![]() |
Crossrail will terminate at Abbey Wood
Fresh off the press - to prevent performance pollution from SET,
Crossrail will share no track with SET on its Isle of Dogs branch and will terminate at a new cross-platform interchange at Abbey Wood. http://www.crossrail.co.uk/pages/pro...announced.html -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
Crossrail will terminate at Abbey Wood
Dave Arquati wrote in :
Fresh off the press - to prevent performance pollution from SET, Crossrail will share no track with SET on its Isle of Dogs branch and will terminate at a new cross-platform interchange at Abbey Wood. http://www.crossrail.co.uk/pages/pro...announced.html Nice one. Should we be waiting for the announcment that all trains will terminate at Paddington to prevent performance pollution from the Great Western? Or maybe just run between Paddington and Canary Wharf so it doesn't matter if it rains? |
Crossrail will terminate at Abbey Wood
"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
... Fresh off the press - to prevent performance pollution from SET, Crossrail will share no track with SET on its Isle of Dogs branch and will terminate at a new cross-platform interchange at Abbey Wood. http://www.crossrail.co.uk/pages/pro...announced.html What a let down! Wasn't one of big benefits of Crossrail supposed to be regeneration of north Kent, Greenhithe, Stone, Dartford through to Slade Green, Erith and Belvedere? If they think it's not feasible to track-share a few stops with SET to Dartford & Ebbsfleet, what hope have they got running to and from Shenfield?! (x-posted to uk.railway) |
Crossrail will terminate at Abbey Wood
David Jackman wrote in message . 252.50...
Dave Arquati wrote in : Fresh off the press - to prevent performance pollution from SET, Crossrail will share no track with SET on its Isle of Dogs branch and will terminate at a new cross-platform interchange at Abbey Wood. http://www.crossrail.co.uk/pages/pro...announced.html Nice one. Should we be waiting for the announcment that all trains will terminate at Paddington to prevent performance pollution from the Great Western? Or maybe just run between Paddington and Canary Wharf so it doesn't matter if it rains? Then if any of this gets built, how long will it be until someone realises the loadings on the Shenfield branch are much higher and alters the split to 16/8 or even 18/6? Sounds like the branch should be cancelled before it drives the cost of the project to ridiculous levels. James. |
Crossrail will terminate at Abbey Wood
"Rich Mallard" wrote in message ...
"Dave Arquati" wrote in message ... Fresh off the press - to prevent performance pollution from SET, Crossrail will share no track with SET on its Isle of Dogs branch and will terminate at a new cross-platform interchange at Abbey Wood. http://www.crossrail.co.uk/pages/pro...announced.html What a let down! Wasn't one of big benefits of Crossrail supposed to be regeneration of north Kent, Greenhithe, Stone, Dartford through to Slade Green, Erith and Belvedere? If they think it's not feasible to track-share a few stops with SET to Dartford & Ebbsfleet, what hope have they got running to and from Shenfield?! Surely Crossrail won't share tracks to Shenfield - the line is pretty much segregated anyway. There's talk of a few trains terminating at Liverpool Street to serve Maryland but I don't see it happening. Jonn |
Crossrail will terminate at Abbey Wood
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 20:12:38 +0000, Dave Arquati wrote:
Fresh off the press - to prevent performance pollution from SET, Crossrail will share no track with SET on its Isle of Dogs branch and will terminate at a new cross-platform interchange at Abbey Wood. http://www.crossrail.co.uk/pages/pro...announced.html That's a rather neat way of cutting scheme costs now while leaving open the door for a separately funded extension through to Ebbsfleet at some far off point in the future. Something tells me this is the first of many such announcements to ensure the financial problems are resolved. -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! |
Crossrail will terminate at Abbey Wood
Jonn Elledge wrote:
"Rich Mallard" wrote in message ... "Dave Arquati" wrote in message ... Fresh off the press - to prevent performance pollution from SET, Crossrail will share no track with SET on its Isle of Dogs branch and will terminate at a new cross-platform interchange at Abbey Wood. http://www.crossrail.co.uk/pages/pro...announced.html What a let down! Wasn't one of big benefits of Crossrail supposed to be regeneration of north Kent, Greenhithe, Stone, Dartford through to Slade Green, Erith and Belvedere? If they think it's not feasible to track-share a few stops with SET to Dartford & Ebbsfleet, what hope have they got running to and from Shenfield?! Surely Crossrail won't share tracks to Shenfield - the line is pretty much segregated anyway. There's talk of a few trains terminating at Liverpool Street to serve Maryland but I don't see it happening. Jonn I think they need the extra Liverpool St-only trains to cater for demand. -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
