Elizabeth line timetable

[Railperf]

Wasn't there a plan for Elizabeth line to run from Shenfield right through to Reading and Maidenhead? Seems to be only Paddington and Heathrow at the moment.

 

[stuu]

Wasn't there a plan for Elizabeth line to run from Shenfield right through to Reading and Maidenhead? Seems to be only Paddington and Heathrow at the moment.

No, that was never planned. For a long time the plan was for all Shenfields to terminate at Paddington

 

[D6975]

The plan was never a from everywhere to everywhere service, it was for a set of individual services with interchanges of a few minutes at any station in the central section.

 

[Tramtrain]

It’s a shame the EL trains from Twyford in the peaks are not more evenly spaced. At the moment they depart 10 mins apart with a 20 min gap, but the second train is 5 mins faster so they arrive in the central section 5 mins apart. Coupled with the fact the GWR service departs in the middle of the 10 mins, and effectively catches up with the first EL train, it leaves two 20 min gaps every hour (in the peak) toward Paddington, and an equally uneven spread of arrival times into London.

 

[Roger B]

I now just need 3 345s for sight since they've been lengthened. I'm wondering where would be the best station to go to see them. I want to be somewhere between Paddington and Whitechapel (inclusive), and the station with the shortest distance between eastbound and westbound platforms - with no stairs or barriers between. Previously I've used Farringdon, but am wondering whether there's a better location for shuttling between platforms so I don't miss any services, either eastbound of westbound.

Does anyone have any suggestions, please? Many thanks

 

[iphone76]

Paddington Low Level itself? You can see both Eastbound and Westbound platforms at the same time, plus the trains usually sit there for slightly longer than the other stations either being terminated or entering service.

(Not this weekend though as there is no service between Abbey Wood and Paddington Low Level).

 

[Roger B]

Paddington Low Level itself? You can see both Eastbound and Westbound platforms at the same time, plus the trains usually sit there for slightly longer than the other stations either being terminated or entering service.

(Not this weekend though as there is no service between Abbey Wood and Paddington Low Level).

Many thanks iphone76 - much appreciated

 

[sp503]

It’s a shame the EL trains from Twyford in the peaks are not more evenly spaced. At the moment they depart 10 mins apart with a 20 min gap, but the second train is 5 mins faster so they arrive in the central section 5 mins apart. Coupled with the fact the GWR service departs in the middle of the 10 mins, and effectively catches up with the first EL train, it leaves two 20 min gaps every hour (in the peak) toward Paddington, and an equally uneven spread of arrival times into London.

A somewhat worse problem is the opposite direction in the evening peak. The pattern goes (as an illustration):

Paddington: 1745, 1750, 1815, 1820
Ealing Broadway: 1753, 1758, 1823, 1828
...
Twyford: 1826, 1835, 1856, 1905
Reading: 1834, 1842, 1904, 1914

And yes, the slightly earlier one in each half hour is actually the semi-fast one, but hardly any faster than the stopper that follows.
In between the (relatively) big gap there is actually a Maidenhead train. If the stopper swaps with the Maidenhead it could even out the gap in the core section, though it might also mean that the bunching will occur at the Reading end.
Usually the semi-fast is already absolutely packed by the time it reaches Paddington, and keeps being packed until Slough, as GWR Didcot services don't stop at Slough during the evening peak. My friends in Twyford have learned to avoid the semi-fast and wait for the stopper which usually guarantees a seat after Southall.

 

[rob.rjt]

It seems like the problem is really where to slot the 2tph peak extras into the timetable. With the Readings and Maidenheads alternating every 15 minutes during the off-peak, and the seeming desire to keep close to those intervals during the peak, along with the requirement to have the Readings and Maidenheads coming from an Abbey Wood starter means that you have to have either a 5 or 10 minute gap between the trains heading out of the core.

The alternating skipped stations also need to be considered - I haven't dug into their stopping patterns though.

 

[nw1]

It seems like the problem is really where to slot the 2tph peak extras into the timetable. With the Readings and Maidenheads alternating every 15 minutes during the off-peak, and the seeming desire to keep close to those intervals during the peak, along with the requirement to have the Readings and Maidenheads coming from an Abbey Wood starter means that you have to have either a 5 or 10 minute gap between the trains heading out of the core.

The alternating skipped stations also need to be considered - I haven't dug into their stopping patterns though.

