Crossrail 3 - SkyscraperCity
 

forums map | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > European Forums > UK & Ireland Architecture Forums > Transport, Urban Planning and Infrastructure

Transport, Urban Planning and Infrastructure Shaping space, urbanity and mobility


Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old May 17th, 2011, 09:18 AM   #1
RBRJ
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 580
Likes (Received): 3

Crossrail 3

February 10th, 2007, 01:05 AM #2
Stuu
Registered User


Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 78 I would agree with most of those apart from:
Crossrail 3: the only thing i;'ve seen about this is from Waterloo-Euston. Suburban traffic to Euston is not enough, and i catch this every day. Instead the obvious solution is a tunnel from Vauxhall to limhouse, replacing the waterloo and city line and havin a stop at Blackfriars to connect with thameslink, and selling hte rest of the Femchurch street line for offices
Thames Estuary Airport: Pointless, a waste of money. Yes I'm disgraced every time i land at heathrow, but it can only get better!
There should be a new line to stansted, from about enfield, its four tracks to there anyway
Why a new line to Reading? wasn't brunel good enough for you? It could do with another parir of tracks but no need for replacement

This caught my attention. There have been many suggestions made about W&C as a tube line. But what if it were the core of Crossrail 3 or even 4?
RBRJ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old May 22nd, 2013, 10:31 AM   #2
RBRJ
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 580
Likes (Received): 3

Now that Crossrail 2 is now moving closer to becoming reality, I thought it time to resurrect this thread on Crossrail 3. Especially as there have been one or two dips into Crossrail 4 speculation. As it seem that Paris can manage 5 crossrail-like services, why should we not be able to do so. Paris has just as many of the under-the-ground problems as has London.
RBRJ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2013, 11:42 AM   #3
cle
Registered User
 
cle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,690
Likes (Received): 820

Is anybody even sure what Crossrail 3 will be?

Euston - Waterloo seems to be joining up the dots, especially as Crossrail 2 will deal with Waterloo's local (via Earlsfield) services. Are you suggesting it's for the Windsor lines?

They're full, and with two-tracking, 10 car max and level crossings, could not provide the frequencies needed for a scheme like this. Much as moving the long distance trains into the old Eurostar would be ideal.

I would suggest Euston to Fenchurch Street - following a route that negates the need for the DLR extension from Bank to Euston.

It would go into a new Fenchurch St/Tower Hill/Gateway single station complex, and then Cannon St/Mansion House (double ended), City Thameslink (northern end - double ended to connect to a new St Pauls western end at the edge of Paternoster Square) and then on to Euston.

Both lines at the end are already wired, similar in distance, 12 car capable and relatively balanced in frequency. Euston's would need to increase - or possibly incorporate the DC lines at 4-6 tph.

Crossrail 1 could then take on some Marylebone trains due to HS2's tunnelling, as JRT's wish: 4-6 slow tph to Gerrards Cross/High Wycombe - with a new station at Greenford.
cle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old May 22nd, 2013, 11:44 AM   #4
Kolothos
Central Belter
 
Kolothos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Perth/Glasgow
Posts: 3,155
Likes (Received): 885

W&C would be no use. It'd probably be cheaper to build it brand new, not to mention the fact that you'd be restricted to tube trains just for the sake of using that one short bit of tunnel.

I'd sure love it if even a fraction of the sort of money that is spent on transport in London was spent here... We've serious capacity issues looming ahead!
Kolothos no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2013, 11:53 AM   #5
kerouac1848
Registered User
 
kerouac1848's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NW London
Posts: 4,324
Likes (Received): 4515

Crossrail 3 was never anything official and is pure speculation.

Given that any new rail link needs to have South London in it, and that north-of-the-river the capacity problems are in East London, a split of CR1 makes the most sense to me, not to mention it would be a tad bit cheaper (with the CW branch keeping CR1). There are various options, but keeping the City-West End link for Stratford passengers should be the basis. Something like Liverpool Street to Blackfriars and Charing Cross/Westminster and then straight down to Vauxhall to connect the 'new' district around there. From there I'd keep going directly south in a tunnel until the junctions around Streamham, where it can branch off SW, S and SE.

