-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Should Heathrow Express be abolished, to enable more Crossrail trains to Terminal 5?
- Thread starter aleph_0
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Sounds like a flying junction before or after OOC has a pretty good business case - taking mainline non-stop/limited stop services from Heathrow and Reading into Paddington low level.Only repeated in threads every 6 months or so for the last ten years?
Any chance?
No chance.
I'm not sure what the business case would be or who would be paying. You would need some souped up 345s to operate on the main lines so as not to get in the way.
It would need to be a dive under in any case as there is too much overhead (eg roads and railways crossing) between Acton Main Line and Old Oak Common, and I don't think there is enough running line or space to make it fit.
Last edited:
Exactly. And use the vacated platforms to extend HS2 trains from Old Oak
interesting, I can’t comment on the likelihood as I know nothing about trains - it’s an honest query.
However the business case is easy. It would solve the biggest problem every passenger has with Paddington, which is that you get there and then your journey starts.
Anecdotally, British Airways has spent years looking at every option (including helicopters) to get a business class passenger to Canary Wharf by 9:00am. EL is a big step forward but it’s still a struggle. This would be so much better.
Also, when Old Oak Common is open, and everything stops there, what’s the point of keeping rating the track 110 between Reading and Paddington? Rating it at 90 is not going to adversely impact journey times on other trains from Reading by more than single minutes.
Lastly there are still 12tph+ being turned around at Paddington it’s a scandalous waste of 25% of the central tunnel capacity, ridiculous. The government knows this and know it needs to create additional EL services into Paddington, somewhere - all the other options for additional services look even more expensive.
Old Oak Common being built from the ground up so now is the time to build it. I can’t believe the costs would move needle on the cost of HS2 or even the total cost of Old Oak Common station.
However the business case is easy. It would solve the biggest problem every passenger has with Paddington, which is that you get there and then your journey starts.
Anecdotally, British Airways has spent years looking at every option (including helicopters) to get a business class passenger to Canary Wharf by 9:00am. EL is a big step forward but it’s still a struggle. This would be so much better.
Also, when Old Oak Common is open, and everything stops there, what’s the point of keeping rating the track 110 between Reading and Paddington? Rating it at 90 is not going to adversely impact journey times on other trains from Reading by more than single minutes.
Lastly there are still 12tph+ being turned around at Paddington it’s a scandalous waste of 25% of the central tunnel capacity, ridiculous. The government knows this and know it needs to create additional EL services into Paddington, somewhere - all the other options for additional services look even more expensive.
Old Oak Common being built from the ground up so now is the time to build it. I can’t believe the costs would move needle on the cost of HS2 or even the total cost of Old Oak Common station.
How is removing Heathrow Express helping HS2? They are completely separate platforms and lines, there is no access from HS2 to GWML platforms.
Snow1964
Established Member
probably not now, but built a flying junction at Whitechapel, so could have built one to fast lines at Paddington, for fast trains to the airport.
Actually Paddington has ended up a bit of a muddle now, it has the long distance trains (as expected), many of its local trains now serve low level Elizabeth line platforms, but there is a confused residual of adding Heathrow Express to outer suburban and long distance in main platforms. Sort of feels like it is there when shouldn't be now.
Yesterday, MPs were backing the Heathrow Western rail link again, so saying access from the west is the problem, maybe if built will sort the problem with Thames Valley semi-fasts looping via Heathrow and using the express slots
The speed limit of the reliefs is already 90mph, not 110mph. Unless you're suggesting lowering the fast lines to 90mph and running the Elizabeth Line on them??? It would certainly make more of a difference than a few minutes, and would likely increase the journey times to anywhere in the West by at least 50%. Not to mention the fasts are near capacity and this would decrease the amount of trains that can run on the line without reksignalling, and therefore decrease the amount of trains the west gets.
What option are you putting forward here? Certainly any option that slows down the fast lines is a no go. Far more people travel from Reading to London everyday than take the Heathrow Express or even travel from Heathrow by train. If this resulted in a reduced capacity on the fasts even worse, you’re disadvantaging a quarter of the country for the needs of a dwindling group, in the post Covid world, of the rich who think they need to get to work just that bit faster.
cactustwirly
Established Member
How does that create capacity?
Surely if the trains are slower, less of them can run?
XR trains have more capacity per train
cactustwirly
Established Member
In terms of seating capacity, a 9 car 800 has a lot more seats
How does that increase capacity? Except for fast services to Heathrow? Which would almost definitely be charged at a premium. Basically you’re saying everyone should suffer for the benefit of the rich who are willing to pay up for a faster transfer from their expensive flight. The Heathrow Express itself is proof more capacity isn’t needed.
As I mentioned it would also decrease capacity without resignalling, so few trains to the west.
My, probably fantasy, suggestion is “fast” Elizabeth line trains on the mainline into Paddington low level, from Reading and Heathrow. Hence the querying the possibility for a flying junction somewhere near Old Oak Common (which does not sound like it is being built).
Your point re Reading, no one at Reading wants to sit on the Elizabeth line train for an hour to get Paddington. Similar complaints exist for the residents of Maidenhead and Slough
Whereas if a semi-fast service stopping only stopping Twyford Maidenhead, Slough and Old Oak Common before Paddington low level then Canary Wharf in less that an hour - that would really be something - similar for a mainline Heathrow non stop to Paddington low level.
As I say I know nothing about railways and the physical constraints but query the future need to barrel through Hayes and Harlington at 110 mph once everything stops at Old Oak Common 5 miles away?
Therefore from Heathrow at least, maybe a 90 mph train is not that big a problem.
