Will Crossrail2 Be Built In The Next 40 Years?

[sk688]

Firstly, as far as I'm aware, the closest the proposed Crossrail 2 route gets to "South East London" is London Victoria, the route south of the river following a very south western path.

Secondly, of those projects you mention only DLR affects "South East London", and then only a very tiny bit of it. Let's not forget your seemingly much ignored NW London has benefited from first the Metropolitan Line and then later many other tube lines, with the far more frequent services that go with them. South East London on the otherhand has little such provision, with the development of the Overground south of the river being the small glimmer of hope that perhaps TFL wouldnt be better described as Transport For North London.

Gipsy Hill station, which serves my old stomping ground, sees a far worse level of service provision than the likes of Harlesden and Willesden Junction, yet as far as I'm aware there is little to nothing being proposed to improve service to it and other similar stations in SE London. Not all SE London stations are East Croydon!

My bad ,got the route wrong

I was referring not just to tube services , but the significant amount of money East London has received for the projects stated earlier , to allow regeneration . Look at the 02 arena , the Emirates cable car for further examples of how those areas of SE London has had money thrown at it

In those terms , areas in NW London have received comparatively less . For example, I am not aware of any such investments where I live , near Moor Park , or in Harrow

I don't venture out to East London much , but isn't there the Jubilee , Central , District and Hammersmith and City, DLR , National Rail and Overground . That doesnt seem too bad

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Crossrail 1 took well over 20 years to get authorised and funded.
In the process the route was changed radically more than once, and moved from being a main line scheme with TfL support, to a TfL scheme with main line connections.
Governments of all types demanded changes in the route and the funding package.
The need for it was questioned during each recession, and it was not certain even in 2010 that it would go ahead.
It could be a hard and rocky road ahead, whatever the government colour.

 

[Clip]

I don't venture out to East London much , but isn't there the Jubilee , Central , District and Hammersmith and City, DLR , National Rail and Overground . That doesnt seem too bad

And ill refer the poster to my post on the previous page with the map of the old oak common station and surrounding area and will ask if they think thats enough connections on NW London to get anywhere they want?

 

[The Ham]

An interesting exercise, let's say that for any given project we take the single largest station in terms of number of passengers and allocate funds on a per person basis based on Crossrail 2 and passenger numbers at Waterloo. That means taking the £32bn and dividing that by 100 million. Giving a project cost of £320 per passenger.

Based on similar costs then the following stations can see the same level of investment:
Birmingham New Street £12.5bn (7th busiest UK station)
Glasgow Central £9.6bn (12th)
Leeds £9.5bn (13th)
Manchester Piccadilly £8.3bn (16th)
Edinburgh Waverley £6.9bn (19th)

However there would also be 15 other London stations that would be seeking similar levels of funding so as to be on a level footing.

If however you took the the busiest stations that Crossrail 2 will benefit, Waterloo, Victoria and Euston and did the same, you end up with a figure of £164 per passenger.

That then halves the comparable levels of investment and that still doesn't cater for the millions of other passenger movements per year that Crossrail 2 will benefit.

The problem is whatever method of "fare distribution" of investment you take London is always going to end up with more, just because something like two thirds of all rail travel is in London and the South East and 25% of the UK population lives in London and the South East.

That's not to say that there shouldn't be investment elsewhere, just don't be surprised if the levels appear to be no where near comparable.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Politics is perception - it still needs to be seen as fair. Not doing (sparking up) Trans-Pennine or Midland Main Line which once had a BCR of infinity, would seem unfair which ever way you dress it up.

 

[HSTEd]

But the MML BCR was nonsense, just like all the 25kV electrification BCRs from that era.

 

[The Ham]

Politics is perception - it still needs to be seen as fair. Not doing (sparking up) Trans-Pennine or Midland Main Line which once had a BCR of infinity, would seem unfair which ever way you dress it up.

Personally​ I would say that NR should be given an electrification budget and just left to get in with it and that only gets political when they say "we're not going to wire up x and y until this is other project is done".

