Elizabeth line full service timetable

[silverfoxcc]

Is there anyone on here ITK who could give a good indication on frequency of trains when fully working, from Twyford to Stratford, or will a change be reqd?


TIA

 

[Benjwri]

Is there anyone on here ITK who could give a good indication on frequency of trains when fully working, from Twyford to Stratford, or will a change be reqd?


TIA

When through running starts all trains from Reading and Heathrow will terminate at Abbey Wood. Therefore you’ll have to change somewhere in the central section, as all trains through Stratford will terminate at Paddington.

Reading trains will remain as they are now, 4tph on peak, 2tph off peak.

Once the full final timetable commences the frequency of trains will be the same, but it’s not known if some will continue towards Shenfield.

 

[55002]

Wasn’t it sold as being able to travel from Reading in west through to Shenfield in east. If you have to change, that claim isn’t strictly true. Pedantic I know.

 

[Benjwri]

Wasn’t it sold as being able to travel from Reading in west through to Shenfield in east. If you have to change, that claim isn’t strictly true. Pedantic I know.

Not too sure it was directly ever sold as that, but the next timetable is not the final 24tph one, and as I understand it there are still ambitions to run Reading to Shenfield, or at least Maidenhead to Shenfield services in the full 24tph timetable.

 

[matt_world2004]

Even if there was full reading to Shenfield services. They are going to be so infrequent that in most circumstances it's still going to be quicker to change at paddington than waiting for a Shenfield train. The change at paddington is going to be very convenient, get off the train and wait 2 minutes on the platform for an empty Shenfield train.

 

[swt_passenger]

I’ve been reading articles and official consultations about this for many years, and I‘m with Matt above, I don’t believe a regular Reading - Shenfield through service has ever been planned.

One problem with researching this though, is that even the latest track access application, (linked in the main Crossrail discussion last month), doesn’t explain how services are linked through the core. They apply to NR for separate paths between Shenfield and Pudding Mill portal, and between Reading/Maidenhead/Heathrow and Westbourne Park.

The track access application was linked in this post, just over a fortnight ago:

Crossrail - operating discussion and opening day 24th May

They won’t, the track access consultation has been published for the final running at 24tph, only the Heathrow services have the scope to stop at Acton or West Ealing. Where is the track access consultation? I found one for 2014 but not a recent one

www.railforums.co.uk

In answer to the OP that was probably the last discussion about the possible 22 and 24 tph timetables.

 

[Gathursty]

I assumed that given there are two end points either side of London (Heathrow/Reading and Shenfield/Abbey Wood) that there would be a similar number of trains doing the 4 combinations (H-S, H-AW, R-S, R-AW). If this is not the case, then I am a bit speechless tbh.

 

[silverfoxcc]

What saddens me is that despite all the bells whistles overspending late delivery and associated Hooha That there the frequency from Reading will be no better or faster than at present
Luckily Maidenhead is just about equidistant as Twtord aand may? be a little bit cheaper
I can see the fares page coming up with lots of options on getting the best value Travelcard Oyster. oyster and contactless once you hit the Zones etc

So can i put forward a Maidenhead to Northumberrland Park routing?

I think a lot of people have been hoodwinked by the 24 trains ph, claim which seems to be Padd to Liv St or just beyond, Whitecchapel?
I must admit i thought turning up at Tyford znd waith no more then 10 mins was going to be the norm

 

[JonathanH]

So can i put forward a Maidenhead to Northumberrland Park routing?

No, the junction is in the wrong place at Stratford and the frequency is needed on the Shenfield route in any case.

What saddens me is that despite all the bells whistles overspending late delivery and associated Hooha That there the frequency from Reading will be no better or faster than at present

The frequency of trains in West London is significantly more than it was before the work. The length of the trains serving the local stations between Reading and London is significantly more.

I think a lot of people have been hoodwinked by the 24 trains ph, claim which seems to be Padd to Liv St or just beyond, Whitecchapel?
I must admit i thought turning up at Tyford znd waith no more then 10 mins was going to be the norm

No one should ever have imagined trains every ten minutes from Twyford but it is likely from Maidenhead. Clearly with separate branches on the route on both sides it can only be 24tph between Paddington and Whitechapel.

 

[matt_world2004]

I assumed that given there are two end points either side of London (Heathrow/Reading and Shenfield/Abbey Wood) that there would be a similar number of trains doing the 4 combinations (H-S, H-AW, R-S, R-AW). If this is not the case, then I am a bit speechless tbh.

That would be quite inconvenient to the passengers . And no quicker journey times . The best journey times and reliability is going to be achieved by having all GWML trains terminating at abbey wood and all great eastern trains terminating at paddington .

