|
|
Post by route53 on May 12, 2020 9:03:12 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on May 12, 2020 12:54:05 GMT
First of all, that was a very informative set of videos which I enjoyed watching. I have to say the figures for the costs seemed eye-wateringly high. I think grade separation of Balham Junction would be excellent as hold ups there are frustrating but given the railway is above ground level there, that will doubtless make it more expensive to deliver. The Streatham Common interchange seems a fantastic idea to bring together the different rail lines crossing over there but I expect it would cost a fortune. I'm a big fan of the Brockley interchange plan and think it would be a great hub. Something which stood out was the plan for the West London Line. I really like the nifty services along there but as others have pointed out the service is odd in that it is a semi fast service north of Wembley Central but then after that it becomes a stopping service. I fully support the proposal for more through trains at Clapham Junction, particularly because I hope it would mean in future that you wouldn't have to run across the station to get a train on the WLL if there were 4tph provided by the Overground both beginning at Clapham Junction and from Purley too. I would have thought a signalling upgrade would be necessary on the WLL to allow for more trains and was disappointed not to here anything of what would be done to try to prevent conflicts with freight trains. If TfL do start providing through trains on the WLL then I hope this paves the way for Southern services coming down the WLL to stop at fewer stations, ideally running fast from Clapham Junction to East Croydon but because there is no way for trains coming down the WLL to get on to the fast lines sadly this isn't possible, I still support WLL trains calling at fewer stops in principle. The East London Line upgrades would be excellent. Its no secret that overcrowding is a huge problem at many stations on the line so I think upgrading the line and re-signalling would be a great way to reduce overcrowding with 18tph between New Cross Gate and Sydenham to help out. Its a shame the Overground trains can't be lengthened because they're only 5 cars and get so overcrowded during the peaks but hopefully having more of them will address this issue. |
|
|
|
Post by route53 on May 12, 2020 17:33:28 GMT
First of all, that was a very informative set of videos which I enjoyed watching. I have to say the figures for the costs seemed eye-wateringly high. I think grade separation of Balham Junction would be excellent as hold ups there are frustrating but given the railway is above ground level there, that will doubtless make it more expensive to deliver. The Streatham Common interchange seems a fantastic idea to bring together the different rail lines crossing over there but I expect it would cost a fortune. I'm a big fan of the Brockley interchange plan and think it would be a great hub. Something which stood out was the plan for the West London Line. I really like the nifty services along there but as others have pointed out the service is odd in that it is a semi fast service north of Wembley Central but then after that it becomes a stopping service. I fully support the proposal for more through trains at Clapham Junction, particularly because I hope it would mean in future that you wouldn't have to run across the station to get a train on the WLL if there were 4tph provided by the Overground both beginning at Clapham Junction and from Purley too. I would have thought a signalling upgrade would be necessary on the WLL to allow for more trains and was disappointed not to here anything of what would be done to try to prevent conflicts with freight trains. If TfL do start providing through trains on the WLL then I hope this paves the way for Southern services coming down the WLL to stop at fewer stations, ideally running fast from Clapham Junction to East Croydon but because there is no way for trains coming down the WLL to get on to the fast lines sadly this isn't possible, I still support WLL trains calling at fewer stops in principle. The East London Line upgrades would be excellent. Its no secret that overcrowding is a huge problem at many stations on the line so I think upgrading the line and re-signalling would be a great way to reduce overcrowding with 18tph between New Cross Gate and Sydenham to help out. Its a shame the Overground trains can't be lengthened because they're only 5 cars and get so overcrowded during the peaks but hopefully having more of them will address this issue. Even before Covid-19 TfL had little money to expand on its Overground network, South Eastern was extremely premature when it got rid of its semi fast Gillingham service thinking that its Dartford/Gravesend services would be operated by LO, and look what happened. I also think some of the service patterns are weird like terminating trains at Wallington |
|
|
|
Post by route53 on May 12, 2020 17:33:53 GMT