That would of course mean that certain regions would have very little of that budget spent there as it already is mostly electrified, but that is neither here or there.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Personally​ I would say that NR should be given an electrification budget and just left to get in with it and that only gets political when they say "we're not going to wire up x and y until this is other project is done".

That would of course mean that certain regions would have very little of that budget spent there as it already is mostly electrified, but that is neither here or there.

I could live with that.

 

[8A Rail]

They can have CR2 when everyone else in the UK has had their "improvements" they realisitic would like, whether reopened lines, new trains or electrification. Alternatively, get the private sector to fund it! By the way I do not include HS2 in this either although I understand why others would as you want it built.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

But the MML BCR was nonsense, just like all the 25kV electrification BCRs from that era.

Maybe so -but all schemes would be the same - so on a like for like basis, MML still had the best BCR of all schemes IIRC and it had been desired since the 1980s. GWML wasn't even on the radar until 2009.

 

[Chester1]

How viable are the alternatives to Crossrail 2? Cross River Tram would have provided some of the connections and Euston to St Pancras and Kings Cross could be served by both a DLR extension from Bank and CRT. If CR2 is truely neccessary and will be profitable then TfL should be prepared to should all the cost of the new section. However, the thought of nearly £30bn of debt might make them consider the alternatives!

 

[Busaholic]

My bad ,got the route wrong

I was referring not just to tube services , but the significant amount of money East London has received for the projects stated earlier , to allow regeneration . Look at the 02 arena , the Emirates cable car for further examples of how those areas of SE London has had money thrown at it

In those terms , areas in NW London have received comparatively less . For example, I am not aware of any such investments where I live , near Moor Park , or in Harrow

I don't venture out to East London much , but isn't there the Jubilee , Central , District and Hammersmith and City, DLR , National Rail and Overground . That doesnt seem too bad

Okay, North Greenwich got a tube service out of the Millennium Dome, too far away for 90% of the SE London population, but to cite the cable car as an example of SE London having money thrown at it is risible. Another piffling Boris Johnson ego trip that only happened because of the Olympic Games being held in Stratford, which the last time I looked is very much north of the river. If the wretched Garden Bridge ever gets built, will that count as SE London having money thrown at it, as one end would land in a SE postal district?

The Bakerloo's passenger figures, by the way, show that parts of NW London get a better service than they may deserve!

 

[Olaf]

The Treasury is dealing with the proposal for a GBP 50 Billion Brexit support fund - with a possible early target as early as 2018/2019. We currently manage a margin of about 10/13 Billion a year but that will not last. Closing the deficit has already been pushed back again until after 2022 to plug the growing gaps. International money markets are spinning down again, and we may see the next stage of the financial crisis upon us at any moment - Banks and Funds seem to be pulling the plugs which may mean it is is anywhere between 9 to 18 months away. So, for big ticket projects, there is no clarity, and it will all be about getting more out of what we already have - thus the focus on the Digital Railway in this case. Add on top of that a possible sudden return to realist interest rate levels given the global competition for scarcer funds and the inability of the ECB to keep it's plates spinning as the markets swing back to realistic behaviour when the funds dry up - a sudden rise in rates will exasperate all issues.


Given the hints in recent policy statements and announcements, I think we can take it that the start on CR2 is to be put back/put on hold, with an identification of cost reductions to be made before a possible phased start. That, however does not mean it would not be delivered within the next 40 years.

Other big ticket projects are also subject to funding profiles; I would expect postponement on parts of HS2, and HS3 will get pushed back simply because there is nothing of substance available yet as to what it could possibly be.

Upgrade projects under NR's remit have effectively been wiped off the slate post-CR5 - a tougher regime will be in-place after the failure of the Electrification projects and the absence of available funding being likely. Each proposal will go through hell-fire on its merits alone. Even the CP6 OMR is unlikely to funded to the extent that industry is hoping for.

