die belebende Bedenkung

The cost of TfL Crossrail 2

with 2 comments

Cost estimates for the London Crossrail 2 railway scheme have increased by more than £6 billion, according to Transport for London.

[“Crossrail 2 cost rises by almost a third, says TfL”, BBC News, 27 Nov 2014]

The 30% increase, of £6.6bn, has been due to the inclusion of costs for new trains and surface works, figures show.

It means the north-south rail scheme is now expected to cost £20bn for the shorter Metro route and £27.5bn for the longer regional option.

A decision is expected in early 2015 between the Metro and regional routes.

[The regional version of] Crossrail 2 would run from Cheshunt in Hertfordshire to Epsom in Surrey, passing through central London via stations at Tottenham Court Road, Victoria, Chelsea and Clapham Junction.

But even the regional version of Crossrail 2 would not be particularly helpful in terms of maximising London rail capacity. The scheme should be redesigned to explicitly address overcrowding on the South West Main Line, and take account of population growth in East Anglia.

The Crossrail_X2 concept (below) combines elements of the 1970s Chelsea – Hackney tube and 1980 British Rail Euston – Victoria proposals, to relieve the South West Main Line, and provide a new route to East Anglia.

London Crossrail_X2 concept (Beleben)

London Crossrail_X2 concept (Beleben)

It would also be possible to route some Midland Main Line commuter trains into Crossrail_X2, in the event of Thameslink ‘maxing out’.

London Crossrail_X2 concept (Beleben)

Written by beleben

November 28, 2014 at 5:34 pm

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. It would be a better option to take the tunnelling down at Camden and in below Euston – reinstating 4 tracks on the route through Camden Road, and a new chord to allow trains from Camden Road, to go South via Euston. There would then be 2 route options from Stratford/Hackney to the point where the 4 track section (with space for an additional track, or grade separated route switching between Dalston West Junction and Canonbury Junction (for GN and Finsbury Park).

    Option 1 directly using the NLL via Homerton
    Option 2 using the abandoned approaches to the former goods yard, which rise up from Bethnal Green Junction to connect with the ELL at Shoreditch High Street, offering a route option avoiding Stratford from Cheshunt, and neatly contained LOROL Metro option for the local routes via Hackney Downs, to connect with the current LOROL network.

    Less tunnelling and the need to find capacity on Grosvenor Bridge would be effected by bringing the route to the surface at Charing Cross and introducing a connection to the former Waterloo International platforms. LOROL metro services would take over the stopping services at Queenstown Road Close the current platform and move ‘station’ over to the North, and could be extended (using land/less used tracks (4 running lines and 2 tracks/trackbeds to just short of Wandsworth Town)) and then a 2-level station at Wandsworth Town, with the LOROL services running via E Putney to Wimbledon, fitting between the District Line services from E Putney to Wimbledon

    Charing Cross train shed would have the potential to be developed as a public space along the lines of Gare d’Orsay or G-MEX, and as a through station the track capacity connected to this and Waterloo West side better used, through no longer having to terminate and reverse direction of every train, Likewise for Euston (locals), and the services diverted from Liverpool Street.

    Dave H (@BCCletts)

    November 28, 2014 at 11:11 pm

    • As mentioned in the last paragraph, the fundamental problem with the London rail network is the large number of terminus stations. This dates back to the 1846 Royal Commission which stopped railways in central London and the creation of a “Hauptbahnhof”. As you correctly point out, capacity can be increased by increasing the train frequency by converting the terminus stations into through stations.

      Many of the terminus stations have multiple approaching lines which are operationally self-contained. For example, Victoria has fast and slow ex-LBSCR lines from Clapham Junction and ex-LCDR lines from Brixton. Fully converting would require 6 lines to head north from Victoria to (maybe) Baker St., Euston and Charing Cross.

      The main problem with the proposed Crossrail 2 scheme is the excessive tunnels away from the central area. More tracks would be made more efficient by building a significant number of cross-London tracks between the existing terminus stations.

      In the Crossrail_X2 concept, I prefer Dave H’s use of the NLL (4 tracks) to Beleben’s proposed St.Pancras-Angel-Dalston tunnel.


      November 30, 2014 at 11:11 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: