Elizabeth Line (CrossRail) opened 24th May 2022

In October 2022, the Committee considered an update on the potential impact on taxi drivers at Heathrow Airport following the opening of the Elizabeth line. It noted that since then there had been a strong recovery in demand for taxis at the airport. To date, there had not been any reported decreases in the demand as a result of the Elizabeth line opening, and last year was the busiest year in terms of taxi movements through the feeder park, since figures started being recorded in 2010. [Report of the Meeting of the TfL Finance Committee held on 8 March 2023]

I was today studying the line closures for coming Easter weekend. (April 2023)

The central core (Paddington - Abbey Wood) will be closed virtually the whole four days!

All west London trains will terminate at Paddington and east London trains at Liverpool Street.

I will miss the faster central London travel.

Thanks for the explanation, but it needs four days?

Is it because every train need updating and then testing?

The final part of the Elizabeth line was implemented on Monday 22nd of May, almost 1 year after it opened. Through trains now run between Shenfield and Heathrow.

www.bbc.com/news/articles/cped02vjnwqo

A broken down train on the first day did not help things.

www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/elizabeth-lines-new-peak-time-timetable-starts-with-a-broken-down-train-62891/

source p.68 / 232

I find it hard to believe that construction of a new public building project, such as Old Oak Common Elizabeth Line, does not automatically include step-free access as part of the design.

That is caused primarily by the specifications for the central operating section (COS), Heathrow tunnels, and trains all being incorrect/not following the national standard. 

The COS and Heathrow stations have platform heights of 1100mm. The entry height of the Class 345 trains is 1100mm. The national standard platform height, to which all the other Elizabeth line stations and all NR stations should be built to is 915mm. 

Presumably 915mm has been specified for Old Oak Common, to enable level boarding from mainline rolling stock when new rolling stock is procured that meets the national standard (like the Class 745, 755 and 777, and the S-Stock). Specifying 1100mm would allow level boarding from the Class 345, but not for any other rolling stock that has level boarding elsewhere. It also causes problems for freight as the 1100mm platform infringes on the loading guage. 

The better call would have been to specify everything at 915mm, but that boat has sailed and now the designers are stuck between a rock and a hard place, with the choice between level boarding now, but with operational restrictions on freight and permitted rolling stock, or level boarding for future non-EL rolling stock, but a step for the EL.  

This is entirely a consequence of the Crossrail central section being built to a non-standard specification, after the original concept of a cross-London rail link had been abandoned in favour of yet another 'new Tube for London'.

Yes and no. As I understand it there will be two reversing and two through platforms normally used by the Elizabeth line. While it is presently very unlikely that other services will need to use the reversing platforms, the through platforms are also able to be used by other NR services if their typical platforms are out of use for any reason. If you build the platforms there to the non-standard height you lose this flexibility, potentially leading to (greater) disruption and also complicate maintenance.
There are advantages and disadvantages to both options.

Does anyone know exactly when the 1100mm platform height for Crossrail was decided? Crossrail has been criticised for adopting this non-standard height, but as far as I'm aware there were no trains with 915mm level boarding on the UK market around the late 2000s - early 2010s when this decision must have been made.

The Stadler Anglia units have 915mm doors but sloping floors within, which aren't suitable for metro operation. I think the first 915mm flat-floored UK trains are the Merseyrail 777s which entered service in January 2023, which is over six years after the original December 2016 target date for class 345 entry to service.

That left Crossrail with the choice of putting the onus for level access on the platforms (easy and low risk compromise) or on the trains (theoretically ideal, but dependent on developing a new train architecture with all the risks involved - and ideally dependent on multiple bidders being willing to commit to develop a new train architecture if they were awarded the contract).

source p.180 / 232

The S stock is a very good point indeed. It's clearly compatible with platforms shared with mainline services too, at Kew etc.
Given it was an established Bombardier product, it would seem that specifying level boarding for Crossrail would have handily tipped the scales in favour of UK manufacture too.
It really does seem like Crossrail missed a trick in that case.
But it does again make me wonder exactly when 1110mm platforms were specified? How much of the Crossrail design was a legacy of the 1990s iteration, carried over with insufficient scrutiny?
Or like carriage length and door spacing, (as well as lift types and many other things) was floor height something else left to bidders to design without Crossrail providing the integration guiding mind they should have?

However the S stock proves that Bombardier are and were capable of designing a 100% low floor train with a 915mm floor height.