Either that or all 24 tph going to either reading or Heathrow which was never going to happen

 

[swt_passenger]

I assumed that given there are two end points either side of London (Heathrow/Reading and Shenfield/Abbey Wood) that there would be a similar number of trains doing the 4 combinations (H-S, H-AW, R-S, R-AW). If this is not the case, then I am a bit speechless tbh.

For a system with 2 branches at each end with four possible route combinations you cannot have a standard interval service on all four branches, and cannot have alternating destinations in both directions through the common or core part of the network..

If you simplify the question based on just a 15 min interval in the core, you end up with 2 branches with a 30 min interval at one end, and 15/45 min intervals on the branches at the other end. Then increasing the overall frequency always leaves the services unbalanced at one end. (We’ve had this discussion before somewhere, I think it was about TPE, but the issues are exactly the same whatever the example.)

 

[Benjwri]

What saddens me is that despite all the bells whistles overspending late delivery and associated Hooha That there the frequency from Reading will be no better or faster than at present

It is actually worse than this, when full running starts anyone travelling to Hayes or Ealing from Reading /Twyford will be worse off than at present, as GWR will stop calling there

 

[Starmill]

For a system with 2 branches at each end with four possible route combinations you cannot have a standard interval service on all four branches, and cannot have alternating destinations in both directions through the common or core part of the network..

If you simplify the question based on just a 15 min interval in the core, you end up with 2 branches with a 30 min interval at one end, and 15/45 min intervals on the branches at the other end. Then increasing the overall frequency always leaves the services unbalanced at one end. (We’ve had this discussion before somewhere, I think it was about TPE, but the issues are exactly the same whatever the example.)

Well put.

In any case, hasn't it been established from the outset that the GWML Relief lines between Westbourne Park and either Heathrow Airport or Reading couldn't ever support the volume of trains anticipated to run between Liverpool Street (Crossrail) and Paddington (Crossrail)? As such large numbers of trains will turn back there for the foreseeable future, and the service will always appear "unbalanced" in this way.

 

[swt_passenger]

Well put.

In any case, hasn't it been established from the outset that the GWML Relief lines between Westbourne Park and either Heathrow Airport or Reading couldn't ever support the volume of trains anticipated to run between Liverpool Street (Crossrail) and Paddington (Crossrail)? As such large numbers of trains will turn back there for the foreseeable future, and the service will always appear "unbalanced" in this way.

Yes, I think it’s all a bit late to be discussing this, but it’s hopefully not a surprise to anyone who’s been following discussions here for the last so many years…

 

[Starmill]

It is actually worse than this, when full running starts anyone travelling to Hayes or Ealing from Reading /Twyford will be worse off than at present, as GWR will stop calling there

The BCR for the "express" option was slightly higher than the "all stations" (or as close as possible) option chosen. However more of the benefits fell to the Home Counties and fewer in London. As a result of the London elements of the funding, the slightly less good value for money option was progressed. But these ships sailed some 15 or more years ago now.

 

[matt_world2004]

It is actually worse than this, when full running starts anyone travelling to Hayes or Ealing from Reading /Twyford will be worse off than at present, as GWR will stop calling there

No they won't. There are no plans for GwR to reduce its frequency any further at these stations

 

[Benjwri]

No they won't. There are no plans for GwR to reduce its frequency any further at these stations

Yes, GWR has a track access consultation to run trains fast after Slough, and therefore the olt direct services from Reading to these stations will be via the Elizabeth Line.

 

[matt_world2004]

Yes, GWR has a track access consultation to run trains fast after Slough, and therefore the olt direct services from Reading to these stations will be via the Elizabeth Line.

Isn't that the current peak time service though. Currently during peak GwR does not stop at Ealing, Hayes and Southall

 

[Benjwri]

Isn't that the current peak time service though. Currently during peak GwR does not stop at Ealing, Hayes and Southall

Yes, however as XR run a 4tph service at peak times, the peak time service won’t be affected, but the off peak service loses 2tph.

 

[matt_world2004]

Yes, however as XR run a 4tph service at peak times, the peak time service won’t be affected, but the off peak service loses 2tph.

But my understanding is even with this track access consultation. GwR will still be calling at the intermediate stations in the off peak. The track access consultation is about which lines the peak trains run on

If there was a plan to remove the off peak GwR stoppers it would have happened in 2019 especially as GwR did not have enough staff to run the service. And MTR did

 

[Benjwri]

But my understanding is even with this track access consultation. GwR will still be calling at the intermediate stations in the off peak. The track access consultation is about which lines the peak trains run on

The track access consultation shows the amount of trains and what routes they can run on. It does not include the provision for any GWR trains to run on the relief lines past Slough.

 

[Horizon22]

For a system with 2 branches at each end with four possible route combinations you cannot have a standard interval service on all four branches, and cannot have alternating destinations in both directions through the common or core part of the network..

