Abbey Line question

[SouthEastBuses]

I am curious to ask this question, regarding the Abbey Line (Watford Junction - St Albans)

Does it currently work fine as a single track railway using 4-car 350s, or would you say the 350s are overkill for the route?

If the latter, should the line be converted into a tram/light rail, maybe improving orbital connections in Hertfordshire?

If the former, should the line be doubled to allow better frequencies?

 

[zwk500]

Others will be able to give more local knowledge (@Bald Rick and @ChiefPlanner perhaps?) but the sense I get from what people post on here is that it works just fine, even if 4-cars can be a bit much during slacker periods they are needed for the busier times.
A tram/Light rail is proposed about once every 6 months on here, and there's just no sensible route or market for it to do anything better than it does today.
Doubling would be overkill but a passing loop is proposed about as often as a tram/light rail, and it's got close a few times but the benefits of moving to a 30- or 20-minutes frequency aren't enough over the current 40-minute frequency achievable with the infrastructure in place today.

 

[SouthEastBuses]

Others will be able to give more local knowledge (@Bald Rick and @ChiefPlanner perhaps?) but the sense I get from what people post on here is that it works just fine, even if 4-cars can be a bit much during slacker periods they are needed for the busier times.
A tram/Light rail is proposed about once every 6 months on here, and there's just no sensible route or market for it to do anything better than it does today.

With a tram, combined with street running in St Albans Town Centre, you could extend the line to Hatfield (and maybe even Hertford!), improving local Hertfordshire connections. Whether the cost for such a project is justified or not is another matter (and I imagine that whilst there could be good demand between Watford, St Albans & Hatfield, going further east than Hatfield the population density gets lower, therefore less demand to support the cost of the project).

Doubling would be overkill but a passing loop is proposed about as often as a tram/light rail, and it's got close a few times but the benefits of moving to a 30- or 20-minutes frequency aren't enough over the current 40-minute frequency achievable with the infrastructure in place today.

That said, the route seems fine to me (apart from maybe the use of 350s - maybe such a short route is better suited to stuff like 398s?). At St Albans Abbey, it's only a 10 minute walk into the town err I mean city centre, and those with reduced mobility can always get a frequent bus such as the Greenline 724 or the 361 The Alban Way. As for Watford, you can transfer to the Overground for Watford High Street to go to the town centre.

 

[The Planner]

Others will be able to give more local knowledge (@Bald Rick and @ChiefPlanner perhaps?) but the sense I get from what people post on here is that it works just fine, even if 4-cars can be a bit much during slacker periods they are needed for the busier times.
A tram/Light rail is proposed about once every 6 months on here, and there's just no sensible route or market for it to do anything better than it does today.
Doubling would be overkill but a passing loop is proposed about as often as a tram/light rail, and it's got close a few times but the benefits of moving to a 30- or 20-minutes frequency aren't enough over the current 40-minute frequency achievable with the infrastructure in place today.

Where is that thread where it was claimed it was going to close, or similar?

 

[zwk500]

With a tram, combined with street running in St Albans Town Centre, you could extend the line to Hatfield (and maybe even Hertford!), improving local Hertfordshire connections. Whether the cost for such a project is justified or not is another matter.

I've not been into the centre much, but my recollection of it is that trams would struggle to get round some of the corners and up some of the hills. St Albans Abbey isn't exactly in the most convenient of places for further development of the route.

That said, the route seems fine to me (apart from maybe the use of 350s - maybe such a short route is better suited to stuff like 398s?). At St Albans Abbey, it's only a 10 minute walk into the town err I mean city centre, and those with reduced mobility can always get a frequent bus such as the Greenline 724 or the 361 The Alban Way. As for Watford, you can transfer to the Overground for Watford High Street to go to the town centre.

The 350 makes sense to avoid LNR needing awkward microfleets. It's perfectly normal to rotate the unit through so it's not like 1 350 is forever marooned on the branch, and being able to use any EMU in the fleet on both branch and mainline services is better overall for all passengers.

