Melbourne has had a massive project to remove level crossings - over 80 since 2016, with rebuilding of more than 50 stations. Huge impacts on rail services, safety, and urban renewal so worth exploring the benefits in SW London too.
Problem is that here in Europe- in particular in Germany and the uk - being small minded all what matters in respect to imprive rail transport. In Melbourne until 2060 124 billion will be spend on improving rail. [ in a country of 24mil) here in Hamburg they proud if 14 billion are being invested by 2050.( in a country of 85 million)
@sick9990101 those numbers getting bandied around are nonsense as they include decades of operation and maintenance costs, and we just wish we had a tenth of the rail infrastructure you Europeans already have
@@DavidShepheardmost level crossings in the UK are fine because they're usually right next to stations (as those are the hardest ones to remove, so they're the only ones that haven't been) the train has to stop at the station anyway, so it's moving quite slowly through the level crossing; the UK has far lower rail deaths than France or Germany
@KingFinnch I think @davidshepheard is right. The changes Melbourne has undertaken can be reused elsewhere. Upgraded stations and gradeseperation will improve any services that do what Melbourne has done. Imagine the communities linked again, the parks and the accessible stations.
Old oak common lane will be used by HS2 passengers too. However the problem is that Acton Wells junction needs to be quadrupled to prevent a problem with the well used freight route. Caroline.
A very informative and comprehensive summary of the West London Orbital . I live a short walk to Brent Cross West in North Cricklewood . Getting to Ealing or Brentford is long journey by tube and really getting there by bus involves the North Circular ; which is nearly always congested as you mentioned . With all this new housing it can only get worse . I have a friend in Shepherds Bush and after discovering the Overground it's a much better option even getting a bus to Kilburn or West Hampstead . When I had to get to Southall for a job it was terrible . It's a shame how long these developments take to get into service .
My favored orbital extension is the one taking the Metropolitan line, via Croxley, into Watford Junction. Most of the route already exists and all it needs is a rail flyover at Two Bridges. Several million pounds has already been spent in getting this project together, before it was pulled by Transport for London.
Great video. If the Heathrow Southern Access is ever built, I can see the WLO being extended from Hounslow up the line to Staines and then into a tunnel to the Airport stations, giving all passengers along the line an easier connection to Heathrow :)
Crossrail and the Heathrow Express already go into Heathrow Airport. But we could do with an express railway from Heathrow Airport to Gatwick Airport. And we would benefit with a radial line around South London that allowed people in South West London to go to Heathrow Airport. Given the planning restrictions on the so called "green belt" around London, we could probably have a high speed radial line around London and put in some railway junctions that can move fast trains onto other railway lines that come back into London. So a high speed line that goes out a bit would probably be easier to build, while a route that came into the inhabited areas would probably be better for London Overground use. In theory, an "M25 style" London Orbital railway, could take high speed trains between Heathrow, Gatwick, Luton and Stanstead Airports and also be used to do things like connect up HS1 to a high speed line to Wales and Cornwall. It's possible that it would make more sense to bring London Overground trains through Heathrow and on to Clapham Junction. But if Crossrail is extended out of the other side of Heathrow Airport and into South West London, it should probably turn away from Central London and go west to Windsor and Legoland Windsor and south to Thorpe Park, Chertsey, Woking and Guildford.
I’m not so sure, I think the plan is Waterloo to Heathrow via Clapham Junction. I think that would be more useful given the stop at Clapham whereas OOC would have faster links to Heathrow
Just watched this again a couple of times - picking up bits I'd missed - really good video! You are right to identify the level-crossings dilemma. Green Signals podcast recently highlighted the safety benefits of getting rid of them, but level-crossings do also pose a limit to the expansion of services - critically important if the aim (rightly) is to get 80% of journeys made by train and bus. Eliminating a crossing is expensive, but against the cost should be set: 1 - the value of saving lives/injuries, plus distress to drivers (which has a cost) 2 - the increased revenue from a higher level of service possible when a crossing is removed 3 - the community benefits from improved train (passenger and freight) and bus/lorry services (climate, air quality, congestion) 4 - savings to bus operators from buses no longer delayed 5 - the value of car/lorry drivers' time (long used as an argument for motorway building) Another source of money might be - if the best solution is to put the railway underground - from the land value of the current rail trace: possibly housing, but certainly industrial - or even urban farming use. Also, there are a number of level-crossings needing elimination - as you point out - so there may be economies of scale in having a 'rolling programme'. You are right that West Hampstead would - network-wise - be ideal for a Chiltern+Met station, but how about Neasden? The Met can already stop there, and if the Chiltern platforms were built between the Met/Jubilee ones and the new WLO station, that would save the cost of a walkway. And it would be a quick and easy change for Chiltern passengers to get to the West Hampstead hub. As regards extending the WLO, how about from Hounslow to Kingston, via Twickenham, where the trains would reverse? There appears to be room, east of Kingston, for a reversing siding - perhaps between the running lines, as at Rayners Lane. Also maybe Cricklewood to Mill Hill Broadway, also extending the Northern tube-line from Mill Hill East to the disused station adjacent to the southern end of the Broadway platforms, and possibly a new station where the MML crosses over the Northern tube-line Hampstead Branch - distressingly disconnected from the rest of the NW London rail network! Old Oak Common Lane, as well as giving interchange with the Elizabeth line, is also not far from North Acton in the Central line. A further interchange could be at a new 'Acton Junction' station where the Pic+District crosses over the WLO, maybe with platforms also on the Gunnersbury lines. All this could sort out Acton's rail-mess, so that you could get from any of Acton's nine stations to any other, with only one change of train! Last idea - how about joining/splitting the two services (Hounslow-W.Hamp. and Kew Bridge-Cricklewood) so that they travel the common part of their journeys together? The old Southern Railway was keen on this and used to do it at Haywards Heath in 2 minutes. The current Southern are slower - 10 minutes at Horsham - but I gather the Berlin S-Bahn can join or split in 2 minutes!
I never understood all the paranoid comments about the '15 minute town' we've had a similar concept for years before the WW2 era in most major cities, including the one I live in in the Midlands.
Same here. My suburban village is very old (its name is pre-Roman). I can get everything I need within a 15 minute walk. Shops, pubs, schools, dentists, GPs, pharmacies, dry cleaners, barbers, car mechanic, nature reserves, dairy farms, food banks, vets, IT shop, contractors e.g. carpenters and electricians, buses both towards London and elsewhere, and a train station that can get me to France in 1 change or Italy in 2 changes. The only things I'm missing: clothes shop, pool, a good gym. All of which I can get to in about 15 minutes by walking 5 minutes to the train station and getting on a train to a town 5 minutes away then walking. And it still feels and looks like a quiet suburb with lots of green space, although it is quite deprived. 15 minute cities are in no way a new concept but ever since Covid everything nice is turned into some weird conspiracy by crackpot fools.
