Elizabeth Line / Crossrail Updates.

[Clearwater]

Out of interest, I’d read that the Liz Line is achieving traffic targets.  Has there been a measurable decline on the central line?  Particularly Liverpool St to Stratford?

[The Stationmaster]

26 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

Interesting point; with TfL's current financial pressures, Chesham would likely be peak hours only were it not for their politically boisterous electorate.  The branch is dead for most of the day.

 

Another thought about Crossrail services to the Chilterns is, would the locals have wanted such a service, encouraging even more potential commuters from the area?  I suspect that the demand created for further housing would have been resisted as equally loudly as the protests against HS2, unlike the Thames Valley there is virtually no brownfield land so new housing would be greenfield development.  They don't want more development in the Chilterns or indeed anything that might impact on their affluence, much of which is based on astronomical house values.  Without the increased population and housing to feed growth in journeys, Crossrail to Amersham and Aylesbury might have been quite a loss-maker.

Almost all the current housing development in the wider Thames Valley area - basically beyond Slough - is on agricultural land, or what was agricultural land i until fairly recently.  the worst exaple is one of those so called 'retirement villages' being built a few miles from us where the bulldozers moved in literally a few days after the rape crop had been harvested.  And that is being built despite a 'retirement development' only 3 miles from it still not being more than c.70% occupied 3 years after it was opened for sales.

 

The only other sites being developed for housing in the middle part of the Tames Valley are either on flood plain or drain their surface water onto flood plain.  Shame the residents of the Chiltrerns towns don't live in the Thames Valley although Goring runs them pretty close at resisting just about everything - not always successfully

[009 micro modeller]

5 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

More or less the case.  But why would LUL 3rd/4th rail be retained?   BTW 25kv overhead powered trains do of course seem to have run quite happily next to LUL trains running parallel to the WCML. The plan could simply have altered the Met north of Moor Park towards Rickmansworth by transferring it to Crossrail operation (which - don't forget was joint BR/LUL) and then onward to Aylesbury by taking out the Marylebone service by transferring it to  Crossrail.  There would no doubt have been an interchange between the Met route (now solely to Watford) and. Crossrail somewhere north of Neasden.

I’d always have assumed that any kind of upgraded electric service (whether Crossrail, or London Overground, or as part of the existing Chiltern network etc.) on the Met/Chiltern line to Aylesbury would involve taking the fast lines (the ones used by Chiltern trains, and by the Met trains that skip some stops) and converting them to overhead electrification if necessary. Then the Met would become a more conventional Underground line, exclusively using the local lines and only going to Watford, with both lines calling at Moor Park. I’m not sure how the Chesham branch would fit into something like this though.

[Michael Hodgson]

On 29/03/2023 at 19:32, 009 micro modeller said:

This seems slightly similar to the Thameslink experience; the issue there seems to be that the trains have to be (north to south) firstly a sort of regional express/commuter train from Peterborough/Bedford/Cambridge to St Pancras/King’s Cross, then a metro through the core, and finally a South London suburban service. The compromise means they’re not the best for longer routes, but are good at fitting standing passengers in. Having commuted on 387s and 700s (depending on what is used for that particular service on the day) the 387s have much more comfortable seats but are much worse when standing, because of the narrow gangway connections and relative lack of space around the doorways. The Elizabeth Line is possibly the same sort of thing but with more of the ‘metro’ aspect.

 

I did a journey on the Elizabeth Line the other day. Only from Farringdon to Paddington but then got off to catch a GWR train to a destination beyond Reading. However, even if I was only going to Reading I think I’d probably have changed at Paddington as it is so much quicker (unless for some reason there were no fast trains to Reading at the time I wanted to travel). Similarly Farringdon to Leeds (for instance) most people wouldn’t stay on Thameslink until Peterborough before changing, they’d change at King’s Cross. I might just stay on Thameslink if I was only going from Farringdon to Peterborough but a lot of them are limited stop anyway and with cheaper/more flexible tickets than other ECML operators on the same route, which perhaps doesn’t apply so much to the Elizabeth Line case.

 

In a similar vein, does anyone actually stay on the GN inner suburban all the way from Moorgate to Letchworth via Hertford, rather than changing at Finsbury Park?

Since you ask, I have done it a few times (well as far as Hitchin anyway).  Thing is a rush hour ouer suburban train stopping to pick up at Finsbury Park was already full and standing.  If you managed to get a seat on a 313 at Moorgate in the rush hour and stayed on it, you would at least not have to stand for the bulk of your trip on an overloaded 312 in the rush hour.  Sometimes so full that not everybody waiting could get on.  But more usually I caught the Met/Circle line to the Cross and got a seat from there or was travelling out of rush hour anyway.  Doubt it's much different with the latest stock, although the chance of a seat is probably better now that they are running more 12-car sets.

