What other possibilities are there to improve capacity around Reading?

[weeklycommuter]

mods note - split from here

Sorry but I do not agree with this revamp, Reading West Station is a bottleneck on a section of track that is used by freight trains between Southampton and the Midlands, Cross Country trains from the Midlands and the North of England to the South Coast and GWR trains from London Paddington to Devon and Cornwall. Reading West Station really should have been closed. It is crazy to have a station at this location a short walk or bus ride from Reading Station which has a far far better service. Unless they cut back the service to parliamentary Reading West Station will prevent the running of more freight services and more passenger services from the Midlands to the South Coast and from London Paddington to Devon and Cornwall. The new Reading Green Park Station by contrast is only on the route of freight and Cross Country services and is not walking distance from Reading Station.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Sorry but I do not agree with this revamp, Reading West Station is a bottleneck on a section of track that is used by freight trains between Southampton and the Midlands, Cross Country trains from the Midlands and the North of England to the South Coast and GWR trains from London Paddington to Devon and Cornwall. Reading West Station really should have been closed. It is crazy to have a station at this location a short walk or bus ride from Reading Station which has a far far better service. Unless they cut back the service to parliamentary Reading West Station will prevent the running of more freight services and more passenger services from the Midlands to the South Coast and from London Paddington to Devon and Cornwall. The new Reading Green Park Station by contrast is only on the route of freight and Cross Country services and is not walking distance from Reading Station.

It's not the worst bottleneck by far- the GWML and Cherwell Valley Lines are more congested, so very little more traffic could be added from Southampton to the Midlands.
If you wanted to solve the issue properly, you'd reinstate the former Didcot, Newbury and Southampton Railway, which joined the SWML at Winchester.

Not only would this free up capacity for more passenger services on the SWML and the Berks + Hants, but it would enable a half hourly passenger service Southampton - Winchester - Sutton Scotney - Whitchurch - Newbury - Chievley - Harwell Campus - Didcot.
This would massively improve regional public transport links, and take a lot of traffic off the A34 which is a badly congested road.

Problem is, who pays for it - it should be a strategic central government policy to connect the major port at Southampton to other significant markets, but I'm not sure major infrastructure projects are popular at the moment.

 

[Kite159]

Sorry but I do not agree with this revamp, Reading West Station is a bottleneck on a section of track that is used by freight trains between Southampton and the Midlands, Cross Country trains from the Midlands and the North of England to the South Coast and GWR trains from London Paddington to Devon and Cornwall. Reading West Station really should have been closed. It is crazy to have a station at this location a short walk or bus ride from Reading Station which has a far far better service. Unless they cut back the service to parliamentary Reading West Station will prevent the running of more freight services and more passenger services from the Midlands to the South Coast and from London Paddington to Devon and Cornwall. The new Reading Green Park Station by contrast is only on the route of freight and Cross Country services and is not walking distance from Reading Station.

Even if you closed the station, it won't magically create new paths, plenty more bottlenecks on the network (i.e. Basingstoke with the flat crossing)

As for rebuilding the Didcot, Newbury & Southampton route, for the parts which haven't been lost under modern developments around Didcot & other places on the route, complete pie in the sky which would likely cost billions.

 

[AlastairFraser]

As for rebuilding the Didcot, Newbury & Southampton route, for the parts which haven't been lost under modern developments around Didcot & other places on the route, complete pie in the sky which would likely cost billions.

It would cost a lot, but if you want to increase paths substantially, it's the only way

 

[JJmoogle]

That's absurdist imo, if you want to increase paths substantially it would be far cheaper and easier to grade seperate 3 or 4 junctions than plough a long closed railway back into existence.

 

[AlastairFraser]

That's absurdist imo, if you want to increase paths substantially it would be far cheaper and easier to grade seperate 3 or 4 junctions than plough a long closed railway back into existence.

Which ones did you have in mind? There is a much tighter scope for growth this way

 

[JJmoogle]

Which ones did you have in mind? There is a much tighter scope for growth this way

Basingstoke, Southcote, and Didcot

 

[AlastairFraser]

Basingstoke, Southcote, and Didcot

Southcote Jcn is on the Holy Brook floodplain and it won't be easy or cheap to build.
Basingstoke again is going to need several viaducts, and will be very disruptive to several major routes.
Didcot is perhaps the easiest of the 3, and might be funded relatively soon - but again it doesn't solve the issue of congestion on that section of the GWML in general.

