Opportunity unnoticed for direct Waterloo-West London Line Services?

[mallard]

The job of Waterloo is to get as many passengers as possible to south of Clapham Junction in the evening and as many as possible from south of Clapham Junction to Waterloo in the morning. That is it in my opinion.

So you want to close Queenstown Road and Vauxhall then?

 

[Matt Taylor]

There was. I seem to remember there was a half-baked plan to route the West Country Sleepers there too.

It was more than a mad plan, it happened for quite some time in the late 1990s, 1V29 2350 Waterloo-Penzance & 1O03 2215 Penzance-Waterloo.

 

[delt1c]

A lot of negatives have been posted here but the original poster has a point. London's transport network is bursting at the seams, especially the Underground, yet the mainline services use the routes and terminals built by the Victorians.

Look at Docklands. A major rethink is required regarding where commuters are actually heading. Many commuters heading into London continue their onward journeys on the tube, this could be avoided by diverting some services to alternative destinations.

Look at the West Anglia service to Stratford, many said this was a waste of resources and initially appeared so but now has grown into a major service. What is required is planers to sit down with a clean sheet of paper to see what is really required.

 

[cle]

Paths in and out of Waterloo itself are not a problem - not is platforming.

It's demand and purpose. Where would this service go? How long would the train be? Anything less than 10 cars is a wasted path.

If dual-voltage, potentially up the WCML. If third rail only, Willesden Junction? Watford DC? One of those crazy Dudding Hill routes? Plus frequency would need to be high to be useful. Vauxhall to Shepherds Bush in about 10-12 mins is somewhat interesting. The OOC connection could be too, one day.

But way too much demand from SW really.

 

[Alteran Ancient]

As was proven last week, Waterloo is a single point of failure. If that stretch between Clapham Junction and Waterloo falls over, that's the majority of the South West out of action until the end of service.

As it happens, I don't imagine that many people on the WLL that travel Southbound are going to double-back towards Waterloo when there are other routes into the city from West London, e.g the District or Central line. The exception possibly being Imperial Wharf.

With that all in mind, we could probably do ourselves a favour by not trying to send more services to Waterloo.

I believe that the WLL could be used in part to provide additional services, but not for Waterloo. Instead, I would rather see a cross-country service that links the Kent coast up with the North. Such services existed 30 years ago and can provide some very useful connections to other parts of the country without having to faff around with a dozen London terminals and the underground. But that's likely a topic for a different thread.

 

[Bald Rick]

What is required is planers to sit down with a clean sheet of paper to see what is really required

That is precisely what the 'planers' do. Indeed you can comment on it yourself, it is the Mayor's Transport Strategy, out for consultation now. https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-...nsport-strategy?cid=mayors-transport-strategy

One thing that is definitely not required, though, is a link from the WLL to Waterloo. There are far better uses of spare capacity (if it exists) on both the WLL and the approaches to Waterloo. Especially given that 79% of passengers using Waterloo use another form of transport to get to from that terminus (ie not walking).

 

[swt_passenger]

Instead, I would rather see a cross-country service that links the Kent coast up with the North. Such services existed 30 years ago and can provide some very useful connections to other parts of the country without having to faff around with a dozen London terminals and the underground. But that's likely a topic for a different thread.

It's been the subject of many threads, and I don't think it is beneficial use of the WLL capacity either. Why do you think the services of 30 years ago were gradually withdrawn? In any case the strategy of successive route studies etc nowadays is to use the WLL for local London orbital services.

 

[mallard]

Why do you think the services of 30 years ago were gradually withdrawn?

Primarily because lack of capacity around high-frequency commuter services made creating a reasonably reliable and convinient timetable bascially impossible. Other issues such as the need to use diesels (since no dual-voltage "InterCity" train, excluding Eurostar, has ever been deployed in the UK) with poorer performance, higher running costs and awkward locomotive changes also contributed to the loss of Intercity connections in the South.

It's certainly not that there's no market for cross-London "Express" services... A review of the destinations of tickets sold at Gatwick Airport alone would confirm a demand for services further north (I am aware that Thameslink exists and does help to a degree). There's also the BR "Cross-London Rail Link" proposal from 1980...

