Heathrow Connect to Aldgate?

[Chris M]

According to a recent edit on Wikipedia (which did not cite a source), it has been suggested that Heathrow Connect should be extended from Paddington along the H&C to Aldgate. If it did happen would obviously give excellent access to Heathrow from places like Euston and Kings Cross.

Leaving asside the obvious capacity issues for the moment, the first problem to my mind is the different electrical systems. The 630volt fourth rail would either need to be expanded to Heathrow, or 25kv OHLE added to the tunnels.
I doubt the HSE would like the former, but it would I believe be physically possible. Adding OHLE to the SSL would at the very least be major work, but would it be physically possible? Would the existing Class 360s be within gauge?

Obviously a third option would be dual voltage trains, Royal Oak or Paddington would seem to be the obvious changeover point.

Discuss

[Deleted]

IIRC, this was talked about when Heathrow Express was introduced: BAA were fairly keen to have the train serve Central London rather than terminate on the outskirts at Paddington.

There was no spare capacity on the northern Circle or at any reasonable terminating point, so it got no further than talk.

[Deleted]

OHLE would not be added to the Circle Line; rather, the 360/2s would be modified to become dual-voltage trains. This of course depends on whether or not the trains can be modified, and whether or not they will actually fit, and whether or not any paths can be found for them...

[Tubeboy]

Again, wont happen. Congestion is at a premium. Cost of OHLE?

Wasnt it suggested years ago, to divert it at Acton onto the NLL, again, a very congested route. On to Willesden, Dudding Hill link, onto MML metals at Cricklewood, thence to St Pancras.

[Deleted]

There have been various suggestions in recent years that mainline services should use the SSR tunnels in the central area, but none have got past the fundamental stumbling block that we simply don't have the capacity to run extra trains!

[amershamsi]

build a link between the Bakerloo and Hammersmith and City, in order to make the space for trains on the northern circle. the H&C west of Paddington is more like the DLR in terms of station spacing than an SSL with fairly big trains, it can be an equal branch of the Bakerloo (upping frequency in the middle).

Or, 4 track the Circle between Praed Street and Farringdon, then rebuild the link between Moorgate and Liverpool Street Mainline, and don't bother building Crossrail (which would fund it and more).

[Phil]

Shame on you Hindenburg!!

Surely, however much Circles are hated (in some circles....) they are better than HEx. Allowing NR onto the LU network in preference to LU trains must be the ultimate treachery!

And we don't want any extra on/off system moves in the Liv/Moor/Ald area. Harsig, Citysig etc have enough fun already. The extra would make their working days far too enjoyable..

[Tubeboy]

Treachery to let NR trains on LU metals? Dont forget a lot of the underground is ex-mainline.

[Deleted]

tubeboy said:

Treachery to let NR trains on LU metals? Dont forget a lot of the underground is ex-mainline.

And we already let them on the Met.

[Phil]

adw said:

And we already let them on the Met.

....provided they keep themselves to themselves

[citysig]

Just a minute. North/West of London to the City of London? Sounds a bit like a project that has been kicked about for years. Crossrail? If that won't seriously get of the ground (or under it) then any other similar project is unlikely.

Extra trains on the north side of the Circle. Forget it. We already run 34tph+ in that area during the peak. The signalling, whilst perfectly safe, is due for a "revamp" which will see a small reduction in signals and extension of overlaps. This will mean a decrease in capacity.

Four tracking would probably be about as expensive as building a dedicated line.

As for additional workload, provided they give us a decent computer to do the work (and I mean decent) then bring it on ;D

As for scrapping Circles. How many times have I repeated it on this and other forums They will be with us for some considerable time yet.

[Chris M]

citysig said:

Extra trains on the north side of the Circle. Forget it. We already run 34tph+ in that area during the peak. The signalling, whilst perfectly safe, is due for a "revamp" which will see a small reduction in signals and extension of overlaps. This will mean a decrease in capacity.

What on earth is the point of reducing capacity?

[Deleted]

To reduce the risk of compromised overlaps allowing trains to get cozy.

Yet another health and safety issue....

[amershamsi]

citysig said:

Four tracking would probably be about as expensive as building a dedicated line.

not if that line is Crossrail, which seemingly is designed to cost as much as possible (mainline gauge, tunnels longer than needed, OHLE in tunnels, huge grand stations, etc), though admittedly things like a lack of City Airport station, ending short of Reading, and so on do lower the cost slightly, though if you are going to spend shed loads of money, the extra 2 or 3% shouldn't be hard to do, especially seeing as how much better it would make the scheme.

Anyway, 4 tracking was my fantasy scheme (though would be cheaper than crossrail-as-is for all the same benefits) - the cheap way would be, as I suggested, to link the H&C beyond Paddington to the Bakerloo, and then plug the H&C into the lines out of Paddington, taking over the Heathrow services, which wouldn't cost that much at all as it's about a mile of new track and some more trains for the Bakerloo, and having some dual voltage S stock to serve Heathrow (or a reelectrification, which might be cheaper, but is more annoying)

[Chris M]

If it will fit in the tunnels, new trains of existing dual-voltage surface stock (or a new design based around them) would probably be easier than modifying S stock to be dual voltage as prjb has said that the air con is going where the panto and associated gubbins would be.

As for Crossrail - it seems that the cost savings are comming from things that would actually provide a huge benefit (e.g. direct Heathrow-Reading trains) to pay for things that are of marginal or no benefit.

[Deleted]

I think it makes perfect sense to make an effort to get Heathrow Connect into the monster that King's Cross/St. Pancras/Thameslink is becoming. Through connections to Eurostar, three quarters of England with the main line and 6(!) London Underground lines.

Still, it should be using main line track and not making life for the Circle Line any more miserable than it already is.

[johnb]

On Crossrail-to-Reading:

* Reading needs a £many millions resignalling scheme at some point in the next few years;
* Crossrail is already expensive;
* Crossrail trains could only terminate at reading if the resignalling scheme were commissioned;
* There are serious plans at the DfT and Network Rail for GWML electrification to Bristol.

Since the main obstacle to Crossrail is financing, it makes sense to take any possible costs out that can be borne by alternative schemes. Then, when the tunnel is built, Reading is resignalled, and Maidenhead to Reading has been wired as the first phase of the GWML electrification, extending services will not be a major problem.

Yes, it's an accounting trick - but frankly if it gets the damn thing built that's probably a good thing...

John B