A lot is written about train services in London. Much more is spoken. The point of view expressed, usually, is coloured by experiences, which is no bad thing. However, it is not enough. Ideas come and go about new lines to be introduced, where they will go etc. There are many an article and brochure produced suggesting ideas which are not lacking. What comes out, if anything, ends up being an amalgam of differing and sometimes conflicting ideas.
There are several people who inform us on YouTube about London´s railways, stations, histories etc. Jago Hazzard is one presenter who gives us excellent videos about differing aspects including reports, drawn up over many years, suggesting expansion which do not usually get built. Geoff Marshall is another who records videos about all aspects of transport, not just railways, and not limited to London.His videos on railways and Transport for London (TfL) are also excellent but in a different style. There are others, of course, but I cannot mention everybody. Their channels can be found at........
https://www.youtube.com/@JagoHazzard https://www.youtube.com/@geofftech2
As I have said, these writers (they have to write the script as well as video the images) often come up with reports that were produced by TfL (and its predecessors)or for them and sometimes reports produced privately. Many ideas have been ignored and many others incorporated into projects which have come to fruition, like the Jubilee Underground line. What is lacking is an overall plan or criteria for making plans. In the end it seems that some bright individual thinks of something which gets elaborated on and then becomes a fixed project which is put forward for debate. Over time criteria have been adopted(and also frequently ignored) so the elements are there. I will try to expound on them and suggest modifications to the rail systems of London to in corporate at least some of them.
I have put in these two present day maps for reference if needed, TfL rail services plus others, and the south east with British Rail (BR) services over a wider area.
https://content.tfl.gov.uk/london-rail-and-tube-services-map.pdf
https://assets.nationalrail.co.uk/e8xgegruud3g/6r0rzYCSpaMX3OJ9aec9tq/6749aef0a7a8cf55b0ec9a7e92af2192/LondonSouthEast_NetworkRailcard_map_Feb25.
..............................................
There are principally three factors to be taken into account for a rail line to be considered part of the TfL group or part of the British Rail Crossrail services. Any new, modified and even old lines have to be looked at through the same prism, and adjusted accordingly. Otherwise there is no sense in the operation which makes it difficult to understand.
a)- It has been claimed by TfL that all rail services within the Greater London area should come under its wing. This officially means only those services which start and finish within the London Metropolitan area (the London boroughs). That is not always strictly possible so an easier way to determine the reach of TfL is to limit their lines to within the M25 area (the M25 is the motorway which circumvents London). This is also not strictly true but it is closer to reality. Some lines have traditionally been extended outside the Metropolitan area such as the Metropolitan Lines to Amersham, Chesham and Watford. However, it suits our purposes to make no change there.Here we are trying to rationalise the services so that those within the M25 pass to TfL while outside the M25 pass to BR Crossrail.
b)- Another point taken into consideration is if the trains can cross the Metro area so that a greater connection between north and south of the Thames (principally) can be achieved to offer greater connectivity and convenience to passengers to provide a service where before none existed, or very little. This also applies in the east-west direction. The object is to reduce the need for changing trains or modes of transport, or at the very least, reducing the need to change to as few times as possible.
c)- The third point is if the modifications give us a positive net result. Do the services improve? Are they faster? Are they less crowded? Can more services be offered on these lines or on others not mentioned? Are platforms freed up in the termini so that extra and/or new services can be offered to other destinations? Is the infrasructure used optimally? Do passengers give positive feedback? This last is the ultimate accolade which we seek.
British Rail Crossrail: The lines to have this idea put into effect are ............
1)- Thameslink : This runs services from Bedford, Peterborough and Cambridge through St. Pancras (and to Kings Cross), City Thameslink and Blackfriars south to (a)Peckham Rye, Sevenoaks and Orpington. Also from the north through London Bridge to (b) East Croydon, Gatwick Airport and Brighton.Another service is directed through (c) Greenwich, Abbey Wood, Gravesend and Rainham. The service which is wholely within the London boundary, through Wimbledon, Sutton, Mitcham and Herne Hill is transfered to TfL.
Result: No change in capacity or convenience but a more logical application of infrastructure resources.
2)- Elizabeth Line : This line starts in Reading (which is over 34 kms. west of the M25) What justification is there for it to start so far west and yet still be considered part of TfL? None, quite frankly. It goes as far as Shenfield in the east (this is just about 6 kms. outside of the M25). Since these trains start so far west and then stop just outside the London M25 border, why not extend them all the way to Southminster and Southend Victoria (at present these are Greater Anglia services). Thus a connection between Heathrow airport (LHR) and Southend Airport would be established.This would be in addition to the Abbey Wood branch which already provides a connection to London City airport.This extension would continue to Ebbsfleet to provide a connection to International and Javelin HS1 services at that station. Obviously such changes mean that the Elizabeth line becomes part of BR Crossrail services, not TfL.
