Hammersmith services as part of Crossrail

The 'problem' of a heavy maintenance facility for the C Stock may not be relevant, as, with the introduction of the S stock in the year 20??, the stock for the C&H will be maintained primarily at Neasden, with Hammersmith relegated to a 'satellite' facility for minor maintenance.
As to the practicalities of the branch going to Crossrail, I'll leave that for others to think about ;D

Yes I've heard that Neasden will be remodelled with extended sheds and a new multi storey training school as part of Bombardier's plans to takeover all fleet maintenance and that the remaining depots will be used for prepping work only. Which could mean shortening of or more cancellation of engineering hours.

That's almost certain,doubling up the sidings at Stanmore is part of the line upgrade plans due to be done by 2010,just in time for the "S" stock.

And that trackless bay on the down side of the station sounds SO useful as a peak-hour and exhibition day turnback point too!



Indeed. Yet another reason to investigate the transfer of the Hammersmith branch to Crossrail.

I think with Crossrail's tph bias towards East End services, then finding an extra already built route at the West End is a good idea. Taking over the H&C would be a good option for this. It would require platform extensions, merging or removal of some stations. Considerable rebuilding would also be needed at Hammersmith.

If the Wimbleware and chopped H&C services were joined at Edgware Road, then a Wimbledon-Barking service could be run with similar frequencies as at present, without having to change frequencies on the other SSLs. Also, with the added flexibility from both the HSK and South Circle routes being available for 7-car S-stock, then there would be further routing options available at times of service disruption, and further possible long-term route options (which may make better use of Earl's Court layout).

So I think it's a good idea, and a lot better than a certain silly(ish) idea on the front cover of this months Modern Railways.

Why is it lately that everyone thinks that LUL branches should be given to NR? Why build a new line that takes each end from another line and just has a new bit to join them, i.e. Wimbledon and Epping branches of the District and Central lines. Why not build a compleate new line and serve other suburbs.
What would be better for the SSL's is this

Metropolitan Line

Baker Street to Aylesbury, trains would only stop at Finchley Road Wembley Park Harrow-on-the-Hill Moor Park and then all stations to Aylesbury, Baker Street to Watford, Aldgate to Uxbridge and Whitechapel to Hammersmith.

District Line

Upminster to Richmond and Ealing Broadway, Edgware Road to Wimbledon.

There would still be trains to Wimbledon from Upminster and Watford to Aldgate during peak hours only. Also note that under my plans the Metropolitan Line would be extended from Amersham to Aylesbury and the Hammersmith & City Line would become part of the Metropolitan Line again. The Circle Line would be unaffected. ;D

Who's doing that?



You just described Crossrail Line 2, which (IMO) will never get built.



NOES. Not only is ground electrification to Aylesbury unlikely to EVER happen, the pax north of Amersham would all have aneurysms - they like Chiltern's services and don't want to ride TfL EMUs into London.

Besides, the nightmare of timetabling these services would give citysig heartburn...

The Hammersmith and City runs a train every 8.5mins during the peaks (in theory). If all of the Crossrail trains that are planned to be turned back in sidings at Westbourne Park, were extended along the H&C, then there could be a 5min frequency. Taking into account that Crossrail would use trains double the length of C stocks, this would be a considerable improvement in capacity, if it were needed.

I know i'm gonna get shot down in flames, but i'm gonna say it anyway ( ;D):

My (personal) definition of metro services are those which run at least 4 trains per hour, using "big trains".

My (personal) definition of tube services are those which run in deep level single track tunnels, every few minutes (turn up 'n' go service).

On that basis, SSR is a metro service.

Of course it's not that simple, as, apart from the Victoria and the Waterloo & city, all lines have open sections and tunnel / covered way sections............

Quick question: will the Crossrail trains be 1x10-car trains or 2x5-car trains?

The earlier concerns about platform lengths remind me that if Crossrail trains are formed in the latter setup, perhaps all that is needed is to divide trains in the sidings (with pax on, as the sidings will be cleared for such) and send a 5-car to Hammersmith every six minutes.

Given that the trains will be 200m long, then omitting a rather quiet station, and providing extra exits at adjacent stations may not be a bad thing.



Splitting and reforming trains regularly would increase journey time, and decrease reliability. Not a good idea in my opinion.

Who does?

Seriously though, Paddington now has a NW entrance to service the new office development beside the Paddington Basin Spur, which is only about 5mins walk from Royal Oak station.

But whether the trains divide in the sidings or at Paddington, there will still be an increase in journey time, and decreases in train reliability.

Given that the DC lines are rather quiet with just 6tph of 72TS and 3tph of 313s trains during the peaks, it would probably be overkill to run 12tph of 200m long Crossrail trains along it.