 

It could also be difficult to get a seat on an outer suburban on a match day when the footie crowd emerged from the Emirates Stadium.  They were always pretty well behaved, if rather noisy.

[The Stationmaster]

On 01/04/2023 at 15:15, Clearwater said:

Out of interest, I’d read that the Liz Line is achieving traffic targets.  Has there been a measurable decline on the central line?  Particularly Liverpool St to Stratford?

This is one of a series of $64,000 questions when it comes to loading on the Liz Line.  Just how much of it west of Paddington is abstraction/transfer from former GWR services; just how much of it comes from beyond Llverpool St - Shenfield where it was previously someone else's figures?   And how much of it is changeover from other Underground Lines particularly the Central and H&C Lines (although in my - limited - experience the latter does seem little different from its previous loadings.   And, obviously, how much of it is from the new UndergrounD territory out to Abbey Wood or even from the DLR where it provides a far better alternative for some journeys?

 

For a very minor example if I happen to go for a pub lunch at my usual haunt for such an adventure in the Isle Dogs I would nowuse the Liz Line to get me to Canary Wharf and change there to the DLR - a different, and much quicker, route (DLR aside) from the ones I used to take.  So I'm not a new traveller as such but one who hasy shifted from one route to another.

 

The Liz Line is of course, in many respects, planned to offer people the chance to make that sort of change but its carryings as a bald figure are meaningless unless broken down by section. For example when I travelled on a 345 from Reading to Twyford last Monday a high proportion of the passengers were schoolchildren with most travelling no further than Maidenhead and maybe a small number through to Slough. They were only on that train because it was the first one to leave after they arrived at Reading station; the next lot to arrive at the station would be on a GWR train.

[jamie92208]

I was over in the UK last weekend and got my first chance to ride the Liz line.   I used it Thursday (13th April) teatime to get from Liverpool Street to Stratford.  It was busy and standing for that relatively short journey so I was more interested in staying upright than anything else.   Certainly the acceleration was impressive.  Services seemed to be running at regular intervals and on time at Stratford.   

On Saturday 15th I got into London at 12.15 and set to work to try and ride all the underground sections.  First off Farringdon to Abbey Wood, then Abbey wood to Paddington where I changed to a Heathrow service. Quite a lot of time was spent reaching all the terminals before catching a train back to Farringdon.   I arrived back at Kings Cross with 5 minutes to spare to catch my train at 16.30.

 

Overall impressions.

a)  The smoothness of the ride in the tunnels especially.

b) the acceleration and with the speed the vertical curvature in places was noticeable.

c) The overall speed to get from Abbey Wood to Acton.   About 40 minutes with the change.   I once did Hither Green to Acton in 25 minutes in the cab of a class 59 .  However a vast improvement on train, tube train.

d)  Why on earth didn't they build a station between Euston and St Pancras with entrances at both ends.   This may have been too difficult due to the existing underground infrastructure but it cuts off three of the busiest northern termini and imposes a change or reversal.

 

e) the bay seating always filled up first.  That was reasonably comfortable.   The longitudinal seating just gave me a stiff neck as I wanted to look out.

 

Overall a very impressive system but I just wish that a fraction of the money had been spent on infrastructure in the north of the UK.

It wasn't easy to take photos due to the screen doors but here are a few.   Here my first train departs Stratford for Shenfield.

I think that this was terminal 4 

And here a 387 at Heathrow. Much more comfortable.

Jamie

 

[jamie92208]

I forgot a journey. On the Friday morning I caught a liz line train from Stratford,directly into Liverpool Street high level.  That was interesting.  Despite several warnings from Platform staff, several passengers with much luggage had to get off in a hurry after a final and sharp warning from the driver.  I wonder how many get caught out that way each day.  For me it was great as my next journey was out to Cambridge. 

 

Jamie

[Ron Ron Ron]

Final phase in opening the Elizabeth line confirmed for next month.

 

The final phase of the staged opening of the Elizabeth line will go ahead as planned next month, in a move that effectively completes the project.

 

https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/final-phase-in-opening-the-elizabeth-line-confirmed-for-next-month-62177/

 

 

Timetables

 

https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/elizabeth-line/elizabeth-line-timetables

 

( 21st May to 9th Dec contains the new, full service.)

 

 

 

.