Crossrail will terminate at Abbey Wood
In article , Dave Arquati
writes Jonn Elledge wrote: "Rich Mallard" wrote in message ... "Dave Arquati" wrote in message ... Fresh off the press - to prevent performance pollution from SET, Crossrail will share no track with SET on its Isle of Dogs branch and will terminate at a new cross-platform interchange at Abbey Wood. http://www.crossrail.co.uk/pages/pro...announced.html What a let down! Wasn't one of big benefits of Crossrail supposed to be regeneration of north Kent, Greenhithe, Stone, Dartford through to Slade Green, Erith and Belvedere? If they think it's not feasible to track-share a few stops with SET to Dartford & Ebbsfleet, what hope have they got running to and from Shenfield?! Surely Crossrail won't share tracks to Shenfield - the line is pretty much segregated anyway. There's talk of a few trains terminating at Liverpool Street to serve Maryland but I don't see it happening. Jonn I think they need the extra Liverpool St-only trains to cater for demand. I'll believe Crossrail when I see it in operation What will be first Crossrail or Thameslink 2000. -- Alan Osborn |
Crossrail will terminate at Abbey Wood
Paul Corfield wrote in
: On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 20:12:38 +0000, Dave Arquati wrote: Fresh off the press - to prevent performance pollution from SET, Crossrail will share no track with SET on its Isle of Dogs branch and will terminate at a new cross-platform interchange at Abbey Wood. http://www.crossrail.co.uk/pages/pro...announced.html That's a rather neat way of cutting scheme costs now while leaving open the door for a separately funded extension through to Ebbsfleet at some far off point in the future. Something tells me this is the first of many such announcements to ensure the financial problems are resolved. True, but the biggest cost is the tunnel which is very difficult to reduce without killing off the scheme (remove Canary Wharf and you lose any funding from that source that might have been available, remove either of the other legs (Paddington-Liverpool Street/Liverpool Street-Stratford) and there really isn't a lot of point). |
Crossrail will terminate at Abbey Wood
|
Crossrail will terminate at Abbey Wood
David Jackman wrote:
Paul Corfield wrote: On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 20:12:38 +0000, Dave Arquati wrote: Fresh off the press - to prevent performance pollution from SET, Crossrail will share no track with SET on its Isle of Dogs branch and will terminate at a new cross-platform interchange at Abbey Wood. http://www.crossrail.co.uk/pages/pro...announced.html That's a rather neat way of cutting scheme costs now while leaving open the door for a separately funded extension through to Ebbsfleet at some far off point in the future. Something tells me this is the first of many such announcements to ensure the financial problems are resolved. That's a sensible decision (though it doesn't go far enough). There's no great advantage to linking the West End, City and Wharf with Ebbsfleet. True, but the biggest cost is the tunnel which is very difficult to reduce without killing off the scheme (remove Canary Wharf and you lose any funding from that source that might have been available, remove either of the other legs (Paddington-Liverpool Street/Liverpool Street-Stratford) and there really isn't a lot of point). On the contrary, removing Canary Wharf would be the most sensible thing they could do! The funding is available from Canary Wharf wouldn't go anywhere near covering the enormous costs of that branch, and passenger capacity to Canary Wharf could easily be provided with boats (which could become quite popular if they accepted travelcards) and with a few minor improvements to the bus network. In the long term, I'd like to see another Crossrail line linking the Canary Wharf area with Kings Cross, Woolwich (and possibly Abbey Wood) and Southend via Tilbury (running alongside the DLR to Gallions Reach, then taking over its Dagenham branch. But there are other lines, such as Crossrail 2, that should take priority. Making half a service to Canary Wharf part of Crossrail 1, with no provision for improvement, will only serve to deter future investment. |
Crossrail will terminate at Abbey Wood
Alan Osborn wrote:
I'll believe Crossrail when I see it in operation What will be first Crossrail or Thameslink 2000. I fear we may see neither under "New" Labour. The gaping hole in the public finances is widening and the slowing of the economy means that the Government is holding back on infrastructure projects. As the song went, "things can only get b.. WORSE"! ;-) |
Crossrail will terminate at Abbey Wood
Dave Arquati wrote in message ...