First of all, that was a very informative set of videos which I enjoyed watching. I have to say the figures for the costs seemed eye-wateringly high. I think grade separation of Balham Junction would be excellent as hold ups there are frustrating but given the railway is above ground level there, that will doubtless make it more expensive to deliver. The Streatham Common interchange seems a fantastic idea to bring together the different rail lines crossing over there but I expect it would cost a fortune. I'm a big fan of the Brockley interchange plan and think it would be a great hub. Something which stood out was the plan for the West London Line. I really like the nifty services along there but as others have pointed out the service is odd in that it is a semi fast service north of Wembley Central but then after that it becomes a stopping service. I fully support the proposal for more through trains at Clapham Junction, particularly because I hope it would mean in future that you wouldn't have to run across the station to get a train on the WLL if there were 4tph provided by the Overground both beginning at Clapham Junction and from Purley too. I would have thought a signalling upgrade would be necessary on the WLL to allow for more trains and was disappointed not to here anything of what would be done to try to prevent conflicts with freight trains. If TfL do start providing through trains on the WLL then I hope this paves the way for Southern services coming down the WLL to stop at fewer stations, ideally running fast from Clapham Junction to East Croydon but because there is no way for trains coming down the WLL to get on to the fast lines sadly this isn't possible, I still support WLL trains calling at fewer stops in principle. The East London Line upgrades would be excellent. Its no secret that overcrowding is a huge problem at many stations on the line so I think upgrading the line and re-signalling would be a great way to reduce overcrowding with 18tph between New Cross Gate and Sydenham to help out. Its a shame the Overground trains can't be lengthened because they're only 5 cars and get so overcrowded during the peaks but hopefully having more of them will address this issue. Also glad you enjoyed the videos |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on May 12, 2020 19:01:40 GMT
I've finally found time to sit and watch them, really interesting although it does all sound just a little bit fanciful. |
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on May 12, 2020 19:32:13 GMT
First of all, that was a very informative set of videos which I enjoyed watching. I have to say the figures for the costs seemed eye-wateringly high. I think grade separation of Balham Junction would be excellent as hold ups there are frustrating but given the railway is above ground level there, that will doubtless make it more expensive to deliver. The Streatham Common interchange seems a fantastic idea to bring together the different rail lines crossing over there but I expect it would cost a fortune. I'm a big fan of the Brockley interchange plan and think it would be a great hub. Something which stood out was the plan for the West London Line. I really like the nifty services along there but as others have pointed out the service is odd in that it is a semi fast service north of Wembley Central but then after that it becomes a stopping service. I fully support the proposal for more through trains at Clapham Junction, particularly because I hope it would mean in future that you wouldn't have to run across the station to get a train on the WLL if there were 4tph provided by the Overground both beginning at Clapham Junction and from Purley too. I would have thought a signalling upgrade would be necessary on the WLL to allow for more trains and was disappointed not to here anything of what would be done to try to prevent conflicts with freight trains. If TfL do start providing through trains on the WLL then I hope this paves the way for Southern services coming down the WLL to stop at fewer stations, ideally running fast from Clapham Junction to East Croydon but because there is no way for trains coming down the WLL to get on to the fast lines sadly this isn't possible, I still support WLL trains calling at fewer stops in principle. The East London Line upgrades would be excellent. Its no secret that overcrowding is a huge problem at many stations on the line so I think upgrading the line and re-signalling would be a great way to reduce overcrowding with 18tph between New Cross Gate and Sydenham to help out. Its a shame the Overground trains can't be lengthened because they're only 5 cars and get so overcrowded during the peaks but hopefully having more of them will address this issue. Even before Covid-19 TfL had little money to expand on its Overground network, South Eastern was extremely premature when it got rid of its semi fast Gillingham service thinking that its Dartford/Gravesend services would be operated by LO, and look what happened. I also think some of the service patterns are weird like terminating trains at Wallington I was glad to see some provision for semi stopping services in there as I shudder at the possibility of TfL making some services all stops, especially when they don't need to be. I was surprised not to see plans for the Bakerloo line extension woven into plans for South East London though if they did take over Southeastern services then the Hayes line would get more frequent services without the downside of more stops and would be provided by the Bakerloo Line. It got me thinking that