So glad you have addressed this - I'd been hoping you would! I need to view it again to really appreciate the detail and amount of thought you've put in, but a couple of points: 1. Buses - thanks for all your usual thorough listing of existing bus links. I'm sure you are right that a few routes will lose long distance custom to the WLO, but they should make it up in local journeys connecting people to the rail line, and from the rail line to hospitals and other major destinations - as you suggest . But TfL Buses must up their game; sometimes I wonder if they are really aware they are part of the same organisation as the tube/OG lines! Better bus connection facilities are needed at a host of town centres which are at a distance from their stations - including Brentford and Hounslow. This must include publicity/wayfinding signage - just make it as easy and obvious as changing tube lines - not rocket science; bus stop siting; bus timings; ticketing (don't charge for the station-to-town-centre trip), and making sure that station staff know about bus connections. 2 Frequency - Sadiq Khan's ambition for 80% of trips to be by public transport is excellent, but needs much better frequencies in the main tube/OG/Rail/SL routes connecting centres, as well as the local buses connecting with them. How about an ambition for 8 per hour on all modes from 6am to midnight? Are there any figures for e.g passenger numbers on the OG 8tph+ sections (e.g. the NLL, the ELL) as opposed to the 4tph sections? My friends who live in 'outer' London almost all have cars as they say much if not most of their travel is to other suburban centres - which makes it ironical that most rail services are into central London: they will use rail/OG - but not if it's only a half-hourly service, as is common in south London. Thanks again for this excellent video
An excellent, comprehensive and well-presented video. My local corner of NW London featured often. This project has been talked about for decades - it is well past the time to create this important link. Developers will contribute generously to the costs involved, as they will benefit greatly over the years.
The main orbital routes in this area like the 260, 266 and 460 used to be trolleybuses. When the trolleybus network was de-electrified in the early 1960s, London Transport kept finding out that in practice, trolleybuses are a higher order of transport than buses even if they aren't on paper. A stumbling block to trolleybus replacement was that London's trolleybuses accommodated around a dozen more passengers than a Routemaster. On the scale at which London Buses operated 60 years ago, this meant that more buses were required, leading not only to a shortage of stabling space but also to a staff shortage, because LT didn't have the budget to pay crews attractive wages, which it never fully resolved until the Routemasters were replaced with one-man-operated buses. TfL is still notorious for being virtually allergic to upgrading a route to a higher order of transit: the forthcoming rollout of Irizars with tram-style bodies on the 227 is about the closest we've got since the New Addington commuter express bus became a tram. Compared with Paris, Berlin and New York, London relies heavily on bog-standard buses running in mixed traffic. Services in the missing middle between buses & heavy rail, like the Croydon Tramlink and East London Transit, are sporadic.
New platforms at West Hampstead wouldn't actually require land take south of the line. North of the line is just a Builder Depot and some disused land. • Up Metropolitan moved into short new tunnel under West End Lane immediately adjacent to Heritage Lane & Blackburn Road, serving the north side of island platform 9/10 Up Underground. • Existing platform becomes 11/12 Down Underground. • Up GCML slewed north onto road currently occupied by Down Metropolitan, with island platform 13/14 serving National Rail. The entire station would be 50 yards wide, about the same as Harrow-on-the-Hill station, and with effectively the same layout.
Interesting plans but a short new tunnel would require land in relation to construction as you would need to excavate underground, find somewhere to put it, provide an access route for trucks to come and go with sediment etc. I don’t disagree with your ideas but cost of land is a major cost when it comes to railway developments and so it’s important to factor that in when making suggestions.
Shame the cost of tunnelling is prohibitive, and the existing tracks too busy, otherwise it's only a mile or so to connect this to the Gospel Oak to Barking line, and make an entire second orbital for north London. Also not enough room to get up to the Overground line without a DLR-style gradient after West Hampstead... The extra tracks continue until just by the tunnel entrance, and there are the remains of an old station there - would it make sense as part of this plan and the O2 regeneration to put a terminus there? As part of the construction work they could even provide a link straight into Finchley Road station, as they'll be digging up the entire area between the two anyway!
All quite fascinating. Reconnecting South Acton to Acton Town by shuttle would give additional passenger flow. For a really radical suggestion, link the Piccadilly line between Acton Town and Chiswick Park to the Overground, then link it to the Brentford loop line where they cross south of the Great West Road. Then you have a Piccadilly Line spur from Heathrow to Waterloo! My final suggestion is extending the line which terminates in the ‘freight’ area by the Great West Road at Brentford, as suggested, to join the Brentford Loop. Then you have a line from Oxford to Waterloo. But no, don’t even think about another Piccadilly Line spur from Waterloo to Oxford!
Thanks for a clear & exhaustive appraisal. I see Hounslow Sta. as a weak point. Only the 281 as a bus link, and the stops are some distance away. The bridge across the station is worryingly narrow (for pedestrians!). The 3rd platform would take some serious rearranging. The only other connection is the existing H’w Loop trains. H’w town centre a tidy step away.
Technically, you wouldn't need a 3rd platform at Hounslow. You would have a similar arrangement as Gerrards Cross, where a train arriving would deposit it's passengers then move into the reversing siding before moving to the opposite platform to pick up passengers for the return journey. A similar arrangement exists for shuttle services to Marylebone, from Wembley Stadium Station, for major events. In this case, the siding is in the middle of the running lines.
Acton to Hanwell, the 607 bus would still be preferable over the train via Old Oak Common. Supposing at Old Oak they go for a people mover, that journey's actually 2 changes: first at Acton Wells onto the people mover, then at Old Oak Common to Crossrail. Now imagine they don't build a people mover.
@@somenorthlondoner : Acton Wells to Old Oak Common GWML station is over half a kilometre. This is double the distance between Paddington (Praed Street) and Paddington (Bishop's Bridge) and significantly more than the notoriously long trip to lines 4 and 12 at Paris Montparnasse. Most people would regard a journey from Ilford into Liverpool Street, then back out on the Northern line to Angel, as comprising 2 interchanges, even if it can technically be done in one by walking along the Elizabeth line platforms under Finsbury Circus. It simply cannot be regarded as an interchange if passengers are left to make the connection, although I believe a travelator would be more appropriate than a people mover given that most people are not going to be going the entire length of the complex from North Acton to the West London line. London in recent years has lost its talent for constructing respectable interchanges that gave us Mile End and Baker Street under the New Works Programme and Stockwell and Oxford Circus with the Victoria line. Even though the latter was done on the cheap, they knew not to skimp on what would later embarrass them. The Elizabeth line's only cross-platform interchange is the pre-existing one at Stratford. Whitechapel is like South Kensington if it didn't have the stairs in the middle of the island platform & to get from the District to Piccadilly line you had to go up to the ticket hall, turn around & join the escalator. Only the northbound Thameslink platform at Farringdon has escalator access down to the Elizabeth line, with the southbound platform having only lifts. Sometimes there's a queue for these lifts & I'm forced to go up to the ticket office to cross to the northbound platform.
Saying that development is needed to justify improvements to transport such as a new station reminds me of when service providers like banks & broadband companies have offers that you can only benefit from if you're not already with them.
