Should the Central line Richmond Branch Proposals be revived?

[AAA94]

Richmond extensions

In 1912 plans were published for an extension of the line from Shepherd's Bush under Goldhawk Road, Stamford Brook Road and Bath Road to Turnham Green and Gunnersbury,[1] including stations at Hammersmith Grove, Paddenswick Road, Rylett Road, Stamford Gardens, Turnham Green and Heathfield Terrace. This would have enabled the Central London Railway to run trains through to Richmond and possibly beyond. The route was authorised in 1913[2] but work had not started by the outbreak of World War I the following year. In 1919 an alternative route was published, building a tunnelled link to the disused London and South Western Railway (L&SWR) tracks south of the L&SWR's Shepherd's Bush station then via Hammersmith (Grove Road) station and Turnham Green.[3] Although authorisation was granted in 1920,[4] the connection was never realised, and the L&SWR tracks were eventually used by the Piccadilly line when it was extended west of Hammersmith in 1932.[5] However the proposal has occasionally reappeared.[6]

I reading about the history of the central line the other day and this richmond branch really struck me as a good idea. i saw something similar to this in earlier proposals of crossrail, however it was rejected because richmond residents didnt want to loose the district line.

the area is served by southwest trains services london underground/overground

but if the central line or crossrail is extended out to richmond it would substantially releive pressure on the RML and District line.

also when/if HS2 is built presumably it will use the corridor next to the central line out of london to aylesbury, surely if they were to 4 track out of london or at least leave prevision for it they'd have to take this branch off the central line......this richmond branch could be where all the extra trains go. or this could be a branch of crossrail....as previously planned...

this would offer releif to the distict line and RML and surely make a better journey for any people living in west london and southwest london....

[John Williams]

Richmond is served by the Underground. To relieve pressure on the District Line new signals need to be installed to get a higher throughput,as they are being done on the Jubilee Line. New lines are not needed.

[poshbakerloo]

Sounds interesting but It would only amount to more pressure on the central section of the line.

[AAA94]

Originally Posted by poshbakerloo

Sounds interesting but It would only amount to more pressure on the central section of the line.

yes and no,
once the HSR corridor is taken out of london on the central line greenford branch.the central line is likely to be taken out of service on this line. an extension to richmond would mean the the trains displaced from greenford could travel down to richmond.

Originally Posted by John Williams

Richmond is served by the Underground. To relieve pressure on the District Line new signals need to be installed to get a higher throughput,as they are being done on the Jubilee Line. New lines are not needed.

yes its served by the district line which climbs at a snails pace through london, often taking up to an hour to get to the city and the west end. the SWT lines are faster yes but offer little better Journey times when changes onto the crowded victoria line or waterloo and city line are needed to get to the west end or the city.

not only would such a branch offer better connections for richmond.

but it would relive the RML (reading main line) and WL (windsor lines) THE buisiest commuter lines in britian. but it would relieve waterloo station, the waterloo and city line, the district line and ultimately the victoria line which is the most crowded line on the network.

and if the central line was closed and tunnels rebored to metro size (crossrail taking the extra traffic) effectively thats a 4 tracked crossrail route. and trains could continue further than richmond to windsor or reading further relieving the SWT lines. crossrail services could have express tunnels and stopping tunnels meaning faster journey times through london.

this could also allow the traffic from the district line to pass onto the central line and the district line could start to focus on express lines because in theory, from Bow to upminister and from Ealing Broadway to South Kensington. there is space for 4 tracking, infact formerly it was 4 tracked. express district line services could operate. calling at (from ealing) only acton town, turnham green,hammersmith,earls court and south kensington then calling at all stations untill Bow. then express only calling at barking and Upminister. which would relieve c2c services and crossrail aswell.

all in all it would lead to a much better cross-london network.

[Jon10]

Cannot see why West Ruilslip - Greenford - North Acton Central Line would be affected by HS2.

Now, North Acton to Elaing Broadway will loose much of its traffic when Crossrail opens, so that would be the branch to go.