 

[Bartsimho]

With a tram, combined with street running in St Albans Town Centre, you could extend the line to Hatfield (and maybe even Hertford!), improving local Hertfordshire connections. Whether the cost for such a project is justified or not is another matter (and I imagine that whilst there could be good demand between Watford, St Albans & Hatfield, going further east than Hatfield the population density gets lower, therefore less demand to support the cost of the project).



That said, the route seems fine to me (apart from maybe the use of 350s - maybe such a short route is better suited to stuff like 398s?). At St Albans Abbey, it's only a 10 minute walk into the town err I mean city centre, and those with reduced mobility can always get a frequent bus such as the Greenline 724 or the 361 The Alban Way. As for Watford, you can transfer to the Overground for Watford High Street to go to the town centre.

Would it be an idea to transfer the service into TFL and the Overground. I know it's all outside London though so it's probably beyond the remit as having one of the Overground trains go up the Single-Track replacing the shuttle might help it be used more. (Although Thameslink probably wouldn't like the St Albans to London competition)

 

[SouthEastBuses]

Would it be an idea to transfer the service into TFL and the Overground. I know it's all outside London though so it's probably beyond the remit as having one of the Overground trains go up the Single-Track replacing the shuttle might help it be used more. (Although Thameslink probably wouldn't like the St Albans to London competition)

As you say, it's outside London, therefore making the Abbey Line being part of the Overground system would make no sense (at least in my opinion)

 

[zwk500]

Where is that thread where it was claimed it was going to close, or similar?

No idea, can't find it on a brief search.

Would it be an idea to transfer the service into TFL and the Overground. I know it's all outside London though so it's probably beyond the remit as having one of the Overground trains go up the Single-Track replacing the shuttle might help it be used more. (Although Thameslink probably wouldn't like the St Albans to London competition)

I doubt that simply running an orange train on it would make a significant difference. London Overground came with station refurbs, new stock, upgraded infrastructure and higher frequencies. That's why passenger numbers increased.

 

[The Planner]

Found it. One of the more amusing threads on here.

Abbey line departure boards and signalling diagram

The Abbey Line Passenger Association (ALPA) has recently been created for the Watford Junction to St Albans Abbey line, website https://alpa.org.uk/ Co-ordination is with the Hertsrail project https://hertsrail.org.uk Hertsrail is the alternative to Hertfordshire Essex Rapid Transit (HERT)...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[SouthEastBuses]

I've not been into the centre much, but my recollection of it is that trams would struggle to get round some of the corners and up some of the hills. St Albans Abbey isn't exactly in the most convenient of places for further development of the route.

That's a good point, but the idea that St Albans Abbey isn't located in a really convenient place could actually be a good reason to transform the Abbey Line into a tram system. Consequently, you could allow an extension to St Albans City Centre by making use of street running along Holywell Hill. Again, whether the cost for such a project would be justified or not is a topic for another discussion

Where is that thread where it was claimed it was going to close, or similar?

There was rumour (back in 2013 I think?) that they wanted to convert the Abbey Line into a guided busway (like what they have in Luton & Cambridge)

 

[zwk500]

Found it. One of the more amusing threads on here.

Abbey line departure boards and signalling diagram

The Abbey Line Passenger Association (ALPA) has recently been created for the Watford Junction to St Albans Abbey line, website https://alpa.org.uk/ Co-ordination is with the Hertsrail project https://hertsrail.org.uk Hertsrail is the alternative to Hertfordshire Essex Rapid Transit (HERT)...

www.railforums.co.uk

Oh that was the one where the chap had fallen out with the user group and set up a rival one. That was an interesting read.

 

[stuu]

It's slightly annoying as it can't run at half hourly frequency and Abbey Station is in a poor location, as the journey time is so much quicker than alternatives.

A tram wouldn't get up Holywell Hill unless it was rack assisted, unfortunately. The town centre has narrow streets, sharp corners and limited options to divert car traffic. There should logically be a decent level of demand onward to Hatfield, but it's all a bit too hard to solve within the sort of budget ever likely to be available

 

[cle]

Couldn't one of the last accursed 319s which has popped back run on this? Or could newer stock with decent acceleration (319s are awful) make a 30 min ideal more realistic - even if it needed a spendy passing loop which feels a luxury.