 

[JJmoogle]

Southcote Jcn is on the Holy Brook floodplain and it won't be easy or cheap to build.
Basingstoke again is going to need several viaducts, and will be very disruptive to several major routes.
Didcot is perhaps the easiest of the 3, and might be funded relatively soon - but again it doesn't solve the issue of congestion on that section of the GWML in general.

Oh yes I agree very much that some are engineering challenges, but they're much cheaper than the reinstatement of a line that will need significant new routing(and land aquistion) along with the grade seperated junctions that line would also then require. A year or two of disruption will be a short pain compared to the following many decades of improvement that follows
I realise after reading Network rails list there I also forgot about Oxford North, which given how often over the years I've been stuck on a train there was quite an oversight on my part

 

[coppercapped]

I don't know if you're originally from, or live in Reading, but Reading West serves a completely different area to Reading GP.
Green Park serves Whitley, the Mad Stad, Green Park offices and the new housing development at Green Park Village adjacent to the new station.

Reading West serves the Oxford and Tilehurst Roads. The Oxford Rd area is very dense and has several commercial destinations in their own right within walking distance of Reading West. It's also the closest station to the new River Academy (which will be the overspill school for a large area of Berks likely), about 15 mins walk. Reading main is another 700m away.

Tilehurst Rd is not quite as populated, but more and more smaller apartment blocks are popping up all over that area of town.

If you want to increase capacity on the existing XC services, lengthen them first by using double Voyagers on all but late night/early morning services.
Price as many Reading/Oxon/South Mids passengers onto the Reading to York service using Advances and you leave capacity free for Hants passengers.

Getting rid of the 2nd GWR service is also stupid - the villages to the south of Reading have seen significant population growth, and there's a new station proposed in the large suburb of Chineham in Basingstoke, so these services will only get busier.


Southcote Jcn is on the Holy Brook floodplain and it won't be easy or cheap to build.
Basingstoke again is going to need several viaducts, and will be very disruptive to several major routes.
Didcot is perhaps the easiest of the 3, and might be funded relatively soon - but again it doesn't solve the issue of congestion on that section of the GWML in general.

I agree with your analysis, but I would add a couple of remarks:

The arrangements of the roads coming into Reading from the Arborfield direction on the A327 give no easy and direct route to Reading Station or its car park. This route from the south east of the town serves Reading University, the Royal Berkshire Hospital and several large schools and the ensuing peak time congestion affects both buses and private cars. In addition to serving the areas you mention Reading Green Park is a useful alternative for those living in the Shinfield / Spencers Wood / Three Mile Cross areas (all of which have seen much housing development recently) as alternative roads from the A327 near Shinfield running alongside the M4 serve the area and feed the station. More than 2 trains per hour would be good though!

I have seen somewhere an alternative suggestion to the question of routing the container trains through Basingstoke but I can no longer find the reference. Essentially it was suggested that freight avoiding lines be built along the north side of the main line west of Basingstoke as far as Worting Junction, swing north of Battledown Flyover and join the Salisbury line near Oakley. The trains would then use the Laverstock chord at Salisbury and reach Southampton from the west. This routing has several perceived advantages in that no flyovers would need to be constructed at Basingstoke and the long and heavy trains would be removed from the line through Winchester with its 1 in 100 northbound gradients and the busy Eastleigh / Southampton station areas. However there are some tight spots west of Basingstoke station near Worting itself so possible some stretches of single track may be needed, but generally I think is a proposal that could be considered seriously.

 

[AlastairFraser]

I agree with your analysis, but I would add a couple of remarks:

The arrangements of the roads coming into Reading from the Arborfield direction on the A327 give no easy and direct route to Reading Station or its car park. This route from the south east of the town serves Reading University, the Royal Berkshire Hospital and several large schools and the ensuing peak time congestion affects both buses and private cars. In addition to serving the areas you mention Reading Green Park is a useful alternative for those living in the Shinfield / Spencers Wood / Three Mile Cross areas (all of which have seen much housing development recently) as alternative roads from the A327 near Shinfield running alongside the M4 serve the area and feed the station. More than 2 trains per hour would be good though!

I have seen somewhere an alternative suggestion to the question of routing the container trains through Basingstoke but I can no longer find the reference. Essentially it was suggested that freight avoiding lines be built along the north side of the main line west of Basingstoke as far as Worting Junction, swing north of Battledown Flyover and join the Salisbury line near Oakley. The trains would then use the Laverstock chord at Salisbury and reach Southampton from the west. This routing has several perceived advantages in that no flyovers would need to be constructed at Basingstoke and the long and heavy trains would be removed from the line through Winchester with its 1 in 100 northbound gradients and the busy Eastleigh / Southampton station areas. However there are some tight spots west of Basingstoke station near Worting itself so possible some stretches of single track may be needed, but generally I think is a proposal that could be considered seriously.

