rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,223 
|
Post by rincew1nd on Nov 4, 2020 10:35:01 GMT
A railway journalist tweets that Crossrail 2 is "mothballed":
|
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Nov 4, 2020 10:53:21 GMT
The Transport for London Settlement Letter at 13c says TfL "In relation to Crossrail 2, prioritises safeguarding activity and brings an orderly end to consultancy work as soon as possible. DfT will support such safeguarding activity for this project as required." There is obviously no money for it in the near future.
|
|
|
|
Post by brigham on Nov 4, 2020 11:09:57 GMT
London's next 'new tube' on hold?
|
|
|
|
Post by miff on Nov 4, 2020 14:13:20 GMT
Again  |
|
|
|
Post by brigham on Nov 4, 2020 14:59:04 GMT
Maybe you can't have another 'new tube' until you've finished your last one?
Like with Fruit Gums...
|
|
|
|
Post by bruce on Nov 4, 2020 15:08:44 GMT
Pity its not HS2 thats to be mothballed.
|
|
|
|
Post by revupminster on Nov 4, 2020 15:11:25 GMT
Should we be surprised. The Victoria Line planning was in the second world war but the country had been bankrupted by the war. We are bankrupt now with covid and is future demand be there. More important; have we got the expertise to build a railway, on time on budget!! Delay does give time to fine tune as on the Victoria and Jubilee Lines.
|
|
|
|
Post by xplaistow on Nov 4, 2020 16:22:30 GMT
(If the embedded tweet isn't showing up then it can be found here: tweet) Can't say I'm that surprised. Maybe when it comes up again (somewhere down the road) there will be a bit of a rethink about what its intended to achieve in light of how things will have changed since its conception. |
|
|
|
Post by brigham on Nov 5, 2020 8:41:13 GMT
Maybe when it comes up again there will be a re-examination of what its original purpose was, whether that demand still exists, and, if not, where could such a sum of money be better spent?
|
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Nov 5, 2020 9:21:27 GMT
Maybe when it comes up again there will be a re-examination of what its original purpose was, whether that demand still exists, and, if not, where could such a sum of money be better spent? Exactly - At the moment most people are presuming there will be a eventual return to "normal" and that will soon result in a system just as overcrowded as it was prior to COVID. I think that perspective is a brave and probably badly founded perspective . Speaking to most people who have been put through the hassle of modifying their homes and working routine to be able to work from home on a long term basis, they may well never return to the 9-5 daily commuting masses. Yes face to face meetings do still have an important role in many business activities. But many corporate firms are now asking home workers to only come into the office when absolutely necessary. Which may be as little as once or twice a fortnight. This change will probably reduce commuting levels permanently and also seems likely to reduce space required for corporate HQs, which is also a trend which seems unlikely to be reversed. Assessing and responding to changed travel paterns is precisely what we should expect of Government and public transport providers across the country.
If that assessment is updated and now shows the case for CrossRail 2 has indeed gone, then it makes sense to simply safeguard the route and free up the planning resource. That way we can focus what limited spending will be available (post the COVID recession) on those areas/projects where the current provision is woeful and yet supressed demand is enormous. If that is North or South of Watford Gap should not be a material factor in such National level decisions, regardless of how loudly local officials plead the case for their pet project, things like this should always be determined solely on their merit. |
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Nov 6, 2020 0:26:01 GMT
Big shame, just think of the employment that would be created whilst its being built - and whilst this would be temporary it would be at a time when the work is most urgently needed. By the time the line could have opened many more other employment opportunities would have been expected to have become possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Nov 7, 2020 8:14:52 GMT
A cheaper expedient might be resorted to, e.g. Chelsea-Hackney. I never understood how 20+ tph up the protected Lea Valley made sense
|
|
|
|
Post by brigham on Nov 9, 2020 9:52:41 GMT
Big shame, just think of the employment that would be created whilst its being built - and whilst this would be temporary it would be at a time when the work is most urgently needed. By the time the line could have opened many more other employment opportunities would have been expected to have become possible. Will yet another 'New tube for London' create long term employment, rather than just temporary work during construction? |
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Nov 9, 2020 10:40:46 GMT
Big shame, just think of the employment that would be created whilst its being built - and whilst this would be temporary it would be at a time when the work is most urgently needed. By the time the line could have opened many more other employment opportunities would have been expected to have become possible. Will yet another 'New tube for London' create long term employment, rather than just temporary work during construction? Crossrail 1 has kept a lot of people employed, for far longer than originally planned...! |
|
|
|
Post by johnlinford on Nov 9, 2020 12:35:33 GMT
Wasn't one of the issues causing a delay to station completion a lack of available skilled workers, and losing them to other large scale projects (a football stadium springs to mind?).
|
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Nov 9, 2020 16:20:18 GMT
A cheaper expedient might be resorted to, e.g. Chelsea-Hackney. I never understood how 20+ tph up the protected Lea Valley made sense I agree - also include one or several London Overground destinations out of Liverpool Street and a less ambitious range of destinations / works in south-west London. Perhaps the Central Line Epping branch too - but, after many decades of the present-day service right through the centre of London would passengers on the Epping service welcome having their existing travel patterns dramatically changed? |
|
|
|
Post by phil on Nov 10, 2020 0:57:18 GMT
A cheaper expedient might be resorted to, e.g. Chelsea-Hackney. I never understood how 20+ tph up the protected Lea Valley made sense
It doesn't!