 

[Bald Rick]

a few points from a regular user:

1) 4 car is overkill, but it’s cheaper than having anything else. I use the trains in the peak, and have never, ever had to share a bay of 4.

2) the 350s enable the trains to do 16 mins end to end punctually. 319s rarely could.

3) various proposals over the years for busways, passing loops, tram conversion etc. None have come remotely close to having a business case, and they never will. The main reason is that most people in St Albans have no need to go to Watford (hospital excepted - for which car is by far the preferred mode) and vice versa. The traffic from intermediate stations is relatively small, especially at the St Albans end.

4) if desired, a tram could get up Holywell hill - average gradient is 5.8% with a peak of 8%. Sheffield has steeper sections. It couldn’t turn onto Victoria St though, so would have to go up to Hatfield Rd and head to the station there. But it would be extraordinarily expensive for minimal benefit.

5) the best hope for the line is a half hourly service, which could (just) be done with one unit and no loop. Note that even if a loop was miraculously free, a half hourly service that requires an extra unit and crew doesn’t come remotely close to covering its marginal costs (£2m+). To make it half hourly with one unit would need 3-4 min turnarounds (done routinely), 30 sec dwells (requires DCO), a couple of linespeed improvements and 2 level crossing upgrades (pref closures), and skip stopping at least two stations on every other service - probably 2 of the St Albans end stations of Park St, How Wood and Bricket Wood. That would have a marginal cost of a few hundred thousand pounds, which probably would be covered by revenue. And avoid the costs of a second unit, another 4 sets of crew, and the loop.

Oh that was the one where the chap had fallen out with the user group and set up a rival one. That was an interesting read.

That thread was a belter.

 

[zwk500]

5) the best hope for the line is a half hourly service, which could (just) be done with one unit and no loop. Note that even if a loop was miraculously free, a half hourly service that requires an extra unit and crew doesn’t come remotely close to covering its marginal costs (£2m+). To make it half hourly with one unit would need 3-4 min turnarounds (done routinely), 30 sec dwells (requires DCO), a couple of linespeed improvements and 2 level crossing upgrades (pref closures), and skip stopping at least two stations on every other service - probably 2 of the St Albans end stations of Park St, How Wood and Bricket Wood. That would have a marginal cost of a few hundred thousand pounds, which probably would be covered by revenue. And avoid the costs of a second unit, another 4 sets of crew, and the loop.

Could the time savings from ATO operation under ETCS L2 be enough to avoid some of that work?

 

[SouthEastBuses]

skip stopping at least two stations on every other service

Alternatively, you could make stations like Bricket Wood as request stops only - the train only stops there if the passenger notifies the guard onboard the train, or clearly sticks his/her hand out to the approaching train

 

[zwk500]

Alternatively, you could make stations like Bricket Wood as request stops only - the train only stops there if the passenger notifies the guard onboard the train, or clearly sticks his/her hand out to the approaching train

Request stops would likely not save any time, as you time the train to stop for 0 seconds but include a 30 second adjustment on the time after the station, so you may as well just stop for 30 seconds.

 

[Bald Rick]

Could the time savings from ATO operation under ETCS L2 be enough to avoid some of that work?

Possibly - but that would be more expensive. Not least lots of driver training. The linespeed improvement would be relatively cheap and possibly just paperwork and signage. Closing one of the crossings would be cheap. Closing the other less so, although I reckon I could do it for a million

Alternatively, you could make stations like Bricket Wood as request stops only - the train only stops there if the passenger notifies the guard onboard the train, or clearly sticks his/her hand out to the approaching train

no good, I’m afraid, as theres always a punter or two in the peaks. And with DCO there’s no guard…

However skip stopping doesn’t mean that worse a service; it’s generally hourly now and would remain hourly for them.

 

[zwk500]

Possibly - but that would be more expensive. Not least lots of driver training.