[streetquark]

Originally Posted by AAA94

Richmond extensions

In 1912 plans were published for an extension of the line from Shepherd's Bush under Goldhawk Road, Stamford Brook Road and Bath Road to Turnham Green and Gunnersbury,[1] including stations at Hammersmith Grove, Paddenswick Road, Rylett Road, Stamford Gardens, Turnham Green and Heathfield Terrace. This would have enabled the Central London Railway to run trains through to Richmond and possibly beyond. The route was authorised in 1913[2] but work had not started by the outbreak of World War I the following year. In 1919 an alternative route was published, building a tunnelled link to the disused London and South Western Railway (L&SWR) tracks south of the L&SWR's Shepherd's Bush station then via Hammersmith (Grove Road) station and Turnham Green.[3] Although authorisation was granted in 1920,[4] the connection was never realised, and the L&SWR tracks were eventually used by the Piccadilly line when it was extended west of Hammersmith in 1932.[5] However the proposal has occasionally reappeared.[6]

I reading about the history of the central line the other day and this richmond branch really struck me as a good idea. i saw something similar to this in earlier proposals of crossrail, however it was rejected because richmond residents didnt want to loose the district line.

the area is served by southwest trains services london underground/overground

but if the central line or crossrail is extended out to richmond it would substantially releive pressure on the RML and District line.

also when/if HS2 is built presumably it will use the corridor next to the central line out of london to aylesbury, surely if they were to 4 track out of london or at least leave prevision for it they'd have to take this branch off the central line......this richmond branch could be where all the extra trains go. or this could be a branch of crossrail....as previously planned...

this would offer releif to the distict line and RML and surely make a better journey for any people living in west london and southwest london....

Technically this was an extension to Gunnersbury, and proper services to Richmond, Kingston and Shepperton were proposed to follow after the usual segregation, i.e. adding extra tracks. Unfortunately extra tracks is not really possible over much of the key areas south of Gunnersbury.

The Central was only proposed to be the Ealing branch at this stage, therefore 2 branches after the Richmond addition, and if today the Central went to Richmond and the Ruislip branch were dropped what would happen to the all-stations services on that line and the added complication of the Greenford loop?

Reboring the Central line to ML tunnels would cost a fortune and add minor capacity improvements unless stations are extended which costs a lot more again. Most of the old route would have to be abandoned as it is too curvy and undulating for any increase in journey times, costing more again. To be like Crossrail it would require massive new stations and closing a lot of old ones, thus costing billions and abandoning a close-station high-frequency metro service which is well used along its's length. It would come up against the same problems re: Richmond as Crossrail itself came up against.

his could also allow the traffic from the district line to pass onto the central line and the district line could start to focus on express lines because in theory, from Bow to upminister and from Ealing Broadway to South Kensington. there is space for 4 tracking, infact formerly it was 4 tracked. express district line services could operate. calling at (from ealing) only acton town, turnham green,hammersmith,earls court and south kensington then calling at all stations untill Bow. then express only calling at barking and Upminister. which would relieve c2c services and crossrail aswell.

There isn't the right of way width along most of the route you suggest for extra tracks. See below for Hammersmith-Gunnersbury problems. There is virtually no capacity for reversing tracks let alone one or 2 extra tracks east of Hammersmith, all the way to Upminster. even if it did, the sensible and comparatively cheap solution would simply be to run express suburban services along the Upminster-Acton route, and split services to Richmond and Heathrow...

Clearly another line would have to be extended to Richmond. Crossrail can take a branch but not too high a frequency. I'd prefer it to Watford in conjunction with the Bakerloo. Crossrail to Richmond and beyond had too many problems.

HST will use express tracks or new tracks, not take over suburban lines out to Ruislip. More likely along the WCML anyway.

Arguably the District and Picc have too many branches, and the North London (LOROL) too restricted to offer any reasonable frequency (even if services were diverted into the centre, anyway, where would they go that couldn't be achieved elsewhere, i.e. Hammersmith and onto the H&C).

I'd suggest a better route today would be from Hammersmith via the A4 to west of Brentford, possibly taking over the former GW branch from Southall, perhaps extending from the H&C around Grove Road, maybe the whole line from Paddington as Light Rail. All existing route or a wide road that can have a cut-and-cover railway built in sections along it, or if more tram-like can be incorporated into the A4 route at far less cost. This relieves the routes west of Hammersmith and therefore the Richmond branch.

Another possibility dealing specifically with the Richmond branch is extending the H&C along the A4 then A316 Grt. Chertsey road direct to Richmond, but likely only as a tram as cut-and-cover on that road would be too disruptive (and not necessarily wide enough).

Alternatively widening between Hammersmith and Gunnersbury and send the H&C down to Richmond, but the line between Ravenscourt Park and Stamford Brook looks too restricted for extra tracks (including the stations), so an expensive tunnel might be needed (but could be express - i.e. no new tube stations) over this section.

[sweek]

Central Line is at capacity pretty much; I can see a couple of other options for Richmond if it really needs the capacity.

