Heathrow Western Access comes to a Standstill

[kevin_roche]

Continuing down to Feltham too to connect with SWR.

I think the original suggestion from the Heathrow Southern Railway was for the Crossrail trains to Terminal 5 to continue through their tunnel to Staines. Although the Tunnel was to go to Virginia Water there was to be an exit near Staines too.

 

[zwk500]

I think the original suggestion from the Heathrow Southern Railway was for the Crossrail trains to Terminal 5 to continue through their tunnel to Staines. Although the Tunnel was to go to Virginia Water the was to be an exit near Staines too.

Service Opportunities - Heathrow Southern Railway

heathrowrail.com

This indicates that XR would be left alone, and 2 separate services offered: Paddington - T1/2/3 - T5 - Basingstoke/Guildford and Waterloo - Staines - T5. 4tph would seem to suggest they're planning to extend the HEx trains.

 

[swt_passenger]

The other thing to consider is whether a link from HS2 to Heathrow might be of more use. If the HS2 train has to call at Old Oak Common, the obvious (?) way would be a train reversal west out of OOC to link into the Great Western lines somewhere, given the difference in elevation. This could help reduce internal flights out of Heathrow.

The original HS2 plans allowed for a future direct link via a separate junction, but research then caused it to be ruled out, as there isn’t enough traffic to justify regular through trains to Heathrow. It is better to run all trains into Euston, with every service connecting via old Oak Common.

 

[cle]

The original HS2 plans allowed for a future direct link via a separate junction, but research then caused it to be ruled out, as there isn’t enough traffic to justify regular through trains to Heathrow. It is better to run all trains into Euston, with every service connecting via old Oak Common.

There would definitely be more traffic from other parts of London/SE, than from the HS2 network. If you look at successful integrated airport stations, it's local and regional vs long distance - making up the volumes. They also became malls, TODs and big employment centres - like Schiphol for instance.

For instance, connecting the likes of Reading and Clapham Junction, plus Richmond, Guildford, Slough, Oxford etc with Heathrow is going to be more impactful than HS2 places ever would have been. Employees and regular visitors over annual travellers!

 

[kevin_roche]

Service Opportunities - Heathrow Southern Railway

heathrowrail.com

This indicates that XR would be left alone, and 2 separate services offered: Paddington - T1/2/3 - T5 - Basingstoke/Guildford and Waterloo - Staines - T5. 4tph would seem to suggest they're planning to extend the HEx trains.

Yes, it does now. The original plan also included taking Crossrail trains to a Bay platform at Staines. (I kept a copy)

 

[hwl]

Service Opportunities - Heathrow Southern Railway

heathrowrail.com

This indicates that XR would be left alone, and 2 separate services offered: Paddington - T1/2/3 - T5 - Basingstoke/Guildford and Waterloo - Staines - T5. 4tph would seem to suggest they're planning to extend the HEx trains.

The problems is that Western access has its eyes on the HEx paths and those are potentially a better operational fit.
The southern access business case relies on getting fast access to Paddington bring with it more fares revenue, Heathrow is only part of their business plan, OOC and Paddington are probably the real destinations they are aiming for with Basingstoke, Guildford, Woking etc. passengers.

ORCATS raids may be a lot harder with GBR.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

As I understand it, all trains on the GWML will stop at Old Oak Common in future - line capacity won't allow anything to pass through non-stop. This means there will be a quicker route to Heathrow from the west than the current backtracking at Paddington, weakening the case for the western link.

Yes I agree with your logic

 

[Bald Rick]

ORCATS raids may be a lot harder with GBR.

Indeed, and with no ORCATS money financing it gets even trickier than it was.

 

[alf]

Of from H&H to Heathrow. There’s a reason the Heathrow Express route was built where it is.

I have just looked at a 2008 A to Z map & the above comment implying there is no clear route from H&H to Heathrow is plain wrong.

There is a almost perfectly unbuilt route from west of Hayes & Harlington following the river Crane corridor to the airport.
It may have been preserved for that purpose.
A to Z doesn’t show levels but from memory it is boringly & helpfully flat. Perfect for a people mover.

However I agree with most other posters that there is no need to stop GWR expresses at H&H when passengers can change into frequent Heathrow trains at OOC 10 mins or less up the line.