having the Overground and Bakerloo line simultaneously on that section could be the best of both worlds - however - I suspect that both wouldn't run together as there are so many track conflicts at Lewisham that the fewer trains there the better. This gets me on to my next point. Lewisham junction is a total mess with so many hold ups and no chance of it ever being grade separated. Its bad enough already so I wonder what makes TfL think that they can run higher frequency services there without more hold ups and as a result, less reliable services. I don't recall any mention of upgraded signalling to compensate for it. I totally agree with you about weird service patterns. I wonder if trains terminating at Wallington was just something for operational convenience, perhaps for the purpose of reducing track conflicts at Sutton which would be caused if those services via West Croydon continued there. Termainating trains at Cheam also seems another weird choice when its hardly a town centre and you'd be better off continuing those services to Epsom to provide increased capacity between Sutton and Epsom as well as Epsom being a town centre. Cheam is the last station before the Greater London boundary so I wonder whether this played on TfL's thinking. Talking of stations on the edge of Greater London, another place where TfL want to terminate trains is Belmont. This again seemed odd just to provide a metro service to Belmont (which is the closest to Sutton of the stations on the Epsom Downs branch) yet to neglect the other two stations on the line. I also noticed a lack of joined up thinking with the ambition to extend the Tramlink to Belmont and the cancer hub was. So there does seem to be a failure of joined up thinking with other infrastructure projects. I wonder if part of this is because TfL know in their heart of hearts that both these infrastructure projects are years off from happening and stand little chance of being built any time soon. It did seem a poor move though, as I would have hoped that as a longer term goal they would have potentially looked at how best to integrate these projects together yet it seems not. |
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on May 12, 2020 23:23:38 GMT
If TFL were to take over these routes, I think the services need to be rationalised to a far greater extent, with regular service patterns and simpler lines. The existing London Overground network works as services are split to individual lines - many of which are orbital routes, and the services to Liverpool Street and Euston are far simpler than those to Victoria or via London Bridge.
The network in south London is quite complex with various diagonal routes crossing each other, while many stations in south east London have services to several different terminals. Also, surely the local SWR services which would not be affected by Crossrail2 should be part of this two, such as the two loop routes via Richmond (and via either Brentford or Kingston).
It's also very unclear how the West London line services would run - what would be the stopping pattern of the 4tph from Purley via Shepherds Bush? I doubt TFL would take over semifast services to Milton Keynes. The proposed routes also includes some Thameslink services, so again unclear how this would transfer to TFL.
|
|
|
|
Post by route53 on May 13, 2020 0:40:32 GMT
I've finally found time to sit and watch them, really interesting although it does all sound just a little bit fanciful. Indeed it does all sound fanciful, almost as if TfL actually has the money for even a quarter of the proposals, and that’s without the money lost during Covid-19 |
|
|
|
Post by route53 on May 13, 2020 0:43:47 GMT
Even before Covid-19 TfL had little money to expand on its Overground network, South Eastern was extremely premature when it got rid of its semi fast Gillingham service thinking that its Dartford/Gravesend services would be operated by LO, and look what happened. I also think some of the service patterns are weird like terminating trains at Wallington I was glad to see some provision for semi stopping services in there as I shudder at the possibility of TfL making some services all stops, especially when they don't need to be. I was surprised not to see plans for the Bakerloo line extension woven into plans for South East London though if they did take over Southeastern services then the Hayes line would get more frequent services without the downside of more stops and would be provided by the Bakerloo Line. It got me thinking that having the Overground and Bakerloo line simultaneously on that section could be the best of both worlds - however - I suspect that both wouldn't run together as there are so many track conflicts at Lewisham that the fewer trains there the better. This gets me on to my next point. Lewisham junction is a total mess with so many hold ups and no chance of it ever being grade separated. Its bad enough already so I wonder what makes TfL think that they can run higher frequency services there without more hold ups and as a result, less reliable services. I don't recall any mention of upgraded signalling to compensate for it. I totally agree with you about weird service patterns. I wonder if trains terminating at Wallington was just something for operational convenience, perhaps