Should Elizabeth line take over the Thames Valley branches and also Romford - Upminster branch?

[Acton1991]

It might do. I would think that 1tph could call, and one pass - as does happen sometimes/in peaks.

Will this lead to two additional Crossrail paths in those relief slots? If so, do we know what for? Would seem that stations beyond Hayes (towards Reading) would be the main ones missing out.

Would it be for additional Heathrow services, or for Hayes/West Drayton terminators?

 

[Meole]

Sunday service ?

 

[JonathanH]

Would it be for additional Heathrow services, or for Hayes/West Drayton terminators?

Heathrow is already pretty full if 4tph Heathrow Express runs to Terminal 5 with the Elizabeth Line running 2tph to Terminal 5 and 4tph to Terminal 4.

The removal of GWR from the relief line east of Dolphin Junction may be solely related to performance of the Elizabeth Line trains with the existing proposed service, no extras - eg 2tph Maidenhead / 2tph Reading off peak and 2tph Maidenhead / 4tph Reading peak. Eliminating conflicts in the Paddington area may be the priority.

 

[306024]

Heathrow is already pretty full if 4tph Heathrow Express runs to Terminal 5 with the Elizabeth Line running 2tph to Terminal 5 and 4tph to Terminal 4.

The removal of GWR from the relief line east of Dolphin Junction may be solely related to performance of the Elizabeth Line trains with the existing proposed service, no extras - eg 2tph Maidenhead / 2tph Reading off peak and 2tph Maidenhead / 4tph Reading peak. Eliminating conflicts in the Paddington area may be the priority.

Yes the Elizabeth line has demanding performance targets, which it would struggle to meet with GW trains on the relief lines throughout.

While this proposal no doubt gives a better chance of meeting those targets, it may move the risk to GW punctuality. The performance of up GW main line trains from Reading will be critical to allow the relief line and HEX trains to merge robustly. But it does separate the GW relief line services from the Liz line Heathrow services.

This will all have been modelled, and agreed with both parties, so is probably the best (least worst) solution for passenger services overall. Then there’s just all the freight to fit in

 

[Bald Rick]

Then there’s just all the freight to fit in

yes, just that !

 

[cle]

Heathrow is already pretty full if 4tph Heathrow Express runs to Terminal 5 with the Elizabeth Line running 2tph to Terminal 5 and 4tph to Terminal 4.

The removal of GWR from the relief line east of Dolphin Junction may be solely related to performance of the Elizabeth Line trains with the existing proposed service, no extras - eg 2tph Maidenhead / 2tph Reading off peak and 2tph Maidenhead / 4tph Reading peak. Eliminating conflicts in the Paddington area may be the priority.

On your final note, everything (westbound Elizabeth) terminating at Paddington today is due to be extended to terminate at OOC - so surely there is confidence in the Paddington approaches having some capacity. The GW in question operate from high numbered platforms already.

Perhaps it’s a reliability/resilience thing for now, and then increases can follow. Hayes would seem a logical place to try run 2tph to, or West Drayton - if it’s a frequency boost in mind. Patterns could be semi fast if needed

 

[Bald Rick]

It’s reliability and fitting in the 4 freight paths an hour from Acton. It is the reliability and consistency of the latter upon which the reliability of the whole of the Elizabeth line depends.

 

[Acton1991]

It’s reliability and fitting in the 4 freight paths an hour from Acton. It is the reliability and consistency of the latter upon which the reliability of the whole of the Elizabeth line depends.

Ah interesting. So no increase in service, just ensuring the planned service can run effectively.

 

[cactustwirly]

Ah interesting. So no increase in service, just ensuring the planned service can run effectively.

So basically shafting Slough passengers for no real gain.

Will Reading and Twyford keep their 4tph service to West Drayton, Hayes and Ealing?

 

[JonathanH]

So basically shafting Slough passengers for no real gain.

Will Reading and Twyford keep their 4tph service to West Drayton, Hayes and Ealing?

You would imagine that they may have to change at Maidenhead at off-peak times for an extra 2tph and retain 4tph in the peak.

