• 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!

My ideas for Chiswick Park station

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MatthewRead

On Moderation
Joined
21 Nov 2014
Messages
1,636
Location
West london
I don't know if this should be on the London Underground page but for years I've said that Chiswick Park should be rebuilt with narrow island platforms and become the Piccadilly lines next calling point after Hammersmith for 3 reasons:
1. It is only served by the Ealing Broadway branch of the District line.
2. The 2 bridges located next to the station on Acton Lane and Bollo Lane make such a racket whenever a Piccadilly line train goes over at speed so it would reduce the noise level.
3. Should the District line trains have to use the fast lines they could still stop there, they currently can't because the station has bay platforms.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Harlesden

Harlesden

Member
Joined
23 Jun 2010
Messages
968
Location
LONDON NW10
1. There are many London Underground stations served by one line serving one destination at each end.
2. You want to slow trains down simply because you don't like the noise of the train hurtling over the bridge? Amazing.
3. The station plan I am looking at shows no bay platforms. Just four tracks with a platform at each outer edge.
If the powers that be saw the need for an additional Piccadilly Line stop, Turnham Green is far more logical. Having traveled the Piccadilly Line from Gloucester Road back to Heathrow, the journey is already tedious enough without an extra stop.
Why is this NOT in the London Underground category?
 
M

MatthewRead

On Moderation
Joined
21 Nov 2014
Messages
1,636
Location
West london
fisher72 said:
1. There are many London Underground stations served by one line serving one destination at each end.
2. You want to slow trains down simply because you don't like the noise of the train hurtling over the bridge? Amazing.
3. The station plan I am looking at shows no bay platforms. Just four tracks with a platform at each outer edge.
If the powers that be saw the need for an additional Piccadilly Line stop, Turnham Green is far more logical. Having traveled the Piccadilly Line from Gloucester Road back to Heathrow, the journey is already tedious enough without an extra stop.
Why is this NOT in the London Underground category?
Click to expand...

I thought so I don't think the Piccadilly line is slow it often sails straight through sometimes you have wait at least 20 mins for a District line train and see 5-10 or more Piccadilly line trains going straight through and the track alongside the platforms makes an awful sound just see this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8ATkUPbcjo . And yes your probably right it should be in the London Underground thread.
 
B

Bookd

Member
Joined
27 Aug 2015
Messages
445
Nym said:
The plans are actually to move Chiswick Park station onto the Richmond Branch long term...
Click to expand...

How? It is on a different branch and would involve rebuilding a fair part of Chiswick.
 
J

John Webb

Established Member
Joined
5 Jun 2010
Messages
3,072
Location
St Albans
There are minimum widths of platforms - so 'narrow island' platforms are unlikely to meet modern safety requirements, perhaps?

John Webb
 
M

MatthewRead

On Moderation
Joined
21 Nov 2014
Messages
1,636
Location
West london
John Webb said:
There are minimum widths of platforms - so 'narrow island' platforms are unlikely to meet modern safety requirements, perhaps?

John Webb
Click to expand...
But they always encourage people to change at Hammersmith rather than Barons Court for the very reason that Barons Court has narrower island platforms and it could be the same at the other end encourage passengers to still change at Acton Town rather than Chiswick Park
 
MikeWh

MikeWh

Established Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
15 Jun 2010
Messages
7,871
Location
Crayford
MatthewRead said:
But they always encourage people to change at Hammersmith rather than Barons Court for the very reason that Barons Court has narrower island platforms and it could be the same at the other end encourage passengers to still change at Acton Town rather than Chiswick Park
Click to expand...

So you want to rebuild the station to provide extra platforms, but then encourage people not to use it. Doesn't sound like much of a business case to me.
 
bluegoblin7

bluegoblin7

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2011
Messages
1,381
Location
JB/JP/JW
Let's also just take a look at the timetables for a moment.

A westbound journey by Piccadilly from Hammersmith to Acton Town, non-stop, is scheduled 6 minutes. This increases to 8 if a stop is required at Turnham Green, and also reduces available headways due to trains taking longer to vacate the signalling section.