So the river corridor can remain for the wildlife.

 

[Bald Rick]

I have just looked at a 2008 A to Z map & the above comment implying there is no clear route from H&H to Heathrow is plain wrong.

I’m sure the people who plan these things are a little more scientific than using an A to Z. The reason there’s a clear route alongside the River Crane is because it’s a flood plain.

 

[hwl]

Indeed, and with no ORCATS money financing it gets even trickier than it was.

Rehomed in the psittacines section of Oslo zoo.

Certainly one of the larger attempted raids.

 

[Bald Rick]

Rehomed in the psittacines section of Oslo zoo.

Taken me a little while to work this one out!

Certainly one of the larger attempted raids.

Rather brazen. And a little obvious.

 

[Meerkat]

The southern access business case relies on getting fast access to Paddington bring with it more fares revenue, Heathrow is only part of their business plan, OOC and Paddington are probably the real destinations they are aiming for with Basingstoke, Guildford, Woking etc. passengers.

And that’s why the southern route is far more important than the Western one.
The West one takes an easy change out of an already relatively easy journey, without through Business.
The southern route connects SW suburbs with the GW suburbs and feeds HS2, providing far more journey opportunities, and takes airport traffic off the worst bit of the M25.
It’s got no chance of getting government funding though as the northerners will kickoff.

 

[Class 170101]

The Telegraph on-line on Sunday 25th July reports that private investors are reluctant to fund the cost of the Heathrow / Langley western rail link, and the rail minister, Chris Heaton-Harris, will ask the Treasury to pay for it.

Taxpayers face near £900m bill for Heathrow rail link

The airport was set to bankroll the majority of the transport link to the West Country before withdrawing funding pledge in pandemic

www.telegraph.co.uk

If I was Rishi Sunak I'd be telling CHH to sod off and advise HAL restore or even up their contribution, reflecting price inflation otherwise the line won't hapening. Its amazing in good times the private sector rakes it in but moans about taxes yet when there are lean years that same private sector comes and asks for extra money.

 

[adrock1976]

How would the Western Access from Reading/Didcot manage to fit in with the (pre pandemic) traffic along the Relief Lines?

I had a look at the Real Time Trains website a long time ago, and could not work out how they would fit in at all.

 

[kevin_roche]

How would the Western Access from Reading/Didcot manage to fit in with the (pre pandemic) traffic along the Relief Lines?

I had a look at the Real Time Trains website a long time ago, and could not work out how they would fit in at all.

The next request will be to reinstate the old plan for the ETCS signalling system on the GWML so that they can add more trains.

 

[Bald Rick]

If I was Rishi Sunak I'd be telling CHH to sod off and advise HAL restore or even up their contribution, reflecting price inflation otherwise the line won't hapening.

The thing is, HAL don’t see any net benefit from the links (either of them), so why would they bother?

 

[JonathanH]

The thing is, HAL don’t see any net benefit from the links (either of them), so why would they bother?

Presumably their original interest would have been to get favourable treatment for their Terminal 6 aspirations?

 

[Bald Rick]

Presumably their original interest would have been to get favourable treatment for their Terminal 6 aspirations?

And 3rd runway I would have thought. But seeing as they have spent most of their war chest keeping afloat for the last 17 months, I suspect the 3rd runway is receding quickly.

 

[Class 170101]

The thing is, HAL don’t see any net benefit from the links (either of them), so why would they bother?

They might not but didn't they agree to land transport link improvements as part of the 3rd Runway? Agree though its probably receding into the future

 

[Bald Rick]

They might not but didn't they agree to land transport link improvements as part of the 3rd Runway

I’m not sure they did. Certainly not any of the rail schemes - they made that very clear.

 

[Mikey C]

And 3rd runway I would have thought. But seeing as they have spent most of their war chest keeping afloat for the last 17 months, I suspect the 3rd runway is receding quickly.

With passengers numbers massively down, and likely to be permanently affected by the "Zoom revolution" driven by lockdown, any planned expansion of the airport, making the Western Access rail scheme essential/highly desirable/politically necessary, looks a loooong way off.

 

[Bald Rick]

With passengers numbers massively down, and likely to be permanently affected by the "Zoom revolution" driven by lockdown, any planned expansion of the airport, making the Western Access rail scheme essential/highly desirable/politically necessary, looks a loooong way off.