It's a shame there isn't a clean way to get Crossrail onto the fasts to take on the 4tph slots from OOC to Heathrow, fast. But you would be fully integrating the GWML and the CR timetables, and likely with some waiting/conflicts. And 'HEx' would be contingent on the core's delays.
I'd sooner a faster headline T5 pattern at 2tph, and then a slower one for local journeys.
I'd sooner a faster headline T5 pattern at 2tph, and then a slower one for local journeys.
How many people would use this compared to the fasts though, the walk from Paddinton High to Low really isn't that bad.
Where are these semi-fasts running? You certainly can't have more than a stop at Slough on the fasts, and even that causes issues. To run them on reliefs you'd have to replace other Elizabeth Line services, the GWR services on the reliefs have already been kicked off where they are at capacity. It really isn't feasible to cut GWML fast services, I'd like to see you tell someone in Bristol or Plymouth they've lost their trains so someone in London can have a better commute.
All these complaints are well and good but it needs to be recognised that the Elizabeth Line is magnitudes better than any other public tranport system in the country, and we shouldn't be further disadvantaging the rest of the country, so people close to London can shave minutes off their journey, while in other areas of the country the trains just don't run half the time, and when they do thye are crowded beyond capacity and people are turned away.
miklcct
On Moderation
My opinion is that there should only be one stopping pattern on each pair of tracks in order to maximise capacity, which means there should only be Elizabeth line services on the relief and fast services on the main.
cactustwirly
Established Member
How does that maximize capacity when Crossrail has to work around freight services?
That's why services skip Acton/West Ealing/Hanwell
Shame if so
Why you would not put the junction in whilst you are starting from scratch and spending £1.7bn (plus the overrun) on one station?
Even if you have no plans to take trains from the mainline into the Elizabeth line tunnel it’s seems massively short sighted not to provide for the option in the future.
I don’t really think not spending £50 million on something you have no foreseeable use for is shortsighted. The idea that we’re already spending x billion on something, so x million is insignificant is shortsighted, that x million could be spent on an entire project that makes a meaningful difference when it’s finished.
Besides XR services can’t run on the fasts without investment in more, faster stock, since even if you could find a way to allow them to run at 90, there aren’t the trains without service reductions to the rest of the line. This flyover would also be a drop in the pond for investment in any rolling stock improvement program.
How is ridership faring from West Drayton and west? I'd also like to see increased service there, it's more important than Heathrow. Which I appreciate is a useful turnback, ostensibly - with some airport traffic. It still has the tube, which is cheap and very well used.
miklcct
On Moderation
If Heathrow Express is abolished, there will be path on the main to put the Didcot service running fast from Slough, which in turn allows more Crossrail trains to run on the relief to Terminal 5.
Because you would need to cross the entire route from Low Level to the main lines which is a huge conflict. I don't know why people keep bringing up the same points over and over!
You don't lose that much capacity from not calling at 3 stations. Plus you are completely ignoring freight. It's already a fairly lengthy journey for a metro service out from Reading without adding more stops.
Because this is an incredibly congested area of London. You've got a depot on the other side (North Pole) then a fair few bridges and London Underground and Overground lines, and also the freight yard at Acton Main Line.
Is it? Have you seen how busy Heathrow trains are? It's the passengers at West Ealing and Acton Main Line who are the most frustrated.
The Didcot service is already running fast from Slough from May, using the old Bristol fast paths, all relief line trains past Slough are going to be XR or freight from May.
What happens to Heathrow Express must be determined by what happens with HS2 and OOC?
What to people think is going to happen here? The HS2 announced this week essentially said they are going to need more trains and a lot of empty seats on the westbound EL at OOC for a long time.
Therefore, as a minimum, the 12tph currently turning around at Paddington has to get to OOC somehow?
If so, the options appear to be:
1. Turn around 12tph at OOC - requires the space facilities to do this, is that possible? (no one on this chat thinks there is the space to build a junction never mind three turnaround bays, is this possible?)
2. Build a junction run Heathrow express with an EL trains to OOC on the mainline and then into Paddington low level (no one on the chat seems to like this option is even possible, but it would would need many more EL trains)
3 Maximise the use of the EL on the existing relief line route to Heathrow with longer trains and higher frequency (would need many more EL trains and probably kills the HE competitiveness, maybe you keep HE for the seats to Paddington so if the EL is rammed you have a way forward)
4. Some combination of the above
What to people think is going to happen here? The HS2 announced this week essentially said they are going to need more trains and a lot of empty seats on the westbound EL at OOC for a long time.
Therefore, as a minimum, the 12tph currently turning around at Paddington has to get to OOC somehow?
If so, the options appear to be:
1. Turn around 12tph at OOC - requires the space facilities to do this, is that possible? (no one on this chat thinks there is the space to build a junction never mind three turnaround bays, is this possible?)
2. Build a junction run Heathrow express with an EL trains to OOC on the mainline and then into Paddington low level (no one on the chat seems to like this option is even possible, but it would would need many more EL trains)
3 Maximise the use of the EL on the existing relief line route to Heathrow with longer trains and higher frequency (would need many more EL trains and probably kills the HE competitiveness, maybe you keep HE for the seats to Paddington so if the EL is rammed you have a way forward)
4. Some combination of the above
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,516
Well that’s already designed for at OOC, and has been explained in a number of earlier threads. It’s not going to directly impact on Hex at all.
Last edited:
That's a matter for stopping patterns though. I am saying that stations West Drayton-Reading need upping, vs the Heathrow stations themselves. But yes also the interim/trunk ones need improvement too. That Hayes bay could hopefully be the first call for another slow 2tph - which in turn could speed something else up (a T5 pair) ?
- Status