Battersea Extension

A normal service split does not necessarily remove the ability to run other services during times of disruption, etc. The DLR does this at the drop of a hat, and during disruption a few weeks back the westbound Circle Line train i was on was diverted to run via Notting Hill Gate rather than to Hammersmith.



The proposed map does show overrun tunnels at Battersea, that look like they will be usable to stable a couple of trains overnight as is done at Walthamstow and elsewhere. However as long as no physical connections are severed, Northern Line depots will still be available, particularly if the two lines/branches (depending on whether or not one or both takes a new name) remain as one operating unit (c.f. Hammersmith and City and Circle Lines). This would seem to me (as a layman) the maximum benefits from both capacity/reliability from the split and operational flexibility from the options.

It appears from the trackmap that a train can reverse in platform 3 at Kennington (nb ex-Morden), reverse in the siding, run north to platform 2 (sb ex-Charing Cross) and then run southbound to Battersea. This would probably require signalling modifications though, as I can't figure any reason for this move with the present layout. However it may permit an earlier southbound service on the extension, there is also a trailing cross-over north of Embankment that would potentially do the same.
The cost of constructing a link tunnel to allow ex-Morden trains direct access to platform 2 would almost certainly be at its cheapest and least disruptive when all the construction is happening in the area anyway. Personally I think it would be foolish for TfL not to at least examine the benefit-cost ratio of doing it, as it would likely not be a realistic option for another generation (or longer).

I agree, a develop-led dogs breakfast of a scheme. It doesn't align with TfL policy objectives around strategic interchanges, it creates yet another disconnected Battersea station, it gives no hint about how/when it might link in with future schemes such as Crossrail 2, and we have no idea about an extension to Clapham Junction. The natural extension should be to Camberwell and perhaps Peckham Rye, to turn this into a major strategic interchange.

The only bit of positive news about the scheme is that it hinges on the developer, and this site has the uncanny habit of sending developers bust. Fingers crossed.

I rather hope that any prospective developer doesn't go bust. To wish for such a thing is pretty poor form IMHO as we're talking about people's jobs here.

To be honest,at this stage in the game (ie before the first spade is wielded) not many jobs at all are involved,possibly countable on the fingers of one hand.
These outfits will consist of a few what we used to call "chancers" who have secured a line of credit and engaged some consultancies (freelance,of course,so probably already engaged on their next project) to flesh their idea out.
If the scheme turns its toes up,the chancers will dust themselves down and get on with another project,and certainly will have ensured they are not out of pocket.The only jobs lost will be the receptionists and office staff who present the facade of a plausible company.It is these one should feel sorry for,but I agree with Lemmo that the scheme is a very weak one and better off forgotten.

I can not recall a plan for the Northern line to Camberwell may be wrong but I thought the Bakerloo line was proposed to go Camberwell and beyond.

I bet whoever thinks it is on the 'wrong' side thinks that HT5 crossovers are on the 'correct' side of the platform!

Likewise, I'd be interested to know what makes it wrong.

I think I remember from around the time of the last round of consultations that a station at Vauxhall would generate too much traffic and overload the line.
Vauxhall to Clapham Junction is already well served by mainline services, and the Battersea and Nine Elms areas already have bus links to Vauxhall (although I don't know the area so can't say how adequate they are). So if going via Vauxhall would add significantly to the cost, the BCR ratio probably doesn't stack up.

As for an interchange with the Vic line where they cross, then I would hope passive provision would be made (and it looks like an I-shaped station with Northern Line platforms at either end of Victoria Line ones would be possible). The reason a station won't be built there now is almost entirely due to the same reasons why Shoreditch High Street doesn't have an interchange with the Central Line, and no extensions to the Victoria Line are on the cards - the existing line simply can't cope with any more traffic.

I can't say the same about the lack of connection to either Battersea station though.

I don't really understand the crossover at Nine Elms. It seems like it would be far enough from the station to slow down platform reoccupation time if it's used for reversing the service, not to mention that the Kennington loop provides a place for trains to change directions that doesn't require switching ends.

While I see your point, Chris, people's objective is to get from A to B in the easiest fashion possible. If significant numbers of people are going to be moving to the Nine Elms and Battersea area and taking the tube towards Zone 1 then by not providing an interchange at Vauxhall the problem is simply being moved elsewhere on the line and making people's journeys more difficult. Looking at the map it would most likely be Waterloo or TCR - can they really take any more passengers?

I'd agree with the fact that somewhere like Oxford Circus is pretty much over at capacity but surely Vauxhall could cope with the (probably) limited traffic coming from two extra stations more easily than Vauxhall. If I was taking the Northern line from Battersea the last thing I'd do is to get off halfway to get the bus to Vauxhall.

This looks like a big opportunity missed with capacity issues being used as an excuse to keep costs down.

The crossover is on the "wrong" side because reversing in sidings allows trains to run at a higher frequency, although for it to be any use in London the rules regarding tipping passengers out would need to be relaxed.

I too also still think that avoiding an interchange at Vauxhall is madness. In my opinion, withdrawing the NR services at the existing stations between Clapham Junction and Waterloo and replacing them with a tube option that serves the local region better is by far the way to go. I've discussed this in RIPAS before so I'll be brief, but CJ, Battersea High Street, Battersea Park, Nine Elms and Vauxhall strike me as far more useful at getting people off the roads.

...I can understand if they want to cut costs...but if that is the case, then at least route it past there and dig out the platform tunnels so it'd be cheap to build at a later date.

On a different note, why has Battersea station in this map got an interchange symbol when it doesn't interchange with anything??
www.flickr.com/photos/88569211@N00/7479685198/in/photostream/