True, although gives other benefits (especially if we can move to GoA3 or 4).

The linespeed improvement would be relatively cheap and possibly just paperwork and signage. Closing one of the crossings would be cheap. Closing the other less so, although I reckon I could do it for a million

Better get that proposal in the workflow then! .

 

[Basil Jet]

A tram wouldn't get up Holywell Hill unless it was rack assisted, unfortunately.

Since some rail engineering vehicles have both rail wheels and rubber wheels which can be alternately deployed, would a tram/bus be more sensible than tracks and racks up Holywell Hill?

 

[jagardner1984]

Clearly wildly unrealistic given the usage - but in terms of transport which involves town to town travel but not London - ie actual St Albans to Watford etc - there is a fairly clear alternative route from Park street in the direction of the city station.



Maybe demolish the Signal box for a bay platform - that should be popular with enthusiasts !

Obviously many reasons this won’t happen. Not least - that portion of St Albans (Cottonmill etc) is then even more poorly served by public transport, the congestion around the MML at and south of SAC on viaducts etc, and perhaps most critically for the NIMBYs of south Hertfordshire - the impact to a golf course …. But ultimately, given at times the centuries old streets seem to be startlingly close to gridlock, “Crossrail” of journeys which do not involve London between large towns in South Herts would doubtless be a bigger driver of modal shift than the notoriously infrequent and outrageously priced buses. As an example - a Google maps search of “St Albans to Watford” suggests various rail options first (including the Abbey Line and via Radlett) before suggesting the 724 bus at just under 3 times the Abbey Line journey time (40 mins) and the bus to reach Watford to start work at 9am ? That leaves St Albans at 7.24am.

Not serious for two places with populations totalling 250,000 people, and a much wider area feeding into them.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

a few points from a regular user:

1) 4 car is overkill, but it’s cheaper than having anything else. I use the trains in the peak, and have never, ever had to share a bay of 4.

2) the 350s enable the trains to do 16 mins end to end punctually. 319s rarely could.

3) various proposals over the years for busways, passing loops, tram conversion etc. None have come remotely close to having a business case, and they never will. The main reason is that most people in St Albans have no need to go to Watford (hospital excepted - for which car is by far the preferred mode) and vice versa. The traffic from intermediate stations is relatively small, especially at the St Albans end.

4) if desired, a tram could get up Holywell hill - average gradient is 5.8% with a peak of 8%. Sheffield has steeper sections. It couldn’t turn onto Victoria St though, so would have to go up to Hatfield Rd and head to the station there. But it would be extraordinarily expensive for minimal benefit.

5) the best hope for the line is a half hourly service, which could (just) be done with one unit and no loop. Note that even if a loop was miraculously free, a half hourly service that requires an extra unit and crew doesn’t come remotely close to covering its marginal costs (£2m+). To make it half hourly with one unit would need 3-4 min turnarounds (done routinely), 30 sec dwells (requires DCO), a couple of linespeed improvements and 2 level crossing upgrades (pref closures), and skip stopping at least two stations on every other service - probably 2 of the St Albans end stations of Park St, How Wood and Bricket Wood. That would have a marginal cost of a few hundred thousand pounds, which probably would be covered by revenue. And avoid the costs of a second unit, another 4 sets of crew, and the loop.





That thread was a belter.

About the best summary going ! - the key fact is that travel St Albans to Watford is not that great by rail , despite terrible road congestion at both ends. The journey by road this end to the crashingly awkward located hospital can take over an hour , and it is a source of some concern about the plans to redevelop said hospital on site. Little interface apart from onto LNW trains to Euston , as there is effectively no long distance services since the WCML upgrade calling at Watford (used to be other services such as Manchester / Liverpool etc - however HS2 ?) , Watford as a retail destination has struggled a bit since COVID and probably before. The whole town is horribly road biased , with the centre encircled by a ring road , and retail parks a plenty. In passing , the station is now very dated , facilities are below standards and an achiles heel is a congested subway. There have always been plans for "masterplans" but little has been achieved.

At it's busiest , there were about a 1000 passengers a day on the line , - not all of which paid for the journey !

