Crossrail - Improving capacity at the Western End

[whole diary]

[IndustryInsider]

There's been a lot of discussion about the value for money of the Crossrail scheme. Doubts over the funding of its ^16bn cost are rife at the moment given the financial problems affecting the country. I've made a post on the CANBER^▸ (Campaign Against the New Beeching Report) website containing details of what I think would make the whole project much better value for money at little extra cost. In summary it involves utilising existing infrastructure to provide a service west from Paddington via Greenford and Ruislip to High Wycombe.

You can view the CANBER post here: http://www.canber.co.uk/?q=node/54

You can download the full document here: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3NXC2RK7


As I respect the opinions of so many visitors to this forum, I would appreciate your feedback and comments, and if you think my proposals are sensible then 'spread the word' to others.

[eightf48544]

I have been saying for a long time now that this version of Crossrail does not work West of London.

It is ludicrous as the canber paper says terminate 14 out of 24 tph in the peaks at Westbourne Park sidings and having to build a special paltform to detrain people who forget to leave at Eastbourne Terrace (Paddington).

Another argument is that it disrupts a very heavy freight flow of stone from the Mendips to Acton Yard for distribution around the SE. More lorries on the road.

Another substantial problem is that it totally disrupts the heavy commuter flow from Twyford and stations Westwards to Langley and stations to Ealing Broadway, if it terminates as proposed at Maidenhead, by enforcing a change at Slough or Maidenhead, .

I fully supoport the idea of using both the Greenford and OOC^▸ (Old Oak Common (depot)) route to High Wycombe and beyond to take at least 10tph.

In the first Crossrail proposal late 80s? it was proposed to put a link from OOC to the Ayesbury line at Neasden and not use the High Wycombe line which I thought was odd at the time. This could be revived as well as OOC line.   

An interchange with the Central Line at North Acton would be essential. Greenford is a bit of problem I'm not sure of the best way to serve the branch stations.  Greenford mainline station must obviously be reopened and linked to the Central line hopefully with 4 tracks. It's whether the bay is still used for the branch stoppers.

Although there are triangles at both ends of the branch, which gives endles routing posibilities (including the chance to turn  Heathrow Express Units at night to even out tyre wear on the wheels) all 6 junctions are flat with conflicting moves.Maybe someone might have a solution.

The trouble is there isn't a Brunel to push the scheme through the "bean counters" are in charge and they can't see beyond the ^ sign.

[Btline]

I always thought that 2 tph should terminate at Greenford, but apparently the platforms are too short.

I do, however, have 3 problems with 10 tph to High Wycombe:

*Even with the extra track through the Ruslips, I doubt the infrastructure could take 10 tph + 3 Chiltern express tph + hourly local trains to Aylesbury via Princes R + W&S^▸ (Wrexham and Shropshire (Open Access Operator)) + possibly Arriva expresses (from December).

*You would need full quadruple tracking, a way of turning 10 tph at HW without disrupting the expresses, and more platform space at HW!

*I don't think there is the space - besides it would cost too much.

A great idea in principle, but there are flaws (unfortunately).

[eightf48544]

I always thought that 2 tph should terminate at Greenford, but apparently the platforms are too short.

I do, however, have 3 problems with 10 tph to High Wycombe:

*Even with the extra track through the Ruslips, I doubt the infrastructure could take 10 tph + 3 Chiltern express tph + hourly local trains to Aylesbury via Princes R + W&S^▸ (Wrexham and Shropshire (Open Access Operator)) + possibly Arriva expresses (from December).

*You would need full quadruple tracking, a way of turning 10 tph at HW without disrupting the expresses, and more platform space at HW!

*I don't think there is the space - besides it would cost too much.

A great idea in principle, but there are flaws (unfortunately).

Sorry I didn't mean 10 tph to terminate at High Wycombe I had Alyesbury (well Snow Hill actually)in mind and if say 6 tph went via Neasden and Amersham then it would not be so many via High Wycombe.

There's probably room for a longer terminating bay at Greenford mainline although that would lose the current on the level change to the Central line.

Of course if Bourne End High Wycombe was reinstated and electrified you could lose 2tph up teh branch from Maidenhead.

[Btline]

Ah... that makes more sense!

But I still think there would be capacity problems.

(and not sure about Crossrail to Snow Hill... unless it ran semi fast all the way)

I like direct trains to the Maidenhead branch!

[IndustryInsider]

Just to clarify that my proposals involve a peak hours service of:

6 tph from/to Northolt
2 tph from/to Gerrards Cross
2 tph from/to High Wycombe

and off-peak:

4 tph from/to Northolt
2 tph from/to High Wycombe
1 tph from/to Gerrards Cross

So only 4tph peak and 3tph off-peak would interfere with the Chiltern Line.