- Northern line after extension to Battersea/Clapham Junction extended onwards.
- Crossrail 2 / Chelney, which has a proposed terminal in either Wimbledon or Clapham Junction, to be extended onwards.

[AAA94]

Originally Posted by streetquark

Technically this was an extension to Gunnersbury, and proper services to Richmond, Kingston and Shepperton were proposed to follow after the usual segregation, i.e. adding extra tracks. Unfortunately extra tracks is not really possible over much of the key areas south of Gunnersbury.

The Central was only proposed to be the Ealing branch at this stage, therefore 2 branches after the Richmond addition, and if today the Central went to Richmond and the Ruislip branch were dropped what would happen to the all-stations services on that line and the added complication of the Greenford loop?

Reboring the Central line to ML tunnels would cost a fortune and add minor capacity improvements unless stations are extended which costs a lot more again. Most of the old route would have to be abandoned as it is too curvy and undulating for any increase in journey times, costing more again. To be like Crossrail it would require massive new stations and closing a lot of old ones, thus costing billions and abandoning a close-station high-frequency metro service which is well used along its's length. It would come up against the same problems re: Richmond as Crossrail itself came up against.



There isn't the right of way width along most of the route you suggest for extra tracks. See below for Hammersmith-Gunnersbury problems. There is virtually no capacity for reversing tracks let alone one or 2 extra tracks east of Hammersmith, all the way to Upminster. even if it did, the sensible and comparatively cheap solution would simply be to run express suburban services along the Upminster-Acton route, and split services to Richmond and Heathrow...

Clearly another line would have to be extended to Richmond. Crossrail can take a branch but not too high a frequency. I'd prefer it to Watford in conjunction with the Bakerloo. Crossrail to Richmond and beyond had too many problems.

HST will use express tracks or new tracks, not take over suburban lines out to Ruislip. More likely along the WCML anyway.

Arguably the District and Picc have too many branches, and the North London (LOROL) too restricted to offer any reasonable frequency (even if services were diverted into the centre, anyway, where would they go that couldn't be achieved elsewhere, i.e. Hammersmith and onto the H&C).

I'd suggest a better route today would be from Hammersmith via the A4 to west of Brentford, possibly taking over the former GW branch from Southall, perhaps extending from the H&C around Grove Road, maybe the whole line from Paddington as Light Rail. All existing route or a wide road that can have a cut-and-cover railway built in sections along it, or if more tram-like can be incorporated into the A4 route at far less cost. This relieves the routes west of Hammersmith and therefore the Richmond branch.

Another possibility dealing specifically with the Richmond branch is extending the H&C along the A4 then A316 Grt. Chertsey road direct to Richmond, but likely only as a tram as cut-and-cover on that road would be too disruptive (and not necessarily wide enough).

Alternatively widening between Hammersmith and Gunnersbury and send the H&C down to Richmond, but the line between Ravenscourt Park and Stamford Brook looks too restricted for extra tracks (including the stations), so an expensive tunnel might be needed (but could be express - i.e. no new tube stations) over this section.

actually the only reason the crossrail richmond branch didnt get built is because of opposition in richmond, they didnt want to loose the tube at richmond station for a new national rail route that is the only reason it wasnt built.

the reboring to metro size would not be neccecary but i was just an idea.

the district line was 4 tracked from acton town to south ken origionally so i can be done again. its already 4 tracks from acton town to barons court anyway. its only in the last 20 years or so the 3rd and 4th tracks were lifted from barons court to south kensington. infact at the stations you can even see the former platforms and track approaches! the space is there, would just mean the H&C instead of going to hammersmith going to heathrow along the GWML, trains being built for dual power(OHLE and 4th rail) the piccadilly line travelling to heathrow but on current district line tracks and stopping(so the new H&C would be the heathrow line)

the district line would operate on the new fast lines (taken over from the piccadilly line) the express district line services (all express district line would terminate at richmond. calling only at (from richmond)

at*:

kew gardens

gunnersbury

turnham green

hammersmith

barons court

earls court

south kensington

then all district line stations till bow then at barking and upminister only. the H and C ( now heathrow and City line) stopping at all stations untill upminister. were talking 20 30 years down the line when the next 'S' stock is ordered. they would need to be dual powered with pantographs and 3/4th rail. really only 3rd rail

so the SSL network would be

hammersmith and city line renamed heathrow and city line and extended to heathrow via the GWML. taking over crossrail stations and crossrail taking over heathrow express(fast from paddington) and taking over stopping district line services from bow to upminister

district line. express route from richmond to south ken, and from bow to upminister see * for stations called at
all stations in the central core zone called at.

note* the express trains would be 4 tph off peak and 5 tph peak time running inbetween
central line, c2c and LOROL services

circle line. extended to hammersmith taking over h&c

DLT network

piccadilly line slow from barons court to heathrow, and less services to rayners lane.

