Many longer distance passengers will have seat reservations, but for those who don't, earlier boarding could help solve that. What's the minimum peak turnround at Paddington today? Could a train be opened say up to 10 mins before departure if cleaning and servicing were complete?
-
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!
Reading commuters: should more long distance GWR trains skip this station?
- Thread starter Schweir
- Start date
- Status
Many longer distance passengers will have seat reservations, but for those who don't, earlier boarding could help solve that. What's the minimum peak turnround at Paddington today? Could a train be opened say up to 10 mins before departure if cleaning and servicing were complete?
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
In terms of enforcing pick-up/set-down only: How about a technological solution: Modify the door controls, so that they can be set to be opened only from the inside if it's a set-down-only stop, or only from the outside if it's a pick-up-only stop.
coppercapped
Established Member
There are no barriers on the overbridge for any of the platforms. In fact there are two stairways on opposite sides of the the overbridge for each of the three platform islands, 10/11, 12/13 and 14/15 and each stairway has at least one 'up' escalator - the wider platforms also have down escalators. Also on the overbridge, between the tops of the stairways, are two lifts to each platform.
There are three gatelines, one to the north of the station leading directly to the stairs, lifts and escalators to the overbridge and a similar set at the southern (town centre) end of the bridge. The third set is in the 1989 station building and is very convenient for platforms 4 to 7. Once through the gates there are no hindrances to movement at all.
coppercapped
Established Member
Minimum turnround in the peaks is in the order of 15 to 20 minutes for HSTs although scheduled turnrounds are about 5 to 10 minutes longer depending on the service. Paddington is still limited in the number of platforms it can use for full length, long distance train departures as the Thames Valley stopping/semi-fast and Heathrow Connect services use the high numbered platforms.
Even now trains are generally opened 10 to 15 minutes before departure - it is only in exceptional circumstances that one only has 5 minutes or less to board and that mostly in the peaks.
Pressure on platform space may ease (assuming the same number of long distance departures) when Heathrow Connect and the Reading terminators are taken over by Crossrail and don't need to use the main train shed any more. However it is already known that more trains are planned so I can't see the turnround times getting significantly longer.
Last edited:
CentralTrainer
Member
- Joined
- 1 Feb 2017
- Messages
- 359
Person outside waiting to get on activates door control and gets on. Reading commuter waiting at door on train then simply gets off through the open door.
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
Yes, people waiting to get on at Reading in that scenario would often take a chance that someone near where they are waiting is going to get off, and use that to get on - because there's not much risk involved. So it won't be a perfect solution there. However, that's perhaps not so important because people getting on at Reading won't take seats that long-distance passengers need - because, obviously, the long-distance people are already seated.
From what I've read here, the biggest problem is claimed to be going the other way - from Paddington - when commuters will take seats that are really intended for long-distance passengers. And I imagine one-way-opening doors would help a lot with that - because almost noone for Reading is going to chance getting on at Paddington if there's even a small chance that they won't be able to get off at Reading because it happens that noone gets on at the door they wait by: The consequences are obviously too severe.
(Should stress though that I wouldn't advocate that as a solution unless there are sufficient other fast trains to absorb the Reading commuters. In principle, I'd rather see overcrowding solved by more trains)
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,382
I think the earlier post (by Kite159) might have been referring to the Paddington footbridge access, (ie the only unbarriered platforms are 1, 5, 6, 7 & 8) and possible means of limiting access to trains on departure from there? Having said that it was made in reply to a post about Reading... confused.com
Last edited:
edwin_m
Veteran Member
They'd just pull the emergency handle and hurry off into the crowd before anyone could stop them.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
I'm unconvinced you actually need to enforce it. So far as I can tell it isn't always enforced at MKC when it applies (peak only), and you do get the odd commuter getting off at MKC from a train you know didn't show it on the board at Euston and they didn't check tickets on boarding - but most people do behave where there is a reasonable alternative (the 12-car LNR fasts) and so the actual problem is reduced.
London bound it's even less of an issue as they won't be stopping a long distance passenger boarding/getting a seat. Plus if they whine at having to stand, all GWR then has to say is that they weren't meant to be on that train to start with.