The main problem is the decision to head via Dalston. If you want to pick up services via Stoke Newington and then you need to put the portal between Liverpool & Bethnal Green (as per the British Rail proposal for Crossrail).
If you want to keep the Dalston routing but want to include the Chingford line as an option then you have to surface NE of Clapton just as the existing line enters the Lea Valley.
The secondary problem is that sending the route via Dalston and Kings Cross means you miss out on service the City of London - Crossrail for all its issues doesn't have any effect on travel patterns from the GEML - if you have always got a train from Ilford to Liverpool Street then you will be able to do the same with Crossrail - by contrast a person from the lea Valley wanting to get to Liverpool Street would find CR2 of no use whatsoever. Similar problems occur with CR2 taking over services to Epping....
|
|
|
|
Post by phil on Nov 10, 2020 1:07:48 GMT
A cheaper expedient might be resorted to, e.g. Chelsea-Hackney. I never understood how 20+ tph up the protected Lea Valley made sense I agree - also include one or several London Overground destinations out of Liverpool Street and a less ambitious range of destinations / works in south-west London. Perhaps the Central Line Epping branch too - but, after many decades of the present-day service right through the centre of London would passengers on the Epping service welcome having their existing travel patterns dramatically changed?
Thing is Liverpool Street and Waterloo are good candidates to link - both have an extensive suburban network but constrained approaches and a finite platform capacity. Thats why linking the two makes a lot of sense.... BUT, not if you are going to be sent round the houses and diverted away from traditional commuting hubs like the City.
From a national rail commuter perspective the optimal route is to have CR2 run below CR1 from Liverpool St to Tottenham Court Road before turning south towards Victoria and Clapham Junc. This however would be a gross over provision on on the east -west axis and does nothing to assist the regeneration of Hackney etc.
Ultimately what London probably needs from a transport perspective is a traditional Chelsea - hackney tube AND a Clapham - Vic - TCR - LS mainline crossrail scheme. Unfortunately money isn't going to be available for both leading to a hybrid scheme that quite frankly doesn't satisfy either need properly.
NOTE:- The above is written without reference to any post Covid employment changes in the City of London as its too early to make a meaningful amassment of where we will be in 10 years time with respect to that.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,387
|
Post by Chris M on Nov 10, 2020 2:32:31 GMT
From the POV of a former Epping-line commuter, what would be most desired would be a link to Walthamstow/Chingford in addition to the Liverpool Street services.
|
|
|
|
Post by billbedford on Nov 10, 2020 9:56:10 GMT
From the POV of a former Epping-line commuter, what would be most desired would be a link to Walthamstow/Chingford in addition to the Liverpool Street services. I did hear of a suggestion to extend the DLR from Stratford International along the Central line to Leytonstone and then on to Walthamstow via Wipps Cross, but how serious this was I don't know. |
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Nov 10, 2020 13:30:14 GMT
Over many years (50+) l've heard of many such schemes.
Some from crayonistas, but many were not. Some were very sensible and were seriously considered.
But they rarely come to anything
For historic information, (1) The Greenford - Ealing Broadway shuttle appeared in a local Conservative politician's GLC (as it was then) manifesto in around 1970. If elected, he was going to improve the service by extending it to Acton Main Line, Olympia & Clapham Junction, all over existing tracks.
Result = it now only runs Greenford - West Ealing (so to get from Greenford to Gunnersbury today, changes are needed at West Ealing, Ealing Broadway, and Turnham Green
(2) A few years on and just a few miles further west, a cry went out from the Uxbridge area to divert some Central Line services at Ruislip, to Uxbridge (let's not get into reasons 'why/why not' here)
Councillors and the local Uxbridge MP all championed this as a logical 'must have' scheme. lt was 'mothballed'
Result = Unbelievably, Boris became the local and current MP. Instead of making it happen, it looks less likely now.
AT THE SAME TIME, (around 1970), there was a cry for better rail connections north - south across West London. Crayons came out of boxes and maps of a sort were produced
Of course, a line already existed that would have done the job perfectly, but believe it or not, the reason given for not re-opening it was "It was open for passenger traffic but closed through lack of use. Therefore there can be no business case for re-opening it". Hang on! It closed 60(?) years ago when west London ended at about Earls Court. ls that the reason you are still using for keeping it closed?
"Yes".