Result: A more logical application of infrastructure resources.Direct connections from Heathrow to City airport. Freeing up of at least 2 platforms (from Greater Anglia) at Liverpool St. main line station for other services. Connections along the line to International services at Stratford International and Ebbsfleet International.
3)- Crossrail 3 : (I use this term because C1 and C2 have already been allocated so C3 is the next to be used. - In the end the term Crossrail will be sufficient). This puts together all the commuter lines to the west of London to connect to those east of London. Thus the London Northwestern lines from Euston to Milton Keynes together with the Chiltern commuter lines to Aylesbury Vale Parkway, Aylesbury, Princes Risborough and High Wycombe, are joined through a new tunnel in central London to all the C2C services from Fenchurch St. to Southend Central and Shoeburyness( through Upminster, Grays and Pitsea) This would mean a new cross-London tunnel taking trains from Fenchurch St. - Cannon St. - Blackfriars - Aldwych (more to be said later) - Tottenham Court Rd.- New Cavendish St./Portland Place(new station) - Marylebone (and Baker St.). From Marylebone one branch would continue to South Hampstead and West Hampstead to continue on the Chiltern Lines to the north west, while a second branch would connect Marylebone with Queens Park and on to the WCML out to Watford Junction and then on to Tring and Milton Keynes on the London Northwestern lines.
Result: A new tunnel under central London to provide access for BR passengers from outside the Metropolitan area.Greater connectivity between west and east including a connection to Southend. Elimination of C2C services into Fenchurch St. station which can, therefore, be put to other uses and services. If not, the main line station is prime property in the City which could be sold at a premium to help pay for the tunnel works. The London Northwestern lines to Milton Keynes out of Euston transfer to Crossrail 3 thus freeing up at least 2 platforms at Euston. The Chiltern lines to Aylesbury out of Marylebone free up (probably) 4 platforms for use by other services.
Since C2C has all its services taken from it, it can become the main operator on the lines, end to end. London Northwestern can continue providing services from Milton Keynes in competition with C2C along to Shoeburyness.Chiltern can do the same from Aylesbury to Southend. It continues to run along its previous lines in competition with C2C but also along the lines to Southend. This means that in the eastern section there are three competitors, while in the western section there are two competitors in each part.
4)- Heathrow - Stansted Express : The Heathrow Express runs non-stop trains from LHR to Paddington station then stops. Similarly the Stansted Express runs trains from Stansted airport to Liverpool St. stopping at Tottenham Hale on the way to connect to the Victoria Line. It is logical to connect both express services to form a through service from one airport to the other. This provides a tremendous service to passengers who wish to connect. Also both expresses, at present, stop at stations on the edge of Central London, so loose a lot of passengers who wish to continue into Central London.This shown by the downfall in Heathrow Express passengers since the introduction of the Elizabeth line. Connect the two and provide a service between the airports along the Elizabeth line, but as a separate entity.
Result: The Heathrow Express is a private company including the airport owners. It runs into Paddington station where it occupies 2 platforms. The Stansted Express is part of Greater Anglia. It starts at Liverpool St. station occupying 2 platforms. Joining the two services would create a open access operator to run express services from Heathrow along the Elizabeth line, stopping in central London, to Stratford where the trains would veer north, along the Greater Anglia lines, to go to Cheshunt and on to Stansted Airport. The trains enter central London so offering a more attractive service for passengers. The frequency can remain the same at 4 trains per hour(tph) as they are at present, but offering more when needed. 2 Platforms are freed up at each terminus (Paddington and Liverpool St.) for other services.
Transport for London (Underground and Overground): Here I make no distinction between the two forms of rail service.That is for TfL to decide.
How London´s Railways will be modified and improved.
1)- The Bakerloo Line (Underground): This line is the poor brother of the Underground system. Its branch to Stanmore has been handed over to the Jubilee line while its services have been cut back from Watford Junct. to Harrow & Wealdstone. Even the service south of the Thames has never gone further south than the Elephant & Castle. My proposals for this line mean extending the line north again to Watford Junct. I think all the travelling public on that line need the possibility of crossing the river to the (new) destinations, without changing trains. For a while now Lewisham to Hayes has been talked about as a line to be handed over from BR to TfL in order to provide an extension for the tube line. That would mean an extension underground along the Old Kent Road with two stations would be needed. Also to provide added mileage the branch line from Grove Park to Bromley North would be taken over. Thus the route would become .......................................... Watford Junct. - Wembley Central - Queens Park - Paddington - Baker St. - Charing Cross - Elephant & Castle (all on the existing route) then new building along the Old Kent Rd. with two new stations to New Cross Gate - Lewisham - then route (a) - Catford Bridge - Elmers End - Hayes. Route (b) would leave Lewisham - Hither Green - Grove Park to Bromley North. These BR lines south of the Thames would be handed over to TfL.
