Crossrail - Through Running confirmed for November

[theking]

I get the feeling people are complaining don't live in the real world. If a nasty accident happened on the EL, they'd be the first to complain!

What a stupid comment.

You do realise that there have been many full weekend closures FOR YEARS.

We are not talking about a line that's had no maintenance and then all of a sudden they need to close it.

 

[LAX54]

How many half mile long container trains, or 2500 tonne stone trains, or 100mph passenger trains, run on the Piccadilly Line?

Well, they could run the GEML at Picc Line speeds from end to end, roughly 30 mph, if you are lucky, ban all freight and put an extra two or three hundred HGV's (or more) on the A12 / A13/M25 every day

 

[JN114]

It isn’t ideal that the eastern branch was closed so soon after through running started - but this block had been planned for years. Crossrail have been dithering and delaying their “opening” date for at least as long.

If they’d know it was going to be the first weekend after through running, it probably would have been scheduled for a different weekend. But by the time Crossrail announced through running it was too late to replan the works.

 

[Horizon22]

Bit difficult to believe, isn't it? But here is the peak period timetable. The second class only trains are the 306 suburban units. A lot of short workings and back empty on the Main line for another load.

If you look at that timetable, there's no way everything ran on the electrics; the 1717 overtakes the 1713 and is fast to Romford. Simarily the 1722 overtakes by Harold Wood. I only see 6tph in the "pure" all stations pattern that they have today (which gets 12+ tph now).

Odd weekend closures are fine, but every almost single weekend for 2 months?

As mentioned above, when they've been closed for long weekend periods previously, the signage has all said the closures are for preparation of the Elizabeth line. Clearly anyone would think that means once the Elizabeth line is here such long closures won't be required

All depends why the closures are being done. It might have zero to do with the Elizabeth line.

I do find it surprising that the GEML has this so much while the GWML regularly is able to work with 2-track running. But again I am not a track maintenance expert and I'm going to suggest that it's being done for good reason, not for the sake of annoying passengers for the sake of it. On a purely economic level, why would Network Rail want to closure an entire part of the route which could provide revenue if they don't have to?

 

[kevin_roche]

It isn’t ideal that the eastern branch was closed so soon after through running started - but this block had been planned for years. Crossrail have been dithering and delaying their “opening” date for at least as long.

If they’d know it was going to be the first weekend after through running, it probably would have been scheduled for a different weekend. But by the time Crossrail announced through running it was too late to replan the works.

I think they had to do it around this time or would have had a large amount to pay to Canary Wharf company who paid a lot of the costs toward building the station there. IIRC the contact had a date this month by which trains would have to run directly to Heathrow or TfL would pay more of the costs. As we know from earlier comments the complexity of the Phase 4 / Phase 5 plans meant there was a need to go ahead with both together.

 

[Falcon1200]

You do realise that there have been many full weekend closures FOR YEARS.

We are not talking about a line that's had no maintenance and then all of a sudden they need to close it.

Do you have inside information that the work they are doing, and therefore the line closures, are completely unnecessary?

 

[306024]

I do find it surprising that the GEML has this so much while the GWML regularly is able to work with 2-track running. But again I am not a track maintenance expert and I'm going to suggest that it's being done for good reason, not for the sake of annoying passengers for the sake of it. On a purely economic level, why would Network Rail want to closure an entire part of the route which could provide revenue if they don't have to?

It is a fact that the GEML has a sub-standard 10 foot in places, unlike the broad gauge GWR.

In English this means the distance between the two inside running lines is insufficient to safely carry out certain tasks, based in today's safety practices. Hence four line blocks.

I've no idea what work was done last Satutday, but if it is impractical to move the number of people by conventional rail replacement buses, a rethink by both NR and GA is needed.

 

[danielcanning]

Do you have inside information that the work they are doing, and therefore the line closures, are completely unnecessary?

Do you? I’ve asked several times about the nature of these engineering works, but no one on here can give a straight answer, only that they are necessary…

 

[Falcon1200]

Do you?

No, but then I'm not one of those on here complaining about the line closures.....

I’ve asked several times about the nature of these engineering works, but no one on here can give a straight answer, only that they are necessary…

Unless someone from NR Anglia is on this forum, and prepared and able to respond, that is not really a surprise. Given that NR compensates Operators for line closures, it seems unlikely they would block the railway except when necessary.....

 

[Taunton]

If you look at that timetable, there's no way everything ran on the electrics; the 1717 overtakes the 1713 and is fast to Romford. Simarily the 1722 overtakes by Harold Wood. I only see 6tph in the "pure" all stations pattern that they have today (which gets 12+ tph now).

