(Martin Whelton) wrote in message . com...
The whole of the Western options need examining again, the options for
the western lines are very limited and from what I have seen will not
provide much relief to Paddington. With the cost of the Western branch
to Richmond, will this really provide value for money when you
remember that Richmond has a quick link's at the moment into Waterloo
and has the District Line. The Western branch should go to Slough or
even Reading and longer distances at the eastern end, the cost of
electrification would more then offset the cost of the tunnel to the
Richmond branch and be a great deal less.

Martin




"Richard J." wrote in message ...
Dr. Sunil wrote:
Angus Bryant wrote:

Afternoon all

It seems that Crossrail has now (as of Friday 3rd Oct) confirmed an
underground station at Turnham Green as part of its Kingston branch.
Also the Custom House route is the preferred option for the North
Kent branch.

See pdfs on this page:

http://www.crossrail.co.uk/pages/res...lcampaign.html

Cheers
Angus

No connection with the Victoria or Piccadilly (except at Heathrow).

... unless LU stop all Piccadilly trains at Turnham Green, which I think the
latest plans make more likely.


With regards to South London, I believe an Outer Circle could be
constructed at litte expense (in context), using the East and West
London Lines, the North London Line, and lines in South London. This
probably wouldn't go out that far, but it would probably clear some
cross-london traffic and make the lines going in to the central area a
bit better

As for Crossrail, I believe Kingston is a good idea, personally I
would have the service divide into three in the West, assuming a 12tph
service in the central area, 4tph go to Aylesbury, 4tph to Reading,
and 4tph to Kingston. Heahrow is already accommodated well enough in
my view. Out eastwards I would send trains to Southend, Ipswich and
the Medway Towns, areas I believe the Government want to grow. I
haven't looked at the plans lately for Crossrail but I doubt they are
like my ideas. Probably mine are a bit impractical, although I am of
the belief that the tunnels would be better used for cross-london
mainline services, and have a similar setup north-south.

CJC wrote:
As for Crossrail, I believe Kingston is a good idea, personally I
would have the service divide into three in the West, assuming a 12tph
service in the central area, 4tph go to Aylesbury, 4tph to Reading,
and 4tph to Kingston.

It's supposed to be 24tph in the peak through the central area. Current
plans are 12tph to Richmond of which 4tph continue to Kingston, 6tph to
Heathrow, 6tph unspecified. The Aylesbury branch was dropped from Crossrail
plans some time ago.

Heahrow is already accommodated well enough in
my view.

I disagree. The Piccadilly is slow, cramped and often overcrowded. HEx only
goes to Paddington. If Heathrow is not to be utterly swamped by road
traffic when T5 opens (and, God forbid, if a third main runway is built),
then you must improve rail access. Note that Crossrail will *replace* HEx.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

(Darryl Chamberlain) wrote in message . com...
(Gary Jenkins) wrote in message . com...

Does anyone have any suggestions for improving transport in the
Cinderella parts of SE London?
Some random thoughts...

Making sure everyone from Eltham/Kidbrooke *didn't* to crawl up to
North Greenwich would be a start, although this seems to be the way
Greenwich Council wants it. The bus network up to North Greenwich
cannot cope with the number of people who use it already, without
bringing in more buses from more areas.


Greenwich Council seems to be content with the current situation
whereby people have to crawl from Eltham to North Greenwich (only
direct route is the 161 bus which takes about 35 minutes). A fast
route using the A 102(M) would reduce this significantly. I don't
think it's unreasonable for Eltham commuters to expect this so that
the Jubilee Line to North Greenwich is a feasible alternative if the
overground services are buggered up or if their journey starts in the
Baker St area, or just to get to the Greenwich Peninsula when that
area is developed. There's plenty of space around North Greenwich,
I'm sure that with a little imagination space could be found for more
buses.


. Or how about simply improving the current rail services?

You're right. However the latest development seems to be the
Overground Network

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/rail/press-746.shtml

It would be interesting to know why the Greenwich/Charlton line has
been chosen as a "key route" ahead of the Bexleyheath and Sidcup
lines, especially when Greenwich/Charlton already get more benefit
from the DLR and Jubilee Line than do Eltham/New Eltham. If I
understand the Overground Network correctly, there are going to be
extra evening trains on the London Bridge-Greenwich-Woolwich line
which will mean that the people who probably need it less are getting
the improvements.

Are there any figures anywhere on relative overcrowding levels between
the various London Bridge-Dartford lines or on the number of people
who use each station?

"Richard J." wrote in message ...
CJC wrote:
As for Crossrail, I believe Kingston is a good idea, personally I
would have the service divide into three in the West, assuming a 12tph
service in the central area, 4tph go to Aylesbury, 4tph to Reading,
and 4tph to Kingston.

It's supposed to be 24tph in the peak through the central area. Current
plans are 12tph to Richmond of which 4tph continue to Kingston, 6tph to
Heathrow, 6tph unspecified. The Aylesbury branch was dropped from Crossrail
plans some time ago.

Heahrow is already accommodated well enough in
my view.

I disagree. The Piccadilly is slow, cramped and often overcrowded. HEx only
goes to Paddington. If Heathrow is not to be utterly swamped by road
traffic when T5 opens (and, God forbid, if a third main runway is built),
then you must improve rail access. Note that Crossrail will *replace* HEx.