[KingEdwardII]

On 18/04/2023 at 15:28, jamie92208 said:

Why on earth didn't they build a station between Euston and St Pancras

The Elizabeth line route is way south of Euston/St Pancras/Kings Cross - Tottenham Court Road station is about a mile due south of Euston station. It would have taken a major diversion of the route to get the Liz line near to the northern terminal stations.

 

But I sympathise with your thinking. Connections between the major stations in London are poor and this makes London an obstacle course for folk trying to travel through (rather than to) the city. Liz line sorted out some of the east/west connections, and Thameslink provides for some of the north/south links, but in general, it is still pretty poor. Connections to/from Waterloo (the busiest station) and almost anywhere else are dire.

 

Yours, Mike.

[adb968008]

Theres maybe an argument to downsize Euston to just a suburban terminus, with HS2 terminating at OC and using Crossrail.

i’m not sure the value of HS2 running to Euston, its got poor connections and its location offers little either.

 

it only exists because its already there… Crossrail offers the Northern line connection at Tottenham court road, Farringdon has the rest.

 

If Crossrail2 focussed on Euston to Waterloo, you could probably get rid of the surface station altogether.

 

Edited April 26, 2023 by adb968008

[The Stationmaster]

8 hours ago, KingEdwardII said:

The Elizabeth line route is way south of Euston/St Pancras/Kings Cross - Tottenham Court Road station is about a mile due south of Euston station. It would have taken a major diversion of the route to get the Liz line near to the northern terminal stations.

 

But I sympathise with your thinking. Connections between the major stations in London are poor and this makes London an obstacle course for folk trying to travel through (rather than to) the city. Liz line sorted out some of the east/west connections, and Thameslink provides for some of the north/south links, but in general, it is still pretty poor. Connections to/from Waterloo (the busiest station) and almost anywhere else are dire.

 

Yours, Mike.

I'm a bit puzzled by your final comment as Waterloo has direct UndergrounD links to 5 of London's 6 main line termini serving places north of the Thames (the exception is Liverpool St (although is does have a direct - albeit slow - UndergrounD lnk to Stratford where many of the main line services from Liverpoool St call)

 

Euston is currently probably regarded as poorly served by UndergrounD links but in fact is well connected to the termini serving places south of the Thames but is not directly connected to three of the termini serving places norh of the Thames.  In fact apart from Paddington it has the best UndergrounD connectivity of the termini north of the Thames to the those serving the area south of the river (Victoria, Charing Cross, and Waterloo - but not Cannon Street and only indirectly to Thameslink).  

 

Paddington is somewhat better disposed as it has direct UnderounD links to all the termini except Cannon St serving the area south of the Thames plus via Thameslink with an easy interchange  at Farringdon.  Old Oak HS 2 station would gain similar access vi a Creosstail but with a change of trains at Paddington although it will have a diret link to Farringdon and thence Thameslink.

[The Stationmaster]

19 hours ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

Final phase in opening the Elizabeth line confirmed for next month.

 

The final phase of the staged opening of the Elizabeth line will go ahead as planned next month, in a move that effectively completes the project.

 

https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/final-phase-in-opening-the-elizabeth-line-confirmed-for-next-month-62177/

 

 

Timetables

 

https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/elizabeth-line/elizabeth-line-timetables

 

( 21st May to 9th Dec contains the new, full service.)

 

 

 

.

Still talking about 11 car trains i see - I wonder what teh signalling is designed for on the GWML?

 

But one of the comments was truly Alice in Blunderlnad stuff by suggestung that the  likely demise of HEX would provide line capacity for more Liz Line trains to call at Acton Main line.  No wonder people don't understand what HS2 is for when their railway line capacity knowledge is that weird.

[St. Simon]

34 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

Still talking about 11 car trains i see - I wonder what teh signalling is designed for on the GWML?

Hi Mike,

 

The signalling was designed to 9-Car 205m length trains, although there is very little that lengthening the trains will affect in terms of signalling principles that I can think of between Reading and Paddington.
 

The main difference you have to wait longer to accelerate after a speed increase.

 

There’s a few turn-back signals between Paddington and Reading where the standard might be too short, but I think the main turn-back locations are long enough thanks to provisions to turn back 10-Car Class 80xs.

 

The only thing I can think of that was directly influenced by 345 train length is some of the TPWS Plan B fitments, but the existing fitments shouldn’t need changing if the trains are lengthened and  won’t be needed when ETCS is commissioned.

 

You do have the interaction between signals and neutral sections which could be affected by train lengthening, but it isn’t insurmountable. 

