Future of the Bakerloo Line?

Use Bakerloo paths to run a second LO service - Kilburn High Road to Harrow & Wealdstone?

I dislike anything that sees even a temporary suspension of track sharing, in case there is a loss of grandfather rights and a return to service is disallowed.

To put it simply, I do not have confidence in politicians, civil servants and other suit-wearing officials so do not want to see them being given even a hint of a chance to seize upon the opportunity to kill off a jointly operated service that has been serving the public for over 100 years.

I'm sure that grandfather rights are something that the relevant team at TfL have discussed with the ORR (I presume it is them that is responsible) and either the rights are not at risk or they have a plan the ORR are happy with that allows them to be retained. My gut feeling is that it's the former given that they (the ORR) have allowed the Class 345s to run despite not having level boarding at standard-height platforms and allow both 745s (with high floors) and 755s (with low floors for level access) to serve the same platforms on Greater Anglia routes.

Don’t suppose it’s feasible now,when the Bakerloo was shut for a few months between Piccadilly Circus and Elephant,4 trains were outstabled at Neasden which were recycled 2 trains a night Monday to Friday.

Yes, Jubilee line TBTC with no trainstops is the hurdle. Not sure that's actually 'rationalisation' though.

24TS should be EMC compatible with signalling on Jub and Met given all the immunisation already done. Not signalling compatible due to not fitted with the correct TBTC or CBTC equipment. I'm fairly sure 24TS plus two battery locos would exceed 138m which will be too long for needed reversing berths.

Posting at districtdavesforum.co.uk/post/523129/thread suggests some transfer routes between the Bloo and Picc, but these might not be practical on a regular basis to allow stock maintenance at Northfields whilst Stonebridge Park depot is reconstructed.

The follow-up posting by d7666 suggests direct fleet delivery from Siemens to the depot, but it is questionable whether the depot will be prepared in time for that. If the production run continues after the Picc fleet enter service 2025 to 2027, then Bloo delivery is probably in 2028-2029. A break in production will presumably add to the cost of the project. Storage of these trains is also a consideration until they can enter service on the line, including some to provide enhanced service after unfunded resignalling.

It seems that the Bakerloo Upgrade project is at its earliest stage, just a concept at present. Can it get to reopening the depot by 2028? Especially as the Picc depot works have hardly commenced yet, mainly still preparatory works. And can funding stretch to three depots in reconstruction concurrently? Resignalling at Northumberland Park depot has been put back behind the Picc depots because of a shortage of specialists.

According to the 2021 annual entry and exit counts link Queen's Park sees 2.4m users, and north from there only Willesden Junction and Wembley Central see over 2m, with Harrow & Wealdstone at 1.8m. Harlesden and Stonebridge Park are next at 1.5 and 1.2 m, with Watford Junction at 1.1m. Kenton and Watford High St are just short of 1m each. South Kenton is the quietest with only 284,940 users in the year.

If the Bakerloo is to continue to Harrow and Wealdstone, could the second siding be relaid to provide more reversing capacity north of Queen's Park? Was the current siding laid between the route of the former two? Or has the site of the second siding been occupied by essential equipment?

The siding area is quite tight at Wealdstone. I believe both sidings were accessed via a double slip. This isn’t particularly flexible (compared with somewhere like Amersham where you can in theory have simultaneous movements) and a complicated piece of kit. How many double slips are left on the network? I know there are two single slips at Aldgate.

I don’t know if there would be another way of getting the second siding back in considering the new trains will be longer?

In what way is the Aldgate layout going to be simplified and when ? May be you start a new post on the Metropolitan or SSL section.

Renewed yes, simplified - we'll see!

Except it clashes with the Croxley link, that, while not happening at the moment, has not actually been cancelled outright and is - AFAIK - still a protected route. Whether it will happen is a moot subject, and not for this thread, the point here being it is not really available unless or until Croxley link is formally cancelled (or, unlikely, somehow radically altered).

Whilst that would certainly be the case, this stabling location is quite out of the way and exposed to abuse I would feel.

I'm not going to go into the detail of your suggestion, but to comment that whenever I see something stated like that - "too long" - my reaction is always that what should have been stated is "too long for operation within existing rules and guidelines".

Restrictions like this tend to be in the form of listing what is permitted, then by default barring everything else. And if to date no-one has foreseen any need to run battery + train + train + battery over the link, or anywhere else, then it won't have been allowed for so "barred".

If there is a need, there is a business case to implement a means to do it, be it a raft of paper instructions or infrastructure mods. I am not going to say if this idea here is good or not, but am saying if it is good and is the solution, then whatever the current limits are, they will be overcome.

No length limit can ever be a total, absolute, cast in stone, can never ever be changed restriction. The only complexication anywhere would be if such a train needs to reverse somewhere where the reversing track(s) is shorter than the reversing train(s) and there is no other practical alternative (such as splitting). Beyond that here is no permanent never can be changed limit to a train length on any line other than any one total train length can not exceed the end to end length of the line .. and that ain't going to happen.

The real question is the cost:benefit £££££.

I was using the same argument when it came to that debate about how do heritage trains operate when CBTC is completed, where the train is based in a depot in a CBTC area, even if the planned use of the train lies outside, you still have the problem of how to get it in position. Under what has been implemented, so far, it is far from practical - but - it could be worked out if there was a business case to do it.

The cost:benefit of seven figure £££££s for a handful of heritage trains for trainspotters on a couple of days each year does not seem to make much sense.

That case to have a protracted period of sending long stock trains over other lines might have a better case.