Of course, that is all subject to change if say we can get more funds out of China, or India say for capital investment. A hung Parliament would also be another factor. However, contrary to some opinion it is not a matter of politics but a simple matter of trying to keep the nation's books in balance something any future Government will be obliged to observe - unless they try to change the constitution.

 

[HSTEd]

Why does the British constitution require the 'books be balanced'?
Parliamentary Supremacy means that any government that can command a majority in the commons can do almost anything it wants.

Additionally if the British railway industry can only manage one project at a time we are really in trouble if we want public transport to play a major part in decarbonisation.
Building up the capability to proceed with two projects at once would likely be critical.
HS2 and CR2, HS3 and some other metro project... etc.

 

[The Ham]

How viable are the alternatives to Crossrail 2? Cross River Tram would have provided some of the connections and Euston to St Pancras and Kings Cross could be served by both a DLR extension from Bank and CRT. If CR2 is truely neccessary and will be profitable then TfL should be prepared to should all the cost of the new section. However, the thought of nearly £30bn of debt might make them consider the alternatives!

TfL would cite the improvements​ to places like Guildford, Woking, Southampton, Portsmouth, Salisbury, etc. As a reason that they shouldn't be required to fund it all. Otherwise they would say, we've funded this creating more paths into Waterloo so we get to use all those paths for the services which aren't able to use Crossrail 2 which they are likely to be running when it opens.

If the government post funds it then they can insist that TfL allow longer distance services to benefit.

 

[Olaf]

Additionally if the British railway industry can only manage one project at a time we are really in trouble if we want public transport to play a major part in decarbonisation.

It is the ability to pay for the investment that is the problem; but yes; examples of NR's performance bring into question the rail industry's ability to manage more than one project at a time. I'm not bothered by the environment impact, and it is not the primary motivation for the investment.

Building up the capability to proceed with two projects at once would likely be critical.
HS2 and CR2, HS3 and some other metro project... etc.

None of these projects are crucial to generating wealth. There is a growing trend to have staff work using Internet hosted comms technology rather than travel, so taking a growing proportion of the paying passengers from these proposed services leaving a greater reliance on subsidised passengers - i.e. they may already passed there sell-by date - see the start of declining numbers in the south east.

 

[infobleep]

So, for big ticket projects, there is no clarity, and it will all be about getting more out of what we already have - thus the focus on the Digital Railway in this case.

So what could they do, with what we have already, to increase services into Waterloo? Would you include a fifth track being built as being part of what we have already or something new? I'm aware the additional platforms at Waterloo will come into use but I didn't think they would increase services by much as their is still bottlenecks at Clapham Junction, due to number of services running already.

 

[Olaf]

So what could they do, with what we have already, to increase services into Waterloo? Would you include a fifth track being built as being part of what we have already or something new? I'm aware the additional platforms at Waterloo will come into use but I didn't think they would increase services by much as their is still bottlenecks at Clapham Junction, due to number of services running already.

We will have to wait for the post-election announcements, and the start on the CP6 process. Even then, there is the potential for Brexit negotiations to cause significant turmoil.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

It is the ability to pay for the investment that is the problem; but yes; examples of NR's performance bring into question the rail industry's ability to manage more than one project at a time.

I agree to an extent. I think having a few smaller projects on the go at any one time is not too bad and easier for NR to handle. For example EGIP, NW Scheme and possibly Birmingham area infills. But when combined with TPE, MML and the motherload of GWML plus Elizabeth line - wow that is a lot. It sounds great to a rail enthusiast like me - but just too much for NR probably.

I think they will/would get better but politicians have little patience especially when things go wrong. Oh well

 

[HSTEd]

None of these projects are crucial to generating wealth. There is a growing trend to have staff work using Internet hosted comms technology rather than travel, so taking a growing proportion of the paying passengers from these proposed services leaving a greater reliance on subsidised passengers - i.e. they may already passed there sell-by date - see the start of declining numbers in the south east.

Leaving aside the social good of being able to move around the country affordably and easily.....
Do we actually have any evidence that passenger numbers are peaking, and if they are peaking, it is anything but an example of the railway simply not being able to carry more people at the times they wish to travel?