Result: The Bakerloo line gets its extension into South London providing a more interesting service for passengers. The passenger numbers, without doubt, will increase. The existing train services to Hayes run from Charing Cross at 4 tph. while those that run the branch line to Bromley North run 2 tph.The service to Grove Park is on the Charing Cross to Sevenoaks line which will continue to run at 2tph. So the TfL line to Bromley North will be in addition to that with the aim of establishing a frequency, initially, of 4 tph.
2)- The South Thames Loops: Loop lines are run out of Waterloo and London Bridge stations which could be joined up. Joined up,these would provide a cross town service along the southern shores (mostly) of the River Thames. From Waterloo South West Trains run circular routes through (a) Brentford and Hounslow to Twickenham and Richmond before returning to Waterloo. The opposite direction works in the same way. From (b) Waterloo to Richmond and Twickenham round through Hounslow and Brentford and back to Waterloo. Another service runs from (c) Waterloo to Richmond and Twickenham then turns south to go to Teddington and Kingston before going to Wimbledon and then on to Waterloo. The inverse is from (d) Waterloo to Wimbledon then Kingston to Teddington then Twickenham and Richmond before reaching Waterloo. That makes a total of four circular routes.
From London Bridge similar services are provided. running to (a) Greenwich then Woolwich Arsenal - Abbey Wood to Slade Green then returning through Barnehurst - Eltham - Blackheath - Lewisham(DLR to Canary Wharf) - New Cross to London Bridge. The inverse is (b) LB to New Cross - Lewisham - Blackheath - Eltham - Barnehurst - Slade Green - Abbey Wood (Elizabeth line connection) - Woolwich Arsenal - Greenwich(DLR) - then directly back to London Bridge. The other two circular services run from London Bridge down to (c) Lewisham - on to Hither Green - Sidcup - Crayford to turn back through Barnehurst - Eltham - Blackheath-Lewisham - and on to London Bridge. The inverse is (d) LB to Lewisham - Blackheath - Eltham - Barnehurst to turn south round to Crayford - Sidcup- Hither Green and Lewisham before running into London Bridge.
So it can be seen that the four services from Waterloo can be connected to the four services from London Bridge. What is missing is a connection by tunnel (most functionally) The distance is short - about 2.15kms with one intermediate station at the existing Southwark or alternatively a new station behind the Tate Gallery (this is more preferible). The cost for such a short distance underground is not expensive. The other expenses would be updating and modifying the existing stations. then you obtain an extensive South Thames Loop service. All these services would transfer from BR to TfL.
Results: The loops can be connected easily across the south of the Thames between 2 important termini. No tremendous construction work is needed. That means a great improvement in services for, relatively, little cost. Since the construction is not extensive the work can be completed in a short time. These TfL services are not meant to replace other existing services run by Southeastern. Those would continue as before.
The "loss" of these services to the 2 termini of Waterloo and London Bridge would mean 8tph at each station which is a substantial amount of platform space(maybe 3 or 4 platforms at each terminus) to provide more services elsewhere.
3)- The Metropolitan Lines: The Croxley link to Watford Junct. is the first section which must be finished on this line. Both Hertfordshire County Council and Greater London are agreed that the link should be made but disagree on who should pay for it. I suggest that the link be done and discounted from the UK Government´s grants to both bodies.
An overlooked gap in the central London TfL map now has the opportunity to be filled.
The Metropolitan line can now run Baker St. - Marble Arch - Hyde Park Corner - Victoria - Pimlico - Vauxhall - Oval - Loughborough Junct. - Tulse Hill - Streatham -to divide. One part would continue down to (a) Carsharlton and on to Epsom Downs. Then another would divide to the right to go through (b) Tooting - Wimbledon - Mordon South - West Sutton - Sutton to turn back up through Carsharlton to Streatham continuing northwards. The other branch of the circular route would run through (c) Carsharlton - Sutton - West Sutton - Morden South - Wimbledon - Tooting - to rejoin the line to Streatham continuing northwards. These inner London services would thus pass to TfL.