E16 Cyclist
Member
I can't help but think a more out of the box solution is required, like perhaps boarding the train by destination similar to what they do on Amtrak and so people in each carriage are only going to a particular destination. Then you can stop all trains at Reading and have a carriage or two designated for Reading commuters and those are then replaced by those going at Reading going west. Journey times and station dwell times would take a slight hit but other than that everybody's happy
And the way to enforce it is by programming selective door operation to only open doors on specific carriages unless overridden in case of emergency
And the way to enforce it is by programming selective door operation to only open doors on specific carriages unless overridden in case of emergency
Kite159
Veteran Member
reddragon
Established Member
Ah this ridiculous Reaxit subject again!!
Half the passengers from the west alight at Reading for Reading or to change trains.
Half the Reading - Paddington flow originates at Reading.
There is a reason why all trains stop at Reading. Only with someone with absolutely no idea on how to provide passenger services on such a busy overcrowded line would suggest not stopping at Reading and halving the route capacity.
Where are the men in white coats? Nurse!
Half the passengers from the west alight at Reading for Reading or to change trains.
Half the Reading - Paddington flow originates at Reading.
There is a reason why all trains stop at Reading. Only with someone with absolutely no idea on how to provide passenger services on such a busy overcrowded line would suggest not stopping at Reading and halving the route capacity.
Where are the men in white coats? Nurse!
Noting my username, perhaps we could go back to slipping at Reading?
May I ask where those data come from please?
Andrewlong
Member
I do hate this condescending attitude to Reading commuters who pay their money and if they get to an empty unreserved seat before a 'genuine' passenger, are perfectly within their rights to occupy a seat. If you want to sit from Paddington to Bristol, reserve a seat or make sure you at the front of the queue when the platform is announced. If you can't get a seat at Paddington, you will get one at Reading when train empties. As to other countries, Spain's intercity services are reserved plus you have to go through a security scan too. They don't have anything like the frequency of trains or volume of people like a station such as Reading has.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
It's not a "condescending attitude". It's a recognition that Reading to London is a commuter demand, and is best provided by way of a high capacity commuter service such as a fast 12-car EMU starting at Reading or Didcot every 10-15 minutes. Almost every other country segregates their commuters from their InterCity passengers, and so should we.
silverfoxcc
Member
- Joined
- 17 Apr 2012
- Messages
- 439
Techno
I understand the mantra of the Railway system is the fare is to get you from a to B irrespective on what you pay or how long it takes and doesnt guarantee a seat
The better idea to stop all the Reading passengers doing this where it is advertised as set down only is run the train as normal and then block/channel by means of barriers alighting passengers to Revenue Inspectors who check each ticket
Anyone with a Reading-Padd season gets done ( what would be the offence under bylaws?)
The transfer passengers eg to Basingstoke or even Earley etc no problem.
Last edited:
But what are GWR to do with all those seats vacated by travellers leaving at Reading? Depart for London with (perhaps?) 25% of seats empty on some trains while those 4 TPH from Didcot are packed to the rafters and the focus of inevitable complaints shifts to overcrowding on those?! Or perhaps we can just remove all the Reading calls, dramatically cull much of the Reading commuter and business market and find new ways to cope (or not) with the thousands of daily longer long distance commuters on the axis as they abandon rail and crowd onto the M4 and access roads into Reading, or more likely seek new jobs or move their businesses elsewhere. The best solution on this long distance high speed premium metro we call the GWML is to supplement the current fast services with many more high speed limited stop 12 car emus in the peaks that have only a very small difference in journey time and present a level of comfort and ambience similar to the 80xs. I think the real trick would be to install the additional crossover to the west of Reading so these trains can cross over from the up relief and be fed, along with the other longer distance trains into the #10/#11 island, the de facto 'fast London' platform, so when emus appear they just form the 'next fast' to London and will largely empty the platform in the process. Such additional trackwork, removing some traffic from the relief side will also make accommodating greater terminating traffic from the east much easier to plan and deliver (i.e. potentially up to 4 TPH Elizabeth Line as well as similar quantities of Heathrow western connection services (although the latter would be better extended to local destinations west of Reading I believe).
SWTrainspottin
Member
- Joined
- 6 Sep 2016
- Messages
- 453
Very true but think about the newer commuters too.
Surely with higher frequencies, the impact of this on each service is spread thinner. If an additional 4tph fast are coming (HEx paths?) - plus higher frequencies on the long distance services, hourly Cheltenham etc - then it is mitigated somewhat.
It's the same situation as East Croydon really. A bit of a pain, but with purpose and too much use within the bigger picture of the network to ignore.
Not to mention the fact that the remodelling was done to enable more trains to stop, dwell and to become a full hub.