 

Simon

[The Stationmaster]

1 minute ago, St. Simon said:

Hi Mike,

 

The signalling was designed to 9-Car 205m length trains, although there is very little that lengthening the trains will affect in terms of signalling principles that I can think of between Reading and Paddington.
 

The main difference you have to wait longer to accelerate after a speed increase.

 

There’s a few turn-back signals between Paddington and Reading where the standard might be too short, but I think the main turn-back locations are long enough thanks to provisions to turn back 10-Car Class 80xs.

 

The only thing I can think of that was directly influenced by 345 train length is some of the TPWS Plan B fitments, but the existing fitments shouldn’t need changing if the trains are lengthened and  won’t be needed when ETCS is commissioned.

 

You do have the interaction between signals and neutral sections which could be affected by train lengthening, but it isn’t insurmountable. 

 

Simon

Yes Simon, absolutely agree.  But there is also the effect on overlaps which in turn affects headways and ultimately line capacity.  Unless things have changed overlap charts were always drawn on the basis of a specified train length against assumed/specified headway.   Thus a longer train menas that clearing of overlaps will take place slightly later in the event of two coaches beung added and that in turn could obviously impact on headway   So were overlaps considered on the basis of 9 coach trains or 11 coach trains in those situations were overlaps might be more critical to line capacity I wonder? 

 

Obviously line speed makes a difference but the signalling will in any case have been designed against the necessary braking curves for the various different types of traffic using a route.

 

I do wonder abou it abut turn back signals at one or two places where a reversing trains will com up against a red aspect at the further end of a platform (and especially about the reversing siding at Maidenhead although it is pretty long) -  time will tell.

[Fishoutofwater]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

Waterloo has direct UndergrounD links to 5 of London's 6 main line termini serving places north of the Thames (the exception is Liverpool St

Just trying to work out which line runs direct from Waterloo to Kings Cross and St Pancras.....................

[St. Simon]

29 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

Yes Simon, absolutely agree.  But there is also the effect on overlaps which in turn affects headways and ultimately line capacity.  Unless things have changed overlap charts were always drawn on the basis of a specified train length against assumed/specified headway.   Thus a longer train menas that clearing of overlaps will take place slightly later in the event of two coaches beung added and that in turn could obviously impact on headway   So were overlaps considered on the basis of 9 coach trains or 11 coach trains in those situations were overlaps might be more critical to line capacity I wonder? 

 

Obviously line speed makes a difference but the signalling will in any case have been designed against the necessary braking curves for the various different types of traffic using a route.

 

I do wonder abou it abut turn back signals at one or two places where a reversing trains will com up against a red aspect at the further end of a platform (and especially about the reversing siding at Maidenhead although it is pretty long) -  time will tell.

Hi,

 

I don’t believe that any of the overlaps were designed specifically taking into account train length, with the exception of a couple of overlaps around Ealing Broadway, but they won’t have an affect on Headway. 

 

As part of the Train Detection Conversion a couple of years ago we looked at the overlaps and reduced them where we could to pull out some extra capacity.

 

The current standard is that overlaps lengths are based on approach speed and we aim for the shortest length to get the best headway. (I’m going to do a post on Overlaps on my IECC thread to explain current thinking)

 

As I wasn’t involved in the original design, I’ll check with the designers to see if they can think of any problems with longer 345s

 

Simon

[009 micro modeller]

54 minutes ago, Fishoutofwater said:

Just trying to work out which line runs direct from Waterloo to Kings Cross and St Pancras.....................

Does it need to be direct? Bakerloo and then Victoria (change at Oxford Circus) seems to be very quick, and I’m sure there are other alternatives that are similarly fast.

 

That said, doesn’t the Waterloo and City line pass under Blackfriars? Actually having a station stop there would seem to open up quite a useful link.

Edited April 26, 2023 by 009 micro modeller

[Fishoutofwater]

1 minute ago, 009 micro modeller said:

Does it need to be direct. Bakerloo and then Victoria (change at Oxford Circus) seems to be very quick, and I’m sure there are other alternatives that are similarly fast.

 

That said, doesn’t the Waterloo and City line pass under Blackfriars? Actually having a station stop there would seem to open up quite a useful link.

See the quote.  The word DIRECT was used.

[KingEdwardII]

2 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

Waterloo has direct UndergrounD links to 5 of London's 6 main line termini serving places north of the Thames

Hmm, not sure I follow this.

 

Waterloo connects to Paddington with Bakerloo and with Euston via the Northern. That's it, I think. Anything else involves changes. My personal bugbear is getting from Waterloo to St Pancras or Kings Cross.