for the purpose of reducing track conflicts at Sutton which would be caused if those services via West Croydon continued there. Termainating trains at Cheam also seems another weird choice when its hardly a town centre and you'd be better off continuing those services to Epsom to provide increased capacity between Sutton and Epsom as well as Epsom being a town centre. Cheam is the last station before the Greater London boundary so I wonder whether this played on TfL's thinking. Talking of stations on the edge of Greater London, another place where TfL want to terminate trains is Belmont. This again seemed odd just to provide a metro service to Belmont (which is the closest to Sutton of the stations on the Epsom Downs branch) yet to neglect the other two stations on the line. I also noticed a lack of joined up thinking with the ambition to extend the Tramlink to Belmont and the cancer hub was. So there does seem to be a failure of joined up thinking with other infrastructure projects. I wonder if part of this is because TfL know in their heart of hearts that both these infrastructure projects are years off from happening and stand little chance of being built any time soon. It did seem a poor move though, as I would have hoped that as a longer term goal they would have potentially looked at how best to integrate these projects together yet it seems not. You’re right about the fact that TfL not wanting to go outside the boundaries might be a reason for the weird termination points. What I can’t understand is that it intends to take over some Thameslink routes. Indeed about the semi fast patterns but I strongly suspect that it was referring to the fact that CX trains bypass New X and St. John’s while CS trains call there. Another thing I can’t understand is that TfL seems to want to run the Thameslink service down to Medway, this would be ironic since SE were eager to off that service to Thameslink in the first place in anticipation of a potential TfL takeover |
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on May 13, 2020 6:41:03 GMT
Even before Covid-19 TfL had little money to expand on its Overground network, South Eastern was extremely premature when it got rid of its semi fast Gillingham service thinking that its Dartford/Gravesend services would be operated by LO, and look what happened. I also think some of the service patterns are weird like terminating trains at Wallington I was glad to see some provision for semi stopping services in there as I shudder at the possibility of TfL making some services all stops, especially when they don't need to be. I was surprised not to see plans for the Bakerloo line extension woven into plans for South East London though if they did take over Southeastern services then the Hayes line would get more frequent services without the downside of more stops and would be provided by the Bakerloo Line. It got me thinking that having the Overground and Bakerloo line simultaneously on that section could be the best of both worlds - however - I suspect that both wouldn't run together as there are so many track conflicts at Lewisham that the fewer trains there the better. This gets me on to my next point. Lewisham junction is a total mess with so many hold ups and no chance of it ever being grade separated. Its bad enough already so I wonder what makes TfL think that they can run higher frequency services there without more hold ups and as a result, less reliable services. I don't recall any mention of upgraded signalling to compensate for it. There would be what looks like manageable levels of crossings on the Lewisham junction with 11 tph requiring crossing both paths. It looks like the plans rely on passengers transferring at Lewisham if there are no direct trains to Central London. Plans for ATO are included from Charing Cross / Cannon Street down to Lewisham / Greenwich The indicative capital cost table from the document includes: Major passenger capacity intervention at Lewisham station**** Network Rail are developing plans for a capacity intervention at Lewisham in the shorter term which has been included here as it may be sufficient to deliver the ‘core’ metroisation option, although we believe a larger intervention will be required at some point in the future. I think Cheam has been chosen based on the fact there is a large amount of space between the existing platforms for an additional platform to be built where the fast lines were previously. in regards to Belmont i think it is due lack of available space to provide affordable turnback facilities at Sutton. The planned London Cancer Hub Royal Marsden Sutton is also not to far from this station so i wonder if this station will support passenger movements there |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on May 17, 2020 8:55:07 GMT
I've had time to analyse all this in a bit more detail.... a few more thoughts:
8tph on the West London Line would be great although there is freight to accommodate and clearly infrastructure changes would be needed at Clapham Junction to run 4tph through to Purley. Presumably in the other direction trains from Purley would run 4tph to Watford Junction and 2tph to Milton Keynes with the 4tph starting at Clapham Junction serving Willesden Junction and continuing along the North London line?
