Back to Home Page


Return to:


Preface   Chapter 4    Chapter 5    Chapter 7    Chapter 10-I     Chapter 10-II    Chapter 11

Diagram 1

Sections of the North Woolwich-Tottenham Hale line to be converted: North Woolwich-Silvertown, Custom House, Canning Town-Tottenham Hale. An “abandoned” section includes Silvertown tunnel. At the other end, 1.72 km to be converted would run alongside a line carrying unaffected services. It would be essential to build a wall between the rail route and the converted road to avoid a swerving road vehicle creating a ‘Selby’ accident.

Diagram 2

The drawing (page 71), has three rows, each of 17 unex­plained dots (one row is shown below as circles). Investigation reveals they are roof support columns.

The 155m long bus station will have 30 bays: 3m per bus lane (Page 13), 2m width per platform to load and unload is inadequate. Barriers are needed to avoid accidents. No width is shown for the pas­senger walkway with bi-directional flows. The plan lacks a passenger/vehicle flow chart to highlight problems. Buses will cross the walkway. The plan should have been put to the H&SE - like rail plans - for approval. Inbound buses – including articulated - will have to turn between the roof support columns.  Articulated buses will need to be in the outer lane to do so. The other rows (not shown above) are expected to be on platforms. Which may have to be wider than 3m to allow pas­sengers to pass by columns meaning less than 30 platforms. Unexplained boxes in the drawing are bases of arches of a wall between the west and east trainsheds. (See photograph. The narrow gaps between columns are also illustrated in Liverpool Street Station by Robert Thorne & Railway Stations of Britain by Geoffrey Body).

Diagram 3

In the chart below, a bar represents 125 drivers required for the hours shown. It provides, in round numbers for 500 during peaks, and half that outside peaks for a service half as frequent. In mid-shift, drivers require a legal break. To move, park or operate their buses may require more drivers. Without a timetable, it is not possible to calculate manpower precisely. Based on the Hall/Smith approach, over 1,000 would be required, (see below), Mondays to Fridays, rather than the 650 postulated. A further 99 are required (see page 136), an increase of about 450. This excludes Saturdays, holidays, sickness, etc. Drivers scheduled to an 8-hour shift will not drive for 8 hours. When a driver picks up a bus from the park, time is occupied in checks on a vehicle’s readiness for work. Shifts starting and ending at 01.00 will be very unpopular, but to cover existing service times would be unavoidable. These manpower levels may be reduced if split shifts are accepted, but a penalty payment is often made for the period between peaks. On this long route, they are unlikely to have time to go home. Whether there would be sufficient spare time in the off-peak to cover ferrying to/from Ilford can only be established by duty rosters.



Diagram 4

Prosperous Railway Companies bought land outside the formation area in case some required later for building stations, or laying sidings. At the location of bridges, viaducts & tunnels, the widt reduced to that of the formation plus cess about 3 feet either side. This width was significantly less than that claimed by Brig Lloyd (see Chapter4).

Diagram 5

From Liverpool St. to Brentwood, 20 crossovers link east to west side tracks. Removal of their OLE would cause costly delays, and could not be done during the changeover week. It is not a matter of cutting wires, which would electrocute the cowboy who did it, and stop trains on west side tracks in a tangle of wire, due to cross runs of wire.

Four-track gantries (see photo), could not be removed while trains still used the two tracks to Brentwood. They would have to be replaced by new 2-track gantries, requiring changes to the con­trol systems of OLE and electricity distribution. The OLE would have to be re-designed involving preparation of drawings. Labour would be required to implement the changes. Speed restrictions would be imposed on all trains whilst alterations took place,  causing more delays and creating a passenger time debit. No allowance has been made for these potentially heavy costs.

A simplified diagram shows the flyover and tracks relevant to the removal plan. It does not show all 20 crossovers which will have an OLE changeover problem. Had the Study included all track diagrams and OLE structures, these crucial defects in the changeover plan would have been seen.

Diagram 6

Rail route is to be abandoned, (see below). Traffic will leave the route at Brentwood to go on the A12 via a new link road*, which will cause delay during con­struc­tion of a huge roundabout/underpass. No time loss is debited. It may take a year. Building can be part done in advance, but a flyover at the railway end must be done in the 2nd weekend. The road to Shenfield/Southend from Brentwood will be slewed onto new ‘uncompacted’ ground. At Chelmsford traffic will re-join the forma­tion for a short distance from existing roads, exit to exist­ing roads to go to Col­chester. At both, major construction is required to connect existing roads to the rail formation. Neither can be done until the sec­ond week­end, as trains will run until then. Between  Brentwood and Col­chester are Ingatestone, Hatfield Peverel, Witham, Kelvedon and Marks Tey, to be served off the A12, via local roads. Abandonment abolishes five level crossings which would be incon­venient flat junctions, and avoids other problems, (see page 146). These diversions onto existing roads must increase accidents and slow traffic, but no financial debit is admitted for either.

*The capacity for this traffic is disputed, (see Chapter 10-II). Up to 65% of the distance will be on existing roads!

Until the Brentwood-Southend line is converted, 137 buses, in each direction, will use existing roads in the peak, plus other off-peak. This task is to take two months, (Page 91).

Diagram 7

The requirements for motorways and railways are depicted in a diagram (see below). The outer box represents the land width and bridge height required for a three-lane motorway; the larger hatched box that required for a four-track railway; the smaller hatched box for a double-track railway. The space between would take a further three-track railway. It will be seen that the width required for a three lane motorway is wide enough for three main lines!

Diagram 8

Illustrates the disparity in headways




Top of Page