Airport. The service pattern could be as follows, with varying calling patterns: 3tph Reading to Shenfield 3tph Windsor to Shenfield 3-4tph High Wycombe to Southend Victoria 4tph Heathrow T4 to Abbey Wood 6tph Heathrow T5 to Ebbsfleet A Windsor branch is a fantastic idea to offer faster Windsor-London trains than currently offered by SWR or changing at Slough. I like your idea for 3tph from Windsor to Shenfield, I'd have the Windsor adopt the same stopping pattern as the Reading-Paddington trains between Slough and Paddington because the Windsor services need to only stop at select stations if they're to attract serious custom of people travelling to Windsor, for those who are unaware, the stops I propose for a Windsor service would be Slough, Langley, Iver, West Drayton, Hayes & Harlington, Southall, Ealing Broadway, then stopping through the core section. I suppose issues with this are trains crossing the fast lines at Slough to get from the relief lines to the Windsor branch and the other issue is civil engineering that would be required at Windsor & Eton Central station to accommodate nine-car trains, with the potential pressure this could pile on to what is not a very large station. Previously I had been in favour of having 8 car GWR services splitting at Slough with only four cars heading to Windsor and Eton Central for this very reason. Very interesting proposal with the High Wycombe branch. Freeing up terminating capacity at Marylebone is essential and I do think that you've conceived a great way of doing so, my alternative would have been to bring the New North Mainline back in to enable both Chiltern Railways trains to terminate at Old Oak Common and to allow Crossrail trains to use the NNML although the elephant in the room is of course the lack of electrification which would be a drawback of sending Crossrail up to High Wycombe. Don't really see any point is having High Wycombe services go via West Ealing, the Greenford branch was truncated to free up mainline capacity for Crossrail so I don't see why this should be squandered with trains bound for High Wycombe having to cross over the Up Slow to get on to the Greenford branch only to not stop at any of the stations. I suppose you could argue that trains need to go via West Ealing so they can stop at Ealing Broadway which could encourage less people to drive up the A40 but I think that faster journey times should be prioritised at the expense of people having to change at Old Oak Common. The idea behind these changes is not only for improved links into central London, but also to utilise the Elizabeth line services that are planned to terminate from the east at Paddington. Also note that these suggestions would require electrification of the lines to Windsor, Greenford and Wycombe. Regarding possible stopping patterns to Windsor, the idea would be to divert the Maidenhead services onto the Windsor branch, with Reading services additionally stopping at Burnham and Taplow. Then additional trains extended from Paddington to give 3tph to Reading and 3 to Windsor. The New North Main Line can not be re-used as the land is needed for HS2. I think Chiltern had some proposals already to extend Greenford services west via South Ruislip if/when they take over the Greenford branch (but not sure where they would terminate). This would also replace the Greenford shuttle service as an anomoly service. Regarding stops on the Greenford to West Ealing line, I would simply reduce the number of stops. Drayton Green is very close to both West Ealing and Hanwell. South Greenford is quite close to both Greenford and Perivale. And each of the intermediate stations have quite low usage. I would opt to introduce one new station on the south side of Ruislip Road East, maybe with another entrance on Copley Close.
|
|
|
Post by route53 on Mar 27, 2020 18:24:09 GMT
As a compromise, maybe extend CrossRail to Medway but Woolwich line services run semi fast out to Medway rather than curtail SE services at Abbey Wood. So you could have this: CROSSRAIL: 1: Paddington to Gillingham, 2tph, semi fast, not calling at Stone, Swanscombe and Northfleet 2: Heathrow to Gravesend, 2tph 3: Reading to Gravesend 2tph, semi fast, not calling at Stone, Swanscombe and Northfleet, also semi fast west of Paddington, With peaks starting from Abbey Wood to various western destinations SOUTH EASTERN: Charing Cross to Maidstone West via Lewisham & Woolwich, fast to Lewisham, then all stations to Abbey Wood then falls only at Dart, Greenhithe, Gravesend, Strood then 1tph all stations to Maidstone, 1tph semi fast calling only at Snodland LONDON OVERGROUND: Cannon Street to Abbey Wood (if space available otherwise Plumstead) 6tph I see your point about not wanting TfL to take over the whole of the South East but what I would do for the Abbey Wood branch is seek to extend it to Ebbsfleet, creating a hub. People will be able to change from Eurostar/Southeastern services on to Crossrail to go to destinations such as on the Crossrail route. Ebbsfleet/Gravesend I definitely agree with, this would mean SE trains would run semi fast between Abbey Wood & Gravesend with stops only at Dartford & Greenhithe, also so that people in SE London can change at Ebbsfleet Intl for the Eurostar
|
|
|
Post by route53 on Mar 27, 2020 18:26:14 GMT