 

[AM9]

Leaving aside the social good of being able to move around the country affordably and easily.....
Do we actually have any evidence that passenger numbers are peaking, and if they are peaking, it is anything but an example of the railway simply not being able to carry more people at the times they wish to travel?

For leisure travel that may be true, but the main driver for infrastructure investment is the volume of peak traffic, much of which is commuter and/or business journeys. Just stepping back with an argument announcing that 'it's tough luck, - it's too busy so don't use the trains' would have significant economic, environmental and social, (hence political) impacts. It therefore isn't a viable solution.

 

[Chester1]

TfL would cite the improvements​ to places like Guildford, Woking, Southampton, Portsmouth, Salisbury, etc. As a reason that they shouldn't be required to fund it all. Otherwise they would say, we've funded this creating more paths into Waterloo so we get to use all those paths for the services which aren't able to use Crossrail 2 which they are likely to be running when it opens.

If the government post funds it then they can insist that TfL allow longer distance services to benefit.

TfL will need central government to be guarantor of Crossrail 2 loans or be prepared to pay a much higher rate of interest if they are just guaranteed by the London Boroughs. The central government can insist on a minimium service level as a condition of acting as guarantor. In this situation unless the line goes bankrupt the government wouldnt be paying for it. London needs long distance commuters and will need them even more as Londons housing crisis gets worse so will need to have some services for them. I don't expect that London will pay all £32bn but I can't see the government agreeing to pay £16bn or anything close.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

There's a paradox about the willingness of the Treasury to spend on rail.
Crossrail 1 (and the NR electrification and other CP5 schemes) were an attempt by the Coalition gov to kick-start the economy after the crash and recession.
It also conserved key skills and sections of the construction industry.
I think the notion was that once the economy recovered, funding would revert to private investment rather than government debt.
We're still waiting for the economy to recover properly, and now there's Brexit.
I don't see NR having another £38 billion (£11 billion on enhancement projects) to spend in the next 5 years.
HS2 is the next big ticket item, and NR/TfL will only get crumbs from that budget.

 

[plcd1]

I broadly agree with Olaf's view that wider economic issues and Brexit are what will set the agenda. The government is keen to avoid excessive spending commitments to give itself headroom to cope with the costs of Brexit. I am afraid that I fully expect London's economy to decline in the near future. I don't know if that will then pull the national economy down but it will not take much to go wrong in the Brexit negotiations for businesses to pull out of the UK. If we start to lose valuable City trading and also tech / science jobs centred in the South East then we're sunk really. That will pull down commuting and travel demand which directly affects the forecasts on which all transport investment is based. It will also affect London's ability to part fund CR2.

I also think the spat between Khan and Grayling is not helping matters. The fact that CR2 is portrayed as a TfL / City Hall scheme will set Grayling's teeth on edge given his strident dislike of devolved schemes / government. For as long as he is SoS then we stand no chance of progress. He has also called for a "land value capture" tax / mechanism as part of CR2's funding. Whether that is viable I don't know but it looks like an almightly delaying tactic to me.

The crucial next moves are

a) does government approve the CR2 business case?
b) does the government show any willingness to proceed and allow TfL to seek powers for construction?
c) would the government allow TfL / City Hall to raise funding for a smaller scheme, perhaps across the centre and partly into NE London and to Wimbledon?
d) will the government preserve the scheme's safeguarding if there is a delay?

I am afraid I don't see construction starting for at least 20 years. I also think the scheme will go back into the "reassess options" stage which will unleash all sorts of debate currently lurking in the background.

Oh and while I completely sympathise with a desire to see schemes elsewhere in the UK proceed they won't be happening either if the economy catches a cold and Mrs May is PM.

 

[LLivery]

Okay, North Greenwich got a tube service out of the Millennium Dome, too far away for 90% of the SE London population, but to cite the cable car as an example of SE London having money thrown at it is risible. Another piffling Boris Johnson ego trip that only happened because of the Olympic Games being held in Stratford, which the last time I looked is very much north of the river. If the wretched Garden Bridge ever gets built, will that count as SE London having money thrown at it, as one end would land in a SE postal district?