Actually it did. All these inner suburban trains departed on the Electric line, out through Stratford. Note how the one which is nonstop Stratford is the one which is after the 4 minute gap. Thereafter those skipping stops and overtaking were crossed to the fast line wherever there was the chance, with frequent crossovers, and then crossed back when they started serving stations again, generally the busiest ones. If they just couldn't get an adequate gap to cross over that evening, it just trailed the stopper, and arrived late. The omission of various inner stops was to spread the load, not to necessarily provide a faster journey. The "proper" fast line trains, most not shown here, ran on the Fast throughout.

It was all described in fascinating detail in a lengthy Modern Railways article in October 1964 "Peak Hour in East London" (which has been discussed here previously). Bear in mind this was done with local signalboxes, some of which still had manual points levers. The line had extraordinarily closely spaced searchlight signals, often little more than a trainlength apart, and two or three ahead were commonly visible.

And whether they switched some past Stratford to and from the main lines for a time, or not, it's the same service to the same stations that Elizabeth is now doing. But from just one London terminus.

Here's the magazine for anyone who wants to look it up :

Modern Railways October 1964 | eBay

<p dir="ltr">Modern Railways October 1964. Dispatched with Royal Mail 2nd Class Large Letter.</p>

www.ebay.co.uk

 

[danielcanning]

No, but then I'm not one of those on here complaining about the line closures.....



Unless someone from NR Anglia is on this forum, and prepared and able to respond, that is not really a surprise. Given that NR compensates Operators for line closures, it seems unlikely they would block the railway except when necessary.....

That’s the problem, if Network Rail actually told the travelling public about the nature of engineering works I suspect a lot of complaints would melt away…

 

[berneyarms]

Do you? I’ve asked several times about the nature of these engineering works, but no one on here can give a straight answer, only that they are necessary…

Why don’t you ask Network Rail directly?

 

[Horizon22]

Do you? I’ve asked several times about the nature of these engineering works, but no one on here can give a straight answer, only that they are necessary…

This forum does not have an expert in every area of the railway industry across every route; this is after all a volunteer forum, and nobody has to answer these questions and/or may not have the experience to do so. If you are so interested, contact the Network Rail community relations team for a "straight answer".

 

[Acton1991]

Travelled on the line over the weekend and it felt much slicker than during the week (I think there are less dwells scheduled).

Travelling into Paddington the train felt slower than usual (perhaps to ensure less of a wait at Westbourne Park?). The dwell times at each station in the central section are still painfully long. Is anything being done to speed these up?

Travelling back out of Paddington was slick and we rejoined the GWML with no wait. All-in-all a good experience that will get much better from May.

 

[Horizon22]

Travelled on the line over the weekend and it felt much slicker than during the week (I think there are less dwells scheduled).

Travelling into Paddington the train felt slower than usual (perhaps to ensure less of a wait at Westbourne Park?). The dwell times at each station in the central section are still painfully long. Is anything being done to speed these up?

Travelling back out of Paddington was slick and we rejoined the GWML with no wait. All-in-all a good experience that will get much better from May.

The vast majority of long dwells are indeed Monday-Friday.

 

[AM9]

If you look at that timetable, there's no way everything ran on the electrics; the 1717 overtakes the 1713 and is fast to Romford. Simarily the 1722 overtakes by Harold Wood. I only see 6tph in the "pure" all stations pattern that they have today (which gets 12+ tph now).

Actually, all of the 2nd class only services were class 306 and ran entirely on the electrics stopping at Stratford P8, and the Ilford terminators (17:21/31 etc.) went into the bay at P5. The Gidea Park terminators (17:17/27,17:19/29 etc.) emptied and ran forward to the stabling sidings to the east. The Shenfield terminators (17:13/23/33 etc.) ran through to P5.
The 17:12/22/32 etc. were the slow Southend Victoria service, usually class 307. These trains started from the east side platforms (typically P15/16) at Liverpool St and took the mains to Stratford where they stopped at platform 10. The then regained the mains and ran fast to Harold Wood crossing over to the electrics buy the double lead crossing just before the A127 bridge. it then stopped at Brentwood and Shenfield (P4) before taking the single track diveunder towards Billericay.
As an aside, this arrangement was described as a 'work of art' because whilst the Southend slow ran on the electrics from Harold Wood to beyond Shenfield, other faster services slipped through towards Chelmsford and/or the fast Southends using the flat junction just east of Shenfield P3. The whole peak service ran on a 10 minute cycle in this way. Sometimes, problems with the Southend slows would cause the whole timetable to hiccup, because the mains also had the Bishops Stortfords and Cambridges squeezed in as far as Bethnal Green.

 

[43066]

Do you? I’ve asked several times about the nature of these engineering works, but no one on here can give a straight answer, only that they are necessary…

So do you think they’re closing the railway unnecessarily? Why do you think they would be doing that? Just to annoy passengers, or for some other reason?