My alternative proposals for the Elizabeth line: To the west, I would retain services to Reading, and both Heathrow branches. I would add additional branches to the west rather than terminating a number of services at Paddington - this would include taking over the branch to Windsor & Eton Central. I would also extend over the Greenford branch, though with fewer stations, continuing onwards via South Ruislip to High Wycombe - this would replace Chiltern services to Gerrards Cross & High Wycombe, relieving some platform capacity at Marylebone. At Heathrow, Crossrail would also replace Heathrow Express, extending the remaining Paddington-terminating services. These would remain as fast services, though with the option of an additional call at Ealing Broadway. To the east, I would keep the two core branches, but extend some Abbey Wood services to Ebbsfleet, with the option of continuing some to Gravesend or Rainham. I would also extend some Shenfield services to Southend Victoria, to serve Southend Airport. The service pattern could be as follows, with varying calling patterns: 3tph Reading to Shenfield 3tph Windsor to Shenfield 3-4tph High Wycombe to Southend Victoria 4tph Heathrow T4 to Abbey Wood 6tph Heathrow T5 to Ebbsfleet A Windsor branch is a fantastic idea to offer faster Windsor-London trains than currently offered by SWR or changing at Slough. I like your idea for 3tph from Windsor to Shenfield, I'd have the Windsor adopt the same stopping pattern as the Reading-Paddington trains between Slough and Paddington because the Windsor services need to only stop at select stations if they're to attract serious custom of people travelling to Windsor, for those who are unaware, the stops I propose for a Windsor service would be Slough, Langley, Iver, West Drayton, Hayes & Harlington, Southall, Ealing Broadway, then stopping through the core section. I suppose issues with this are trains crossing the fast lines at Slough to get from the relief lines to the Windsor branch and the other issue is civil engineering that would be required at Windsor & Eton Central station to accommodate nine-car trains, with the potential pressure this could pile on to what is not a very large station. Previously I had been in favour of having 8 car GWR services splitting at Slough with only four cars heading to Windsor and Eton Central for this very reason. Very interesting proposal with the High Wycombe branch. Freeing up terminating capacity at Marylebone is essential and I do think that you've conceived a great way of doing so, my alternative would have been to bring the New North Mainline back in to enable both Chiltern Railways trains to terminate at Old Oak Common and to allow Crossrail trains to use the NNML although the elephant in the room is of course the lack of electrification which would be a drawback of sending Crossrail up to High Wycombe. Don't really see any point is having High Wycombe services go via West Ealing, the Greenford branch was truncated to free up mainline capacity for Crossrail so I don't see why this should be squandered with trains bound for High Wycombe having to cross over the Up Slow to get on to the Greenford branch only to not stop at any of the stations. I suppose you could argue that trains need to go via West Ealing so they can stop at Ealing Broadway which could encourage less people to drive up the A40 but I think that faster journey times should be prioritised at the expense of people having to change at Old Oak Common. Any stopping service from Windsor to Paddington would surely be much faster than the current semi fast from Windsor to Waterloo, Windsor is a natural CrossRail terminal, that can handle the stoppers with the Reading trains calling only at Hayes & Harlington and Ealing Broadway.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Mar 27, 2020 19:20:06 GMT
A Windsor branch is a fantastic idea to offer faster Windsor-London trains than currently offered by SWR or changing at Slough. I like your idea for 3tph from Windsor to Shenfield, I'd have the Windsor adopt the same stopping pattern as the Reading-Paddington trains between Slough and Paddington because the Windsor services need to only stop at select stations if they're to attract serious custom of people travelling to Windsor, for those who are unaware, the stops I propose for a Windsor service would be Slough, Langley, Iver, West Drayton, Hayes & Harlington, Southall, Ealing Broadway, then stopping through the core section. I suppose issues with this are trains crossing the fast lines at Slough to get from the relief lines to the Windsor branch and the other issue is civil engineering that would be required at Windsor & Eton Central station to accommodate nine-car trains, with the potential pressure this could pile on to what is not a very large station. Previously I had been in favour of having 8 car GWR services splitting at Slough with only four cars heading to Windsor and Eton Central for this very reason. Very interesting proposal with the High Wycombe branch. Freeing up terminating capacity at Marylebone is essential and I do think that you've conceived a great way of doing so, my alternative would have been to bring the New North Mainline back in to enable both Chiltern Railways trains to terminate at Old Oak Common and to allow Crossrail trains to use the NNML although the elephant in the room is of course the lack of electrification which would be a drawback of sending Crossrail up to High Wycombe. Don't really see any point is having High Wycombe services go via West Ealing, the Greenford branch was truncated to free up mainline capacity for Crossrail so I don't see why this should be squandered with trains bound for High Wycombe having to cross over the Up Slow to get on to the Greenford branch only to not stop at any of the stations. I suppose you could argue that trains need to go via West Ealing so they can stop at Ealing Broadway which could encourage less people to drive up the A40 but I think that faster journey times should be prioritised at the expense of people having to change at Old Oak Common. Any stopping service from Windsor to Paddington would surely be much faster than the current semi fast from Windsor to Waterloo, Windsor is a natural CrossRail terminal, that can handle the stoppers with the Reading trains calling only at Hayes & Harlington and Ealing Broadway. I'm sure it would be a faster service, not a bad idea to give some stops to the Windsor services thus reducing stops on the Reading services.
|
|