Results: The Metropolitan line would no longer run along the Circle line for part of the day. One of the oldest and longest lines would stretch south to cover areas of South London in a similar way to which its original promoters envisaged. It would also cover a gap in the offer of north/south lines which includes easing access between Victoria and Marylebone. Marylebone can be one terminus station for HS2 services to Birmingham (but that would need another article).
4)- The Hammersmith & City Line: This line seems to have no great importance, just the northern part of the Circle Line. However, if, the Metropolitan Line is destined to go south of the Thames then it achieves a greater importance. From Hammersmith the line is extended south of the Thames along Castelnau(and a new station) and Rocks Rd. to Barnes (on the South West Railway).Here is an excellent connection for those passengers on those lines through Barnes who wish to have an easy transfer to stations north of the West End and on to Kings Cross.
Results: Greater connectivity means more trains. Thus the number of trains running to Barnes could be considerable to transport the increased load of passengers travelling to Paddington, Marylebone, Euston and Kings Cross.This would cover the Metropolitan trains taken off the route to go south of the Thames. There is no change for the services in the east out to Barking.
5)- The Piccadilly Line: It has never seemed logical for a line to go west to east and then suddenly make a 90 degree turn to go north. This is what happens at Holborn. It is better for the Piccadilly to continue eastwards. From Holborn the Piccadilly line continues east to Farringdon - Barbican - Moorgate - Shoreditch High St. - Cambridge Heath - Victoria Park (new station with Waterloo & City line) - Hackney Wick - Stratford - where one part branches off to (a) Leyton - Leytonstone - Wanstead - Grants Hill and Hinault, while(b) continues to West Ham Park (new station) - Plashet (new station) - Barking.
Results:The long talked about division of the Central line takes place. Part is taken over by the Piccadilly line which goes to Hinault via Wanstead. The rest remains the same as at present. This change makes the network layout more logical.
6)- The Aldwych Line: From Holborn The Cockfosters branch, renamed the Aldwych Line, would continue south to Aldwych - Temple - Waterloo - Kennington - Denmark Hill - North Dulwich - West Dulwich then (a) Sydenham Hill - Beckenham Junct. - Orpington. (b) West Dulwich - Crystal Palace - Purley - Caterham or (c) Purley - Chipstead - Tattenham Corner.
Results: The connection from Holborn to Aldwych is reopened to make use again of this infrastructure From there the lines are new to West Dulwich. The Cockfosters branch is, therefore, connected to the south of the river to cover a wide area unserved by TfL lines. All these connections south of the Thames are passed from BR to TfL. The trains to Orpington suppose 2tph from Victoria. and 2tph from Charing Cross and 2 tph from Cannon St.
7)- The Wimbledon & Lea Valley Line: The Lea Valley refers to the three TfL lines which originate in Chingford, Chesham and Enfield to the north of the city. These are to connect to the three lines in the south west going to Chessington South, Shepperton and Hampton Court. The lines could use the new tunnel from Waterloo to London Bridge, built for the South Thames Loop lines. These, however, would branch off at London Bridge to cross the Thames to Tower Hill - Aldgate - Aldgate East - Whitechapel to Bethnal Green where they would join the traditional route to their destinations.
Results: The three lines from Waterloo along the Southwest Trains route would pass from BR to TfL. At off-peak times these have a frequency of 2tph each. The Lea Valley lines have a similar frequency from Liverpool St. More importantly joining these services together means platforms (about 4) would become free at both Waterloo and Liverpool St.
8)- The Waterloo & City Line: This line was constructed as part of the railway company into Waterloo. Instead of building into the City this shuttle service was built to serve that purpose. Many people think it works well doing the job assigned to it. The weak point is that the line is extremely busy for two hours in the morning transporting passengers into the City , and for two hours in the evening to transport them back to Waterloo on their ways home. The rest of the time it is underused with no service on Sundays. To make better use of this line it has to be extended. If we consider that busy Interchanges are the best solution to catch passengers to transport them to parts of the Metropolis more easily then we have excellent interchanges at Clapham Junct. and Stratford. The line could then run from Clapham Junct. - Queenstown Rd. - Vauxhall - Waterloo - Blackfriars (the present line passes directly under the station) - Bank - Aldgate East - Bethnal Green - Victoria Park (new station together with the Piccadilly line) - Hackney Wick - Stratford International.
Results: The stops at Queenstown Rd. and Vauxhall serve commuters who take this line on several services which run into Waterloo. If the TfL found it convenient they could avoid the main line trains arriving from Richmond and Wimbledon from stopping at those two stations so that all the trains could have a clear run into Waterloo.That would increase average speeds to help improve the service.
