Bracknell MP - service to Waterloo unacceptable

[Dr_Intoxicated]

When I first moved to Feltham in the 80s there was one train from Reading that ran non stop from Feltham to Waterloo via Hounslow. Very rare to miss Clapham junction. It left Feltham some time round 18:00. I caught it a few times for the novelty of a non stop service to Waterloo.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

When I first moved to Feltham in the 80s there was one train from Reading that ran non stop from Feltham to Waterloo via Hounslow. Very rare to miss Clapham junction. It left Feltham some time round 18:00. I caught it a few times for the novelty of a non stop service to Waterloo.

Not on the Wimbledon side it’s not, not at all in fact, but yes - on the Reading lines, it’s practically unheard of these days.

 

[Beebman]

Back in 2020 there was a thread on here about Waterloo-Reading stopping patterns which was of interest to me as a commuter on that route for two periods of time in the 1980s and I contributed some info, in particular this from post #8:

Regarding the weekday peak fasts, in 80/81 there were up trains from Reading at 07:23, 07:43 and 08:01 which each only called at Staines after Sunningdale. In the down direction it was a little more complicated (departure times from Waterloo):

17:20 - stopped at Richmond, Staines, Sunningdale (but not Ascot) then Bracknell and all stations to Reading
17:34 - stopped at Hounslow, Virginia Water, Sunningdale and all stations to Reading.

 

[nw1]

When I first moved to Feltham in the 80s there was one train from Reading that ran non stop from Feltham to Waterloo via Hounslow. Very rare to miss Clapham junction. It left Feltham some time round 18:00. I caught it a few times for the novelty of a non stop service to Waterloo.

This seemed to be a common shoulder peak pattern in the early 80s, as referred to above. There were two fasts and two slows per hour around 1600-1700 or so and the fasts (at 05 and 35) would be Waterloo-Feltham-Staines only. The 1982 timetable, which shows this, is on Timetable World.

Back in 2020 there was a thread on here about Waterloo-Reading stopping patterns which was of interest to me as a commuter on that route for two periods of time in the 1980s and I contributed some info, in particular this from post #8:

And to fill in more details (from a CWN I have) from 1982:

1705 Guildford via Ascot 2EPB + 4Cig
1720 Reading 8Cig
1722 Guildford via Ascot 4EPB + 4Vep
1734 Reading (Brentford) 8Cig
1736 Camberley 2EPB + 4Vep
1750 Aldershot 8Cig
1752 Reading 8Cig

Full stopping patterns available on the (free) 1982 timetable on Timetable World.
The shoulder peak pattern was 05/35 fast and 22/52 stopping, so the high peak looks like that with three additionals on top.

 

[AlastairFraser]

A lot of these journeys look easy on a map but if you don't know the area it's hard to appreciate how bad, and unpredictable, the traffic can be. More journey time added in consequence to allow a buffer if you need to be on a particular train. So the time savings from driving to somewhere with a quicker train can often be an illusion.

There's also the walk from the car park to station which in places like Maidenhead is not insignificant.

I do know the area, I appreciate how bad some of the roads are round there, but Bracknell to Farnborough is grade separated dual carriageway for most of the journey.
Twyford/Maidenhead is a fair point, I don't deny that, but Bracknell was built for cars!
Reading down the A329 (M) is easy, same for most of the Blackwater Valley and even a Windsor line station wouldn't be terrible.
The interurban journeys are mostly fine, it's the E. Berks suburban villages and medium sized towns which are difficult from Brackers.

Yes, traffic is solid in the area in the peaks. The roads to Maidenhead and Slough are poor and the inference that it's only a 20 min drive to Reading Station is laughable. Train beats that journey every time.

Anyway, the whole notion that in a town of 114k inhabitants that is 25 miles from the centre of London and is directly linked by a train service should *drive* to another town to catch a train could only be dreamt up on these forums.

It's not the best solution, but, as I said, Bracknell is built for cars! It is one of the better options if the Waterloo via Staines line is up the spout, given bus options in Bracknell are rather limited.

I mentioned the roads towards GWML stations are mostly rubbish, which is why I said your best bet is Farnborough Main if the Waterloo via Staines is up the spout.

Train over bus into Reading from some areas of Bracknell, but, if you're in a rush and coming from anywhere in urban Bracknell itself plus Binfield/Popeswood, it's an easy drive down the A329 (M).

 

[43096]

Train over bus into Reading from some areas of Bracknell, but, if you're in a rush and coming from anywhere in urban Bracknell itself plus Binfield/Popeswood, it's an easy drive down the A329 (M).

Until you get to Reading, which is a pig for traffic.

 

[Goldfish62]

Train over bus into Reading from some areas of Bracknell, but, if you're in a rush and coming from anywhere in urban Bracknell itself plus Binfield/Popeswood, it's an easy drive down the A329 (M).

Until you get to Reading. The council is pro-public transport (unlike a few people on these forums!) so deliberately doesn't make it too easy to reach the town centre by car.

As I said before no one is going to drive north, south or west to catch a train into London when London is so close. Bracknell is in the Greater London Urban Area.

Anyway, back to railways rather cars as a mode, and in particular the slow down of services on the line. Until the 2004 timetable overhaul there was an 0713 from Reading that ran all stations to Ascot, then Staines, Richmond and Clapham Junction, arr Waterloo at 0826. I used to catch it most days and very popular and generally reliable it was too.

Nowadays the equivalent is the 0711 from Reading that makes five additional stops and arrives at Waterloo 13 min later.

 

[Dr_Intoxicated]

Not on the Wimbledon side it’s not, not at all in fact, but yes - on the Reading lines, it’s practically unheard of these days.

Yes but I was talking about the Windsor side.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Yes but I was talking about the Windsor side.

Of course, I was just stating it’s interesting the difference.
Obviously the skips on the other side are down to pathing though.

 

[Craig1122]

Of course, I was just stating it’s interesting the difference.
Obviously the skips on the other side are down to pathing though.

Skips on the mainline side are largely down to the curved platforms restricting capacity, lower line speed for fast trains than if it was straight and longer dwell times for trains that stop.

SWT fairly consistently stated they would have liked more to stop but couldn't afford the overall loss of capacity. The Sea Containers bid for the franchise included a proposal to move the platforms at Clapham east so that they were all on straight track. Not sure how realistic that would have been.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Skips on the mainline side are largely down to the curved platforms restricting capacity, lower line speed for fast trains than if it was straight and longer dwell times for trains that stop.

SWT fairly consistently stated they would have liked more to stop but couldn't afford the overall loss of capacity. The Sea Containers bid for the franchise included a proposal to move the platforms at Clapham east so that they were all on straight track. Not sure how realistic that would have been.

That's certainly an interesting one. I'm assuming you mean the first bid that lost to Stagecoach, rather than the far more recent one to First MTR? Actually, yes - you must do, as I believe Sea Containers is long defunct.

 

[Craig1122]

That's certainly an interesting one. I'm assuming you mean the first bid that lost to Stagecoach, rather than the far more recent one to First MTR? Actually, yes - you must do, as I believe Sea Containers is long defunct.

Yes, 2001 bids which were initially supposed to be for 20 year franchises. Then the SRA got cold feet because they found it pretty much impossible to assess the relative merits/value for money of vastly contrasting bids.

Both contained some pretty major plans almost none of which were the same as I recall!

 

[Goldfish62]

Yes, 2001 bids which were initially supposed to be for 20 year franchises. Then the SRA got cold feet because they found it pretty much impossible to assess the relative merits/value for money of vastly contrasting bids.

Both contained some pretty major plans almost none of which were the same as I recall!

Another stated factor at the time was SWT's poor performance, resulting in a just three year franchise from 2004 to 2007.

 

[nw1]

Until you get to Reading. The council is pro-public transport (unlike a few people on these forums!) so deliberately doesn't make it too easy to reach the town centre by car.

As I said before no one is going to drive north, south or west to catch a train into London when London is so close. Bracknell is in the Greater London Urban Area.

Anyway, back to railways rather cars as a mode, and in particular the slow down of services on the line. Until the 2004 timetable overhaul there was an 0713 from Reading that ran all stations to Ascot, then Staines, Richmond and Clapham Junction, arr Waterloo at 0826. I used to catch it most days and very popular and generally reliable it was too.

Nowadays the equivalent is the 0711 from Reading that makes five additional stops and arrives at Waterloo 13 min later.

Looking a bit further back still, the 1967 CWN from Waterloo is available on the BR Coaching Stock groups.io group. I don't have 1967 stopping patterns admittedly.

This was the 1967 departure pattern (from a CWN on groups.io BR Coaching Stock group), exact stops unknown:

1658 Reading/Guildford
1700 Weybridge/Windsor
1702 Teddington
1709 Hounslow (Twickenham)
1713 Reading/Camberley
1715 Weybridge/Windsor
1720 Hounslow (Brentford)
1723 Shepperton
1726 Teddington
1728 Reading/Guildford
1730 Weybridge/Windsor
1732 Teddington
1739 Hounslow (Twickenham)
1743 Reading/Camberley
1745 Weybridge
1748 Windsor (Brentford)
1750 Hounslow (Brentford)
1753 Shepperton
1756 Teddington
1758 Reading/Guildford

I do know that the Readings were pretty fast in this era so one might assume this would have been true in 1967.
Of note also that Windsor and Weybridge had 4tph in the peak. So how did they manage to fit all that lot in, in 1967, when now they seem to struggle?

 

[Goldfish62]

Looking a bit further back still, the 1967 CWN from Waterloo is available on the BR Coaching Stock groups.io group. I don't have 1967 stopping patterns admittedly.

This was the 1967 departure pattern (from a CWN on groups.io BR Coaching Stock group), exact stops unknown:

1658 Reading/Guildford
1700 Weybridge/Windsor
1702 Teddington
1709 Hounslow (Twickenham)
1713 Reading/Camberley
1715 Weybridge/Windsor
1720 Hounslow (Brentford)
1723 Shepperton
1726 Teddington
1728 Reading/Guildford
1730 Weybridge/Windsor
1732 Teddington
1739 Hounslow (Twickenham)
1743 Reading/Camberley
1745 Weybridge
1748 Windsor (Brentford)
1750 Hounslow (Brentford)
1753 Shepperton
1756 Teddington
1758 Reading/Guildford

I do know that the Readings were pretty fast in this era so one might assume this would have been true in 1967.
Of note also that Windsor and Weybridge had 4tph in the peak. So how did they manage to fit all that lot in, in 1967, when now they seem to struggle?

Thanks for posting. A real revelation. 19tph in the evening peak when about 12tph is seemingly a struggle now.

 

[Beebman]

I did a few trips from Earley to Waterloo with my Mum in the late 60s and I'm pretty certain that the off-peak service was half-hourly with trains running non-stop after Staines. I remember that one day we went to the Battersea Funfair and we had to get to Queenstown Road by going to Waterloo and doubling back on a stopping service which would seem to confirm that there was no stop at Clapham Junction in those days by the Reading trains. The route after Staines was via Twickenham, I remember being interested in the flourescent platform lights there with the station name and I always looked out for them as we passed through.

 

[jfollows]

1968 timetable: (but it looks the same as 1967)

1658 Reading/Guildford - Staines, Egham, Virginia Water, Longcross, Sunningdale, Ascot, all stations to Reading
1700 Weybridge/Windsor - Richmond, Twickenham, Whitton, Feltham, Ashford, Staines
1702 Teddington - all stations except Queens Road then onwards to Waterloo
1709 Hounslow (Twickenham) - all stations
1713 Reading/Camberley - Staines, Egham, Virginia Water, Sunningdale, Ascot, all stations to Reading
1715 Weybridge/Windsor - Richmond, Twickenham, Whitton, Feltham, then all stations
1720 Hounslow (Brentford) - all stations
1723 Shepperton - Richmond, then all stations
1726 Teddington - Clapham, Putney, Barnes, Mortlake, Richmond, then all stations
1728 Reading/Guildford - Staines, Egham, Virginia Water, Longcross, Sunningdale, Ascot, all stations to Reading
1730 Weybridge/Windsor - Richmond, Twickenham, Whitton, Feltham, Ashford, Staines, then all stations
1732 Teddington - all stations except Queens Road (to Kingston)
1739 Hounslow (Twickenham) - all stations
1743 Reading/Camberley - Staines, Egham, Virginia Water, Sunningdale, Ascot, then all stations to Reading
1745 Weybridge - Richmond, Twickenham, Whitton, Feltham, Ashford, Staines, then all stations
1748 Windsor (Brentford) - Hounslow, Feltham, Ashford, Staines, then all stations
1750 Hounslow (Brentford) - all stations
1753 Shepperton - Richmond, St. Margarets, Twickenham, then all stations
1756 Teddington - Clapham, Putney, Barnes, Mortlake, Richmond, then all stations
1758 Reading/Guildford - Staines, Egham, Virginia Water, Sunningdale, Ascot, then all stations to Reading

