On Fri, 21 May 2010 08:44:12 -0700 (PDT), Alistair Bell
wrote:

On May 21, 10:26*am, Bruce wrote:
And just as the mythical western terminus of Maidenhead got initial
approval for Crossrail in better fiscal times, a western terminus at
Heathrow would cut project costs allowing it to go ahead in these
straitened times. *It would also allow Ealing Broadway to be served by
the trains that don't terminate at Paddington.

Yes, but there isn't room for all the trains at Heathrow, and adding
it would be prohibitively expensive. That's the problem.


No it isn't, because I am not suggesting spending any more money at
Heathrow than has already been planned. Heathrow would get the number
of trains it needs, and no more, so no need for additional capacity
there, and the rest should terminate at Paddington.

I'm afraid your problem seems to have vanished.


Descoping Maidenhead until Crossrail can run to Reading makes a lot of
sense, but then the right answer is to turn trains at Hayes &
Harlington, ideally by a rebuild that puts a couple of terminating
tracks between the through tracks. All you need is to demolish
platform 1, slew the tracks so that the up main runs in the old down
main and the down main runs where platform 1 used to be, extend
platform 5 under the bridge, and hook it all up with pointwork. Bingo,
you have a useful terminating station that can take the service it
needs. Not cheap, but a whole lot cheaper than most of the
alternatives. (If you want to go even cheaper, you use the existing
bay and turn some other trains at West Ealing or something.)


See above.


As for taking out Abbey Wood, that's pretty idiotic for the reasons
previously cited. And I can't think of a good way to descope it and
still achieve the necessary at Canary Wharf. On the other hand, it's
pretty expensive to tunnel all the way from Whitechapel to Woolwich.


All the more reason for leaving it until later.

I am not convinced of the necessity to build to Canary Wharf at this
time. Elsewhere, Mizter T made a good case for Canary Wharf, but only
on the basis of serving developments that aren't yet built. My
response was that, overall, the City of London and Docklands will have
an excess of office accommodation for at least the next decade. So
why are we rushing to build more in Docklands?

If these Docklands office developments are really so profitable that
they must go ahead, let the developers pay a substantial contribution
towards the cost of Crossrail. Then they can have the Canary Wharf
branch.

Given the £ billions in profits that property developers will gain
from Crossrail, it does appear to me that they should be paying a heck
of a lot more towards its cost than they have agreed to so far. So
let them pay more, otherwise it's Shenfield to Heathrow only.