24tph on the East London line would be great and with trains limited to 5 coaches not much opportunity for extending services further afield...... having said that extending the New Cross service to the isolated Bromley North branch would be ideal but probably not viable in view of the infrastructure changes that would be needed.
I'm not sure 6tph Victoria to Orpington is viable as well as 2tph peak hour Blackfriars to Beckenham Junction with fast trains also having to be accommodated. There is mention of passing loops between Beckenham and Penge but there are already passing loops at Kent House.
I think the Blackfriars to Sevenoaks service should remain a Thameslink service and 6tph at peak times would be great with 2tph terminating at Bromley South.
The Bexleyheath line will lose its off peak Charing Cross service although it will have an impressive 9tph off peak to either Victoria or Cannon Street.
As previously mentioned I'm also a bit surprised that the long mooted Bakerloo Line extension to Hayes and possibly Beckenham Junction hasn't been incorporated into this.
I think the Thameslink service through Greenwich and Woolwich should remain but curtailed at Dartford or Gravesend with Crossrail taking over the Rainham service.
8tph around the Sutton loop, 4tph in each direction, would be great although I think flyovers at Herne Hill would be needed to make it viable. I think this service could quite conceivably be terminated at Blackfriars and passed to LO.
I assume the London Bridge via Tulse Hill service terminates at Wallington as there is no room to terminate anymore trains at West Croydon and no capacity for the service at Sutton.
The Streatham Common and Brockley interchanges would be very useful and if money is so plentiful may as well throw in high level platforms at Brixton for LO as well .......all things considered the whole thing sounds great and somebody has clearly put in a lot of time and effort coming up with this but I really do wonder about the viability of it all.
|
|
|
|
Post by route53 on May 19, 2020 11:36:41 GMT
At best, the routes that will be taken over by TfL is the Penge East Metro Line and the Bromley North line, the Penge East line end to end is roughly 40 mins long and it’s far easier to separate the metro routes from the mainline on the Chatham line than it is on the lines out of Charing Cross and Cannon Street
|
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on May 19, 2020 20:17:13 GMT
At best, the routes that will be taken over by TfL is the Penge East Metro Line and the Bromley North line, the Penge East line end to end is roughly 40 mins long and it’s far easier to separate the metro routes from the mainline on the Chatham line than it is on the lines out of Charing Cross and Cannon Street I can't see any point TfL taking over the Bromley North branch in isolation and I'm dubious as to whether services on the Penge East line could be increased without seriously delaying fast services. |
|
|
|
Post by ServerKing on May 19, 2020 20:27:11 GMT
There just isn't the money... I seriously doubt Central Government will bail Sadiq out for this - especially the way he's making London so unpleasant with the Congestion Charge hike, and yet more roads handed to cyclists. South London services are quite complex, so it's not going to be an easy task like the West Anglia Inners, or TfL Rail to Shenfield. The last time Sadiq wanted to call time on Southern / SouthEastern metro services, it didn't end well. As for the West London Line extension, I can't see the point. Surely you can just change at Clapham Junction as present for any trains elsewhere in SE London?  |
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on May 19, 2020 20:41:53 GMT
There just isn't the money... I seriously doubt Central Government will bail Sadiq out for this - especially the way he's making London so unpleasant with the Congestion Charge hike, and yet more roads handed to cyclists. South London services are quite complex, so it's not going to be an easy task like the West Anglia Inners, or TfL Rail to Shenfield. The last time Sadiq wanted to call time on Southern / SouthEastern metro services, it didn't end well. As for the West London Line extension, I can't see the point. Surely you can just change at Clapham Junction as present for any trains elsewhere in SE London? You can just change at Clapham Junction but the through services are very useful an popular so its a shame there's only one an hour. Not sure how much track capacity there is to metroise the South London services, as you point out its very complex and upgrading signalling would cost a fortune. Also as has been pointed out, the WLL is a key freight route so without an upgrade to look to create some freight passing loops or something of the sort its very difficult to see how more trains could be facilitated on the line, there's no other cross London freight route that could be used. |
|