. with the central line taking over the richmond branch and joining on from the north london line at gunnersbury.

no new central line tunnels would need to be bored for the richmond extension unless a route via turnham green from shepherds bush was made joining the district line again at gunnersbury. im working on a map will be in my next post

[streetquark]

Originally Posted by AAA94

actually the only reason the crossrail richmond branch didnt get built is because of opposition in richmond, they didnt want to loose the tube at richmond station for a new national rail route that is the only reason it wasnt built.

There was opposition in Kingston too and operational problems throughout. Crossrail was always at worst transferring service or at best increasing capacity. Overall the latter would be needed to justify a branch. The Kingston branch would have seen service reduction over all. Believe me if it was just a few Richmondites complaining it would have gone ahead.

the district line was 4 tracked from acton town to south ken origionally so i can be done again. its already 4 tracks from acton town to barons court anyway. its only in the last 20 years or so the 3rd and 4th tracks were lifted from barons court to south kensington. infact at the stations you can even see the former platforms and track approaches! the space is there, would just mean the H&C instead of going to hammersmith going to heathrow along the GWML, trains being built for dual power(OHLE and 4th rail) the piccadilly line travelling to heathrow but on current district line tracks and stopping(so the new H&C would be the heathrow line)

East of Earl's court the extra tracks were to do with HSK services from the east. West of there till past Hammersmith is limited by space and need for sidings. These 2 stations are at capacity anmd South Ken has limited potential. As pointed out, there is space in sections westward to Acton town - indeed to Northfields - but not enough for the extra pair of tracks needed.

Where east of South Ken (if that were poss)?

the district line would operate on the new fast lines (taken over from the piccadilly line) the express district line services (all express district line would terminate at richmond. calling only at (from richmond)

at*:

kew gardens

gunnersbury

turnham green

hammersmith

barons court

earls court

south kensington

Even if you could get 2 extra tracks all the way from the not-in-the-centre South Ken, including Pic tracks west of Baron's Court and if needs be west of West Kensington, where would all the Heathrow and Uxbridge branch trains go?

then all district line stations till bow then at barking and upminister only. the H and C ( now heathrow and City line) stopping at all stations untill upminister. were talking 20 30 years down the line when the next 'S' stock is ordered. they would need to be dual powered with pantographs and 3/4th rail. really only 3rd rail

The route east of South Ken is at capacity. What services would you reduce to accommodate more traibs along the Richmond branch than at present and why would you reduce such services? how would you extend H&C services on top of this?

so the SSL network would be

hammersmith and city line renamed heathrow and city line and extended to heathrow via the GWML. taking over crossrail stations and crossrail taking over heathrow express(fast from paddington) and taking over stopping district line services from bow to upminister

Why divert Crossrail into the H&C? Where would the extra tracks be for it between Stamford Brook and Ravenscourt Park - and elsewhere if instead of Pic tracks?

district line. express route from richmond to south ken, and from bow to upminister see * for stations called at
all stations in the central core zone called at.

note* the express trains would be 4 tph off peak and 5 tph peak time running inbetween
central line, c2c and LOROL services

An awful lot of change and expense for low frequency services.

piccadilly line slow from barons court to heathrow, and less services to rayners lane.

Why reduce Rayners Lane services?
What about district services in the west?
Why essentially swap Pic and District services?

. with the central line taking over the richmond branch and joining on from the north london line at gunnersbury.

What about the other 2 branches?

[Tubeman]

The 1990's proposal was for a new tunnel under Kensal Green cemetery to take terminating Bakerloo services from Queen's park onwards across Old Oak Common railway lands to North Acton, where they would run through to Ealing Broadway instead of the Central Line.

This then allowed the Central Line to branch at Shepherd's Bush and run under Goldhawk Road / Bath Road to Turnham Green (intermediate stop at Askew Road) and take over the Richmond Branch.

It was a pretty decent proposal: improved reliability on the Bakerloo by removing the need to detrain / reverse 2/3 trains at Queen's Park, and improved connectivity with the Bakerloo / Central interchange at North Acton and Central / District (& Piccadilly?) at Turnham Green.

Be removing the Richmond Branch from the District, it also allows the would-be Richmond trains to run to Rayners lane / Uxbridge instead, so the Piccadilly Line can focus purely on alternate T5 / T4 trains.

Quite a lot of benefit for a relatively short bit of new line.

[AAA94]

no you dont understand. there is space for 4 tracks along the current tracks on the district line. from hammersmith to barons court there is one track for sidings the rest are used by piccadilly line and district line.

THIS SIDING LINE WOULD NOT BE USED.

the piccadilly line would take oven the 6 tph of district line services that would have run to richmond. on second thoughts the whole richmond district line could close and instead the fast services could terminate at raynerslane/uxbridge then the fast services could be more like 6-8tph all times

the piccadilly line would be heathrow only but stopping services taking over the district line slots which would have been for richmond branch trains.

the fast district lines to uxbridge would use the fast tracks formerlly for piccadilly line: calling at from ealing common: acton town, turnham green,hammersmith,barons court*,earlscourt,south kensington then all stations till bow then, barking and upminister only.

the h and c would take over crossrail to heathrow stopping services. and crossrail would take over heathrow express services, the h and c renamed 'heathrow and city' line

the h and c would then take over the district line to upminister from bow stopping services.

the capacity for the express services in the central section of the district line would be from the ex richmond services. then the whole district line including wimbledon line. would be fast from bow-barking-upminister.

there would be no express lines in the main tunneled section after south ken. untill bow.

there is space. take a trip on the district line you can see all the former trackbeds and where theve bricked up bridge entraces(at west ken) and bricked up platforms(at west ken) you can see the ex-platform at gloucester rd and south ken.

the space is all there.
the h and c would be quicker than any piccadilly line train into london and the city from heathrow. would be around the same as crossrail would be before it took over heX when h and c takes over stopping services.

the circle line extension allows this to happen!

central line would just need to be extended down goldhawk rd. calling at *goldhawk rd, askew rd,turnham green, gunnersbury,kew gardens,richmond.

relativly simple. only expensive part is central line to gunnersbury.

and its simple for trackbeds to be retracked. and not extensively expensive as no new tunnels are being bored. its just relaying tracks.

[Tubeman]

Originally Posted by AAA94

there is space. take a trip on the district line you can see all the former trackbeds and where theve bricked up bridge entraces(at west ken) and bricked up platforms(at west ken) you can see the ex-platform at gloucester rd and south ken.

the space is all there.

It's not... What you see at West Kensington is the former entrance to West Kensington goods yard diverging under North End Road. West Kensington never had any more than the current 2 platforms.

Between Baron's Court and West Kensington there used to be 2 goods loops where goods trains waited for a path in / out of the goods yard.

West Kensington to Earl's Court is only 2 tracks, with an additional eastbound track between the Olympia junction and a point just west of Earl's Court. To quadruple West Kensington to Earl's Court would be immensely expensive because it's all covered way under Earl's Court Exhibition Centre, so effectively to widen the westbound tunnel you'd need to demolish the exhibition hall, unless you bored the additional track deep level under the existing westbound. For the eastbound, although the tunnel is double track including the line ex-Olympia, for the last few metres under Warwick Road the two eastbound lines merge and to widen this to continue into Earl's Court platforms would entail demolition of Warwick Road overbridge.

Likewise, Earl's Court to Gloucester Road, including the bridge where Cromwell Road crosses, was only ever double track so to widen to 4 tracks would involve demolition of the very busy A4 overbridge.

Finally, when Gloucester Road station was rafted over, support columns were placed along the route of one of the eastbound tracks so to reinstate it would involve demolition of the shopping centre above in order to remove these support columns... Out of the question.

[streetquark]

Originally Posted by AAA94

the piccadilly line would take oven the 6 tph of district line services that would have run to richmond. on second thoughts the whole richmond district line could close and instead the fast services could terminate at raynerslane/uxbridge then the fast services could be more like 6-8tph all times

the piccadilly line would be heathrow only but stopping services taking over the district line slots which would have been for richmond branch trains.

This is unclear. Is pic taking over other services or not - it's at capacity already? Is it Heathrow-only, in which case wither Uxbridge?

And how do either of these answer the Richmond problem?

the fast district lines to uxbridge would use the fast tracks formerlly for piccadilly line: calling at from ealing common: acton town, turnham green,hammersmith,barons court*,earlscourt,south kensington then all stations till bow then, barking and upminister only.