The elephant in the room is that North East London and South East London need a number of tunnels under the Thames. And traditionally lobbyists have argued that "railway tunnels do not offer good return on investment and have argued for road crossings. We actually have a great opportunity to use the relatively poor road connectivity in East London to increase demand for railway lines that cross the Thames. Thameslink is a success and rail tunnels that are positioned far enough east would allow people in the counties around London to circumvent the need to travel into London at all. Maybe something that eventually can connect to East West Rail would be good for creating an outer ring.
Excellent work I grew up knowing most of the areas from West Hampstead & Hendon as far as Acton. Why only as far as Acton? It was difficult to get to Acton or any further
@@somenorthlondoner I was based around Harrow but spent a lot of time in Hendon, West Hendon, Cricklewood, Kilburn, Willesden & Harlesden, as well as Wembley. I knew the transport options well for these areas. Two Trains or Busses at most I had very little of interest to draw me to Acton, so never fully investigated getting there. It always looked like three Trains/Busses to get there, plus more time
@@mikehiggins4079Ah right. I suppose in your case a more robust orbital transport system would have made it easier, although by the sounds of things you didn’t need to go there all too often!
I grew up beside the Outer Circle Loop and 50 yards from the Harlesden and Stonebridge Station that was Gabs shop and the Building beside it was one side Cherrington's Coal and Classic Cars, A news agent, tobacco and sweet shop, on the other side of the station building and around the corner on Craven Road a cobblers shop.
Maybe an extension past Hendon to Elstree & Borehamwood? It' the zone 6 boundary so keeps within the oyster system. The downside is that the car park is already full to bursting and a new or larger one would be difficult. If time isn't an issue, we take 2 buses down to West Hendon. It's slightly cheaper and drops us closer to our final destination at Hendon FC.
@@somenorthlondoner Maybe further extend to St Albans and have a similar arrangement to Watford Junction, Oyster-wise? Overground could replace some of the Sutton Loop Thameslink services between there and Hendon. Those passengers wanting to go all the way to STP tend to use the fast trains from Bedford. We do so regularly from Harlington to St Albans, then on to Hendon with a bus to our destination.
I really think the line should go one stop further than Hounslow to Feltham, which would allow passengers from the SWR lines from Reading and Windsor to change onto the new line, instead of having to change once at Feltham and then again at Hounslow/Isleworth/Syon Lane/Kew Bridge.
TFL have been fairly clear that this project won’t go further than Hounslow and I imagine that’s because if they did, it would mean conflicts across flat crossings near Whitton. If it was to go past Hounslow then my bets would be on Twickenham as that has a platform that could be used for terminating and would reduce strain from rugby matches.
Excellent video. I don't why the west London orbital cannot be extended to Heathrow from Hounslow via feltham. At Heathrow it would link up with the Piccadilly and Elizabeth lines. That would be great.
There are plans for services from SW London towards Heathrow Airport when the Southern Link opens but there’s more of an emphasis on linking Clapham Junction with it which I think carries more merit than a West London Orbital extension, especially as it links up with Old Oak Common already. I think the general sentiment is there’s no extension planned west of Hounslow because it would interfere with existing Waterloo - Reading and Windsor services when crossing the flat junctions near Whitton. Plus Hounslow is already linked to Heathrow Airport by the Piccadilly Line, and South Acton/Brentford/Syon Lane aren’t a million miles from Piccadilly Line stations either.
Third rail extensions are banned by ORR and RSSB, so it makes logical sense to extend wires from Acton Central to Houslow Loop, where you would change there.
@@somenorthlondoner Yeah or a modification of that could be to do a Thameslink and have Richmond-Stratford services change power at Acton Central when head to Richmond and at South Acton when heading to Stratford a bit like how Thameslink changes at Farringdon heading south and City Thameslink heading north.
A greater benefit would be to use the Dudding Hill Line to provide access for Thameslink services from the north to access Heathrow so connecting the MML with the GWML thus reducing congestion on the NW section of the M25 and saving having to change at Farringdon for Elizabeth Line services
The line could also branch off at Neasden to wembley stadium station, although that would require more electrification. Possibility of a Chiltern metro overground?
Traditionally North London has overhead electrification while South London has third rail. Of the two overhead electrification is far better, as it can be used to power freight trains. Third rail is actually incredibly unsafe as it can instantly kill people who touch the rail. That is why the Office of Road and Rail has banned new use of third rail. The best way to manage the risk of level crossings in the UK is to remove the level crossings. removing level crossings is also going to be essential if we are going to roll-out overhead electrification, as double decker busses would not be compatible with a level crossing that has overhead electrification. If the West London Orbital has the sort of success that reopening Thameslink, converting radial lines into London Overground and opening Crossrail have had, we could see demand for bus routes that feed passengers into the stations on the West London Orbital line rise. And having additional trains per hour on a line with level crossings that cause delays to busses would mean that you have two transport modes that are blocking the other from increased frequency. So I think there is a solid business case for fixing the problem once and for all. When you combine level crossings, which allow unauthorised people (like naughty kids) to easily access the railway line and third rail you have a very high risk to intruders on the railway lines. So shutting down any and all of those level crossings has a business case benefit that can be measured in the value of saving the lives of intruders who are stupid enough to trespass on the railway line. Get rid of the level crossings and you can have a future-proof scheme for the West London Orbital, where more trains can be run on the shared track by retrofitting in the same system that the Thameslink core uses to automate trains. We would never be able to get to the "90 second railway" ambition that the Victoria Line management had in the 1960s, but if this railway gets crowded, we need to have a way forward. Given that the disfunctional London Underground system got funding for the "New Works Program" almost 100 years ago and the commuter lines in cities in the rest of the UK have not all had electrification programs or programs for cross-city lines to connect to suburban routes, I would usually argue that priority should be given to electrifying commuter lines to cities outside London that lack any sort of electrification. However, given that DC is unable to power freight trains and given that the freight carriers in the UK have to use diesel trains if there is a gap in overhead electrification, I think there is a health benefit to the people of London, if we bridge the "electrification deserts" with new bits of overhead electrification. And there is also a benefit to long-freight journeys if we can punch an electrification route from the Channel Tunnel through the third rail zone to the parts of the rail network that have the more sensible overhead electrification. The passenger railways that currently straddle both overhead electrification and third rail power systems are Thameslink, the not-very-well-served West London Line route that goes from East Croydon to Watford Junction and London Overground. If we are going to have passenger services that are only run by London Overground, it makes sense to transfer power from third rail to overhead electrification, when the electrification equipment needs to be renewed. And with the extra benefit of being able to get electrified fright trains from lines north of London to lines west of London, I'd say there is a business case for central government to put it the extra investment needed to banish a bit more of the third rail and modernise some of the West London Orbital track early.
Great video, however as someone not familiar with London it would be great to have more maps to show what you mean. Show each station on the map before talking about it, and the route of each section of track.
Very few people are going to change at Harlesden instead of Willesden Junction if they have to walk down Winchelsea Road. In-fact it's a joke not calling the station Craven Park but naming it Harlesden as though it's another West Hampstead. If I were wanting to go from Acton to Wembley Central and the first train was via Dudding Hill, I would skip it & wait for the Stratford train a few minutes after.
You say that people won’t want to undertake the walk down Winchelsea Road but it’s not exactly like the two Willesden Junction platforms in this example are next to one another! Why would you call the station Craven Park over Harlesden?
@@somenorthlondoner : Because I don't want to create another Bethnal Green. Suppose we were to promote the convenience of the connection in London to passengers travelling between Paris, Dublin and Edinburgh by calling all 3 termini that lie along that stretch of the Euston Road "London North".
@@ccityplanner1217 Both Bethnal Greens are much further apart and aren't even on the same road as each other. I'd agree that maybe they shouldn't be the same name but you could probably wave to someone from either Harlesden and they could see you 😂
Old Oak Common is not going to be a great interchange. It's not going to be the Clapham Junction of the northwest. At best it's going to be London's answer to Montparnasse, with a super-travelator connecting the different parts; at worst they won't even build a travelator and it will be more like trying to change between the different stations in central Birmingham or between Euston and King's Cross.
I did mention that. I’m not sure if there are spare paths along the GWML slows (and if there are they should be delegated to Elizabeth Line) but I think Kew Bridge is adequate terminus-wise
@@somenorthlondoner paths on the EL/GWML are not needed. The service can use the slip from the NLL and the freight tracks to Action Mainline where an extra platform and terminating track can be fitted in with little disruption to the freight. No need for paths on the GWML main or surburban lines. That is why I suggested stopping at Acton Mainline and no further where pathing on GWML would be an issue.
In fact further this could add considerable connectivity for the cost of using the north edge of the existant northerly platform at Acton main line and about a mile of extra 3rd rail electrification. On reflection ditch extra capacity to Hownslow and simply cut it back to serve referbished northerly platforms at Kew Bridge allowing interchange with SWR services, run to Acton main line as the other southerly destination and choose the higher traffic northerly terminus probably West Hampsted but I do not have the numbers, and you could have this whole project for the cost of a few miles of electrification and an extra platform edge. If it proves a sucess then you can gain momentum for extra stations and extra branches. Do not know what is stopping things. Apart from pathing issues and clean up at Kew Gardens there is little to stop the project startig tommrow other than finding a bit of diseal stock. Doing a smaller version as above could also miniminse the initial need for rolling stock which could be grown with demmand.
I think concerns are more about cost and how that would disrupt existing North London Line services and freight, especially with the GWML diversions now in full swing!
Agree - this would solve the conflict with freight - whih is really important - and, if the extra lines were either in tunnel or elevated, would solve the level-crossings problem, which - as is argued ably by David Shepheard above - has its own business case
Yeah, public transport is great, I can see a lot of expensive issues with level crossings, but you know what really struck me> London again, all the money goes to London. A few more thousand people here, a few more thousand jobs there, I know it's not your fault, but for pity's sake where is the investment further north than Birmingham, Wales? East Anglia? Millions of people with shit infrastructure. And what about transport around London, you know it get's in the way for some journeys, Channel tunnel journeys, say, a direct journey from Edinburgh or Cardiff to Paris or Brussels? Oh, I don't know. I liked your analysis, but we need a much bigger picture for the UK as a whole. And a proper balance as to where expenditure should be directed, not really moaning at you.
Fair points you make but the selling point of this project is that there infrastructure intact which will require upgrades to signalling/track and stations being built (adding extra cost obviously) but there are other projects across the UK with similar intentions to this one in improving orbital connections/eliminating radial journeys. Best one that springs to mind is Wolverhampton to Walsall which I believe is on the cards to reopen. Thats also all intact IIRC
This is all pie in the sky. Overall this proposal has a poor business case with only £2m net fare revenue and nothing has been released on this since 2017. No proposals have been made to address the effective closure of level crossings which 6 + 8 t.p.h would imply. This makes the proposal for 4 t.p.h to West Hampstead a completely crazy idea: it creates no journey time savings and drags down the business case. The walk time Old Oak Common Lane to the Elizabeth Line is 12 minutes and I have seen no proposals for an overhead walkway. There are much better ways to spend money in west London. czcams.com/video/Liq3FzrwuYw/video.html
That’s not true regarding your first argument, there has been plenty on this since 2017, it’s clearly been under serious considerations by TFL given it features on the “How We Work” page on their website alongside the DLR and Bakerloo Line extensions. There haven’t been proposals made thus far given we don’t know whether or not the project is actually going ahead. It’s in the proposed stages, so until TFL receives funding for it and goes through the consultation process and addresses hindrances that the project would face (like Acton Wells and the crossings en route) then there wouldn’t be much in the way of planning for solutions just yet. But it has been acknowledging on numerous occasions by the WLA who investigated whether or not the project would have feet to stand on, and I’m sure TFL are aware of it too. Re OOC, then create walkways? I think that’s a fairly simple solution, we’ve seen the installation in Hackney and as I said in the video, Brent Council have put forward suggestions for one between the two Neasdens. I clicked through your proposals and sure they look nice on paper but the real selling point of the WLO is the idea that no new track needs to be built, one of the more costly aspects of a railway project given all the land that needs to be sourced for them to go ahead. OOC to West Hampstead is more to address overcrowding on the NLL as it provides alternative journey pathways.
Melbourne has had a massive project to remove level crossings - over 80 since 2016, with rebuilding of more than 50 stations. Huge impacts on rail services, safety, and urban renewal so worth exploring the benefits in SW London too.
Problem is that here in Europe- in particular in Germany and the uk - being small minded all what matters in respect to imprive rail transport. In Melbourne until 2060 124 billion will be spend on improving rail. [ in a country of 24mil) here in Hamburg they proud if 14 billion are being invested by 2050.( in a country of 85 million)
@sick9990101 those numbers getting bandied around are nonsense as they include decades of operation and maintenance costs, and we just wish we had a tenth of the rail infrastructure you Europeans already have
Totally. Level crossings kill people. Getting rid of level crossings gets rid of that risk to both road users and passengers.
@@DavidShepheardmost level crossings in the UK are fine because they're usually right next to stations (as those are the hardest ones to remove, so they're the only ones that haven't been)
the train has to stop at the station anyway, so it's moving quite slowly through the level crossing; the UK has far lower rail deaths than France or Germany
@KingFinnch I think @davidshepheard is right. The changes Melbourne has undertaken can be reused elsewhere. Upgraded stations and gradeseperation will improve any services that do what Melbourne has done. Imagine the communities linked again, the parks and the accessible stations.
Old oak common lane will be used by HS2 passengers too. However the problem is that Acton Wells junction needs to be quadrupled to prevent a problem with the well used freight route. Caroline.
A very informative and comprehensive summary of the West London Orbital . I live a short walk to Brent Cross West in North Cricklewood . Getting to Ealing or Brentford is long journey by tube and really getting there by bus involves the North Circular ; which is nearly always congested as you mentioned . With all this new housing it can only get worse . I have a friend in Shepherds Bush and after discovering the Overground it's a much better option even getting a bus to Kilburn or West Hampstead . When I had to get to Southall for a job it was terrible . It's a shame how long these developments take to get into service .
Well I suppose you’ve got to find the funds somehow! But yes it is a shame how long it takes to get these things off the ground
My favored orbital extension is the one taking the Metropolitan line, via Croxley, into Watford Junction. Most of the route already exists and all it needs is a rail flyover at Two Bridges. Several million pounds has already been spent in getting this project together, before it was pulled by Transport for London.
Guess what’s coming soon on this channel…😉
I've just got contempt for Watford and its posh residents.
Great video. If the Heathrow Southern Access is ever built, I can see the WLO being extended from Hounslow up the line to Staines and then into a tunnel to the Airport stations, giving all passengers along the line an easier connection to Heathrow :)
Crossrail and the Heathrow Express already go into Heathrow Airport. But we could do with an express railway from Heathrow Airport to Gatwick Airport. And we would benefit with a radial line around South London that allowed people in South West London to go to Heathrow Airport.
Given the planning restrictions on the so called "green belt" around London, we could probably have a high speed radial line around London and put in some railway junctions that can move fast trains onto other railway lines that come back into London. So a high speed line that goes out a bit would probably be easier to build, while a route that came into the inhabited areas would probably be better for London Overground use.
In theory, an "M25 style" London Orbital railway, could take high speed trains between Heathrow, Gatwick, Luton and Stanstead Airports and also be used to do things like connect up HS1 to a high speed line to Wales and Cornwall.
It's possible that it would make more sense to bring London Overground trains through Heathrow and on to Clapham Junction. But if Crossrail is extended out of the other side of Heathrow Airport and into South West London, it should probably turn away from Central London and go west to Windsor and Legoland Windsor and south to Thorpe Park, Chertsey, Woking and Guildford.
I’m not so sure, I think the plan is Waterloo to Heathrow via Clapham Junction. I think that would be more useful given the stop at Clapham whereas OOC would have faster links to Heathrow
Just watched this again a couple of times - picking up bits I'd missed - really good video! You are right to identify the level-crossings dilemma. Green Signals podcast recently highlighted the safety benefits of getting rid of them, but level-crossings do also pose a limit to the expansion of services - critically important if the aim (rightly) is to get 80% of journeys made by train and bus. Eliminating a crossing is expensive, but against the cost should be set:
1 - the value of saving lives/injuries, plus distress to drivers (which has a cost)
2 - the increased revenue from a higher level of service possible when a crossing is removed
3 - the community benefits from improved train (passenger and freight) and bus/lorry services (climate, air quality, congestion)
4 - savings to bus operators from buses no longer delayed
5 - the value of car/lorry drivers' time (long used as an argument for motorway building)
Another source of money might be - if the best solution is to put the railway underground - from the land value of the current rail trace: possibly housing, but certainly industrial - or even urban farming use. Also, there are a number of level-crossings needing elimination - as you point out - so there may be economies of scale in having a 'rolling programme'.
You are right that West Hampstead would - network-wise - be ideal for a Chiltern+Met station, but how about Neasden? The Met can already stop there, and if the Chiltern platforms were built between the Met/Jubilee ones and the new WLO station, that would save the cost of a walkway. And it would be a quick and easy change for Chiltern passengers to get to the West Hampstead hub.
As regards extending the WLO, how about from Hounslow to Kingston, via Twickenham, where the trains would reverse? There appears to be room, east of Kingston, for a reversing siding - perhaps between the running lines, as at Rayners Lane. Also maybe Cricklewood to Mill Hill Broadway, also extending the Northern tube-line from Mill Hill East to the disused station adjacent to the southern end of the Broadway platforms, and possibly a new station where the MML crosses over the Northern tube-line Hampstead Branch - distressingly disconnected from the rest of the NW London rail network!
Old Oak Common Lane, as well as giving interchange with the Elizabeth line, is also not far from North Acton in the Central line. A further interchange could be at a new 'Acton Junction' station where the Pic+District crosses over the WLO, maybe with platforms also on the Gunnersbury lines. All this could sort out Acton's rail-mess, so that you could get from any of Acton's nine stations to any other, with only one change of train!
Last idea - how about joining/splitting the two services (Hounslow-W.Hamp. and Kew Bridge-Cricklewood) so that they travel the common part of their journeys together? The old Southern Railway was keen on this and used to do it at Haywards Heath in 2 minutes. The current Southern are slower - 10 minutes at Horsham - but I gather the Berlin S-Bahn can join or split in 2 minutes!
I never understood all the paranoid comments about the '15 minute town' we've had a similar concept for years before the WW2 era in most major cities, including the one I live in in the Midlands.
Same here. My suburban village is very old (its name is pre-Roman). I can get everything I need within a 15 minute walk. Shops, pubs, schools, dentists, GPs, pharmacies, dry cleaners, barbers, car mechanic, nature reserves, dairy farms, food banks, vets, IT shop, contractors e.g. carpenters and electricians, buses both towards London and elsewhere, and a train station that can get me to France in 1 change or Italy in 2 changes.
The only things I'm missing: clothes shop, pool, a good gym. All of which I can get to in about 15 minutes by walking 5 minutes to the train station and getting on a train to a town 5 minutes away then walking.
And it still feels and looks like a quiet suburb with lots of green space, although it is quite deprived.
15 minute cities are in no way a new concept but ever since Covid everything nice is turned into some weird conspiracy by crackpot fools.
Sydney's Metro may become like an orbital railway if planned correctly.
So glad you have addressed this - I'd been hoping you would! I need to view it again to really appreciate the detail and amount of thought you've put in, but a couple of points:
1. Buses - thanks for all your usual thorough listing of existing bus links. I'm sure you are right that a few routes will lose long distance custom to the WLO, but they should make it up in local journeys connecting people to the rail line, and from the rail line to hospitals and other major destinations - as you suggest . But TfL Buses must up their game; sometimes I wonder if they are really aware they are part of the same organisation as the tube/OG lines! Better bus connection facilities are needed at a host of town centres which are at a distance from their stations - including Brentford and Hounslow. This must include publicity/wayfinding signage - just make it as easy and obvious as changing tube lines - not rocket science; bus stop siting; bus timings; ticketing (don't charge for the station-to-town-centre trip), and making sure that station staff know about bus connections.
2 Frequency - Sadiq Khan's ambition for 80% of trips to be by public transport is excellent, but needs much better frequencies in the main tube/OG/Rail/SL routes connecting centres, as well as the local buses connecting with them. How about an ambition for 8 per hour on all modes from 6am to midnight? Are there any figures for e.g passenger numbers on the OG 8tph+ sections (e.g. the NLL, the ELL) as opposed to the 4tph sections? My friends who live in 'outer' London almost all have cars as they say much if not most of their travel is to other suburban centres - which makes it ironical that most rail services are into central London: they will use rail/OG - but not if it's only a half-hourly service, as is common in south London.
Thanks again for this excellent video
This looks like an interesting project, especially if it'll improve connectivity in the areas it'll serve!
I hope so!
Great informative video as always! The level of congestion in North West London is certainly evident so hopefully this project can help with this.
Thanks :D
An excellent, comprehensive and well-presented video. My local corner of NW London featured often. This project has been talked about for decades - it is well past the time to create this important link. Developers will contribute generously to the costs involved, as they will benefit greatly over the years.