Ultimately, Elizabeth Line only have 70 345s which will have been specified against a given level of service.

 

[Jamiescott1]

So basically shafting Slough passengers for no real gain.

Will Reading and Twyford keep their 4tph service to West Drayton, Hayes and Ealing?

Not really shafting slough passengers as the vast majority of passengers is mostly to / from Paddington.
The gain is maidenhead passengers getting a faster service to Paddington off peak

 

[cactustwirly]

Not really shafting slough passengers as the vast majority of passengers is mostly to / from Paddington.
The gain is maidenhead passengers getting a faster service to Paddington off peak

But the passengers wanting Oxford and Reading would have a significantly longer journey time.

 

[mangyiscute]

I'd be interested to see if those Slough, Maidenhead and Twyford GWR trains count as off peak during the evening peak periods, as this would be very useful to people travelling to Reading who used to have a few fairly fast off peaks trains from paddington (I think, for example, the Frome train was off peak to Reading) but these got removed in the 2018/19 timetable change (i forget exactly when it was)

 

[JonathanH]

I'd be interested to see if those Slough, Maidenhead and Twyford GWR trains count as off peak during the evening peak periods, as this would be very useful to people travelling to Reading who used to have a few fairly fast off peaks trains from paddington (I think, for example, the Frome train was off peak to Reading) but these got removed in the 2018/19 timetable change (i forget exactly when it was)

None of the main line services count as off-peak in the evening peak now including those which are formed of 387s and run fast to Maidenhead. It is only the Elizabeth Line trains and the handful of GWR relief line only trains that now count.

There is no obvious reason why that should change.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

But the passengers wanting Oxford and Reading would have a significantly longer journey time.

Slough to Reading will have 2tph GWR with only 2 stops, provided the paths are in the right place in the RL standard hour the journey time increase shouldn't be massively worse than now? Probably 22 mins rather than 15, something like that?

 

[mangyiscute]

Slough to Reading will have 2tph GWR with only 2 stops, provided the paths are in the right place in the RL standard hour the journey time increase shouldn't be massively worse than now? Probably 22 mins rather than 15, something like that?

I guess its just that Slough to Reading already has that in addition to the non-stop 2tph, so its just removing half of the faster trains

 

[cactustwirly]

Slough to Reading will have 2tph GWR with only 2 stops, provided the paths are in the right place in the RL standard hour the journey time increase shouldn't be massively worse than now? Probably 22 mins rather than 15, something like that?

And over an hour to Oxford compared to 45 minutes

 

[Jamiescott1]

And over an hour to Oxford compared to 45 minutes

Inconveniencing very few people. Theres less than a handful of people going west from Slough each train whereas there's multiples of 20 going from maidenhead to London that a fast train will benefit

 

[cactustwirly]

Inconveniencing very few people. Theres less than a handful of people going west from Slough each train whereas there's multiples of 20 going from maidenhead to London that a fast train will benefit

The time difference isn't a huge amount.
It's literally 5 minutes and 2 stops.

You also lose extra paths for Bristol services which are definitely required.
The current services are often full and standing throughout, even on 9 cars

 

[Horizon22]

I would be against this idea, Bristol services are extremely busy at the moment, the fast Bristol path is needed!

Slough also loses their direct service to Oxford, which I'm aware is a very useful service that quite a few people use.

I think the status quo is better

This would I presume be the "superfast" which ran for about 1 week back in 2020.

Inconveniencing very few people. Theres less than a handful of people going west from Slough each train whereas there's multiples of 20 going from maidenhead to London that a fast train will benefit

And Maidenhead has definitely not had the best deal since the Elizabeth line took over the service, just for a speed and comfort perspective and removal of a few non-stop services post Covid.

Getting back to the point in hand, yes ideally the same operator. But you'd probably want all routes wired, sorting out the weird token movement on the Marlow/Bourne End branch (which requires guards) and a standard stock of say electric 4 cars AND somewhere to put it all. 345s come as a minimum 7-car, and you won't be fitting that down any of the branches any time soon. So should they? In an ideal world, yes. Will they? Not any time soon.