I don't think that extending Crossrail further than High Wycombe would be a cost effective use of the cash. Crossrail is (and should be on financial and operational grounds) a high-frequency, suburban style service, with the main London terminals handling the long distance traffic.

[Electric train]

I always thought that 2 tph should terminate at Greenford, but apparently the platforms are too short.

I do, however, have 3 problems with 10 tph to High Wycombe:

*Even with the extra track through the Ruslips, I doubt the infrastructure could take 10 tph + 3 Chiltern express tph + hourly local trains to Aylesbury via Princes R + W&S^▸ (Wrexham and Shropshire (Open Access Operator)) + possibly Arriva expresses (from December).

*You would need full quadruple tracking, a way of turning 10 tph at HW without disrupting the expresses, and more platform space at HW!

*I don't think there is the space - besides it would cost too much.

A great idea in principle, but there are flaws (unfortunately).

Sorry I didn't mean 10 tph to terminate at High Wycombe I had Alyesbury (well Snow Hill actually)in mind and if say 6 tph went via Neasden and Amersham then it would not be so many via High Wycombe.

There's probably room for a longer terminating bay at Greenford mainline although that would lose the current on the level change to the Central line.

Of course if Bourne End High Wycombe was reinstated and electrified you could lose 2tph up teh branch from Maidenhead.

Is this not the 1980/90s Crossrail concept  but that did have a new cord to be built through Old Oak to Neasden.

The key with Crossrail is to actually get the east west tunnels built the expansion of it further west of Maidenhead and even a new route to Wycombe and Aylesbury should be pushed for once the tunneling is underway.

[IndustryInsider]

The key with Crossrail is to actually get the east west tunnels built the expansion of it further west of Maidenhead and even a new route to Wycombe and Aylesbury should be pushed for once the tunneling is underway.

Indeed. My proposals are made on that basis, as they could easily be built separate to the main Crossrail project.

[Lee]

As an aside, the Arriva services mentioned by Btline are featured in the link below.
http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/2009/01/19/plans-for-direct-aberystwyth-to-london-train-55578-22722119/

[Btline]

I am glad they are keeping an eye on the Arriva plans, to make sure W&S^▸ (Wrexham and Shropshire (Open Access Operator)) passengers are not poached.

I personally think an hourly service would be better for the region than 2 London trains.

[Lee]

Andrew Adonis and London Mayor Boris Johnson have announced the appointment of Tony Gregory as the new independent Crossrail Complaints Commissioner (link below.)
http://nds.coi.gov.uk/environment/fullDetail.asp?ReleaseID=390339&NewsAreaID=2&NavigatedFromDepartment=False

[eightf48544]

Andrew Adonis and London Mayor Boris Johnson have announced the appointment of Tony Gregory as the new independent Crossrail Complaints Commissioner (link below.)
http://nds.coi.gov.uk/environment/fullDetail.asp?ReleaseID=390339&NewsAreaID=2&NavigatedFromDepartment=False

DOH!

[IndustryInsider]

There's been a lot of discussion about the value for money of the Crossrail scheme. Doubts over the funding of its ^16bn cost are rife at the moment given the financial problems affecting the country. I've made a post on the CANBER^▸ (Campaign Against the New Beeching Report) website containing details of what I think would make the whole project much better value for money at little extra cost. In summary it involves utilising existing infrastructure to provide a service west from Paddington via Greenford and Ruislip to High Wycombe.

You can view the CANBER post here: http://www.canber.co.uk/?q=node/54

You can download the full document here: http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3NXC2RK7

I've had an official reply to this document from the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about). Probably the response I expected, but at least it's not just 'standard reply letter #4' and there is a definite commitment to looking at possible Crossrail expansion and designing the current scheme to allow for it.

You can view the letter here: http://img186.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=12782_img594_122_344lo.jpg

Apologies for any advertising, just click on 'continue to the image' when the countdown timer has reached zero.

[stebbo]

If services to High Wycome are to be considered, then redouble Old Oak junction to Ruislip and reinstate the through lines at Denham and Beaconsfield (pity it's too late at Gerrards X) - the fast lines ought to be reinstated anyway if Chiltern want to run a fast Oxford srvice via Bicester. 

[paul7575]

If services to High Wycome are to be considered, then redouble Old Oak junction to Ruislip and reinstate the through lines at Denham and Beaconsfield (pity it's too late at Gerrards X) - the fast lines ought to be reinstated anyway if Chiltern want to run a fast Oxford srvice via Bicester. 

Why is it too late at Gerrards Cross? Even the Tesco website emphasises that the tunnel is sized for four tracks, even if platforms might need shifting...

Paul