I’m not so sure. HAL will be using the recovery from the pandemic as an argument for expansion - kick starting the economy, tourism, etc. However I think they may find it more difficult to secure the finance they need for it.

 

[The Ham]

With passengers numbers massively down, and likely to be permanently affected by the "Zoom revolution" driven by lockdown, any planned expansion of the airport, making the Western Access rail scheme essential/highly desirable/politically necessary, looks a loooong way off.

Indeed, however with a limited range of options to reduce carbon in the actual flying element (and many of the greenest at least a decade away) flying may look at ways of reducing the non flying carbon emissions. That may include making it easier for people to get to the airport by public transport.

As the big emissions for lots of companies will still be staff travel, so the airlines may try spinning that by getting their staff to work by public transport they have reduced their emissions whilst those "carbon neutral" companies are still creating lots of carbon through their staff driving to work.

Many will call it out as greenwashing, however the airlines will have a point. In that how can companies be carbon neutral if for them to exist their staff all have to create significant amounts of carbon getting to and from work.

I suspect that we may see different tiers of carbon neutral companies:
In operations - the company is carbon neutral in what it does, including business trips
In operations and supply chain - as above plus through their supply chain
In operations, supply chain and staff commuting - as above plus they account for their staff travel to and from work

The last will be the hardest to achieve and will not be something that will be used for a few years yet, however as more companies claim carbon neutrality more questions will be asked about just how green they really are. With little else to go on staff commuting will start to be the next thing to be asked about.

 

[kevin_roche]

The thing is, HAL don’t see any net benefit from the links (either of them), so why would they bother?

If anything, with their plans to charge people extra for driving to the airport, income will be reduced by allowing people to get there on a train.

 

[Mikey C]

Indeed, however with a limited range of options to reduce carbon in the actual flying element (and many of the greenest at least a decade away) flying may look at ways of reducing the non flying carbon emissions. That may include making it easier for people to get to the airport by public transport.

As the big emissions for lots of companies will still be staff travel, so the airlines may try spinning that by getting their staff to work by public transport they have reduced their emissions whilst those "carbon neutral" companies are still creating lots of carbon through their staff driving to work.

Many will call it out as greenwashing, however the airlines will have a point. In that how can companies be carbon neutral if for them to exist their staff all have to create significant amounts of carbon getting to and from work.

I suspect that we may see different tiers of carbon neutral companies:
In operations - the company is carbon neutral in what it does, including business trips
In operations and supply chain - as above plus through their supply chain
In operations, supply chain and staff commuting - as above plus they account for their staff travel to and from work

The last will be the hardest to achieve and will not be something that will be used for a few years yet, however as more companies claim carbon neutrality more questions will be asked about just how green they really are. With little else to go on staff commuting will start to be the next thing to be asked about.

Business flying is likely to be permanently impacted by Zoom though, as technology has shown that much of it's not necessary

Never mind the environmental impact

a) It's a lot cheaper to use video conferencing technology, instead of expensive flights
b) Who would choose to get up at 5am for an early morning flight to Frankfurt for a 2 hour meeting, or fly to New York for a meeting, then fly back overnight, if you can do it all from the office or even your home study?

That companies can boast about their environmental conscience, but cutting down on business travel, is a bonus too!

And of course, this applies to ALL travel. Why take a train to Newcastle or Plymouth for a routine 1 hour meeting, when you can do it on Zoom?

 

[Grumpy Git]

A western approach to LHR would benefit most of the rest of the country apart from the south-east. I guess that's why it's a low priority?

 

[zwk500]

A western approach to LHR would benefit most of the rest of the country apart from the south-east. I guess that's why it's a low priority?

It's a low priority because it doesn't really benefit many people at all. Especially once HS2 is up and running and Crossrail in full service.

 

[hwl]

A western approach to LHR would benefit most of the rest of the country apart from the south-east. I guess that's why it's a low priority?

Western is higher priority over southern.

A large potential airport user group from a decent Crossrail service levels and both Western and Southern would be airport and airline staff but that isn't big revenue.

 

[matt_world2004]

The thing is, HAL don’t see any net benefit from the links (either of them), so why would they bother?

They would get the fare revenue from the planned Heathrow express services that were meant to run along this route