Fortsätt till huvudinnehåll

Crossrail again


Crossrail differs from previous underground lines which have reached out into the suburbs over entirely new lines, in some cases parallel to existing main lines, or by taking over lines previously belonging to the main line operators.

Only Thameslink shares tracks with the main line operators, and this gives rise to concerns which are inherent to such a concept.

The first is delay propagation. Although Thameslink provides good connectivity, the service is unreliable. The line joins two separate networks and transfers disruption from one to the other; a delay at, say, Luton, will affect passengers at Haywards Heath, and there may be knock-on effects to other services. The long-standing and familiar problems with inter-city Cross-country are another example of such delay propagation across networks, and Crossrail can be expected to suffer from the same thing.

The second concern is the rolling stock, which is inevitably a compromise, as it must be configured primarily for inner suburban use, with seating which is acceptable for perhaps 20 minutes. This is not a trivial matter, as one of the attractions of public transport is that the time can be used productively, which is not possible if passengers have to stand or the seats are too cramped and uncomfortable to allow the use of, eg a laptop computer. Such is the discomfort of the Thameslink rolling stock that many passengers on the Brighton line prefer to go to Victoria and change rather than use a direct Thameslink train. Suitable stock for Crossrail will require wide doorways and large areas of clear floor space for circulation and standing, and so, like Thameslink, will be avoided or disliked by passengers travelling longer distances who expect to sit and get on with something during their journey.

A further drawback of Crossrail in its present form comes from lack of capacity on the GW main line; even though some freight services will be squeezed off, it will still be necessary to turn back trains at Paddington.

A possible alternative would follow the same underground alignment from Paddington to Stratford as the present Crossrail proposal, but as a tube line. At Paddington, it would link to the existing Hammersmith branch of the Metropolitan Line. The Jubilee Line terminus at Stratford (photograph), would become a through station, and Crossrail trains would then continue to Stanmore; thus the service would run from Hammersmith to Stanmore, crossing over itself at Bond Street.

This would provide much of the functionality of Crossrail at a fraction of the cost. As an independent route with no junctions, conveyor-belt reliability could be expected. It would also allow more frequent services on the Paddington to Hammersmith route, improving communications to an area of London at present poorly served by public transport due to the limited capacity of the northern arm of the Circle Line between Paddington, Baker Street and Aldgate. There would be no need for the Abbey Wood branch as passengers could go to Canary Wharf by remaining on the train as it loops back, and the DLR will soon be providing a service to Woolwich.

I have never seen such a proposal. Can somebody look at it?

Kommentarer

Populära inlägg i den här bloggen

Importing people to sustain demand

I got involved in a discussion with a Youtuber called “Philosophy all along”. This was in connection with criticism of Trump’s policy of deporting illegal migrants, which he argued would be bad for the economy as it would reduce demand. This implies that there is a need to import people to sustain demand. There is no obvious reason why a population should not be able to consume everything that the same population produces. If it can not, then something else is going on. It is a basic principle that wages are the least that workers will accept to do a job. Wages are a share of the value added by workers through their wages. The remainder is distributed as economic rent, after government has taken its cut in taxes. Monopoly profit is a temporary surplus that after a delay gets absorbed into economic rent. Land values in Silicon Valley are an example of this; it's like a gold rush. The miners get little out of it. Rent and tax syphon purchasing power away from those who produce the g...

The dreadfulness of British governance

I wrote to my MP on two entirely separate issues recently. The first was to do with the replacement for the Inter City 125 train, which at £2.6 million per vehicle, is twice as expensive as it ought to be. The second concerned the benefits of a switch from business rate and Council Tax to a tax based on site values. In both cases, the replies were full of spurious, unsubstantiated assertions and completely flawed arguments. This is typical. You will not get an iota of sense from the government on any area of public policy at all - finance, economics, trade and employment, agriculture, housing, health, transport, energy. All junk. If you write to your MP you will invariably receive answers that are an insult to your intelligence, no matter what subject you are writing about. Of course they cannot understand statistics. They are innumerate. Whitehall is staffed with idiots with a high IQ. Look at their IT projects. And mind your purse, they will have that too.

How much more will the British tolerate?

The British are phlegmatic, tolerant and slow to rouse. Thus there was no great reaction after the terrorist attack in July 2005. The murder of Lee Rigby created a sense of outrage, but nothing more, since it appeared to be an isolated incident. Two serious incidents within a fortnight are another matter. Since the first major terrorist incident in 2001, authority has tried to persuade the public that Islam is a religion of peace, that these were isolated events, or the actions of deranged "lone wolves", having nothing to do with Islam, or to reassure that the chances of being killed in a terrorist attack were infinitesimally small. These assurances are are beginning to wear thin. They no longer convince. If government does not act effectively, people will take the law into their own hands. What, however, would effective action look like? What sort of effective action would not amount to rough justice for a lot of innocent people? Given the difficulties of keeping large n...