Fortunately, for once, reason and logic prevailed
So, "Mothballed" can have two possible meanings (1) Filed for possible future use, however unlikely. Or, (2) "Binned"
I wonder which this for Crossrail 2 will turn out to be
|
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Nov 10, 2020 22:10:04 GMT
From the POV of a former Epping-line commuter, what would be most desired would be a link to Walthamstow/Chingford in addition to the Liverpool Street services. I did hear of a suggestion to extend the DLR from Stratford International along the Central line to Leytonstone and then on to Walthamstow via Wipps Cross, but how serious this was I don't know. The Central Line could certainly be divided- the formation from Leytonstone to Leyton allows for it, and enough remains from Leyton Station Junction to Stratford with a bit of engineering. And of course the Leyton- Loughton-Epping line is main line loading gauge. About 4 miles of tunnel from the Olympic Park would take you out onto the SR... |
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Nov 14, 2020 3:26:31 GMT
Well Crossrail 2 had a cost of £23bn to enable 200,000 homes. Fortunately no talk yet of Bakerloo line extension, with a cost of £5bn to Lewisham enabling 35,000 homes. Not ruled out yet!
|
|
|
|
Post by revupminster on Nov 14, 2020 7:34:55 GMT
Well Crossrail 2 had a cost of £23bn to enable 200,000 homes. Fortunately no talk yet of Bakerloo line extension, with a cost of £5bn to Lewisham enabling 35,000 homes. Not ruled out yet! Who is going to live in theses houses and will the jobs be there? When the government talks of levelling up, this will suck people and jobs from other parts of the country and Europe. Covid has increased flight from the cities. Second homes become become first homes and their jobs follow them. We will get an influx from Hong Kong and they will bring a lot of money with them but they have been buying properties in the north as better value. House prices in London have been pushed up by successive waves of rich investors from abroad buying central London properties causing a ripple effect outwards. In the crash of 2008 property prices crashed and it took London 5 years to recover but this recovery did not happen in the rest of the country until about 2018 and covid is having a knock on effect of increasing house prices in coastal areas. My parents-in-law property at the coast doubled in value between 2001 and 2006 and was still the same price in 2016 as I keep an eye on the properties I know through Right move. The wife's childhood road in Walthamstow, property is between £750,000-£1m. |
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Nov 14, 2020 15:03:28 GMT
Nobody ever talks about who pays, but it should never be forgotten that as soon as you cross the GLA wall, there are suddenly more players but not necessarily more payers
l remember the end of the "Fares fair" scheme because the London Borough of Bromley wouldn't pay for other Londoners' tube travel
Unlike "Watford schemes". where some locals honestly expect Londoners (via TfL) to pay for their new railway, (Bromley would rather declare 'Independence' than contribute towards that),
schemes wholly within the GLA area MIGHT have legs (or wheels), but get onto Essex C C turf, and any scheme will have zero chance
|
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Nov 16, 2020 0:53:05 GMT
I did hear of a suggestion to extend the DLR from Stratford International along the Central line to Leytonstone and then on to Walthamstow via Wipps Cross, but how serious this was I don't know. The Central Line could certainly be divided- the formation from Leytonstone to Leyton allows for it, and enough remains from Leyton Station Junction to Stratford with a bit of engineering. And of course the Leyton- Loughton-Epping line is main line loading gauge. About 4 miles of tunnel from the Olympic Park would take you out onto the SR... I cannot ever recall having heard of that DLR extension, although as someone who has worked at Whipps Cross hospital I very much like the idea of replacing an often over subscribed bus service* between the station and the hospital with a rail link. A major road now blocks the former railway route between Leyton and Stratford. Would both services call at Leyton? Or just the one that has the surface platforms? At Leytonstone widening the eastbound platform for cross platform interchange would probably be possible, although it would mean relocating staff accommodation and one of the bus stations (Leytonstone has two of these!). Westbound already has a double sided island platform which could be used for cross-platform interchange. I question whether extending either the Overground from Chingford or the Victoria line from Walthamstow towards a Central line interchange would be seen as financially viable? *) In the rush hours when children were going to school the buses were so over subscribed that passengers were frequently left behind. |
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Nov 16, 2020 8:15:28 GMT
I never heard of a DLR extension either; maybe the poster is thinking of the daft idea posited c 1987 for a light rail substitution for everywhere north of Woodford?
Re the A12, I think the view was that an engineering solution was a possibility, to allow trains to continue to serve Leyton. My understanding is that the Chelse-Hackney alignment was designed into the road scheme, albeit only just.
Leytonstone station: should be possible to convert the down platform into an island.
Connecting the Chingford Line into anything other than Stratford or Tottenham Hale via Hall Farm Junction would be really difficult... And the "desire line" for Chingford commuters is fast to Liverpool St (which of course they had up to c.1980 via "James Street farce"), not fancy connections, except possibly to Stratford for Canary Wharf
|
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Dec 12, 2020 11:27:44 GMT
Folks, there are a lot of RIPAS / FRIPAS type ideas in this thread, and it is becoming cluttered. The existing Crossrail 2 proposal is mothballed, as per the OP. Locking this one as there isn't really much more to discuss on that - feel free to start new threads as appropriate.
|
|