If you simplify the question based on just a 15 min interval in the core, you end up with 2 branches with a 30 min interval at one end, and 15/45 min intervals on the branches at the other end. Then increasing the overall frequency always leaves the services unbalanced at one end. (We’ve had this discussion before somewhere, I think it was about TPE, but the issues are exactly the same whatever the example.)

The idea is ultimately a max (peak) of 24tph Paddington - Whitechapel

The easiest way to do this is 12tph Shenfield - Paddington & 12tph Abbey Wood - Heathrow/Reading. You could theoretically swap some of the Paddington & Heathrow / Reading terminators around from either end, but it would only be a few tph ultimately.

A change from Western <> Eastern destinations will most of the day likely be required, but it's going to be the easiest change; get off in the core section, wait a few minutes at the same platform, get back on a train.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I assumed that given there are two end points either side of London (Heathrow/Reading and Shenfield/Abbey Wood) that there would be a similar number of trains doing the 4 combinations (H-S, H-AW, R-S, R-AW). If this is not the case, then I am a bit speechless tbh.

Quite so. I read that all ex Shenfields will terminate at Paddington, which, if is the case, is appalling.

 

[londonteacher]

Quite so. I read that all ex Shenfields will terminate at Paddington, which, if is the case, is appalling.

It really is not appalling - quite an overreaction. Delays on the eastern branch would affect the western if through running occurred and the opposite way also. Therefore Abbey Wood services continuing on to the western minimises risks and delays as it is contained.

 

[XAM2175]

Quite so. I read that all ex Shenfields will terminate at Paddington, which, if is the case, is appalling.

Jesus, some of this moaning really is pathetic. It's a same-platform interchange!

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Jesus, some of this moaning really is pathetic. It's a same-platform interchange!

I appreciate both your point and your desire to critique every post I make, but when Crossrail was heavily promoted as something that would boost connectivity between East and West, you’d surely expect them to run direct services from East to West at least.

 

[XAM2175]

I appreciate both your point and your desire to critique every post I make, but when Crossrail was heavily promoted as something that would boost connectivity between East and West, you’d surely expect them to run direct services from East to West at least.

Surely it can be said that it is hugely boosting east-west connectivity, no? Shenfield-end passengers will have direct access past Liverpool Street to Paddington, and Western-end passengers will have direct access past Paddington to Liverpool Street - both of which are significant improvements over the pre-Crossrail arrangements. The relatively-small proportion (IIRC) of passengers who wish to from the Western branches on to the Shenfield branch and vice-versa will, granted, not be able to enjoy a single-seat journey but will be able to 'drop back' to a suitable following service by simply waiting for a few minutes on a comfortably enclosed and spacious platform. Maybe it's not perfect, but it's pretty bloody good.

And on a point of honour: anybody taking such an opinion on this as you did was going to get my critique - on that front I am almost entirely author-agnostic. There are even, in fact, a handful of your posts with which I find myself in complete agreement! Just bad timing for you this time around

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Surely it can be said that it is hugely boosting east-west connectivity, no? Shenfield-end passengers will have direct access past Liverpool Street to Paddington, and Western-end passengers will have direct access past Paddington to Liverpool Street - both of which are significant improvements over the pre-Crossrail arrangements. The relatively-small proportion (IIRC) of passengers who wish to from the Western branches on to the Shenfield branch and vice-versa will, granted, not be able to enjoy a single-seat journey but will be able to 'drop back' to a suitable following service by simply waiting for a few minutes on a comfortably enclosed and spacious platform. Maybe it's not perfect, but it's pretty bloody good.

I just think that Stratford as such a major interchange hub would benefit greatly from direct trains to Heathrow, but I suppose you’re right in saying that a simple change wouldn’t be the end of the world.

And on a point of honour: anybody taking such an opinion on this as you did was going to get my critique - on that front I am almost entirely author-agnostic. There are even, in fact, a handful of your posts with which I find myself in complete agreement! Just bad timing for you this time around

Ahh, well, I can put my pride aside for now then

 

[matt_world2004]

I appreciate both your point and your desire to critique every post I make, but when Crossrail was heavily promoted as something that would boost connectivity between East and West, you’d surely expect them to run direct services from East to West at least.

If the trains ran to a mixture of Shenfield and abbey wood it from the west it would provide everyone with a slower than average journey. The interchange penalty at paddington for trains to Shenfield is going to be an average of 2.5 minutes and few people are going to be making that journey

 

[DanNCL]

It really isn’t the end of the world if Stratford doesn’t have direct trains to Heathrow. Through running from Shenfield to Paddington on its own will massively improve the Stratford to Heathrow journey compared to what it is now where the journey with the fewest changes is via the Underground.

Abbey Wood to Heathrow was never a surprise as it was always known there was a desire for direct trains to Heathrow from Canary Wharf. Abbey Wood to Reading is a bit more surprising but operationally it makes more sense than the original plan to run Reading trains from Shenfield.