I didn't realise that Crossrail was going to replace HEx. The
Piccadilly Line should have been four-tracked from Northfields to
Heathrow when the extension to the airport was being built, the
District could have taken over the Uxbridge branch and fast and slow
services could have run from the airport on the piccadilly, fast
stopping at Acton and Hammersmith only.

A third runway is being built isn't it? On the news it said between
the M4 and A4.

Having 12tph to Richmond in my view is ridiculous, considering that
there are express services to London from there already. Having every
train through to Kingston would have made sense, or even coming off
the NLL at Kew Bridge and going via Brentford and Hounslow to
Kingston.

"CJC" wrote in message
om...
"Richard J." wrote in message
...
CJC wrote:

Heahrow is already accommodated well enough in
my view.

I disagree. The Piccadilly is slow, cramped and often overcrowded. HEx
only
goes to Paddington. If Heathrow is not to be utterly swamped by road
traffic when T5 opens (and, God forbid, if a third main runway is
built),
then you must improve rail access. Note that Crossrail will *replace*
HEx.

I didn't realise that Crossrail was going to replace HEx. The
Piccadilly Line should have been four-tracked from Northfields to
Heathrow when the extension to the airport was being built, the
District could have taken over the Uxbridge branch and fast and slow
services could have run from the airport on the piccadilly, fast
stopping at Acton and Hammersmith only.

A third runway is being built isn't it? On the news it said between
the M4 and A4.

NO!!! One of the government's options is indeed to build a third main
runway, but those of us who live under its flight path are hoping that they
decide not to. It is NOT being built at present.

Having 12tph to Richmond in my view is ridiculous, considering that
there are express services to London from there already. Having every
train through to Kingston would have made sense, or even coming off
the NLL at Kew Bridge and going via Brentford and Hounslow to
Kingston.

Why is it ridiculous? There are no express services to central London from
Kew Gardens, Gunnersbury and Turnham Green. For those stations, Richmond is
a convenient terminal operationally, and Crossrail will provide new fast
links from there to various parts of central London north of the Thames,
hence reducing pressure on Waterloo and the tube links from there.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

In article ,
(CJC) wrote:

Heathrow is already accommodated well enough in my view.

I disagree. The Piccadilly is slow, cramped and often overcrowded.
HEx only goes to Paddington. If Heathrow is not to be utterly swamped
by road traffic when T5 opens (and, God forbid, if a third main runway
is built), then you must improve rail access. Note that Crossrail
will *replace* HEx.

I didn't realise that Crossrail was going to replace HEx. The
Piccadilly Line should have been four-tracked from Northfields to
Heathrow when the extension to the airport was being built, the
District could have taken over the Uxbridge branch and fast and slow
services could have run from the airport on the piccadilly, fast
stopping at Acton and Hammersmith only.

A third runway is being built isn't it? On the news it said between
the M4 and A4.

Heathrow needs a through station with intercity services. Anything else
will fail to distribute its passengers adequately.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:

Heathrow needs a through station with intercity services. Anything else
will fail to distribute its passengers adequately.

Instead of, as I understand it, no mainline (as opposed to tube) trains
that even manage to stop at all 5 terminals without reversing - we might
even get 3tph each to T4 and T5.

I would say there's a case for 8tph to KHR, half continuing to Staines
and half to Uxbridge.

And they should bite the bullet and divert all GW mainline expresses
through Heathrow. How would the length and cost of this diversion
compare with the Selby diversion?

Colin McKenzie

"Colin McKenzie" wrote in message
...
Colin Rosenstiel wrote:

Heathrow needs a through station with intercity services.
Anything else will fail to distribute its passengers adequately.

And they should bite the bullet and divert all GW
mainline expresses through Heathrow. How would
the length and cost of this diversion
compare with the Selby diversion?

A big problem is the three terminal areas within Heathrow. I can't see every
train from Cardiff calling at Terminal 5, Terminal 123 and Terminal 4. If
the expresses only call at one station and loads of passengers need to
change, then the expresses might as well call at Hayes or Reading and all
the passengers change for trains to Heathrow there.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

Colin McKenzie wrote in message ...
Colin Rosenstiel wrote:

Heathrow needs a through station with intercity services. Anything else
will fail to distribute its passengers adequately.

Instead of, as I understand it, no mainline (as opposed to tube) trains
that even manage to stop at all 5 terminals without reversing - we might
even get 3tph each to T4 and T5.

I would say there's a case for 8tph to KHR, half continuing to Staines
and half to Uxbridge.

And they should bite the bullet and divert all GW mainline expresses
through Heathrow. How would the length and cost of this diversion
compare with the Selby diversion?

Colin McKenzie

I live under the flightpath and I think airport expansion is a good
idea, it will boost the local economy. Also I think that the
government and BAA are pretty determined, look at Terminal 5. I really
am not bothered by the planes, I hardly notice them. I can understand
people who live really close having an issue, but anyone who has moved
in in the last forty odd years should have realised the place was
going to expand. The anti-airport view is perfectly valid, but
everyone is selfish and I would like a nice managerial position at an
airline based in Heathrow at some time in the future.