Crossrail/Elizabeth Line. From construction to operation - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[eightf48544]

Nice trains though, and TfL^» (Transport for London - about) have given Taplow a much enhanced service, as well as an improved station environment and ever friendly staff!

Agree with Taplowgreen the station looks good although it would be better still with the old footbridge in place. However it would mean no lift from the South Car Park.

The train service seems pretty reliable Three Up stoppers is an hours gardening.

Just a thought  now that the line is likely to be less well used in the central section when it opens it might it be time to add toilets to the 345s whislt many units are spare and could be run though the works .

One disabled two ordinary in a nine car.  Lose < 100 capacity out ot 1500.

[broadgage]

Agree, IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion) ALL new trains should have toilets.
Allowance needs to be made not just for the normal and foreseeable needs of passengers, but also for the inevitable strandings and breakdowns.
Remember the Lewisham debacle and the appalling conditions resulting.
Consider also the inevitable use of trains on longer routes than for which they were originally intended.

[Surrey 455]

Just a thought  now that the line is likely to be less well used in the central section when it opens it might it be time to add toilets to the 345s whislt many units are spare and could be run though the works .

One disabled two ordinary in a nine car.  Lose < 100 capacity out ot 1500.

I'm struggling to visualise how this could lead to the loss up to 100 sitting / standing passengers.

[Surrey 455]

From newcivilengineer.com

Crossrail Ltd has confirmed that upgrade works to surface stations on the eastern and western sections of the railway will be pushed into next year due to the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic.
In a monthly update to the London Assembly, Crossrail Ltd chief executive Mark Wild said that despite recent progress at Romford, West Drayton, Ealing Broadway and Hayes & Harlington, the pandemic had interrupted progress.
?As a result of the temporary pause of Network Rail works due to Covid-19, it is likely that these enhanced stations, along with llford, Southall, Acton Main Line and West Ealing, will be completed as soon as possible in 2021,? he said.

[FremlinsMan]

Just a thought  now that the line is likely to be less well used in the central section when it opens it might it be time to add toilets to the 345s whislt many units are spare and could be run though the works .

One disabled two ordinary in a nine car.  Lose < 100 capacity out ot 1500.

I'm struggling to visualise how this could lead to the loss up to 100 sitting / standing passengers.

To provide toilets, couldn't these trains have a carriage dedicated to that purpose? No seats, just toilets. It would truly be a "honey wagon".

[stuving]

Just a thought  now that the line is likely to be less well used in the central section when it opens it might it be time to add toilets to the 345s whislt many units are spare and could be run though the works .

One disabled two ordinary in a nine car.  Lose < 100 capacity out ot 1500.

I'm struggling to visualise how this could lead to the loss up to 100 sitting / standing passengers.

You said "up to". The original said "less than". They mean the same thing, don't they (apart from exact equality, that is)?

[IndustryInsider]

Whilst a toilet retrofit would be most welcome, realistically it won?t happen.  Too costly and of course the depots would also need redesigning and expensive equipment fitted to allow for toilet waste to be tanked and disposed of.

It remains a major flaw of the trains and tarnishes the slick operation and otherwise suitable design of the trains IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion).

[TonyK]

It remains a major flaw of the trains and tarnishes the slick operation and otherwise suitable design of the trains IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion).

Nonetheless, the time most, if not all, passengers will spend on a Crossrail train is less than many will spend on a bus in somewhere like Bristol. There is no call to equip buses with toilets, and fewer bus stops than stations have facilities.

[broadgage]

IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion), toilets are a requirement even for relatively short rail routes due to the risk of stranding, breakdown or other delays.
Not comparable to buses. Passengers may alight from a delayed bus and relieve them selves, whereas on trains the policy is "keep them on board no matter what"

[TaplowGreen]

IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion), toilets are a requirement even for relatively short rail routes due to the risk of stranding, breakdown or other delays.
Not comparable to buses. Passengers may alight from a delayed bus and relieve them selves, whereas on trains the policy is "keep them on board no matter what"

.............an empty Port bottle may come in handy in these circumstances? 

[didcotdean]

The TfL^» (Transport for London - about) argument is that toilets will be available within nearly all Crossrail stations and for the others they are facilities nearby (eg for Paddington in the main line station and Bond Street in the shopping centre above). However, some people will be in more urgent need, and outside of emergencies the current low service frequencies makes breaking the journey unattractive.

[grahame]

Agree, IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion) ALL new trains should have toilets.

[snip]

Consider also the inevitable use of trains on longer routes than for which they were originally intended.

I will give you "most" but not all.  There are no toilets on class 139 trains, and I think you would be hard pressed to justify them as and when the time comes for replacements.

[Electric train]

The TfL^» (Transport for London - about) argument is that toilets will be available within nearly all Crossrail stations and for the others they are facilities nearby (eg for Paddington in the main line station and Bond Street in the shopping centre above). However, some people will be in more urgent need, and outside of emergencies the current low service frequencies makes breaking the journey unattractive.

The Elizabeth Line is a Metro service, the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) have determined that metro services do not require toilets, many other services into London do not have toilets on board trains

[1st fan]

This is an interesting article and associated research paper showing how common overruns and cost escalations are in all sectors, not just rail:

https://www.taxpayersalliance.com/cost_overruns_of_major_government_projects

Interesting indeed - I note that rail projects had by far the highest average cost escalation (page 4) and the organisation you cite have produced a lot of interesting articles on HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) as well, which dwarfs most of the others in terms of cost overrun;

https://www.taxpayersalliance.com/scrap_hs2

The taxpayers alliance is a shadowy extreme right wing lobby group whose funding is a closely guarded secret.  I am not sure how much weight I would put on any so called research they publish. 

My uncle has worked on large projects across the world. He said there's zero chance that they only realised months/weeks/days before it was due to open that it wouldn't. You have timelines, deadlines, project update meetings all of which would in any normal project indicate that there are going to be delays.

[Surrey 455]

The Elizabeth Line is a Metro service, the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) have determined that metro services do not require toilets, many other services into London do not have toilets on board trains

But SWR^» (South Western Railway - about) are correcting that with their new 701 fleet of trains that should be in service within the next year or two. Or maybe three. It's a rail project so it's bound to take longer than expected for the complete rollout.