Jonn Elledge wrote: "Rich Mallard" wrote in message ... "Dave Arquati" wrote in message ... Fresh off the press - to prevent performance pollution from SET, Crossrail will share no track with SET on its Isle of Dogs branch and will terminate at a new cross-platform interchange at Abbey Wood. http://www.crossrail.co.uk/pages/pro...announced.html What a let down! Wasn't one of big benefits of Crossrail supposed to be regeneration of north Kent, Greenhithe, Stone, Dartford through to Slade Green, Erith and Belvedere? If they think it's not feasible to track-share a few stops with SET to Dartford & Ebbsfleet, what hope have they got running to and from Shenfield?! Surely Crossrail won't share tracks to Shenfield - the line is pretty much segregated anyway. There's talk of a few trains terminating at Liverpool Street to serve Maryland but I don't see it happening. Jonn I think they need the extra Liverpool St-only trains to cater for demand. (sorry if this appears twice - server problems) You really think so? When people complain that 4tph should be sufficient for the line, I tend to assume they've never used it; but even with the extra passengers Crossrail will bring, would 12 long trains really be insufficient? Jonn |
Crossrail will terminate at Abbey Wood
Jonn Elledge wrote:
Dave Arquati wrote in message ... Jonn Elledge wrote: "Rich Mallard" wrote in message ... "Dave Arquati" wrote in message ... Fresh off the press - to prevent performance pollution from SET, Crossrail will share no track with SET on its Isle of Dogs branch and will terminate at a new cross-platform interchange at Abbey Wood. http://www.crossrail.co.uk/pages/pro...announced.html What a let down! Wasn't one of big benefits of Crossrail supposed to be regeneration of north Kent, Greenhithe, Stone, Dartford through to Slade Green, Erith and Belvedere? If they think it's not feasible to track-share a few stops with SET to Dartford & Ebbsfleet, what hope have they got running to and from Shenfield?! Surely Crossrail won't share tracks to Shenfield - the line is pretty much segregated anyway. There's talk of a few trains terminating at Liverpool Street to serve Maryland but I don't see it happening. Jonn I think they need the extra Liverpool St-only trains to cater for demand. (sorry if this appears twice - server problems) You really think so? When people complain that 4tph should be sufficient for the line, I tend to assume they've never used it; but even with the extra passengers Crossrail will bring, would 12 long trains really be insufficient? Jonn Romford receives up to 15tph in the evening peak, and significant growth is expected at Stratford. CLRL estimate morning peak volumes on westbound trains arriving at Stratford in 2016 to be around 36,000 passengers (across a period of around 3 hours). At an average of 12,000 pph, you'll need more than 12 trains to make sure overcrowding isn't extremely severe. This figure is from the 2003 business case, before the Richmond branch was axed, but I wouldn't have thought too many passengers would be travelling from the Great Eastern to the Richmond branch so soon after Crossrail opened. -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
Crossrail will terminate at Abbey Wood
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 20:12:38 +0000, Dave Arquati wrote: Fresh off the press - to prevent performance pollution from SET, Crossrail will share no track with SET on its Isle of Dogs branch and will terminate at a new cross-platform interchange at Abbey Wood. http://www.crossrail.co.uk/pages/pro...announced.html That's a rather neat way of cutting scheme costs now while leaving open the door for a separately funded extension through to Ebbsfleet at some far off point in the future. Something tells me this is the first of many such announcements to ensure the financial problems are resolved. I also just realised that they no longer need dual-voltage stock. I don't know if this makes any significant difference to cost or reliability. -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
Crossrail will terminate at Abbey Wood
Dave Arquati wrote:
Paul Corfield wrote: On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 20:12:38 +0000, Dave Arquati wrote: Fresh off the press - to prevent performance pollution from SET, Crossrail will share no track with SET on its Isle of Dogs branch and will terminate at a new cross-platform interchange at Abbey Wood. http://www.crossrail.co.uk/pages/pro...announced.html That's a rather neat way of cutting scheme costs now while leaving open the door for a separately funded extension through to Ebbsfleet at some far off point in the future. Something tells me this is the first of many such announcements to ensure the financial problems are resolved. I also just realised that they no longer need dual-voltage stock. I don't know if this makes any significant difference to cost or reliability. However, Crossrail's announcement says "We can all look forward to completing the direct link to Ebbsfleet once the technical [sic] problems of using the lines beyond Abbey Wood have been overcome", which suggests that they would buy stock capable of running to Ebbsfleet. Hounslow's Corridor 7 proposal (Paddington-Hounslow) also assumes dual-voltage stock. My impression is that dual-voltage doesn't add much to cost these days, as it has been provided with little hard justification on various recent EMU designs. -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) |
All times are GMT. The time now is 02:03 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk