Kensal Crossrail Station/North Pole Depot
E27002
civilization (Reno). On page 8 is an item discussing the possibility
of a Crossrail Station in the Kensal/Old Oak Common area. This, in
itself, is not a great idea IMHO.
However, the column goes on to say that this locale, including the no-
longer-used Eurostar depot at North Pole is a "regeneration site".
Apart from this area's future transport utility, i.e. a possible HS2
link, surely it is crazy to dispose of an almost new train depot.
Could North Pole find a new life as the depot for the coming GW ML
electric trains, or as home for HS2's rolling stock?
Paul Scott
"E27002" <e27...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b6e192f9-b1a6-4655...@m33g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
> Yesterday, Modern Railways (November) reached this distant outpost of
> civilization (Reno). On page 8 is an item discussing the possibility
> of a Crossrail Station in the Kensal/Old Oak Common area. This, in
> itself, is not a great idea IMHO.
Were you aware that about 10 empty trains per hour have to be turned round
at the planned Westbourne Park 'dummy station' under the current plans?
Apparently this 'turnback facility' is planned to include 3 or 4 basic
platforms and provision for dealing with passengers in an emergency anyway.
Expanding that to an operational station shouldn't be too difficult, and it
also answers a big question about the unbalanced nature of the east and west
ends of the network.
> However, the column goes on to say that this locale, including the no-
> longer-used Eurostar depot at North Pole is a "regeneration site".
> Apart from this area's future transport utility, i.e. a possible HS2
> link, surely it is crazy to dispose of an almost new train depot.
I don't think that being in a 'regeneration site' necessarily implies that
the depot would be demolished. Regeneration in its broadest terms would
include reactivating the depot and recreating the jobs that were transferred
away with Eurostar, IYSWIM. Building the new Crossrail depot at Old Oak
Common might also count as regeneration.
> Could North Pole find a new life as the depot for the coming GW ML
> electric trains, or as home for HS2's rolling stock?
Probably the former I should imagine, if only because it is the project
likely to happen at the earliest, by quite a few years.
Paul S
D7666
wrote:
> > Could North Pole find a new life as the depot for the coming GW ML
> > electric trains, or as home for HS2's rolling stock?
> Probably the former I should imagine, if only because it is the project
> likely to happen at the earliest, by quite a few years.
But if I were the operator I'd not want my depot at the inner London
end for either the intercity or suburban operation.
BR made this mistake the last time for BedPan by placing its depot at
Cricklewood. Yes CW (as a depot) was closed because of Thameslink, but
when extra depot facilities were needed, it made more sense to build
new at the end of the route at Cauldwell and not re-open CW - which
was vacant at the time ((CW depot building has long had non rail use -
but not continuous use - it was vacant around the time Cauldwell was
announced)).
Depots are better off ''out in the sticks'' as that is by far the best
place to berth and hence maintain anything that has any kind of London
flow. This is why what is now Chiltern built at Aylesbury, SWT at
Salisbury, LM at Northampton, WC at Manchester, and so on. Even the
bulk of C2C stabling is not East Ham but Shoeburyness.
Reading is just about OK for Thames Valley EMU but no closer. IEP need
to be Bristol and/or Cardiff/Swansea.
--
Nick
David Randles
wrote:
Earlier this year Agility Trains (Hitachi et al) announced that the
proposed new maintenance centres for the IEP would be at North Pole
(part of site only), Reading and Bristol Parkway. These are in
addition to several upgraded existing facilities (undisclosed). Of
course this predated the GWML electrification announcement, so it
could all change
http://www.agilitytrains.com/assets/pdf/Agility_Trains_IEP_Preferred_Bidder_Announcement.pdf.
David
D7666
> Earlier this year Agility Trains (Hitachi et al) announced that the
> proposed new maintenance centres for the IEP would be at North Pole
> (part of site only), Reading and Bristol Parkway. These are in
> addition to several upgraded existing facilities (undisclosed). Of
> course this predated the GWML electrification announcement, so it
> could all change
>
> http://www.agilitytrains.com/assets/pdf/Agility_Trains_IEP_Preferred_....
And of course no IEP has actually been ordered yet has it ???
Agility/Htchi is merely the prefered bidder.
--
Nick
Basil Jet
>
> Depots are better off ''out in the sticks'' as that is by far the best
> place to berth and hence maintain anything that has any kind of London
> flow. This is why what is now Chiltern built at Aylesbury, SWT at
> Salisbury, LM at Northampton, WC at Manchester, and so on. Even the
> bulk of C2C stabling is not East Ham but Shoeburyness.
>
> Reading is just about OK for Thames Valley EMU but no closer. IEP need
> to be Bristol and/or Cardiff/Swansea.
Wouldn't manpower costs be lower if you maintained the trains in London
between the peaks, instead of in the sticks overnight?
--
We are the Strasbourg. Referendum is futile.
D7666
<jo...@journeyflow.spamspam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Wouldn't manpower costs be lower if you maintained the trains in London
> between the peaks, instead of in the sticks overnight?
Explain then why every type if long distance stock on London radial
lines is maintained at the country end, and most outer suburban stock
is too. Your Wimbledons Selhurtst SladeGreens etc are largely inner
suburban stock depots. Yes these depots do stable main line units
(but stabling / cleaning only) and yes they have heavy repair shops,
but the work in those repair shops is not stuff that can be done
betwene peaks or overnight anyway, ususally units involved are stopped
for several days, thus its irrelevant from a traffic point of view
where the depot is.
Or are you saying they are all those TOC are wrong with London
services rolling stock based in Plymouth Bristol Norwich Manchester
Leeds Edinburgh Northampton Aylsebury Salisbury Ramsgate Brighton
Southampton. Apart from former ER operations at Hornsey Ilford and
East Ham, and they are all legacy BR depots, just about every TOC has
its main line depots away from London.
Perhaps there are reasons for this :o)
--
Nick
MIG
Before the 321s replaced everything with a common fleet based at
Ilford, the longer distance stuff was maintained at Clacton, wasn't it?
Peter Masson
"Basil Jet" <jo...@journeyflow.spamspam.demon.co.uk> wrote
>
> Wouldn't manpower costs be lower if you maintained the trains in London
> between the peaks, instead of in the sticks overnight?
>
You only have half a shift between the peaks, but presumably will have to
pay the depot staff for a full-time job. Overnight you can get a full shift.
Peter
Zen83237
"D7666" <d7...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3963867c-fbf9-42df...@v25g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...
> > Could North Pole find a new life as the depot for the coming GW ML
> > electric trains, or as home for HS2's rolling stock?
> Probably the former I should imagine, if only because it is the project
> likely to happen at the earliest, by quite a few years.
But if I were the operator I'd not want my depot at the inner London
end for either the intercity or suburban operation.
BR made this mistake the last time for BedPan by placing its depot at
Cricklewood. Yes CW (as a depot) was closed because of Thameslink, but
when extra depot facilities were needed, it made more sense to build
new at the end of the route at Cauldwell and not re-open CW - which
was vacant at the time ((CW depot building has long had non rail use -
but not continuous use - it was vacant around the time Cauldwell was
announced)).
Depots are better off ''out in the sticks'' as that is by far the best
place to berth and hence maintain anything that has any kind of London
flow. This is why what is now Chiltern built at Aylesbury, SWT at
Salisbury, LM at Northampton,
And previously of course at Bletchley so hardly a drastic move and
presumably Aylesbury was built to free up very valuable land at Marylebone
and surely built by Network SE not Chiltern Trains.
Kevin
Bruce
wrote:
>
>Depots are better off ''out in the sticks'' as that is by far the best
>place to berth and hence maintain anything that has any kind of London
>flow. This is why what is now Chiltern built at Aylesbury, SWT at
>Salisbury, LM at Northampton,
>
>And previously of course at Bletchley so hardly a drastic move and
>presumably Aylesbury was built to free up very valuable land at Marylebone
>and surely built by Network SE not Chiltern Trains.
Yes, the present Aylesbury depot was constructed in Network SouthEast
days as part of the so-called "Total Route Modernisation" of the
Chiltern lines.
DW downunder
--
Nick
>>>>>>>>>>>>
And the traffic flows for IEPs are different than for commuter/outer
suburban services; so having facilities close to the London termini will be
useful for first turn down trains, and late returning up trains.
DW downunder