That scoops up a lot of the metro services into Victoria and probably relieves the VL more than CR2. There would also be a chance add another branch to CR1 (further helping SE London), as well as rationalise Thameslink by chopping off some branches.

Last edited by kerouac1848; May 22nd, 2013 at 12:13 PM.
kerouac1848 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2013, 12:03 PM   #6
johnb78
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 394
Likes (Received): 4

Agree with Kerouac, by far the most important aspect of Crossrail 3 will be to relieve Crossrail 1, which probably means taking over Stratford: passenger capacity on CR1 CW branch will be maxed out pretty much from CR1 opening day onwards, so will be unimaginable in 2040 when CR3 opens. Also agree that Victoria metro trains are probably the best candidate at the other end.

The route between Stepney Green and (the junction for Victoria trains) is less obvious, although clearly City and West End stops of some kind would be required. An interchange at Liverpool Street would be expensive but necessary to avoid a riot from ex-CR1 pax. An interchange with TL at Blackfriars would parallel the CR1 interchange at Farringdon, which would be useful.

If I were completely trolling, I'd suggest reworking Stepney Green Junction to match up with the current Camden Town format ;-)
johnb78 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2013, 03:16 PM   #7
D-Notice
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 63
Likes (Received): 9

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnb78 View Post
An interchange at Liverpool Street would be expensive but necessary to avoid a riot from ex-CR1 pax.
How about Shoreditch High Street instead? It's walking distance from Liverpool St
D-Notice no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2013, 03:34 PM   #8
potto
Registered User
 
potto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 18,656
Likes (Received): 12261

how about South London? Would that area be seeing more demand for better rail links? Or even a more frequent orbital service?
potto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2013, 03:51 PM   #9
Rational Plan
Registered User
 
Rational Plan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Slough
Posts: 3,815
Likes (Received): 802

Hey if we are going to look at Crossrail 3, lets look at my little scheme (ahem).

https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid...16055,0.338173



The core would be a tunnel from Victoria to North Greenwich. Eastern brabches could run NE to Barking to take join the South Essex line. The extra capacity given to both branches could mean a doubling of services down these routes.



Another branch would run down the Peninsula towards the various Kent lines (with no stations) and provide direct services to the Dome, Canary Wharf, the City and the West End all on one train. No worries about which train to catch here, they'd take you all the possible destinations you'd want.



The trains would be rammed all day. Indeed the problem maybe to decide which branches to serve as you'd want at least 4 trains an hour in peak for each route, depending on service levels some routes on the old lines may need to cut back to where the lines meet, if very few passengers want to go the old way.


The centre section hitting all those demand points



With stations running North Greenwich - Canary Wharf - Tower Hill - Mansion House - City Thameslink - Charing Cross - Victoria. I had though of it missing Charing Cross and going via Waterloo to provide a direct connection between it and Victoria but most of those passengers can already do that at Clapham Junction, also the addition of Waterloo to City commuters would probably crush the line.


After that you could have a choice of branches, but I've shown a branch going towards Marleybone via Knightsbridge and Marble Arch connecting to Chiltern services, but could equally link in with WCML services as well.



Also I'd have a branch going to Earls Court and Hammersmith, thereby relieving the crush on the District and Piccadilly. From Hammersmith it could loop down to Richmond and Twickenham in tunnel, with a possible stop at Gunnesbury.
Rational Plan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2013, 05:09 PM   #10
StiffUpper
Registered User
 
StiffUpper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 199
Likes (Received): 10

I think further investment could be made to get a lot more out of CR1. One of our forumers called it "one and a half crossrails". Make it two in the core and there's potentially lots of branch line options with that big a capacity.