Thanks so much! Yes I do hope so too
Brent Cross West opened with a set of platforms specifically for the WLO if it goes ahead, so they at least future proofed that
That’s good!
The main orbital routes in this area like the 260, 266 and 460 used to be trolleybuses. When the trolleybus network was de-electrified in the early 1960s, London Transport kept finding out that in practice, trolleybuses are a higher order of transport than buses even if they aren't on paper. A stumbling block to trolleybus replacement was that London's trolleybuses accommodated around a dozen more passengers than a Routemaster. On the scale at which London Buses operated 60 years ago, this meant that more buses were required, leading not only to a shortage of stabling space but also to a staff shortage, because LT didn't have the budget to pay crews attractive wages, which it never fully resolved until the Routemasters were replaced with one-man-operated buses.
TfL is still notorious for being virtually allergic to upgrading a route to a higher order of transit: the forthcoming rollout of Irizars with tram-style bodies on the 227 is about the closest we've got since the New Addington commuter express bus became a tram. Compared with Paris, Berlin and New York, London relies heavily on bog-standard buses running in mixed traffic. Services in the missing middle between buses & heavy rail, like the Croydon Tramlink and East London Transit, are sporadic.
Well researched, constructed, Informative and entertaining video. Thanks for this. Let's hope it progresses rapidly. Thank you.
Cheers :D
Good video. Long but worth the watch🙂.
Thanks a lot!
long AND worth the watch!!
New platforms at West Hampstead wouldn't actually require land take south of the line. North of the line is just a Builder Depot and some disused land.
• Up Metropolitan moved into short new tunnel under West End Lane immediately adjacent to Heritage Lane & Blackburn Road, serving the north side of island platform 9/10 Up Underground.
• Existing platform becomes 11/12 Down Underground.
• Up GCML slewed north onto road currently occupied by Down Metropolitan, with island platform 13/14 serving National Rail.
The entire station would be 50 yards wide, about the same as Harrow-on-the-Hill station, and with effectively the same layout.
Interesting plans but a short new tunnel would require land in relation to construction as you would need to excavate underground, find somewhere to put it, provide an access route for trucks to come and go with sediment etc.
I don’t disagree with your ideas but cost of land is a major cost when it comes to railway developments and so it’s important to factor that in when making suggestions.
Shame the cost of tunnelling is prohibitive, and the existing tracks too busy, otherwise it's only a mile or so to connect this to the Gospel Oak to Barking line, and make an entire second orbital for north London. Also not enough room to get up to the Overground line without a DLR-style gradient after West Hampstead...
The extra tracks continue until just by the tunnel entrance, and there are the remains of an old station there - would it make sense as part of this plan and the O2 regeneration to put a terminus there? As part of the construction work they could even provide a link straight into Finchley Road station, as they'll be digging up the entire area between the two anyway!
I think Finchley Road wouldn’t be a bad idea actually, would link into the Met and would further alleviate pressure on the NLL
Very Good. Thank you from New Zealand. 👍
Thanks a lot :)
All quite fascinating. Reconnecting South Acton to Acton Town by shuttle would give additional passenger flow. For a really radical suggestion, link the Piccadilly line between Acton Town and Chiswick Park to the Overground, then link it to the Brentford loop line where they cross south of the Great West Road. Then you have a Piccadilly Line spur from Heathrow to Waterloo! My final suggestion is extending the line which terminates in the ‘freight’ area by the Great West Road at Brentford, as suggested, to join the Brentford Loop. Then you have a line from Oxford to Waterloo. But no, don’t even think about another Piccadilly Line spur from Waterloo to Oxford!
Staggering amount of interesting information. Must have taken ages to research. Thank you
Thank you very much!
Thanks for a clear & exhaustive appraisal. I see Hounslow Sta. as a weak point. Only the 281 as a bus link, and the stops are some distance away. The bridge across the station is worryingly narrow (for pedestrians!). The 3rd platform would take some serious rearranging. The only other connection is the existing H’w Loop trains. H’w town centre a tidy step away.
Technically, you wouldn't need a 3rd platform at Hounslow. You would have a similar arrangement as Gerrards Cross, where a train arriving would deposit it's passengers then move into the reversing siding before moving to the opposite platform to pick up passengers for the return journey. A similar arrangement exists for shuttle services to Marylebone, from Wembley Stadium Station, for major events. In this case, the siding is in the middle of the running lines.
I've been asking my local MP about this exactly and still waiting on her response. The WLO would be so much help for me.
It’ll be coming soon…hopefully! :)
I think it needs the direct connections with other trains and it needs 8 trains per hour if you want people to get out of there cars
Acton to Hanwell, the 607 bus would still be preferable over the train via Old Oak Common. Supposing at Old Oak they go for a people mover, that journey's actually 2 changes: first at Acton Wells onto the people mover, then at Old Oak Common to Crossrail.
Now imagine they don't build a people mover.
I don’t see the point of a people mover for such a small journey between two stations!
@@somenorthlondoner : Acton Wells to Old Oak Common GWML station is over half a kilometre. This is double the distance between Paddington (Praed Street) and Paddington (Bishop's Bridge) and significantly more than the notoriously long trip to lines 4 and 12 at Paris Montparnasse. Most people would regard a journey from Ilford into Liverpool Street, then back out on the Northern line to Angel, as comprising 2 interchanges, even if it can technically be done in one by walking along the Elizabeth line platforms under Finsbury Circus.
It simply cannot be regarded as an interchange if passengers are left to make the connection, although I believe a travelator would be more appropriate than a people mover given that most people are not going to be going the entire length of the complex from North Acton to the West London line.
London in recent years has lost its talent for constructing respectable interchanges that gave us Mile End and Baker Street under the New Works Programme and Stockwell and Oxford Circus with the Victoria line. Even though the latter was done on the cheap, they knew not to skimp on what would later embarrass them. The Elizabeth line's only cross-platform interchange is the pre-existing one at Stratford. Whitechapel is like South Kensington if it didn't have the stairs in the middle of the island platform & to get from the District to Piccadilly line you had to go up to the ticket hall, turn around & join the escalator. Only the northbound Thameslink platform at Farringdon has escalator access down to the Elizabeth line, with the southbound platform having only lifts. Sometimes there's a queue for these lifts & I'm forced to go up to the ticket office to cross to the northbound platform.
Great video as always. I wonder what the proposal is for electrification? These lines are mix of 3rd rail, overhead, or nothing.
I discuss it at the end :)
Saying that development is needed to justify improvements to transport such as a new station reminds me of when service providers like banks & broadband companies have offers that you can only benefit from if you're not already with them.
Not entirely sure I agree with that but it’s a decent analogy regardless 😅
Great video! when it comes to the level crossings, surely we could make the project in 2 phases, with the first phase ending at harlesden?
I read somewhere that the plan is for this project to open in 2 phases when it comes to the northern spurs but not sure.
If you look at a map of the train lines in and around London the east side looks even worse for orbital travel
True. Imagine if there was a line linking Romford with Dartford. Or Barking and Abbey Wood.