The same journey by District, stopping at all stations, is scheduled 9 1/2 minutes.

At most times the District runs at a 5 minute frequency (10 beyond Turnham Green); the Piccadilly every 2 1/2-3 minutes. Assuming you routed every other District down the fast you've immediately cut the service as far as Turnham Green in half, and you'll also need to take out a Piccadilly line train every 10 minutes to make space, as well as slowing down those remaining whilst you perform the cross-over between Baron's Court and Hammersmith, and again at Acton Town - remembering that you've also now got two completely unused tracks west of Turnham Green. So that's your Central London frequency cut to ~3 1/2-4 minutes, Chiswick Park closed (or, with your new island platforms, slowing down *every single train*, including the *next* 'fast' District) and two perfectly good lines sitting out of use. Add into that the inevitable late running or service disruption and you've got a disaster waiting to happen. And, because you've got less trains through the west end, your platforms are now busier. Meaning other lines get busier to take the strain, and stations get closer to overcrowding. Dropping frequency by even a minute can have a *massive* impact.

All that disruption to thousands of others just so you can save *one and a half minutes*. That bit cannot be stressed enough. One and a half minutes. Thank goodness you don't write our timetables.
 
M

MatthewRead

On Moderation
Joined
21 Nov 2014
Messages
1,636
Location
West london
MikeWh said:
So you want to rebuild the station to provide extra platforms, but then encourage people not to use it. Doesn't sound like much of a business case to me.
Click to expand...
It's for the benefit of the local residents and I'm not one of them I actually live nearer to Turnham Green.
 
M

MatthewRead

On Moderation
Joined
21 Nov 2014
Messages
1,636
Location
West london
bluegoblin7 said:
Let's also just take a look at the timetables for a moment.

A westbound journey by Piccadilly from Hammersmith to Acton Town, non-stop, is scheduled 6 minutes. This increases to 8 if a stop is required at Turnham Green, and also reduces available headways due to trains taking longer to vacate the signalling section.

The same journey by District, stopping at all stations, is scheduled 9 1/2 minutes.

At most times the District runs at a 5 minute frequency (10 beyond Turnham Green); the Piccadilly every 2 1/2-3 minutes. Assuming you routed every other District down the fast you've immediately cut the service as far as Turnham Green in half, and you'll also need to take out a Piccadilly line train every 10 minutes to make space, as well as slowing down those remaining whilst you perform the cross-over between Baron's Court and Hammersmith, and again at Acton Town - remembering that you've also now got two completely unused tracks west of Turnham Green. So that's your Central London frequency cut to ~3 1/2-4 minutes, Chiswick Park closed (or, with your new island platforms, slowing down *every single train*, including the *next* 'fast' District) and two perfectly good lines sitting out of use. Add into that the inevitable late running or service disruption and you've got a disaster waiting to happen. And, because you've got less trains through the west end, your platforms are now busier. Meaning other lines get busier to take the strain, and stations get closer to overcrowding. Dropping frequency by even a minute can have a *massive* impact.

All that disruption to thousands of others just so you can save *one and a half minutes*. That bit cannot be stressed enough. One and a half minutes. Thank goodness you don't write our timetables.
Click to expand...
I never said take the local lines out of use:o
 
R

rmt4ever

Member
Joined
13 May 2013
Messages
692
Location
RMT
MatthewRead said:
I thought so I don't think the Piccadilly line is slow it often sails straight through sometimes you have wait at least 20 mins for a District line train and see 5-10 or more Piccadilly line trains going straight through and the track alongside the platforms makes an awful sound just see this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8ATkUPbcjo . And yes your probably right it should be in the London Underground thread.
Click to expand...

The service is scheduled for every ten minutes towards Ealing and London for most of the day. Unfortionately, if a train is cancelled and you arrived having just missed one this can mean a wait of up to 19 minutes. There are no departure screens and instead of having staff announce that the next train due at xxxx is cancelled due to xxxxxx , LT seem to think it's more useful to hear good service/minor delays etc played repeatedly over the tannoy. Which is frankly insulting when a train is cancelled with no notification or reason why...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top