As already pointed out there isn't the space for 2 extra tracks along the route so there is no capacity potential for fast even one extra service let alone 2 (H&C, fast District, fast Pic etc).

the h and c would take over crossrail to heathrow stopping services. and crossrail would take over heathrow express services, the h and c renamed 'heathrow and city' line

The H&C between Paddington and Hammersmith is not suited to Crossrail. It has short platforms and tight curves and would make for a circuitous route. There is also nowhere for it to go once it gets extended to Ravenscourt Park. It would need a tunnel.

the h and c would then take over the district line to upminister from bow stopping services.

Why cut services bound for the south side of the circle, including the Charing X which is far more West End than Euston?

Which do you think has the greater demand from the Upminster branch? The West End or Heathrow?

the capacity for the express services in the central section of the district line would be from the ex richmond services. then the whole district line including wimbledon line. would be fast from bow-barking-upminister.

there is no room for extra tracks so you would be closing stations, reducing existing District/circle services, cutting richmond off from the district - and it of course can't go onto the Pic. The H&C can't be extended beyond Ravenscourt Park, Crossrail won't go that way...

there would be no express lines in the main tunneled section after south ken. untill bow.

there is space. take a trip on the district line you can see all the former trackbeds and where theve bricked up bridge entraces(at west ken) and bricked up platforms(at west ken) you can see the ex-platform at gloucester rd and south ken.

the space is all there.

no it isn't. Gloucester road-south ken is a 4-tracked section, South Ken was rebuilt to allow for the deep level tube but has since been altered. nowhere else is there space for extra tracks.

the h and c would be quicker than any piccadilly line train into london and the city from heathrow. would be around the same as crossrail would be before it took over heX when h and c takes over stopping services.

but it doesn't go into the same central areas the Pic does. I'd doubt a line which already has about 6 stastions along its short section be quicker anyway. any comparison to HEX is insane.

the circle line extension allows this to happen!

It's a very limited service which needs terminators at Hammersmith. It's struggling as it is without an unworkable scheme for an ill-suited section of light rail and shared circle routes being sent through widely deviating route to Heathrow.

What is yor frequency comparison, bearing in mind H&C is only now 12 tph peaks? Pic Heathrow frequencies?

Will you match them?

central line would just need to be extended down goldhawk rd. calling at *goldhawk rd, askew rd,turnham green, gunnersbury,kew gardens,richmond.

relativly simple. only expensive part is central line to gunnersbury.

and its simple for trackbeds to be retracked. and not extensively expensive as no new tunnels are being bored. its just relaying tracks.

The problem is the 3 branches.

[AAA94]

Originally Posted by streetquark

This is unclear. Is pic taking over other services or not - it's at capacity already? Is it Heathrow-only, in which case wither Uxbridge?

And how do either of these answer the Richmond problem?



As already pointed out there isn't the space for 2 extra tracks along the route so there is no capacity potential for fast even one extra service let alone 2 (H&C, fast District, fast Pic etc).

right i thinks its obvious the express district line all the way to south ken wouldnt work. didnt do my homework on that one.

but untill barons court it could
if the piccadilly line took over the ex richmond stopping services but continuing to heathrow.

Originally Posted by streetquark

The H&C between Paddington and Hammersmith is not suited to Crossrail. It has short platforms and tight curves and would make for a circuitous route. There is also nowhere for it to go once it gets extended to Ravenscourt Park. It would need a tunnel.

no you dont get my route to heathrow. crossrail would stay on the GWML. but take over heathrow express services. not stopping at any intermediate stations between paddington and heathrow.

the circle line is extended to hammersmith anyway. personally i think they should rename it the 'spiral' line, but whatever

the hammersmith and city line, is extended down the GWML taking over the crossrail stopping services down to heathrow which crossrail used to operate

and renamed the 'hammersmith and city line' , but were talking 30 years down the line when all this is done and new stock for the ssl is ordered. and they would have to be dual voltage and 3rd/4th rail capabilities.

again with the central line stock. (not OHLE though just 3rd/4th rail)

Originally Posted by streetquark

Why cut services bound for the south side of the circle, including the Charing X which is far more West End than Euston?

Which do you think has the greater demand from the Upminster branch? The West End or Heathrow?

i have no idea what relevance this has. nothing on the south or north side would be cut.... just extended.

Originally Posted by streetquark

there is no room for extra tracks so you would be closing stations, reducing existing District/circle services, cutting richmond off from the district - and it of course can't go onto the Pic. The H&C can't be extended beyond Ravenscourt Park, Crossrail won't go that way...

the h and c wont use the current route to heathrow on the pic. it will travel down the GWML.