 

[rebmcr]

no dual-voltage "InterCity" train, excluding Eurostar, has ever been deployed in the UK

*cough* Class 73/9 *cough*

 

[AlterEgo]

*cough* Class 73/9 *cough*

...wasn’t dual voltage. That was an electro-diesel.

 

[rebmcr]

...wasn’t dual voltage. That was an electro-diesel.

Oh dear, I even mentally discounted Class 80x on that basis!

 

[Olaf]

A lot of negatives have been posted here but the original poster has a point. Londons transport network is burasting at the seqams, especially the underground, yet the mainline services use the routes and terminals built by the victorians. look at Docklands. A major rethink is required regarding where commuters are actually heading. Many commuters heading into london continue their onward journeys on the tube, this could be avoided by diverting some services to alternative destinations. Look at the WA service to Stratford, many said this was a waste of resources and initialy appeared so but now has grown into a major service. What is required is planers to sit down with a clean sheet of paper to see what is really required

I'm in general agreement.

The population of Greater London is projected to have grown by about 1.5 M by the time CR2 is projected to be in-service, with about 3.5 M new residents in London, Anglia and South East regions in the same time-scales.

A new corridor across south London would facilitate new connections into the city from the West, South West and the North and between the provinces and the Euro Tunnel. However, this would all be a another major project for beyond current planning horizons.

 

[anti-pacer]

I'm all for better links from North West and West to South, South East and South West London, and would (capacity allowing) like to see direct links from, say, Watford Junction towards Bromley South/Orpington, if that's possible via Clapham Junction.

What I don't see the point of though is a link from these places north of the river to Waterloo. If I wanted to travel from Imperial Wharf to Bank for example, I could comfortably do that via West Brompton, and ending my journey at Monument. I wouldn't see the need to do so via Waterloo.

 

[Olaf]

I'm all for better links from North West and West to South, South East and South West London, and would (capacity allowing) like to see direct links from, say, Watford Junction towards Bromley South/Orpington, if that's possible via Clapham Junction.

What I don't see the point of though is a link from these places north of the river to Waterloo. If I wanted to travel from Imperial Wharf to Bank for example, I could comfortably do that via West Brompton, and ending my journey at Monument. I wouldn't see the need to do so via Waterloo.

Yes, if the scope of such a proposal went only so far as Waterloo then there is no justification.

 

[Busaholic]

It was more than a mad plan, it happened for quite some time in the late 1990s, 1V29 2350 Waterloo-Penzance & 1O03 2215 Penzance-Waterloo.

Done, in part at least, to aid Eurostar connections.

 

[Dr_Paul]

One problem with the through routes suggested here is that the most direct route from the WLL to the south-east doesn't actually go through Clapham Junction station. It's a bit like the inability of services from Clapham Junction to Watford to stop at Willesden Junction. Either new platforms would have to be built on the WLL -- and I can't see where they could go with all the complexities of the track at the Latchmere junctions and the Waterloo and Victoria lines' over-bridges -- or services would have to go through platforms 16 and 17 then meander round the houses through Streatham Hill, Crystal Palace and Birkbeck to get to a mainline going to the south-east, or go into Clapham Junction on platform 1 or 2 (I suppose that the old platform 1 could be reactivated, which would help) and out again.

 

[infobleep]

That is precisely what the 'planers' do. Indeed you can comment on it yourself, it is the Mayor's Transport Strategy, out for consultation now. https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-...nsport-strategy?cid=mayors-transport-strategy

One thing that is definitely not required, though, is a link from the WLL to Waterloo. There are far better uses of spare capacity (if it exists) on both the WLL and the approaches to Waterloo. Especially given that 79% of passengers using Waterloo use another form of transport to get to from that terminus (ie not walking).

With all the additional trains running from Dec 2018, the numbers using other forms of public transport away from Waterloo are only going to increase. However there's no room to link to the WLL, even if passengers might prefer it to having catch the tube and then another train.