 

[Benjwri]

Getting to Acton Main Line via Paddington is always going to be quicker than sitting on a stopping train all the way from Reading, particularly if it has to stop at Hanwell and West Ealing as well.

This actually isn't true all the time. The fast trains are not well synced to the Elizabeth Line services calling at Acton, therefore it is often quicker to get a GWR stopping service to Ealing, then swap onto Elizabeth Line for the final bit. These only have a 6 minute change at Ealing, and therefore end up quicker. This is even more true for me, as I come to Reading on that same GWR stopper, and so would have a wait at reading to, and this is a route I travel fairly often.

It will also increase the price of the route at peak, as at the moment you can sometimes get a ticket rquiring a stop in Twyford.

However the Maidenhead trains are currently stopping at Acton, so it may be possible to change onto one of these, or TFL may change which trains stop at Acton in the final timetable.

 

[mangyiscute]

This actually isn't true all the time. The fast trains are not well synced to the Elizabeth Line services calling at Acton, therefore it is often quicker to get a GWR stopping service to Ealing, then swap onto Elizabeth Line for the final bit. These only have a 6 minute change at Ealing, and therefore end up quicker. This is even more true for me, as I come to Reading on that same GWR stopper, and so would have a wait at reading to, and this is a route I travel fairly often.

It will also increase the price of the route at peak, as at the moment you can sometimes get a ticket rquiring a stop in Twyford.

However the Maidenhead trains are currently stopping at Acton, so it may be possible to change onto one of these, or TFL may change which trains stop at Acton in the final timetable.

I guess I would argue it depends how long you think you can get away with at paddington - I would say I would be comfortable with a 5 min change (if we assume no delays which realistically is unlikely) and could probably do a 3 min, but it will obviously differ for other people. Plus, sometimes those GWR stoppers have 10-15 mins in Reading, in which case I guess it might be better to change. Although, you are way more likely a seat and a hassle free journey changing at Ealing

 

[Benjwri]

I guess I would argue it depends how long you think you can get away with at paddington - I would say I would be comfortable with a 5 min change (if we assume no delays which realistically is unlikely) and could probably do a 3 min, but it will obviously differ for other people. Plus, sometimes those GWR stoppers have 10-15 mins in Reading, in which case I guess it might be better to change. Although, you are way more likely a seat and a hassle free journey changing at Ealing

A lot of GWR stoppers no longer stop at Reading for those times. The 5 minute change isn't so comfortable, but is usually fine as delays usually near paddington, and as both trains run the relief line the Elizabeth Line train is normally stuck behind the GWR.

To add to this according to the proposed track access agreement the Maidenhead trains will not stop at Acton and West Ealing in the final timetable and therefore there is no option but to head to paddington and back, which is far more costly

 

[cle]

It does seem like Slough loses out - a non-stop service to Reading is degraded and Oxford gone. Slough also suffers in the peaks vs Maidenhead and Twyford which have outer fasts. Folks on here say the Slough (and Windsor) - Reading/Oxford links are well used. Plenty of employment throughout those four places. Which is it?

The Bristol super fasts have always been a bit of a fantasy/indulgence - the market isn't proven to need 4tph, the wires haven't happened and arguably it was a waste of paths. The new journey times are competitive with what a HST fast would have been.

 

[43096]

345s come as a minimum 7-car, and you won't be fitting that down any of the branches any time soon. So should they? In an ideal world, yes. Will they? Not any time soon.

345s will be minimum 9 car once the need to fit into P14 at Paddington goes.

 

[mangyiscute]

The Bristol super fasts have always been a bit of a fantasy/indulgence - the market isn't proven to need 4tph, the wires haven't happened and arguably it was a waste of paths. The new journey times are competitive with what a HST fast would have been.