Why do all Readings and Maidenheads have to come from Abbey Wood? Is there any reason that the peak extras could not be Shenfield starters (which would off-peak terminate at Paddington) if it leads to a better-spaced service?

 

[JonathanH]

Why do all Readings and Maidenheads have to come from Abbey Wood? Is there any reason that the peak extras could not be Shenfield starters (which would off-peak terminate at Paddington) if it leads to a better-spaced service?

Running trains from Reading and Maidenhead to Shenfield runs the risk of transmitting delays between the Western and Eastern side of London.

If all trains from Abbey Wood run through Paddington, then it endures broadly even headways out to Ealing, which then allow freight to run.

I'm not sure you get a better spaced service by running Shenfield trains through to Reading and Maidenhead, because it means there are bigger gaps between Heathrow and Reading / Maidenhead services (assuming they aren't immediately behind).

Take a look at Whitechapel departures towards Paddington from 1716 to 1745 in RTT. The 1716 is Abbey Wood to Maidenhead. Even with the two Reading departures towards the end of that (recurring) sequence it isn't apparent that sending one of the Shenfield trains to Reading reduces pathing time or generates a better balance when the overall timetable is considered.

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/se...4-06-05/1715-1745?stp=WVS&show=all&order=wttp

 

[nw1]

Running trains from Reading and Maidenhead to Shenfield runs the risk of transmitting delays between the Western and Eastern side of London.

If all trains from Abbey Wood run through Paddington, then it endures broadly even headways out to Ealing, which then allow freight to run.

I'm not sure you get a better spaced service by running Shenfield trains through to Reading and Maidenhead, because it means there are bigger gaps between Heathrow and Reading / Maidenhead services (assuming they aren't immediately behind).

Ah ok, fair enough.

Another idea: could you extend the Maidenheads to Reading in the peak and run the peak extra service to Maidenhead rather than Reading?

(Guessing that would not work either as there would be a conflict at Maidenhead, but just asking out of curiosity)

 

[JonathanH]

Ah ok, fair enough.

Sorry, I'm not trying to shut this down, although it isn't a speculative thread.

If there was a genuinely better balance of Elizabeth Line services that someone could propose it would be interesting to read views. The issue seems to be that multiple types of service have to be managed west of Paddington and within all those constraints, and the desire to keep it operationally robust, it is difficult to see how else the Reading services are placed.

 

[rob.rjt]

Looking again, the peak timetable seems to be quite well managed with the extra trains. Just taking the Abbey Wood starters that call at Bond Street between 1700 and 1730 (with the pattern repeating in the next 30 minutes), you have services to Heathrow T4, Paddington, Reading (fast), Reading (slow), T4, Maidenhead.

RTT shows the fast Reading passing Hayes and Harlington only 3.5 minutes after the T4 departs, despite starting 10 minutes later (1729 for the T4, 1732.5 for the Reading). It is 7 minutes ahead of the slow at Slough and has gained another minute by Reading.

The Maidenhead is much tighter behind the T4 that precedes it at Hayes (1746 depart to T4, 1748 arrival to Maidenhead). It is also the slowest of the three 'far west' services, taking 31 minutes from Paddington to Slough (Reading fast, 26 minutes, Reading slow 28 minutes).

Assuming that the constraint of requiring a start from Abbey Wood is maintained:

• You can't put the Reading fast immediately after the T4, as it would catch up before Hayes
• You could put the Reading slow after the T4, but then you'd have a worse situation further down as the fast would catch the slow - the way it is at the moment gives you a bigger gap at Twyford than the other way round, so you want the fast running ahead of the slow - just doing a straight swap would mean that the fast is 3 minutes behind at Slough, not 7 minutes ahead. If you did T4, Reading slow, Paddington, Reading fast, you'd be in no better of a position than you are now, with an 8 minute gap at Slough, with the fast catching up towards Maidenhead.
• Running the Maidenhead as a Reading may give a slightly better spread of services...for two stations - the gaps at Slough for these trains are 8 mins (Reading fast to slow), 12 mins (Reading slow to Maidenhead) and 10 ins (Maidenhead to Reading fast). The question then becomes, what do you do with the peak extra - can Reading handle it, is it worth running a fast Maidenhead instead?

All of this is without changing the calling patterns of services, which probably is something for Speculative Discussion.

Overall, it seems that the pattern works well for what it is trying to achieve.