9)- The Northern Lines: The planned extension from Kennington to Battersea Power Station has been constructed. The question remains if it stays as it is or is extended from there to Clapham Junct. or elsewhere. Until their ideas are clearer at TfL I cannot comment.
There has been a lot of talk over the years about dividing the Northern Line into two different ones.The main proposal so far is,for one branch to go from Edgware to Battersea Power Station via Charing Cross, while the other would be from High Barnet and Mill Hill East to Morden via Bank.One of the obstacles is the bottleneck at Camden Town which will be very difficult to remodel. One branch could be called the Northern West Line while the other the Northern East line. This maintains some continuity with the the original line but distinguishing between them.Names which would be easy to assimilate.
There is one branch whose existence is in question. Originally the branch from Finchley Central to Mill Hill East was meant to continue northwards but the green belt and the Second World War put a stop to it. Also it was not a priority so was put on a backburner where it has remained, forgotten. The idea has interest so could be brought back in one form. Double the track and extend the route from Mill Hill East along its original designation to Mill Hill Broadway (connecting to Thameslink and East Midland services), then continue to Edgware (Northern line - western branch) and to Stanmore (Jubilee line). If it were so desired then the line could continue to Harrow & Wealdstone(Bakerloo line) - West Harrow - Rayner´s Lane (Metropolitan & Piccadilly lines) to finish at Uxbridge. This would result in a real cross London line over the northern districts.
Results: A long desired separation of the Northern line is affected.Plus a much needed cross London line through the northern suburbs is introduced. It is said that the division of the lines will mean a 25% increase in capacity, which is a lot.
10)- The Overground Lioness Line: Once we mention any Bakerloo line extension we have to look at the Overground service from Watford Junction to Euston. The Overground service is basically a cross London service to circle the capital. The Overground services terminating into Euston, therefore, have no logic. If we look at the Overground map we can see that there is just a short break between South Hampstead and Camden Rd. The distance is 2.8kms over an already existing line between the two stations but really comes down to a connection of only 800 meters on lines which already exist. It does not suppose any new construction so can be accomodated very easily. From there the Watford line(Lioness) can be connected, in two stops, to the Windrush line at Highbury & Islington from which services can be forwarded on to Surrey Quays to Clapham Junction or New Cross,or alternatively on to New Cross Gate,and either Crystal Palace,or West Croydon.
These Overground Lioness services from Watford Junction, being diverted along the line through Camden Road and Highbury & Islington will only mean the loss of Euston
as a station. That is beneficial as it will free up much needed
platform space and can be easily covered by the services on the Bakerloo line plus the improved services on Crossrail 3.
Results: The most important aspect of this change is for 2 platforms (at least)to be freed up at Euston for other services. Passengers who need to enter Central London can use either the Bakerloo line to the West End or Crossrail 3 which will take them down to the City. The Lioness line will join the Windrush line to take passengers to the East End and south of the river. Thus a wide selection of destinations is offered for travellers along the upper part of the line between Watford Junct. and Queen´s Park There is very little cost to put this operation into practice as no new construction is needed.
Laying down a clear transport strategy is what London is crying out for. Up to now it has mostly been a mish mash of ideas thrown together without any overall picture. Having that picture would make planning much easier. I am sure these ideas presented here can go someway to achieving what is needed.
Nobody knows what the sytem will look like in 2050 but some people have, at least, made an attempt.
London Reconnections
----------------------------------------------------
PD:The net results for platform space is tremendous. At least 2 platforms are freed up at almost all the termini, which means a big increase in potential capacity. But for what can the sºpare platforms be used?
HS2: part of my thinking was towards the need for platforms for HS2. At the moment everything has been built around the idea of Euston being the HS terminus. I would adopt a different approach from the start by introducing competition. With the transfer of Heathrow Express, 2 platforms become available at Paddington. These could provide Great Western Railway (GWR) to run HS services from Paddington to Birmingham, and on to Stourbridge and Longbridge. At Marylebone platforms become free so that 2tph could run to Birmingham and on to Wolverhampton - 1tph going via Smethwick Galton Bridge to Wolverhampton, while the other 1tph would go through Witton and Bescot Stadium to Wolverhampton. The main number of HS trains would leave from Euston by Avanti West Coast to Liverpool, Manchester, the North West, Holyhead, Glasgow and Edinburgh, as well as Birmingham itself. You go to where the passengers are, you do not wait for them to come to you. That is the reasoning for the Chiltern Trains to go to Wolverhampton, and the GWR to go to Stourbridge and Longbridge. These companies would also provide some needed competition for West Coast which would be essential.