I agree with most of your first point - I'd say the Riseley/TMC/Spencers Wood/Shinfield/Arborfield set would probably head for Winnersh Triangle, because crossing the roundabouts at the M4 (Mereoak junction) is a nightmare, and it's an RBC car park so will naturally cost a bomb.

That solution for Basingstoke is an interesting plan, and would probably do well to release passenger capacity on the SWML. However - I have a couple of thoughts.
1) How badly does this impact on WoE/Romsey line services? Would it prevent service increases on the busier section south of Romsey - and if so, are the upgrades needed to release capacity cheap?
2) The issues still remain with the Berks and Hants from Reading to Basingstoke - how do we solve them? Perhaps OHLE and some station loops?

 

[HSTEd]

It's not the worst bottleneck by far- the GWML and Cherwell Valley Lines are more congested, so very little more traffic could be added from Southampton to the Midlands.
If you wanted to solve the issue properly, you'd reinstate the former Didcot, Newbury and Southampton Railway, which joined the SWML at Winchester.

Not only would this free up capacity for more passenger services on the SWML and the Berks + Hants, but it would enable a half hourly passenger service Southampton - Winchester - Sutton Scotney - Whitchurch - Newbury - Chievley - Harwell Campus - Didcot.
This would massively improve regional public transport links, and take a lot of traffic off the A34 which is a badly congested road.

That's an awful lot of track for a comparatively small improvement in capacity or connectivity.

It's at least 60 route kilometres, which is going to cost a few billion pounds at current prices.

 

[The Planner]

Reopening Winchester to Didcot is an absolute non-starter. First thing you would do is re-signal Southcote to Basingrad and get the headways down to a sensible level of 3 minutes all the way.

 

[RT4038]

Not only would this free up capacity for more passenger services on the SWML and the Berks + Hants, but it would enable a half hourly passenger service Southampton - Winchester - Sutton Scotney - Whitchurch - Newbury - Chievley - Harwell Campus - Didcot.
This would massively improve regional public transport links, and take a lot of traffic off the A34 which is a badly congested road.

Gosh - if you thought HS2 was difficult enough to build through the Chilterns opposition, imagine trying to do this through Burghclere and Hampstead Norris.....

 

[MarkyT]

Here are some ideas for Reading West and Southcote Junction incorporating some grade separation:

 

[zwk500]

Here are some ideas for Reading West and Southcote Junction incorporating some grade separation:

This isn't really that big a problem though - the issue is linking the paths into the constraints at each end

First thing would be loops between Southcote Jn and Basingstoke. Second would be to Grade-Separate basingstoke. 2 options for this - 1 a deviation line to the east, the other an additional freight line as an extension of the sidings north of the bay platform (would require a new northern entrance), running alongside the existing northbound ex-Southampton line and then either staying up when it drops, or just accepting a flat junction across only 1 line. Could potentially reduce the length of new track for greater bi-di on the Up Southampton for cost reasons.

 

[AlastairFraser]

That's an awful lot of track for a comparatively small improvement in capacity or connectivity.

It's at least 60 route kilometres, which is going to cost a few billion pounds at current prices.

With coppercapped's useful submission, I've realised you could shave 10 miles off the reopening (reopening from Whitchurch to Didcot only).
It's not an insubstantial improvement in connectivity too.
There are very few north south lines in the South Central region, and traffic is only forecast to grow on the A34.

Reopening Winchester to Didcot is an absolute non-starter. First thing you would do is re-signal Southcote to Basingrad and get the headways down to a sensible level of 3 minutes all the way.

Wouldn't electrification be another key improvement if you're aiming for a small improvement?

Gosh - if you thought HS2 was difficult enough to build through the Chilterns opposition, imagine trying to do this through Burghclere and Hampstead Norris.....

I'd anticipate some tunnelling needed around Newbury, but yes, it would be difficult.
You do have the advantage of A34 widening being the main alternative however...

 

[The Planner]

Wouldn't electrification be another key improvement if you're aiming for a small improvement?

Would probably get some journey time improvements, doesn't solve the overarching capacity problem.

 

[brad465]

Reopening Winchester to Didcot is an absolute non-starter. First thing you would do is re-signal Southcote to Basingrad and get the headways down to a sensible level of 3 minutes all the way.

Can you explain this description please?

 

[AlastairFraser]

Would probably get some journey time improvements, doesn't solve the overarching capacity problem.