I think this is true provided that they are all 9/10 coach trains, the only super busy Bristol trains I've been on recently have been due to it being 5 coaches and/or other cancellations.
I think GWR needs to focus on ensuring that they can run their full timetable with 9/10 coaches besides Oxford and Cheltenham services which can be 5, as I have had many cancellations recently. This must be rectified before any new services, unless we just want more cancellations

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

I guess its just that Slough to Reading already has that in addition to the non-stop 2tph, so its just removing half of the faster trains

Not really, as the RL semi-fast is currently overtaken by the ML fast in the down direction in most daytime instances, so no one will use it for the Slough-Reading journey. The up direction is more variable due to the various freight paths impacting individual hours differently.

From personal experience, at key leisure times the Slough stop is a cause of severe overcrowding of the Oxford service to/from Padd, so although Slough-Oxford loses out for the minority in the May 23 plan, it does benefit the majority.

 

[cactustwirly]

I think this is true provided that they are all 9/10 coach trains, the only super busy Bristol trains I've been on recently have been due to it being 5 coaches and/or other cancellations.
I think GWR needs to focus on ensuring that they can run their full timetable with 9/10 coaches besides Oxford and Cheltenham services which can be 5, as I have had many cancellations recently. This must be rectified before any new services, unless we just want more cancellations

I have been on very busy Bristol services thoughout the day. And have been extremely busy west of Reading even when they are formed of 9 coaches.
I believe there is justification for some extra Superfast services to take some of the London to Bristol passengers off these services

 

[coppercapped]

It does seem like Slough loses out - a non-stop service to Reading is degraded and Oxford gone. Slough also suffers in the peaks vs Maidenhead and Twyford which have outer fasts. Folks on here say the Slough (and Windsor) - Reading/Oxford links are well used. Plenty of employment throughout those four places. Which is it?

Superimposing a high frequency service of passenger trains on a well-used mixed traffic railway will always cause problems if the track, signalling and stations are not adapted for the new service pattern.

My take on this is that if TfL wants to run a frequent service then it should pay for the extra infrastructure and not throw others off it. In this case I would suggest that TfL pays for an additional pair of independent tracks at least as far as Airport Junction. I fail to see what justification TfL can offer - and by extension the Mayor of London - for making services operating outside the London area less attractive simply to fulfill its train frequency doctrine.

cle: The Bristol super fasts have always been a bit of a fantasy/indulgence - the market isn't proven to need 4tph, the wires haven't happened and arguably it was a waste of paths. The new journey times are competitive with what a HST fast would have been.

These have been a fantasy/indulgence of the DfT for years. Eleven years ago I wrote to my then MP to ask him to try to get the Intercity Express Programme stopped in its then form. I included the following paragraph:

The DfT, even now after a change of Government, is not able to stop micro-managing the railway. It was clear in the presentation made by two senior civil servants to the Institute of Mechanical Engineers on 27th June 2011, which I attended, that the DfT has decided that additional non-stop trains are required between London and Bristol. So it would appear that the next franchisee will get issued with (a) a set of trains for which they have to pay a pre-determined leasing charge and (b) a timetable to operate - Agility Trains showed a simulation of the train rosters designed to ensure that the trains could be returned to a suitable maintenance depot at the end of the day. This does not leave much freedom of action for the franchisee to match his business to passenger demand - which was one of the original purposes of privatisation.

One of the civil servants was Stuart Baker, now deceased, the 'Great Cartographer'.

 

[nw1]

Great news. The stopping off peak services to maidenhead are painfully slow and actually alot of people alight at maidenhead, fast services are definitely needed.

Even the current service seems an improvement on that in Turbo days (when there were four services per hour, but all slowish as all four made calls in some of the minor stations, at least - for example ISTR all services called at EITHER Taplow/Burnham OR Langley/Iver, rather than the perhaps more obvious pattern of 2tph calling at all 4 and 2tph skipping all 4). Now there are, IIRC, calls only at Slough, Hayes and Ealing on the way to London.

I travelled from Maidenhead to London both days on one weekend in 2015 and found the services very slow; same goes with a journey I made from Reading to Ealing in 2008. Both these example journeys are very much faster, presumably, even with the current service.