Originally Posted by streetquark

no it isn't. Gloucester road-south ken is a 4-tracked section, South Ken was rebuilt to allow for the deep level tube but has since been altered. nowhere else is there space for extra tracks.



but it doesn't go into the same central areas the Pic does. I'd doubt a line which already has about 6 stastions along its short section be quicker anyway. any comparison to HEX is insane.



It's a very limited service which needs terminators at Hammersmith. It's struggling as it is without an unworkable scheme for an ill-suited section of light rail and shared circle routes being sent through widely deviating route to Heathrow.

What is yor frequency comparison, bearing in mind H&C is only now 12 tph peaks? Pic Heathrow frequencies?

Will you match them?

the new heathrow and city line would be comparable with current heathrow connect services.

remember the pic would still go to heathrow if the express plan wasnt adopted on the District line but less frequently with more trains going to rayners lane to even out the service.

h and c and crossrail would carry the rest of the heathrow passengers

Originally Posted by streetquark

The problem is the 3 branches.

2 branch lines.

central line ealing bdy would close due to less use because of crossrail.

or greenford branch because of hs2 corridor....

either way. in the future one of the branches will go

[kerouac1848]

Ok, how about this as an idea (I’m not 100% sure it can realistically work, but hey ho).

There is a little used branch of the slow GWML that goes to Greenford, terminating at the same station as the central line one yeah? West of Paddington crossrail will be underused. So.... why not use the Greenford line branch to take over the central line north of there, up to West Ruislip (looking at Google Earth, this seems simple enough, although i don't really no the technically details of it). With this new extended route taking over the central line, there would then likely be enough passengers to run this through to crossrail*. The central line would now start/end at greenford.

At the same time, Ealing Broadway will have plenty of faster crossrail trains running through it meaning that there is little need for a branch there. Also, the greenford branch wouldn't need 32 tph either. This, therefore, offers the chance to run a second central line branch somewhere else - and this is where Richmond comes in. You run the central line to Richmond as it was stated above (cutting off somewhere around shepherds bush wasn't it?). 16-18 tph could probably be put on this branch, a dramatic improvement upon the district line as it currently is (not to mention a better, faster and more useful line anyway). Also, the central line with automatic signalling, lack of flat junctions and newer, faster trains going to more useful destinations would probably be a better option for Richmond commuters than a packed, slow train to waterloo which then involves the nightmare of interchanging at waterloo. Anyone who has had to get a train into waterloo will know how painful it can be due to waiting for a vacant platform; 10 mins could easily be added onto your journey time, especially between Vauxhall and waterloo.

There is also the option of maybe running it to Twickenham. I don't know how easy it would be to build 2 segregated tracks between Richmond and Twickenham, but if done you could take off a whole lot of commuters on a very busy stretch of NR, freeing up much needed capacity on the line and at waterloo. The one problem is the removal for Ealing and Action residents of a direct train service to white city and Shepherd’s Bush, an important and growing employment and retail area.

Just a thought.

*I would probably get rid of the drayton green station to speed up journeys since its so close to others.

[sweek]

I think some of you are underestimating the importance of Ealing Broadway. It is an absolutely major transport and interchange hub, for both local traffic , with more LUL passengers than many central London stations. More than, say, Notting Hill Gate for example. About as many passengers as Manchester Piccadilly.

It is an overcrowded station that really needs additional trains... you can't give it those trains and then take away the Central Line, the main mode of transport people get there.

[AAA94]

Originally Posted by sweek

I think some of you are underestimating the importance of Ealing Broadway. It is an absolutely major transport and interchange hub, for both local traffic , with more LUL passengers than many central London stations. More than, say, Notting Hill Gate for example. About as many passengers as Manchester Piccadilly.