The elephant in the room is that North East London and South East London need a number of tunnels under the Thames. And traditionally lobbyists have argued that "railway tunnels do not offer good return on investment and have argued for road crossings.
We actually have a great opportunity to use the relatively poor road connectivity in East London to increase demand for railway lines that cross the Thames. Thameslink is a success and rail tunnels that are positioned far enough east would allow people in the counties around London to circumvent the need to travel into London at all. Maybe something that eventually can connect to East West Rail would be good for creating an outer ring.
@@robtyman4281no need to go out of london. something like rainham to walthamstow via romford and chingford could be great.
Excellent work
I grew up knowing most of the areas from West Hampstead & Hendon as far as Acton.
Why only as far as Acton? It was difficult to get to Acton or any further
What do you mean by the last bit
@@somenorthlondoner I was based around Harrow but spent a lot of time in Hendon, West Hendon, Cricklewood, Kilburn, Willesden & Harlesden, as well as Wembley. I knew the transport options well for these areas. Two Trains or Busses at most
I had very little of interest to draw me to Acton, so never fully investigated getting there. It always looked like three Trains/Busses to get there, plus more time
@@mikehiggins4079Ah right. I suppose in your case a more robust orbital transport system would have made it easier, although by the sounds of things you didn’t need to go there all too often!
I grew up beside the Outer Circle Loop and 50 yards from the Harlesden and Stonebridge Station that was Gabs shop and the Building beside it was one side Cherrington's Coal and Classic Cars, A news agent, tobacco and sweet shop, on the other side of the station building and around the corner on Craven Road a cobblers shop.
Great to see Acton Central. Lovly station staff there.
Yeah it’s a nice station isn’t it?
Maybe an extension past Hendon to Elstree & Borehamwood? It' the zone 6 boundary so keeps within the oyster system. The downside is that the car park is already full to bursting and a new or larger one would be difficult. If time isn't an issue, we take 2 buses down to West Hendon. It's slightly cheaper and drops us closer to our final destination at Hendon FC.
Goes from 6 to 4 tracks after Hendon, so without removing Thameslinks or EMRs it wouldn’t be possible
@@somenorthlondoner Maybe further extend to St Albans and have a similar arrangement to Watford Junction, Oyster-wise? Overground could replace some of the Sutton Loop Thameslink services between there and Hendon. Those passengers wanting to go all the way to STP tend to use the fast trains from Bedford. We do so regularly from Harlington to St Albans, then on to Hendon with a bus to our destination.
Anyone notice the van go through the red light at 32:02
I really think the line should go one stop further than Hounslow to Feltham, which would allow passengers from the SWR lines from Reading and Windsor to change onto the new line, instead of having to change once at Feltham and then again at Hounslow/Isleworth/Syon Lane/Kew Bridge.
TFL have been fairly clear that this project won’t go further than Hounslow and I imagine that’s because if they did, it would mean conflicts across flat crossings near Whitton. If it was to go past Hounslow then my bets would be on Twickenham as that has a platform that could be used for terminating and would reduce strain from rugby matches.
@@somenorthlondoner Those points are 20mph too!
Excellent video. I don't why the west London orbital cannot be extended to Heathrow from Hounslow via feltham. At Heathrow it would link up with the Piccadilly and Elizabeth lines. That would be great.
I don't see why the west London orbital...
There are plans for services from SW London towards Heathrow Airport when the Southern Link opens but there’s more of an emphasis on linking Clapham Junction with it which I think carries more merit than a West London Orbital extension, especially as it links up with Old Oak Common already.
I think the general sentiment is there’s no extension planned west of Hounslow because it would interfere with existing Waterloo - Reading and Windsor services when crossing the flat junctions near Whitton.
Plus Hounslow is already linked to Heathrow Airport by the Piccadilly Line, and South Acton/Brentford/Syon Lane aren’t a million miles from Piccadilly Line stations either.
Nit from London, but I have many London videos because I'd like to visit one day, but this was a great video!!!
Thanks so much :)
Third rail extensions are banned by ORR and RSSB, so it makes logical sense to extend wires from Acton Central to Houslow Loop, where you would change there.
Yes, and power changeovers would take place at South Acton for the Richmond-Stratford services
@@somenorthlondoner Yeah or a modification of that could be to do a Thameslink and have Richmond-Stratford services change power at Acton Central when head to Richmond and at South Acton when heading to Stratford a bit like how Thameslink changes at Farringdon heading south and City Thameslink heading north.
A greater benefit would be to use the Dudding Hill Line to provide access for Thameslink services from the north to access Heathrow so connecting the MML with the GWML thus reducing congestion on the NW section of the M25 and saving having to change at Farringdon for Elizabeth Line services
No paths north of Hendon or on GWML. Would make it difficult.
The line could also branch off at Neasden to wembley stadium station, although that would require more electrification. Possibility of a Chiltern metro overground?
That was listed as a possibility in a WLA report that I saw. But there’s pathing issues on the Chiltern Main Line
@@somenorthlondonerIf capacity is an issue only use this link for events at Wembley Stadium
A very informative and thoughtful video.
Thanks!
Traditionally North London has overhead electrification while South London has third rail. Of the two overhead electrification is far better, as it can be used to power freight trains. Third rail is actually incredibly unsafe as it can instantly kill people who touch the rail. That is why the Office of Road and Rail has banned new use of third rail.
The best way to manage the risk of level crossings in the UK is to remove the level crossings. removing level crossings is also going to be essential if we are going to roll-out overhead electrification, as double decker busses would not be compatible with a level crossing that has overhead electrification. If the West London Orbital has the sort of success that reopening Thameslink, converting radial lines into London Overground and opening Crossrail have had, we could see demand for bus routes that feed passengers into the stations on the West London Orbital line rise. And having additional trains per hour on a line with level crossings that cause delays to busses would mean that you have two transport modes that are blocking the other from increased frequency. So I think there is a solid business case for fixing the problem once and for all.
When you combine level crossings, which allow unauthorised people (like naughty kids) to easily access the railway line and third rail you have a very high risk to intruders on the railway lines. So shutting down any and all of those level crossings has a business case benefit that can be measured in the value of saving the lives of intruders who are stupid enough to trespass on the railway line.
Get rid of the level crossings and you can have a future-proof scheme for the West London Orbital, where more trains can be run on the shared track by retrofitting in the same system that the Thameslink core uses to automate trains. We would never be able to get to the "90 second railway" ambition that the Victoria Line management had in the 1960s, but if this railway gets crowded, we need to have a way forward.
Given that the disfunctional London Underground system got funding for the "New Works Program" almost 100 years ago and the commuter lines in cities in the rest of the UK have not all had electrification programs or programs for cross-city lines to connect to suburban routes, I would usually argue that priority should be given to electrifying commuter lines to cities outside London that lack any sort of electrification. However, given that DC is unable to power freight trains and given that the freight carriers in the UK have to use diesel trains if there is a gap in overhead electrification, I think there is a health benefit to the people of London, if we bridge the "electrification deserts" with new bits of overhead electrification. And there is also a benefit to long-freight journeys if we can punch an electrification route from the Channel Tunnel through the third rail zone to the parts of the rail network that have the more sensible overhead electrification.