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

So do you think they’re closing the railway unnecessarily? Why do you think they would be doing that? Just to annoy passengers, or for some other reason?

It seems reasonable enough to me to want to know specifically why services are suspended.

 

[43066]

It seems reasonable enough to me to want to know specifically why services are suspended.

I agree, but only up to a point. The poster concerned seems to have deemed the closure unnecessary unless he is convinced otherwise. He also has form for refusing to accept in depth explanations given in relation to other railway matters, so I’m not sure what amount of detail will be sufficient to satisfy him.

It’s entirely possible that the information simply isn’t in the public domain, nor known to anyone who is able or willing to divulge it on here. That does not mean the reasons are not valid.

 

[Falcon1200]

That’s the problem, if Network Rail actually told the travelling public about the nature of engineering works I suspect a lot of complaints would melt away…

It seems reasonable enough to me to want to know specifically why services are suspended.

Reasonable points, but what level of detail would be expected? Unless for a single major job, such as a bridge replacement (which very likely would be well publicised anyway) the information supplied would be on the lines (sorry!) of, for example, signalling work, embankment work, track renewal, etc, which I don't believe would really leave the public much the wiser. And, unless it has changed since I retired, the Weekly Operating Notice, which gives details of blockages, doesn't go into any great detail either, other than to give a mileage for work locations, again of limited use to the public.

 

[Bald Rick]

Do you? I’ve asked several times about the nature of these engineering works, but no one on here can give a straight answer, only that they are necessary…

sigh.
it’s for a whole variety of different works, not least preparations for a major power upgrade taking place over Christmas / New Year.

 

[345 050]

Is anyone else perplexed that the engineering works were on Saturday but services ran as normal to Shenfield on Sunday?

 

[306024]

Is anyone else perplexed that the engineering works were on Saturday but services ran as normal to Shenfield on Sunday?

If you remember, Sunday was Remembrance Sunday. This is traditionally kept clear of engineering work on the GEML. However Saturday was Lord Mayors Show day in London, which also used to be a no-no for engineering work.

 

[345 050]

If you remember, Sunday was Remembrance Sunday. This is traditionally kept clear of engineering work on the GEML. However Saturday was Lord Mayors Show day in London, which also used to be a no-no for engineering work.

Ah that all makes sense now. I didn't know that was one of the reasons for not doing engineering works. Whereas 19/20 November the service to Shenfield is suspended on both days.

Thanks for explaining!

 

[Thirteen]

sigh.
it’s for a whole variety of different works, not least preparations for a major power upgrade taking place over Christmas / New Year.

I always wonder why people get so huffy about engineering works. Network Rail has no obligation to tell the public the exact level of details.

 

[Watershed]

I always wonder why people get so huffy about engineering works.

Because they're inconvenient and, to a lot of people, mean the railway may as well not exist whilst they're being undertaken?

Network Rail has no obligation to tell the public the exact level of details.

As a public authority, they're subject to FoI and so, in principle, anyone could request details of the engineering works being undertaken.

The FoI encapsulates the quite reasonable sentiment that, as NR are in receipt of significant taxpayer subsidy, the public has a right to know what they're spending that money on, and to hold them to account.

 

[306024]

Ah that all makes sense now. I didn't know that was one of the reasons for not doing engineering works. Whereas 19/20 November the service to Shenfield is suspended on both days.

Thanks for explaining!

You’re welcome. There are all sorts of regular events where engineering access is usually avoided unless absolutely impossible. Anything from music festivals to beer festivals. The timescales for engineering planning are far longer than those for sporting fixtures though, which is why these sometimes clash. I have only known two football matches rescheduled for railway engineering work, both a long time ago. One at Upton Park when c2c and the district line were both blocked for a bridge renewal, and another at White Hart Lane.

 

[Falcon1200]

As a public authority, they're subject to FoI and so, in principle, anyone could request details of the engineering works being undertaken.

What level of detail should NR be obliged to provide, other than say for example 'signalling maintenance near Seven Kings, track maintenance near Ilford, embankment work near Brentwood', and what real benefit would it be to the travelling public?

 

[Watershed]

What level of detail should NR be obliged to provide, other than say for example 'signalling maintenance near Seven Kings, track maintenance near Ilford, embankment work near Brentwood', and what real benefit would it be to the travelling public?

Any documents they hold in relation to the engineering works would be 'fair game', albeit subject to the usual FoI exemptions and cost limit.

 

[ChewChewTrain]

I always wonder why people get so huffy about engineering works. Network Rail has no obligation to tell the public the exact level of details.

Such “huffiness” will reach its annual zenith in 41 days…