R A I LT R AC K - The Railways Archive

Route characteristics
DESCRIPTION This route links south London and the South Coast to London’s
West End (at Victoria) and the City (via London Bridge). Over the busiest
section, between Clapham Junction and Balham, the route carries some 700
trains per day, making it one of the most heavily used routes in Great Britain. The
route also caters for a large leisure market, providing access to Gatwick Airport,
central London, and to the resorts of the Sussex Coast.
The core route is four track from Victoria and London Bridge until it reaches
Balcombe Tunnel where it becomes two track for much of the remainder of its
length to Brighton. Linespeed is vari a ble but predominantly 60mph within Greater
London, 90mph elsewhere, and with a short stretch of 100mph.
The West London Line (WLL) connects the West Coast Main Line, North
London Line and Great Western Main Line with the south London network. This
two-track line has a predominant linespeed of 40mph, with a short section of
60mph and flat, low-speed entry and exit junctions.
Other lines are predominantly two track, with linespeeds 60–75mph. With
the exception of the line between Hurst Green and Uckfield, the route is
electrified throughout.
MAJOR STATIONS
Gatwick Airpor t This station handles rail traffic to the UK’s second busiest
airport, at which significant growth is expected over the next ten years. A
package of SRP work has been completed, which includes lighting improvements,
and new, enhanced waiting areas and toilets. Way-finding improvements will be
made during 1999 to improve access between the station and airport terminals.
We intend to renew the customer-information system during 1999/2000. We will
also work with BAA to develop longer-term proposals to radically improve the
rail/air interchange, provide capacity for the anticipated growth and ensure a
long-term growth in rail share of this market.
London Victoria As our busiest major station, Victoria handles south London,
Kent and Sussex commuting and interurban business, as well as providing a
specialist facility for Gatwick Express. In 1999/2000 we will provide a modest
airline check-in facility in the station concourse and work with Connex to
provide automatic ticket gates for their platforms. We also intend to start station
regeneration work during 1999 and are in the process of developing new
information and ticketing facilities.
BOTTLENECK ANALYSIS
Victoria to Haywards Heath There are a number of related capacity
constraints between Victoria and Haywards Heath. A key constraint is Windmill
Bridge Junction where the four-track routes from Victoria and London Bridge
combine into one four-track railway. Other capacity constraints on this section
include limited platform availability at both Victoria and Gatwick Airport stations
due to platforms dedicated to Gatwick Express Services and station dwell times
at Clapham Junction. The number of tracks and platform availability are also
constraints at East Croydon.
Option A Retimetable to improve use and release capacity. A detailed exercise
has been carried out, showing that it would only be possible to release one
additional path on the fast lines by retimetabling while meeting existing customer
aspirations.
Option B Lengthening of existing trains and platforms to increase passengercarrying
capacity on existing services. In addition to the vehicle leasing cost
involved, this would require platform lengthening and track layout changes at
Victoria, East Croydon and Gatwick Airport and a number of other locations.
This would, however, increase ability to carry additional passengers without
running extra trains.
Option C Use of rolling stock with increased seating capacity on existing
services. This would increase ability to carry additional passengers without
running extra trains. Up to 20% additional passengers could be carried in the
peak, thereby reducing the need for additional paths or longer trains. New rolling
stock would be required to achieve this.
Option D Use of rolling stock with higher-speed and better performance
characteristics. This would facilitate better use of the available capacity. However,
it would only be of benefit if the majority of the rolling stock on the route was
replaced at the same time.
Option E Infrastructure solution to increase route capacity in the peak. In order
to avoid simply shifting the bottleneck from one location to another, capacity can
only be released through addressing a number of constraints at various points
along the route. The infrastructure enhancement involves:
• construction of a flyover at Windmill Bridge Junction (to remove down
Victoria/up London Bridge conflicts)
• additional platforms at Gatwick Airport Station
• upgrade carriage roads at Victoria and Brighton
• upgrade power supply along the route
• operational changes (reduce turnaround times for trains, and restructure the
timetable).
The combined effects of the above infrastructure work would create capacity for
up to four additional trains per hour on both fast and slow lines.
Option F Infrastructure solution to increase route capacity in the off-peak.
Again, in order to avoid simply shifting the bottleneck from one location to
another, capacity can only be released through addressing a number of
constraints at various points along the route. The infrastructure involves:
• provision of additional turnback capacity at Gatwick Airport
• provision of an additional 40mph junction between fast and slow lines near
Clapham Junction
• restructuring the timetable between Balcombe Tunnel Junction and Brighton.
This would allow an increase of six off-peak trains per hour in services from the
north terminating at Gatwick Airport and would deliver a number of customer
aspirations. In addition, action would be required on the West London Line at
the junctions of both WCML and GWML.
Our preferred long-term option would be to undertake the complete
infrastructure works required to de-bottleneck the route if there were sufficient
industry funding. Option E is chosen as it is the only solution to provide any
significant benefit in terms of capacity. However, in the shorter term, options A,
C, and D would provide significant improvement in seating capacity on the route.
West London Line The West London Line is used by a wide mix of local and
long-distance passenger and freight traffic. This section of route is bounded by
the WCML, GWML, Brighton Main Line and Channel Tunnel Routes. The entry
and exit points to the route are mainly via single-lead and flat junctions and
linespeed is low. These adjoining routes all have their own capacity constraints
and restrict timetabling flexibility. As a result, use of the available capacity is
dictated by peaks elsewhere as much as by those on the line itself, and varies
widely through the day with a single mid-day peak rather than distinct morning
and evening commuter peaks. During the busiest hours, there is little spare
capacity. There is insufficient capacity to meet PSR, contractual rights and
franchise commitments as well as local authority and developer aspirations to
open additional local stations on the line.
Option A Retimetabling to facilitate better use of the existing capacity. It is not
considered that retimetabling on the West London Line at this stage would be a
practical option, given the fact that it is a key artery linking so many routes. Any
retimetabling is likely to have a significant effect on the timetable for much of the
rest of the network.
It is recommended that no retimetabling be carried out at this stage.
However, it is planned to revisit this in conjunction with the timetabling review to
be undertaken for completion of Phase 1 of CTRL works.
Option B Relax capacity constraint over Chelsea River Bridge by increasing
linespeed. Chelsea River Bridge curr e n t ly has restricted speeds, due to its
condition and track alignment on its approaches. In addition, the signal spacing is
greater than for the rest of the line. A headway improvement of 20 seconds could
be achieved by strengthening the bridge and providing an additional signal.
Either of these would increase capacity by between one and two paths
per hour.
Option C Examine linespeed profile in an attempt to make it more unifo rm .
C u rr e n t ly, differential speeds along the route prevent effe c t i ve use of the av a i l a bl e
c a p a c i t y. An assessment has been undert a ken to determine whether the existing
p r o file can be smoothed to provide an increase in capacity. We consider it unlike ly
that increasing speeds on the line would produce a significant capacity enhancement.
H owe ve r, it would aid timetabling and perfo rmance reliability on this route.
233