The BML2 (second Brighton main line) proposal would go through Lewisham-Canary Wharf-Stratford-Stansted so could be considered a Crossrail scheme.
StiffUpper no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2013, 07:21 PM   #11
LondonerMiles
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 264
Likes (Received): 14

Well, heres my idea:

Crossrail Line 1- as is, but with a second branch from Paddington to Heathrow running via Earls Court, Hammersmith, Turnham Green and onto the Hounslow Loop to Feltham with a connection to Heathrow.

Crossrail 2- Southern Metro services out of Victoria to Great Northen Electrics out of Kings Cross via Victoria-Tottenham Court Road, Euston, Kings Cross St. Pancras-Angel-Finsbury Park

Crossrail 3- SWT Metros via Wimbledon to Lea Valley Lines running through Waterloo-Blackfriars-Bank/Cannon Street-Liverpool Street

Crossrail 4- Again, SWT Metros via Wimbledon, running via Waterloo and connecting up to CR2 at TCR running up to Stoke Newington and taking over the Enfield Town Branch.

Crossrail 5- Windsor Lines to Greenwhich/Bexleyheath Lines via Victora/Charing Cross/Waterloo/London Bridge

Crossrail 6- SE metro routes to Chiltern/WCML via London Bridge-Cannon Street/Bank-Blackfriars-TCR-Euston-Marylebone-Swiss Cottage Splitting the line near Harlseden to access the Chiltern Line via Dudding Hill

Crossrail 7- Local, suburban Thameslink routes.

Crossrail 8- LTS lines from Fenny Street andsharing tracks with CR6 through the core and up to Ruislip with a new branch to Uxbridge.

Lots of lines, but only four completely new tunnels needing to be built, most lines will run on the same track through core sections.
LondonerMiles no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2013, 07:49 PM   #12
stephen_c
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: London
Posts: 517
Likes (Received): 135

Quote:
Originally Posted by StiffUpper View Post
I think further investment could be made to get a lot more out of CR1. One of our forumers called it "one and a half crossrails". Make it two in the core and there's potentially lots of branch line options with that big a capacity.
I suspect that was me wrt Swanlink which still must be one of the cheapest ways to get a Crossrail line into London (Waterloo to Stratford using the existing CR1 portal).

In an ideal world, you'd have CR2 and Swanlink planned together, so the Southern locals go to CR2 and the Waterloo locals go to Swanlink, with a cross-platform interchange at Clapham Junction. perfectly do-able, if only we weren't limited by small minded civil servants and politicians.
stephen_c no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2013, 08:04 PM   #13
cle
Registered User
 
cle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,690
Likes (Received): 820

What does 'Swanlink' mean?

Thinking about Fenchurch St a bit more, there's not point 'relieving' it as nothing else uses it, so if it went into a Crossrail system, it'd close. And probably be demolished, as much as it can.

Better to help out a longer distance terminus.
cle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2013, 08:10 PM   #14
stephen_c
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: London
Posts: 517
Likes (Received): 135

Quote:
Originally Posted by cle View Post
What does 'Swanlink' mean?
South West to ANglia LINK.
stephen_c no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2013, 08:58 PM   #15
StiffUpper
Registered User
 
StiffUpper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 199
Likes (Received): 10

Quote:
Originally Posted by stephen_c View Post
I suspect that was me wrt Swanlink which still must be one of the cheapest ways to get a Crossrail line into London (Waterloo to Stratford using the existing CR1 portal).

In an ideal world, you'd have CR2 and Swanlink planned together, so the Southern locals go to CR2 and the Waterloo locals go to Swanlink, with a cross-platform interchange at Clapham Junction. perfectly do-able, if only we weren't limited by small minded civil servants and politicians.
That's right Stephen. I've really enjoyed reading your blogs.
StiffUpper no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2013, 09:03 PM   #16
R.K.Teck
2010
 
R.K.Teck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,431
Likes (Received): 831

Can we have a tunnelled Glasgow Crossrail 1 first please!?
__________________
__

2 0 2 0
1 7 1 7
2 0 2 0
1 7 1 7


Dundee, UK City of Culture, Candidate City
___________________

V&A Museum. Dundee Waterfront. Kengo Kuma. 2018?
Jute, Jam, Journalism... and Japanese Award Winning Architecture.