Crossrail, wires, E/W, 4tph SWT, WRAtH/new acronym, more North Downs etc etc etc... all of these things at Reading will increase demand and usage further. It's only going to get busier and more important. Meaning even more so, everything should stop.
It's the same situation as East Croydon really. A bit of a pain, but with purpose and too much use within the bigger picture of the network to ignore.
Not to mention the fact that the remodelling was done to enable more trains to stop, dwell and to become a full hub.
Crossrail, wires, E/W, 4tph SWT, WRAtH/new acronym, more North Downs etc etc etc... all of these things at Reading will increase demand and usage further. It's only going to get busier and more important. Meaning even more so, everything should stop.
reddragon
Established Member
Well said!
PHILIPE
Veteran Member
Unless this is another instance but a Swansea train once ran through Reading as too full to pick up and the Readings finished up in Swindon
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
That won't be hard - the Class 387 Standard interior is in my view markedly superior to the Class 800 in seat comfort, legroom and general ambiance. Yes, even with the ironing boards (which are the ScotRail style ones with a contoured rather than a flat cushion, vastly better than the Class 700 ones).
Surely the most logical thing to do is to announce departures from Paddington 15 mins before the train leaves. The long distance passengers who generally turn up early can find their reserved seat or any seat. Reading commuters generally still have 5 mins to catch the train in front so will take that one as the next fastest train before they fill up any remaining space on a train not departing for 15 mins.
I don't see trains coming into Paddington in the morning as much of a problem as obviously long distance passengers are already on board before the train reaches Reading. Just an increase in fast / semi fast EMU crowd buster services could be used in the peaks starting / terminating further out in the Thames valley. Even if these are every 15 mins then at least some of the Reading commuters will learn to time their travel to these trains if they are likely to get a seat. Crossrail will also run 4 tph to Reading and an additional 2 tph in the peak out to Maidenhead from December 2019 so one would assume more GWR services will make fewer calls at the stations closer to London during the peaks.
In regards to long distance services not calling at Reading, GWR seem to be working towards having an hourly clock face timetable which has 2 x Bristol via Bath, 2 x S Wales, 1 x Cheltenham, 2 x Oxford / Worcester, 2 x Exeter / Plymouth and 1 x Bedwyn all running non-stop PAD - RDG with the Oxfords making a call at Slough. I make that an average of 1 train every 6 minutes which should even out the peak flow of commuters.
I do agree though with the additional 2 tph that are planned to Bristol via Parkway should not call at Reading, and I think I read somewhere that in the peaks this will change to 1 non stop to Bristol via Parkway and 1 non stop to S Wales. Maybe one or two additional non-stop trains to other destinations could be added in the morning and evening peaks but not at the expense of the clock face calls.
I don't see trains coming into Paddington in the morning as much of a problem as obviously long distance passengers are already on board before the train reaches Reading. Just an increase in fast / semi fast EMU crowd buster services could be used in the peaks starting / terminating further out in the Thames valley. Even if these are every 15 mins then at least some of the Reading commuters will learn to time their travel to these trains if they are likely to get a seat. Crossrail will also run 4 tph to Reading and an additional 2 tph in the peak out to Maidenhead from December 2019 so one would assume more GWR services will make fewer calls at the stations closer to London during the peaks.
In regards to long distance services not calling at Reading, GWR seem to be working towards having an hourly clock face timetable which has 2 x Bristol via Bath, 2 x S Wales, 1 x Cheltenham, 2 x Oxford / Worcester, 2 x Exeter / Plymouth and 1 x Bedwyn all running non-stop PAD - RDG with the Oxfords making a call at Slough. I make that an average of 1 train every 6 minutes which should even out the peak flow of commuters.
I do agree though with the additional 2 tph that are planned to Bristol via Parkway should not call at Reading, and I think I read somewhere that in the peaks this will change to 1 non stop to Bristol via Parkway and 1 non stop to S Wales. Maybe one or two additional non-stop trains to other destinations could be added in the morning and evening peaks but not at the expense of the clock face calls.
This is the correct answer. I fear some posting in this thread don't know Reading that well, hence the occasionally fascinating. but irrelevant, comparisons with Milton Keynes. Anyone doubting this may care to do some trainspotting at Blackwater on a weekday morning. There is a reason why the Blackwater property rental market is tighter than a duck's proverbial - finding somewhere affordable to live with good access to Reading is becoming increasingly difficult. Reading is a boom town that is hugely attractive to those that want to better themselves through the many high quality employment opportunities on offer. So it would make no sense whatsoever to reduce the number of trains calling at Reading and any attempt to make a swathe of trains pick-up or set down-only would be doomed to a very quick failure.