Having said all that - the line is in good condition , much of the track has been relaid over the years , the intermediate stations are in good order and so on and there is an active supporters group.

 

[zwk500]

Clearly wildly unrealistic given the usage - but in terms of transport which involves town to town travel but not London - ie actual St Albans to Watford etc - there is a fairly clear alternative route from Park street in the direction of the city station.

Obviously many reasons this won’t happen.

The most important being that there isn't a clear alternative route to anywhere useful on that image. The rail corridor isn't wide enough for an additional track.

“Crossrail” of journeys which do not involve London between large towns in South Herts would doubtless be a bigger driver of modal shift than the notoriously infrequent and outrageously priced buses.

Why is sorting out the buses not a viable option for this, so that we have to spend several hundred million on a rail solution? London is rather big, the towns in South Herts fairly small and travel between each node is proportionally sized. I used to live in MK and have friends or family in St Albans, Bedford and Hitchin. Inter-town travel is small fry compared to travel involving London round there.

 

[stuu]

Q

4) if desired, a tram could get up Holywell hill - average gradient is 5.8% with a peak of 8%. Sheffield has steeper sections. It couldn’t turn onto Victoria St though, so would have to go up to Hatfield Rd and head to the station there. But it would be extraordinarily expensive for minimal benefit.

I sit corrected! I thought it was worse than that, it feels it walking up it...

I do think that converting it to a guided busway would be the most useful likely outcome though, it could have a connection to Cottonmill Lane to run directly to the main station if that was desirable. I can't imagine the traffic is any better than when I lived there so making more of the available infrastructure can only be a good idea.

 

[Verulamius]

The 350 makes sense to avoid LNR needing awkward microfleets. It's perfectly normal to rotate the unit through so it's not like 1 350 is forever marooned on the branch, and being able to use any EMU in the fleet on both branch and mainline services is better overall for all passengers

Currently the unit rotates daily at around 15.36. From the May timetable change this permits a 15:18 Euston - St Albans Abbey direct service.

 

[zwk500]

Q

I sit corrected! I thought it was worse than that, it feels it walking up it...

I do think that converting it to a guided busway would be the most useful likely outcome though, it could have a connection to Cottonmill Lane to run directly to the main station if that was desirable. I can't imagine the traffic is any better than when I lived there so making more of the available infrastructure can only be a good idea.

A guided busway is probably a poorer overall service than a 30-minute interval service, and from what @Bald Rick has said that's achievable for less money than conversion to guided busway would take.

 

[jagardner1984]

Why is sorting out the buses not a viable option for this, so that we have to spend several hundred million on a rail solution?

As I said - clearly not suggesting this is viable or likely - not least for the reasons above.

My point is the entire public transport networks of many towns around the London area are focussed around getting in and out of London quickly - which as you say is the major market.

However, there are plenty of people who study at Hatfield, who go to shop in another town to the one they live (not least for the ludicrous price of housing in much of the area, which pushes people into commuting.

At some points, the bus connections are so poor that the automated journey planners will in fact suggest travelling to London, change London terminal and back out to another location. This is clearly nonsense.

Providing Centre to centre bus improvements is problematic when much of the road layout of historic towns are single carriageway roads (one in each direction) - so the potential for bus lanes is slim, the potential for getting stuck in chronic traffic is pretty much guaranteed, the bus usage is at an all time low and thus prices are sky high, and the motoring lobby is so loud that any councillor daring to question their right to take their SUVs freely into each corner of every town and city opens themselves to a barrage of abuse. And so the cycle continues.

As for population numbers - they are small places in the context of London, Birmingham, Manchester etc. However the principles of metro travel which have transformed how people live in those cities equally apply in many other places, where such connectivity seems completely alien.

In London, 42% of households are car free. In the South East, it is 17%.

The traffic around such places, and the amount of road/rail commuting of people driving to places like SAC to get to well served commuter lines, is testament to how poor the rest of the provision is.