_________________________________
R.K.Teck no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2013, 09:51 PM   #17
ill tonkso
Portsmouths Finest, Maybe
 
ill tonkso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: St. Neots
Posts: 16,919
Likes (Received): 2550

Technically, wouldn't that be 2, or even 3? But I agree, the rest of the UK needs some of this money.
ill tonkso no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2013, 10:30 PM   #18
D-Notice
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 63
Likes (Received): 9

Quote:
Originally Posted by kerouac1848 View Post
Given that any new rail link needs to have South London in it, and that north-of-the-river the capacity problems are in East London, a split of CR1 makes the most sense to me, not to mention it would be a tad bit cheaper (with the CW branch keeping CR1). There are various options, but keeping the City-West End link for Stratford passengers should be the basis. Something like Liverpool Street to Blackfriars and Charing Cross/Westminster and then straight down to Vauxhall to connect the 'new' district around there. From there I'd keep going directly south in a tunnel until the junctions around Streatham, where it can branch off SW, S and SE.
If I was to play "Join the dots", I'd go Streatham -> Balham -> Clapham Junction -> Battersea (linking with both existing train stations & the Northern line extension) -> Victoria -> Westminster -> combined Charing Cross/Piccadilly Circus/Leicester Sq station (possibly called Trafalgar Sq) -> Blackfriars -> Liverpool St (with links to Bank & Shoreditch High St) then take over the Stratford Crossrail bit...
D-Notice no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 23rd, 2013, 02:22 AM   #19
Vulcan's Finest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: None these days.
Posts: 9,035
Likes (Received): 2781

Although it is good fun to 'join the dots' we really need to think a lot harder about the reason for building a third crossrail (which will really be a fourth Crossrail, Thameslink is effectively Crossrail 0). Exactly which lines through which suburbs can support a huge increase in capacity by allowing much higher frequencies or longer trains than are already being planned?

Do we really need to build another West - East Crossrail? CR1 is designed to be extended to 240m trains with 20% extra capacity, and new signalling systems may squeeze in another 4-6 TPH on top of that.

Perhaps we should be thinking about building new lines serving suburbs with currently either limited stations/ lines or slow tube lines which need relief?
Vulcan's Finest no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 23rd, 2013, 12:01 PM   #20
Rational Plan
Registered User
 
Rational Plan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Slough
Posts: 3,815
Likes (Received): 802

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vulcan's Finest View Post
Although it is good fun to 'join the dots' we really need to think a lot harder about the reason for building a third crossrail (which will really be a fourth Crossrail, Thameslink is effectively Crossrail 0). Exactly which lines through which suburbs can support a huge increase in capacity by allowing much higher frequencies or longer trains than are already being planned?

Do we really need to build another West - East Crossrail? CR1 is designed to be extended to 240m trains with 20% extra capacity, and new signalling systems may squeeze in another 4-6 TPH on top of that.

Perhaps we should be thinking about building new lines serving suburbs with currently either limited stations/ lines or slow tube lines which need relief?
I'd say yes we do need another East West route as that is the only way for a route to hit all three business centres. If not then a new line needs to hit the West End, as that is the biggest all day traffic generator.

As shown and East West route provides natural links to routes from the East and the South East.

Once past Victoria a line can split in any number of directions to take over various commuter lines.

The real problem of building a new crossrail line is that commuter flows are unevenly spread around the capital via different modes.

Commuting from the Westside is weaker in comparison due to the stronger suburban job market.

The tube is also concentrated in the North and North West making linking up full size lines difficult.

Crossrail 2 gets round this problem by linking one main line in the NE and building one full size express tube to relieve other tube lines.

Though everyone says that crossrails are the future, I wonder if some North South routes would be better off as 'Automated Metro's'
Rational Plan no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 07:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us