Agree entirely with all of that. I read somewhere they're planning to retain some skip stops on the mains for many of the 387s, at one of Slough, Maidenhead or Twyford. With these units' high acceleration and top speed they will only be a very few minutes slower than the best non-stop 80x timings, so could be very attractive to Reading punters and thus very effective platform clearers in the morning peak, especially if they can be routed via platform #10 or #11 by some means - no problem for such trains from the Westbury line, but would need an extra crossover from the Up Relief coming from Didcot.
SWTrainspottin
Member
- Joined
- 6 Sep 2016
- Messages
- 453
1L20 0559 Swansea - London Paddington is also booked to pass through Reading.
reddragon
Established Member
The new January timetable already has 8 / 12 car 387s starting at Didcot mopping up Thames Valley commuters to keep them off the fasts, impossible before electrification as the HSTs used on these stopping services were wholly unsuitable due to slow acceleration / long platform dwell times. I no longer need to change at Reading in the mornings for a quicker train as the 387s are within 10 mins of the HST fast timings. I do miss the one off morning peak HST on the stoppers that did not stop at Reading though, ideal for a nap.
The same will happen for the Newbury / Bedwyn peak services later this year when 3 car 165s become 8 car 387s.
In my experience, the only time those west of Reading actually suffer is during disruption when their destination train is full, all reserve seats are cancelled and first class is declassified and their next train is 1 or 2 hour plus away. That is the time for genuine restrictions at the gate line and when I choose not to board a train to infrequently served destination. If you watched Paddington 24/7, GWR go to great lengths to accommodate those going to such destinations where they can as they otherwise might have to provide taxis.
The same will happen for the Newbury / Bedwyn peak services later this year when 3 car 165s become 8 car 387s.
In my experience, the only time those west of Reading actually suffer is during disruption when their destination train is full, all reserve seats are cancelled and first class is declassified and their next train is 1 or 2 hour plus away. That is the time for genuine restrictions at the gate line and when I choose not to board a train to infrequently served destination. If you watched Paddington 24/7, GWR go to great lengths to accommodate those going to such destinations where they can as they otherwise might have to provide taxis.
I don't think anyone needs to be a genius to work out which large city is located to the east of Reading... whether they have just started commuting or not and, as a result, where all the trains are going to end up. People aren't stupid. They can work out for themselves what's going on, they talk to fellow commuters, etc.
I doubt 10 and 11 could handle any more trains - they're already busy enough and moving trains across from the relief line would cause conflicts with westbound relief line services, freights heading to the Berks & Hants, etc - the whole point of rebuilding Reading station and adding the flyover and altering the junctions to the west was to remove conflicts.
In addition, switching the Didcot limited-stop 387 services to/from the main lines at Maidenhead or other places to the east makes the best use of the capacity available on the reliefs and allows trains arriving from the London direction to be sorted out well to the east of Reading.
I've said it before, so I'll say it again - is it so hard for all the people here with 'solutions' to just wait and see what impact the introduction of the 387s and 800s, with their extra seats, the new GWR timetable in 12 months' time and Crossrail reaching Reading in December 2019 have on the situation?
All that adds up to a huge increase in capacity for the Thames Valley, even before you get to the likely changes to travel habits that Crossrail will permit, by offering direct access to central London and the City. It may just turn out that they do the trick all by themselves, without barriers, armies of staff policing commuters, etc, etc, etc...
As we can see, reddragon's journey habits have already been changed just by the first phase of 387 operation west of Maidenhead.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
On this one it's probably worth noting that on occasions ex-LM services out of Euston are near fully loaded with commuters before any information has appeared on the PIS or the train bodyside as to where they are going. And that happened before RTT[1], too, people just knew what the platforms were, and in some cases an educated guess from the arrivals display works too.
It probably helps that a very high percentage are going to MKC, and other than accidentally ending up on a Tring stopper (which would just be inconvenient, not a PF/prosecution matter) or one of the very small number of Bletchley terminators (2 in the late evening, I think, being Tring stoppers "going home" for the night) there are no northbound ex-LM trains that don't call at MKC. (Which is almost true of Reading, but not *quite*, though there are no eastbound trains at Reading that do not go to Paddington eventually).
[1] Bolded platforms on RTT at Euston are from my observation 100% accurate, unlike some other stations.
Last edited:
- Status