It is an overcrowded station that really needs additional trains... you can't give it those trains and then take away the Central Line, the main mode of transport people get there.

ealing bdy. does not operate the same amount of passengers as manchester piccadilly...its the busiest station outside london.

if the H and C was extended down the GWML. taking over stopping crossrail services to heathrow. the H and C would be a substitute to crossrail, which would still take people to the city.

the crossrail services to maidstone or whereever it is before reading on the GWML would still serve ealing. an additional service into the west end and the city.

with theses 2 services the ealing bdy branch could be taken off completely.

the central line could still operate to west ruislip AND to richmond. remember ealing bdy, LIKE richmond is served by the district line AND mainline services.

ealing and richmond are both very similar centers and they both need a central branch into london. ealing will have crossrail. richmond would still be left without a central branch into london. this is why the GWML is less busy than the RML because stations like ealing have good underground links.

richmond has the district line. and the SWT services. all requiring changes and both equally slow, and under current plans will still have just the district and SWT services.

ealing will have. crossrail, FGW,district line and the central line. and under my plans the H and C aswell

crossrail and central practically the same destinations.

richmond needs the central line or crossrail. so it relieves the RML services and gives richmonders a MUCH faster service into London.

lesser the need for faster mainline services into london
Putney could then have more fast trains stopping that would be 4 fasts per hour to putney and 6-7 at peak time. which would releive the stopping services. so they serve the intermediate stations rather than the main centers like richmond clapham and putney.

crossrail/central line to richmond would benefit the whole of southwest/west london. which currently relies on the SWT services and the district line.

[sweek]

Originally Posted by AAA94

ealing bdy. does not operate the same amount of passengers as manchester piccadilly...its the busiest station outside london.

Ealing Broadway is around £18m LU passengers + £4 million NR passengers. , which does not include interchanges. Manchester Piccadilly is on 20.6 million passengers a year.

It's also not the busiest outside London; that title goes to Glasgow Central.

[RBRJ]

Originally Posted by streetquark

Another possibility dealing specifically with the Richmond branch is extending the H&C along the A4 then A316 Grt. Chertsey road direct to Richmond, but likely only as a tram as cut-and-cover on that road would be too disruptive (and not necessarily wide enough).

Alternatively widening between Hammersmith and Gunnersbury and send the H&C down to Richmond, but the line between Ravenscourt Park and Stamford Brook looks too restricted for extra tracks (including the stations), so an expensive tunnel might be needed (but could be express - i.e. no new tube stations) over this section.

Hounslow Council, quite a few years back, proposed a Tram/light rail to run from Hammersmith to Heathrow. It was to have run along the A4. At Heathrow a branch would have headed to Kingston, and another to Uxbridge. This last would have connected to the punative West London Tram.

I still think that it was a good idea that was wasted.

[streetquark]

Originally Posted by AAA94

but untill barons court it could
if the piccadilly line took over the ex richmond stopping services but continuing to heathrow.

Assuming I've understood correctly and you mean simply making the pic trains stop where the Districts previously did, then I would say there is a limit with the existing tracks on how many trains can pass through the 4 lines between Hammersmith and Acton town. I suspect the current arrangement is close to optimum and switching around or changing the proportion of stopping versus non-stopping trains won't make much difference.

It maybe that you're right but I would need to see some timetable evidence or be convinced that you or someone has worked out such a timetable before I would consider such a squeeze likely.

no you dont get my route to heathrow. crossrail would stay on the GWML. but take over heathrow express services. not stopping at any intermediate stations between paddington and heathrow.

the circle line is extended to hammersmith anyway. personally i think they should rename it the 'spiral' line, but whatever

the hammersmith and city line, is extended down the GWML taking over the crossrail stopping services down to heathrow which crossrail used to operate

and renamed the 'hammersmith and city line' , but were talking 30 years down the line when all this is done and new stock for the ssl is ordered. and they would have to be dual voltage and 3rd/4th rail capabilities.

again with the central line stock. (not OHLE though just 3rd/4th rail)

I can see taking HEX stopping services off Crossrail and adding it to H&C from Paddington. Yes, possible. Possibly frees Crossrail up for another branch too (DC!) but should Hammersmith branch go back down to 6 tph from the new 12 tph (you cannot put more than 12 tph into Praed Street Junction)?

i have no idea what relevance this has. nothing on the south or north side would be cut.... just extended.

I see, I understand. Probably a good idea to have a mix of Met/H&C and District services beyond Barking anyway.

2 branch lines.

central line ealing bdy would close due to less use because of crossrail.

or greenford branch because of hs2 corridor....

either way. in the future one of the branches will go

Well you should have said the Ealing branch could close. I don't think it is a great idea at all even though both routes touch on the dame points most of the way to the same station (Stratford). It will compromise Crossrail's ability to add any branches or extensions or increase Heathrow services in the west and cut services to some useful locations from Ealing/Acton.

If the HS2 corridor goes along the High Wycome route it won't be taking up CL tracks and replacing stations on line. That's an awful lot of stations to close. The line's underused, not dead and it has a useful depot for the CL.