So are you suggesting resignalling would allow, if, say, you looped freight at either end of the bottleneck to utilise the smaller headways?

Can you explain this description please?

Some Redingensians (like myself) call it Basingstroke. Although I can't speak for another user, Basingrad is a similar sentiment from my POV.
It's a soulless town (excluding some of the old town, which is nice-ish) which was built essentially as a monument to the car.

 

[The Planner]

So are you suggesting resignalling would, if, say, you looped freight at either end of the bottleneck to utilise the smaller headways?

It would mean a stopper doesnt impact the following train so much. You have to plan 5½ minutes behind a stopper currently.

 

[AlastairFraser]

It would mean a stopper doesnt impact the following train so much. You have to plan 5½ minutes behind a stopper currently.

OK, so you essentially claw back 2.5 mins if I've understood correctly.
In which case, how would that investment lead to a meaningful increase to capacity?

 

[The Planner]

OK, so you essentially claw back 2.5 mins if I've understood correctly.
In which case, how would that investment lead to a meaningful increase to capacity?

You can run more trains through it. Reduction of headway is normally the first way of doing it if you aren't building infrastructure. West Coast Route Mod reduced the headway from 5 minutes to 3 minutes on the southern end of the WCML.

 

[coppercapped]

SNIP

Some Redingensians (like myself) call it Basingstroke. Although I can't speak for another user, Basingrad is a similar sentiment from my POV.
It's a soulless town (excluding some of the old town, which is nice-ish) which was built essentially as a monument to the car.

Many years ago it was sometimes called Blazingsmoke due to the Lord Nelsons and the Bulleid pacifics...

(And the basin of the Basingstoke canal in the town centre was filled in and built over... Vandals!)

 

[AlastairFraser]

Many years ago it was sometimes called Blazingsmoke due to the Lord Nelsons and the Bulleid pacifics...

(And the basin of the Basingstoke canal in the town centre was filled in and built over... Vandals!)

I mean, that's comparatively polite. However, some things haven't changed clearly - the station is the best place in the town...

You can run more trains through it. Reduction of headway is normally the first way of doing it if you aren't building infrastructure. West Coast Route Mod reduced the headway from 5 minutes to 3 minutes on the southern end of the WCML.

Run more trains on that section, the issue is then capacity on the next legs..

 

[WAO]

The answer to this depends on whether you want to make rail operation easier or facilitate travel around Reading. The rebuilding of Reading station included much expensive junction work linking the Basingstoke line with the GWML westwards.

Given the choice, I would have preferred Green Park station to have been placed south of the M4, perhaps with car parking and access also from the North, as Jn 11 is difficult to cross at times. Against that there are no roads to that rural site which is also close to the ROF (MoD factory). It is also almost Venetian in the amount of lakeland around (worked our gravel pits). I would also have included platform loops, perhaps like Farnborough Main, so that capacity was maintained. This could be adopted at Mortimer and Bramley if indeed the line were shown to be a pinch point

Reading's problem is that it is very bus (and developer) orientated; the park and ride at Winnersh was first sited below flood level, away from the SR station, with a bus link through the densest traffic in the town; sanity eventually prevailed (at a cost).

The other local rail improvement would be to have completed the electrification to Oxford and Bedwyn, to give a real advantage to rail over road in accessing this regional centre.

WAO

 

[The Planner]

Run more trains on that section, the issue is then capacity on the next legs..

Which are? Oxford itself will be an issue, as it always is.

 

[Mark J]

Too much of the route has been obliterated around the Newbury area, for the DNSR to reopen.

Even the 'reopen the DNSR' Crayola group disbanded a few years ago, when it was realised the idea was a non-starter.

If the DNSR was to be reopened, it should of happened in the early 90's, before the A34 bypass was built, and London Rd embankment was leveled.

A reopened DNSR would cost a fortune for little benefit.

I can think of other lines that are more worthy of reopening.

*I'm in favour of reopening rail lines. However only when it is practicable and serves a reasonable purpose.

 

[didcotdean]

The DNSR route has also been obliterated in Didcot. You might in theory be able join the main line eastwards or westwards of the town but avoiding capacity issues doing that isn't obvious.

 

[zwk500]

OK, so you essentially claw back 2.5 mins if I've understood correctly.
In which case, how would that investment lead to a meaningful increase to capacity?

Half hourly service = 2x2.5 mins, so 5 mins saved = Extra path.

A Didcot Avoider Avoider (i.e. Grade Separated Mains to Oxford route) would be higher up my priority list than any attempt to bypass Southcote Junction.