 

[Olaf]

One problem with the through routes suggested here is that the most direct route from the WLL to the south-east doesn't actually go through Clapham Junction station. It's a bit like the inability of services from Clapham Junction to Watford to stop at Willesden Junction. Either new platforms would have to be built on the WLL -- and I can't see where they could go with all the complexities of the track at the Latchmere junctions and the Waterloo and Victoria lines' over-bridges -- or services would have to go through platforms 16 and 17 then meander round the houses through Streatham Hill, Crystal Palace and Birkbeck to get to a mainline going to the south-east, or go into Clapham Junction on platform 1 or 2 (I suppose that the old platform 1 could be reactivated, which would help) and out again.

Yes, but consider potential demand and the options from a 2030's perspective.

 

[theironroad]

Isn't Waterloo already busy enough?

I think when platforms 20-24 all become fully available at the end of the year, there is more platform capacity available even after the new services planned from December 2018. Not so sure about paths available on the Windsor lines, but possibly on the Windsor reversible.

 

[theironroad]

Don't think anything uses it now apart railtours perhaps. It used to be used by the Eurostars to get to North Pole depot.

Certainly West Coast Railways use the connection to get the ECS rail tours that start and finish at Waterloo back to their depot at Southall via Willesden. Not sure of any other uses.

 

[Dr_Paul]

Yes, but consider potential demand and the options from a 2030's perspective.

Thinking again, I feel that it would not be impossible not only to renovate the original platform 1 at Clapham Junction, but also to have another platform parallel to it. Looking at maps and aerial photography, and knowing the area reasonably well, I reckon that this new platform could be built on a viaduct over Grant Road, and I don't think that this would require any housing in that road or to the east of Falcon Road to be demolished. This would enable services coming down the West London Line from Willesden through to south-east London and beyond via Brixton to have an interchange at Clapham Junction, admittedly on an 'in and out' basis.

 

[swt_passenger]

I think when platforms 20-24 all become fully available at the end of the year, there is more platform capacity available even after the new services planned from December 2018. Not so sure about paths available on the Windsor lines, but possibly on the Windsor reversible.

Network Rails current proposals (as far as the recent Wessex route study is concerned) get rid of the Windsor reversible. The Windsor side services are shown to use only the two tracks available through Queenstown Rd P1 and P2, and Vauxhall P1 and P2, those lines are re-designated up and down Windsor. The track through the respective P3s is to be a dedicated carriage line for ECS to/from Clapham Yard.

All indications are that the additional capacity will be used by main fast services via Wimbledon, not random services off the WLL.

 

[Dr_Paul]

Network Rails current proposals (as far as the recent Wessex route study is concerned) get rid of the Windsor reversible. The Windsor side services are shown to use only the two tracks available through Queenstown Rd P1 and P2, and Vauxhall P1 and P2, those lines are re-designated up and down Windsor. The track through the respective P3s is to be a dedicated carriage line for ECS to/from Clapham Yard. All indications are that the additional capacity will be used by main fast services via Wimbledon, not random services off the WLL.

Is it really feasible to run all the Windsor services along two lines without there being problems with congestion? At the moment there are each hour two Reading (fast to Clapham Junction), two Windsor (stopping at Vauxhall), two Kingston loop and two Hounslow loop (all stopping at Vauxhall and Queenstown Road) services, plus additionals at rush hour.

 

[swt_passenger]

Is it really feasible to run all the Windsor services along two lines without there being problems with congestion? At the moment there are each hour two Reading (fast to Clapham Junction), two Windsor (stopping at Vauxhall), two Kingston loop and two Hounslow loop (all stopping at Vauxhall and Queenstown Road) services, plus additionals at rush hour.

I don't know. I just repeat what is published, assuming they know what they are about. They suggest about 20 tph peak total on the Windsor side IIRC, 18 off-peak, all stopping at Vauxhall, that's about the same as the main sub two tracks.

 

[davetheguard]

What does that bit of track actually usually get used for? I’d assume engineering trains/tamper/OTP and that’s about it?

I think it's called the Sheepcote Lane curve (?) and if I remember correctly, it had been lifted decades ago, but it was reinstated for empty Eurostar movements between Waterloo & North Pole depot via the West London Line. There was also a regular HST over it for a couple of years I think, (one a day?) a booked diversion away from Paddington to serve Waterloo instead specifically to provide a connection with Eurostar departures.