"Peter Masson" wrote in message
...


wrote

Exactly what service would they propose to Gravesend? Would they
squeeze in the Crossrail stoppers between the North Kent trains? Would
they remodel Dartford?

It all seems a bit vague. I haven't yet seen anything in the Kent RUS
or S London RUS to suggest what they would plan on doing. Maybe I
missed it..

It is vague - as there is no current intention to extend Crossrail to
Gravesend. The safeguarding seems to include more land than was envisaged
in the original Crossrail proposals, suggesting that there will be more
track, especially in the Slade Green - Dartford area, and it is clear that
a terminus at Ebbsfleet has been dropped in favour of Gravesend.

Peter

1. Safeguarding is a planning tool, a smart one. But can lead to "planning
blight" so there is a downside.
2. Crossrail's scope is clearly constrained by economics.
3. Earlier proposals probably inform us of the potential scope of Crossrail
operation longer term.
4. NO-ONE has mentioned the plethora of hybrid battery-equipped rollingstock
currently prototyped, on trial, in low volume production etc around the
world. Given Crossrail's gestation, can I assert with some confidence that
by then it will be quite normal for trains to extend a moderate distance
beyond the wires or juice rail. 25kV to Reading would not necessarily be a
pre-requisite to CrossRail service by the mid-10s.
5. Also absent from discussion so far has been AirTrack. In some other
forums, we hear that BAA are firmly behind AirTrack. AIUI, provision has
been made in the Heathrow 5 station box for them. The discussion suggests
that HConn/Crossrail will run through to Reading via H5 and AirTrack. Those
with local route knowledge can fill me in here, but once the link is made,
basically would dual-voltage stock (one assumes Bombardier will have
recovered from their supply line and quality management difficulties by
then - ) provide a through Crossrail all-electric service?

From
http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/s/2...runway_ plans
we read

January 23, 2009

Greener trains and a direct rail-air link from Reading are among a raft of
transport improvements being outlined alongside confirmed plans for Heathrow's
third runway. Transport Secretary Geoff Hoon confirmed work would be
undertaken to consider electrifying the Great Western Mainline (GWML) as he
gave the go-ahead for the airport's expansion last week.

Network Rail has welcomed the proposals which would mean quieter and
smoother journeys for passengers on eco-friendly trains and "a sustainable
form of travel". Electric trains are cheaper and easier to maintain and
cause less wear and tear on the track, which rail bosses say would lead to
an increase in reliability.

Last year also saw Network Rail start a significant piece of work on
potential further electrification of key rail routes which is expected to be
completed in the spring. The enhancements of the track at Reading as part of
the £425 million station redevelopment would also pave the way for Airtrack
trains to use the station. Network Rail is also working with the Department
for Transport and British Airports Association (BAA) on the scheme to
connect passengers directly to Terminal 5.

Network Rail is carrying out ongoing work looking at the need for new
railway lines which will feed into the work of the Government's new company
High Speed 2. This company will consider fast rail-links between London and
Scotland and could include plans for an interchange station on the GWML to
do be determined later this year.

Rupert Walker, scheme sponsor for Reading re-modelling scheme, said: "The
announcements show that the plan to upgrade the capacity of the railway at
Reading plays an important part in the future of transport in Britain.
Network Rail welcomes Mr Hoon's comments and awaits further announcements
about whether electrification and the Airtrack service to Heathrow will
become a reality."

6. Given the time frames for Crossrail, and the rather modest scope of
AirTrack in comparison, could it be that AirTrack is up, and through
electric services running Paddington - Reading before Crossrail starts?

7. While HConn only goes to H123 (old H Central, made more sense!), AIUI
that's a commercial decision. The AirTrack scheme clearly envisages
HConn/Crossrail coming into the H5 box and extending west out of it. What
happens to HEx and links to H123 then would be influenced by the commercial
imperitives of the day.

8. The discussion about what will happen to this local or that once
Crossrail is extended to Reading via GWML is, IMHO, a tad premature. I'd
suggest that in the perhaps 8 years or so before the earliest that might
happen, the shape of the world as we know it might alter somewhat. If we
look back 8 years, or even more instructive, 15 - how recognisable are the
service patterns and timetables now compared to then? The players involved?
Government policies? That part of the thread seemed to me, at my safe and
comfortable distance down under in Perth, Western Australia as having a
discernable whiff of NIMBYism about it.

9. I am one who was surprised that Crossrail wasn't more firmly tied in with
the Kent HS1 - at Stratford and further out. The safeguarding excercises
give a future Government the opportunity to take some new risks

My 2p for now ...

David down under

What exactly needs to be safeguarded anyway?

I assume that if a four track main line is good enough for Crossrail
between Paddington and Maidenhead, then the continuation of the same
four track main line is good enough between Maidenhead and Reading. So
no additional land neeeding to be safeguarded?

As to clearances for knitting. Aren't all new structures built above
railway lines supposed to allow for a hypothetical future
electrification anyway? And whether that electrification is being done
for Crossrail or as a part of a more extensive GWML electrification
shouldn't surely make any difference to the physical clearances
needing to safeguarded above the line.

Possibly Crossrail might need additional platform capacity or
arrangements at Reading. But surely the Reading remodeling is being
projected with that in mind anyway?

wrote:
What exactly needs to be safeguarded anyway?

I assume that if a four track main line is good enough for Crossrail
between Paddington and Maidenhead, then the continuation of the same
four track main line is good enough between Maidenhead and Reading. So
no additional land neeeding to be safeguarded?

Substations?

wrote in message
...

What exactly needs to be safeguarded anyway?

As to clearances for knitting. Aren't all new structures built above
railway lines supposed to allow for a hypothetical future
electrification anyway? And whether that electrification is being done
for Crossrail or as a part of a more extensive GWML electrification
shouldn't surely make any difference to the physical clearances
needing to safeguarded above the line.

From the Crossrail site, you seem to have hit the nail on the head:

"Most land needed is already within the railway estate and the proposal is
to safeguard only such additional land as is necessary (for example works
sites adjacent to bridges that need to be raised) so as to minimise the
impact on adjacent development."

http://billdocuments.crossrail.co.uk...feguarding.pdf

Nice sounding press release last week, but little real content, now if the
actual safeguarding plans issued to planning departments were available
online...

Paul S

"Paul Scott" wrote

Nice sounding press release last week, but little real content, now if the
actual safeguarding plans issued to planning departments were available
online...

Have you tried the link from this page (it's a 17.6 Mb file)?
http://www.crossrail.co.uk/pages/mai...toreading.html

There's also a link from that page to the Abbey Wood to Hoo Junction page,
which also links to maps.

eter

"Peter Masson" wrote in message
...


"Paul Scott" wrote

Nice sounding press release last week, but little real content, now if
the actual safeguarding plans issued to planning departments were
available online...

Have you tried the link from this page (it's a 17.6 Mb file)?
http://www.crossrail.co.uk/pages/mai...toreading.html

There's also a link from that page to the Abbey Wood to Hoo Junction page,
which also links to maps.


Thanks - I'd missed that, but I'd seen the Abbey Wood to Hoo stuff only
recently, which I think was linked from the Crossrail 'bill documents'
pages. It does seem to confirm the earlier note I found, that it's mainly
about providing works access, and modified bridge approach roads etc, rather
than anything more substantial.

Paul S