 

Yes, it is possible to connect from Waterloo to Stratford to catch some of the trains from Liverpool Street, but not all of them.

 

Yours, Mike.

[009 micro modeller]

37 minutes ago, Fishoutofwater said:

See the quote.  The word DIRECT was used.

I realise that. But does it actually need to be direct, if the journey involves only one change and is still very quick and easy?

[KingEdwardII]

44 minutes ago, 009 micro modeller said:

if the journey involves only one change and is still very quick and easy?

Define "quick and easy".

 

I judge the journey for difficulty based on me + some luggage, as is generally the case when I do these journeys. Changing trains is "easy" if it is done on the same platform, or an adjacent one - i.e. no stairs/escalators/lifts involved. Not many tube connections are like this. And using the tube in the first place involves journeys to/from the mainline trains which mostly involve a descent on entry followed by an ascent on exit, sometimes with quite long and involved routes to follow. This is what contributes to London being an "obstacle course" if you have to connect from a train on one side of the city to another on the opposite side.

 

Yours, Mike.

[009 micro modeller]

38 minutes ago, KingEdwardII said:

Define "quick and easy".

 

I judge the journey for difficulty based on me + some luggage, as is generally the case when I do these journeys. Changing trains is "easy" if it is done on the same platform, or an adjacent one - i.e. no stairs/escalators/lifts involved. Not many tube connections are like this. And using the tube in the first place involves journeys to/from the mainline trains which mostly involve a descent on entry followed by an ascent on exit, sometimes with quite long and involved routes to follow. This is what contributes to London being an "obstacle course" if you have to connect from a train on one side of the city to another on the opposite side.

 

Yours, Mike.

I think in this context, not being on the Circle line is a problem for Waterloo, in contrast to other stations.

[Northmoor]

2 hours ago, 009 micro modeller said:

I realise that. But does it actually need to be direct, if the journey involves only one change and is still very quick and easy?

You and I might think so, but the non- or reluctant rail user is very put off rail travel by changing of trains, and changing trains to cross London most of off-putting of all.  Convenience, for non-essential travel, frequently trumps reduced journey time.  Which is why the idea above of asking HS2 travellers to change at OOC, TCR and then KingsX, is the sort of proposal a certain Mr. Serpell would have thought was a really good idea.

[009 micro modeller]

3 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

the idea above of asking HS2 travellers to change at OOC, TCR and then KingsX

The issue I have with this is that if the time saving for HS2 over the WCML is added back on again by having to twiddle around within London then there seems less of a point to it (I realise there’s a capacity as well as a speed argument for HS2, but as an ordinary passenger I would just want the route that got me to the ultimate destination the quickest). At least if it goes to Euston it’s the same terminus as the WCML, so there’s no difference in that respect.

 

9 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

You and I might think so, but the non- or reluctant rail user is very put off rail travel by changing of trains

I was thinking more of the idea that the tube in central London is generally high frequency enough to be considered a turn up and go service, even off-peak, so changing between two tube lines while travelling between two mainline termini (as opposed to just getting one line all the way) would not necessarily add appreciably to the journey time, although it might be more of an issue if you have heavy luggage and the tube lines are on different levels at the point where they connect.

 

Of course for some journeys it might be preferable to not even have to switch to the tube at all, and to simply get on a train that will take you past the traditional termini, into the city and across to the other side (as on the Elizabeth line but also on Thameslink, and to some extent parts of the Metropolitan line and London Overground). This is often faster anyway, but even if it isn’t it does get to the point where the convenience outweighs an increase in the journey time, up to a point. But I’m not sure that’s quite the same discussion, or how relevant it is for people arriving into (or leaving from) Euston or King’s Cross on long-distance rather than suburban services.

[jamie92208]

After my recent travels on the Elizabeth line and my comments on the difficulty of getting to Kings Cross St Pancras from Heathrow, I have remembered my own experience. Back in 2010, I arrived at Heathrow terminal 5 when it had snowed. My connection to Manchester was cancelled and no one knew when the plane replacement bus might actually appear. Needing to get to Leeds with a lot of luggage I bailed out and took the Piccadilly line direct to KX and caught a train.  I was able to do the journey relatively easily and despite the potential time penalty I probably got there quicker than the then alternative of HEX then the circle line. The lack of changes was a huge advantage.  Having done the Heathrow trip on the Elizabeth line to KX via Farringdon, I think that I would still choose the tube in the same circumstances. 

 

Jamie

Edited April 27, 2023 by jamie92208