The Bakerloo's passenger figures, by the way, show that parts of NW London get a better service than they may deserve!

I can't really think of anything wrong with NW London's network apart from the Chiltern stations. Its the only part of London with express underground trains, not to mention a massive number of underground stations compared to any other part of London outside central. Its getting Crossrail and LO has had a massive improvement from Silverlink days.

South London on the other hand is putting up with Thameslink upgrade, with only two lines gaining a (rather low frequency) Thameslink service. The Sydenham corridor now has the incredibly overcrowded (at peaks) ELL, 10 car SWT and SN trains and thats about it. The Southeastern area has had sod all and we can't even get a bridge over the Thames. Sydenham for example has 6tph and 4 bus routes to Croydon during the day but has absolutely nothing linking to two areas at overnight. All TfL say about suggested bus improvements is that they don't have the money but then seem to spend quite stupidly on things like over priced routemasters and their latest idea which nobody asked for: colour coding routes (because colour coding 600 routes will work :roll: ). Crossrail 2 and the Bakerloo extension can't come soon enough.

As for will Crossrail 2 be built within the next 40 years... I say probably in just over a decade.

 

[AM9]

... All TfL say about suggested bus improvements is that they don't have the money but then seem to spend quite stupidly on things like over priced routemasters and their latest idea which nobody asked for: colour coding routes (because colour coding 600 routes will work :roll: ) ...

To be fair, the routemaster thing was a Boris vanity project which allowed him to crow about the good old days with open platforms, mmm, so much for that idea. The colour coding of bus routes has been successful in many other places, including overseas, so what is so special about London that it wouldn't work here? Also, what is the problem with coding a great number of routes anyway?

 

[gsnedders]

Also, what is the problem with coding a great number of routes anyway?

It's an exponentially hard problem.

 

[Busaholic]

To be fair, the routemaster thing was a Boris vanity project which allowed him to crow about the good old days with open platforms, mmm, so much for that idea. The colour coding of bus routes has been successful in many other places, including overseas, so what is so special about London that it wouldn't work here? Also, what is the problem with coding a great number of routes anyway?

Colour coding can only work in a few areas that are, in the main, not connected to each other, otherwise how do you integrate seven routes operating in Barkingside with the fifteen or so routes in neighbouring Romford, given that some buses travel between the two places? You also have the nonsense, if there are too many routes, is that a navy blue or a royal blue bus approaching? It adds unnecessary cost and the prospect of either buses being put onto the wrong routes or a bus journey being cut because only a 'wrong' bus was available.

 

[AM9]

Colour coding can only work in a few areas that are, in the main, not connected to each other, otherwise how do you integrate seven routes operating in Barkingside with the fifteen or so routes in neighbouring Romford, given that some buses travel between the two places? You also have the nonsense, if there are too many routes, is that a navy blue or a royal blue bus approaching? It adds unnecessary cost and the prospect of either buses being put onto the wrong routes or a bus journey being cut because only a 'wrong' bus was available.

I did say " a great number of routes" which means not every one of them. With a pallete of about 20 colours, and some careful planning, (like the four colour map theory) the majority of community routes could be covered. For referfence, the combined tube and national rail map has 15 solid and 14 dashed colours.
If you want to look at the Barkingside trial, only the yellow (247) and purple (128) routes go near Romford. That leaves 5 colours that can be used provided they don't go towards Ilford. Looking at the Romford Station spider map, the 66 & 296 routes both go into the Barkingside scheme area. It wouldn't be necessary to code the trunk routes like the 25 & 86 in the same way (it would make things a bit more complicated). The actual geographical separation of same-colour routes would only need to be a couple of miles, - i.e. more than somebody is likely to walk looking for a bus stop.
I personally think that it could work well as I said on community routes which probably amounts to 2/3 of all red buses.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

As long as it happens between 2026 & 2027 or later, I don't care.