 

[stuu]

A guided busway is probably a poorer overall service than a 30-minute interval service, and from what @Bald Rick has said that's achievable for less money than conversion to guided busway would take.

Why would it be a worse service? It could be much more frequently and run into the respective town centres, and further, similar to the Luton busway. None of that is ever likely to happen using heavy, or even light rail

 

[Richardr]

Obviously many reasons this won’t happen. Not least - that portion of St Albans (Cottonmill etc) is then even more poorly served by public transport, the congestion around the MML at and south of SAC on viaducts etc, and perhaps most critically for the NIMBYs of south Hertfordshire - the impact to a golf course …. But ultimately, given at times the centuries old streets seem to be startlingly close to gridlock, “Crossrail” of journeys which do not involve London between large towns in South Herts would doubtless be a bigger driver of modal shift than the notoriously infrequent and outrageously priced buses. As an example - a Google maps search of “St Albans to Watford” suggests various rail options first (including the Abbey Line and via Radlett) before suggesting the 724 bus at just under 3 times the Abbey Line journey time (40 mins) and the bus to reach Watford to start work at 9am ? That leaves St Albans at 7.24am.

Not serious for two places with populations totalling 250,000 people, and a much wider area feeding into them.

The 321 bus is a better option than the 724 most of the time - 33 minutes station to station, and every 20 minutes, which, given the train is now hourly, is quicker most of the time (and currently £2). It also has the advantage that it goes through the city centre, so is more convenient for many people.

Re a couple of the earlier comments:

TfL - what would that achieve? Given the single track, as stated above investment would be needed to increase that, and not only is there no business case, TfL is hardly going to finance anything like that outside London.

Request stops:

1. do they really save time? Any timetable needs to take into account the likelihood of them being used (and the driver needing to slow down in time to see anyone waiting); and
2. getting the time down to just under 15 minutes - can that really be sufficient to run a 30 minute service - no rest time, no resilience?

 

[edwin_m]

Clearly wildly unrealistic given the usage - but in terms of transport which involves town to town travel but not London - ie actual St Albans to Watford etc - there is a fairly clear alternative route from Park street in the direction of the city station.

View attachment 132316

Not sure exactly where you're referring to here, but there was a connection in this area, used for bringing in material when the Midland line was under construction.

Why is sorting out the buses not a viable option for this, so that we have to spend several hundred million on a rail solution? London is rather big, the towns in South Herts fairly small and travel between each node is proportionally sized. I used to live in MK and have friends or family in St Albans, Bedford and Hitchin. Inter-town travel is small fry compared to travel involving London round there.

My point is the entire public transport networks of many towns around the London area are focussed around getting in and out of London quickly - which as you say is the major market.

However, there are plenty of people who study at Hatfield, who go to shop in another town to the one they live (not least for the ludicrous price of housing in much of the area, which pushes people into commuting.

At some points, the bus connections are so poor that the automated journey planners will in fact suggest travelling to London, change London terminal and back out to another location. This is clearly nonsense.

Providing Centre to centre bus improvements is problematic when much of the road layout of historic towns are single carriageway roads (one in each direction) - so the potential for bus lanes is slim, the potential for getting stuck in chronic traffic is pretty much guaranteed, the bus usage is at an all time low and thus prices are sky high, and the motoring lobby is so loud that any councillor daring to question their right to take their SUVs freely into each corner of every town and city opens themselves to a barrage of abuse. And so the cycle continues.

As for population numbers - they are small places in the context of London, Birmingham, Manchester etc. However the principles of metro travel which have transformed how people live in those cities equally apply in many other places, where such connectivity seems completely alien.

In London, 42% of households are car free. In the South East, it is 17%.

The traffic around such places, and the amount of road/rail commuting of people driving to places like SAC to get to well served commuter lines, is testament to how poor the rest of the provision is.

It sort of feels as if an east-west segregated quality transport link in Hertfordshire ought to be viable, considering the general population density and the traffic congestion. However, it would probably require bus feeders to bring the passengers to it, which is unlikely to be workable possible considering said traffic congestion and also the obstacles of bus deregulation - not to mention the general lack of funding.