The passenger railways that currently straddle both overhead electrification and third rail power systems are Thameslink, the not-very-well-served West London Line route that goes from East Croydon to Watford Junction and London Overground. If we are going to have passenger services that are only run by London Overground, it makes sense to transfer power from third rail to overhead electrification, when the electrification equipment needs to be renewed. And with the extra benefit of being able to get electrified fright trains from lines north of London to lines west of London, I'd say there is a business case for central government to put it the extra investment needed to banish a bit more of the third rail and modernise some of the West London Orbital track early.
Double decker buses use level crossings with OHLE every day.
Great video, however as someone not familiar with London it would be great to have more maps to show what you mean. Show each station on the map before talking about it, and the route of each section of track.
I will consider that in future! Thanks your feedback!
Very few people are going to change at Harlesden instead of Willesden Junction if they have to walk down Winchelsea Road. In-fact it's a joke not calling the station Craven Park but naming it Harlesden as though it's another West Hampstead. If I were wanting to go from Acton to Wembley Central and the first train was via Dudding Hill, I would skip it & wait for the Stratford train a few minutes after.
You say that people won’t want to undertake the walk down Winchelsea Road but it’s not exactly like the two Willesden Junction platforms in this example are next to one another!
Why would you call the station Craven Park over Harlesden?
@@somenorthlondoner : Because I don't want to create another Bethnal Green.
Suppose we were to promote the convenience of the connection in London to passengers travelling between Paris, Dublin and Edinburgh by calling all 3 termini that lie along that stretch of the Euston Road "London North".
@@ccityplanner1217 Both Bethnal Greens are much further apart and aren't even on the same road as each other. I'd agree that maybe they shouldn't be the same name but you could probably wave to someone from either Harlesden and they could see you 😂
Old Oak Common is not going to be a great interchange. It's not going to be the Clapham Junction of the northwest. At best it's going to be London's answer to Montparnasse, with a super-travelator connecting the different parts; at worst they won't even build a travelator and it will be more like trying to change between the different stations in central Birmingham or between Euston and King's Cross.
lionel road should be called brenford stadium.
That I can get behind
@@somenorthlondoner thought in would be fun to build it in the shappe of a train in omage to the lionel model train company.
Kew bridge did you mention that, maybe I was sleeping, but no in any case send those trains to acton mainline to connect with the Elizabeth line
I did mention that. I’m not sure if there are spare paths along the GWML slows (and if there are they should be delegated to Elizabeth Line) but I think Kew Bridge is adequate terminus-wise
@@somenorthlondoner paths on the EL/GWML are not needed. The service can use the slip from the NLL and the freight tracks to Action Mainline where an extra platform and terminating track can be fitted in with little disruption to the freight. No need for paths on the GWML main or surburban lines. That is why I suggested stopping at Acton Mainline and no further where pathing on GWML would be an issue.
In fact further this could add considerable connectivity for the cost of using the north edge of the existant northerly platform at Acton main line and about a mile of extra 3rd rail electrification. On reflection ditch extra capacity to Hownslow and simply cut it back to serve referbished northerly platforms at Kew Bridge allowing interchange with SWR services, run to Acton main line as the other southerly destination and choose the higher traffic northerly terminus probably West Hampsted but I do not have the numbers, and you could have this whole project for the cost of a few miles of electrification and an extra platform edge. If it proves a sucess then you can gain momentum for extra stations and extra branches. Do not know what is stopping things. Apart from pathing issues and clean up at Kew Gardens there is little to stop the project startig tommrow other than finding a bit of diseal stock. Doing a smaller version as above could also miniminse the initial need for rolling stock which could be grown with demmand.
Not that complex with the superloop buses now, but orbital trains would be useful
The Superloop doesn’t really do anything in relation to most of these links
Acton could be quadrupled as the locals are used to HS2 disruption so do this sooner and then not too much of a problem. Caroline
I think concerns are more about cost and how that would disrupt existing North London Line services and freight, especially with the GWML diversions now in full swing!
Agree - this would solve the conflict with freight - whih is really important - and, if the extra lines were either in tunnel or elevated, would solve the level-crossings problem, which - as is argued ably by David Shepheard above - has its own business case
Excellent video. Well researched, scripted and narrated, but I suggest you use the "see" construction much less as it gets a bit tiresome.
Fair enough. Thanks for the compliments!
Yeah, public transport is great, I can see a lot of expensive issues with level crossings, but you know what really struck me> London again, all the money goes to London. A few more thousand people here, a few more thousand jobs there, I know it's not your fault, but for pity's sake where is the investment further north than Birmingham, Wales? East Anglia? Millions of people with shit infrastructure. And what about transport around London, you know it get's in the way for some journeys, Channel tunnel journeys, say, a direct journey from Edinburgh or Cardiff to Paris or Brussels? Oh, I don't know. I liked your analysis, but we need a much bigger picture for the UK as a whole. And a proper balance as to where expenditure should be directed, not really moaning at you.
Fair points you make but the selling point of this project is that there infrastructure intact which will require upgrades to signalling/track and stations being built (adding extra cost obviously) but there are other projects across the UK with similar intentions to this one in improving orbital connections/eliminating radial journeys. Best one that springs to mind is Wolverhampton to Walsall which I believe is on the cards to reopen. Thats also all intact IIRC
This is all pie in the sky. Overall this proposal has a poor business case with only £2m net fare revenue and nothing has been released on this since 2017. No proposals have been made to address the effective closure of level crossings which 6 + 8 t.p.h would imply. This makes the proposal for 4 t.p.h to West Hampstead a completely crazy idea: it creates no journey time savings and drags down the business case. The walk time Old Oak Common Lane to the Elizabeth Line is 12 minutes and I have seen no proposals for an overhead walkway. There are much better ways to spend money in west London. czcams.com/video/Liq3FzrwuYw/video.html
That’s not true regarding your first argument, there has been plenty on this since 2017, it’s clearly been under serious considerations by TFL given it features on the “How We Work” page on their website alongside the DLR and Bakerloo Line extensions.
There haven’t been proposals made thus far given we don’t know whether or not the project is actually going ahead. It’s in the proposed stages, so until TFL receives funding for it and goes through the consultation process and addresses hindrances that the project would face (like Acton Wells and the crossings en route) then there wouldn’t be much in the way of planning for solutions just yet. But it has been acknowledging on numerous occasions by the WLA who investigated whether or not the project would have feet to stand on, and I’m sure TFL are aware of it too.
Re OOC, then create walkways? I think that’s a fairly simple solution, we’ve seen the installation in Hackney and as I said in the video, Brent Council have put forward suggestions for one between the two Neasdens.
I clicked through your proposals and sure they look nice on paper but the real selling point of the WLO is the idea that no new track needs to be built, one of the more costly aspects of a railway project given all the land that needs to be sourced for them to go ahead.
OOC to West Hampstead is more to address overcrowding on the NLL as it provides alternative journey pathways.