I have the working timetable for 1968.
Four trains non-stop to Staines (the Reading services) (five listed above, four in the hour 1658-1757)
Six trains non-stop to Richmond
One train non-stop to Hounslow

With two exceptions (1726 & 1756) Clapham Junction was part of the “all stations” stopping pattern, which differs radically from today.

I think the problem is that it's impossible to reconcile the needs of a fast service to Bracknell coupled with the vastly increased need to stop at stations closer to London - non-stop to Richmond or even Staines won't cut it today. 55 years ago places like Clapham were a wilderness with relatively little reason to stop. I lived in the area in the early 1980s and it hadn't changed much then either. Now not just Clapham but Vauxhall are pretty important stops, and then Putney and Barnes also, so you've got four stops before Richmond pretty much all the time. Twickenham and Feltham aren't unimportant either. There's not the track capacity to do both - so today we have plenty of trains but they stop a lot.

 

[Goldfish62]

I think the problem is that it's impossible to reconcile the needs of a fast service to Bracknell coupled with the vastly increased need to stop at stations closer to London - non-stop to Richmond or even Staines won't cut it today. 55 years ago places like Clapham were a wilderness with relatively little reason to stop. I lived in the area in the early 1980s and it hadn't changed much then either. Now not just Clapham but Vauxhall are pretty important stops, and then Putney and Barnes also, so you've got four stops before Richmond pretty much all the time. Twickenham and Feltham aren't unimportant either. There's not the track capacity to do both - so today we have plenty of trains but they stop a lot.

You're absolutely right that running fast from Waterloo to Staines wouldn't cut it these days. The whole line is almost an urban conurbation right from Waterloo to Reading.

Frequency is the answer as I've highlighted before on this thread. Unfortunately we don't have that either right now.

 

[Craig1122]

I do know that the Readings were pretty fast in this era so one might assume this would have been true in 1967.
Of note also that Windsor and Weybridge had 4tph in the peak. So how did they manage to fit all that lot in, in 1967, when now they seem to struggle?

4tph to Windsor & Weybridge was achieved by 2 x 8 coach train per hour splitting and joining at Staines, so 2tph to each from Staines. There are still 4tph today but it's 2 x 8/10 coach to Windsor and the same to Weybridge.

It's notable that this gives a much slower direct service from Chertsey and Addlestone so in reality most London traffic from those stations will circulate via Weybridge.

However as noted up thread this reflects the heavy increase in demand closer to London. While 8 coaches aren't generally needed past Staines on those routes they are needed closer to London, or at least were pre covid. One big improvement over previous timetables was that the Hounslow loop went from 2 to 4tph from 2004 (Currently 4tph peak hours only).

I think the problem is that it's impossible to reconcile the needs of a fast service to Bracknell coupled with the vastly increased need to stop at stations closer to London - non-stop to Richmond or even Staines won't cut it today. 55 years ago places like Clapham were a wilderness with relatively little reason to stop. I lived in the area in the early 1980s and it hadn't changed much then either. Now not just Clapham but Vauxhall are pretty important stops, and then Putney and Barnes also, so you've got four stops before Richmond pretty much all the time. Twickenham and Feltham aren't unimportant either. There's not the track capacity to do both - so today we have plenty of trains but they stop a lot.

An excellent summary. There are ways to get some incremental speed gains, for example eliminating the level crossings would help, but it's hard to see any way to get significant journey time reductions without an unacceptable reduction in service levels at some stations.

The only other way would be very substantial infrastructure investment, for example there's probably space to four track parts of the Hounslow loop, but that kind of scheme would be extremely unlikely ever to justify the investment.

 

[Goldfish62]

The only other way would be very substantial infrastructure investment, for example there's probably space to four track parts of the Hounslow loop, but that kind of scheme would be extremely unlikely ever to justify the investment.

There was talk about 20 years ago of upgrading Reading to Wokingham from 70 to 90 mph, but then this would only benefit non-stopping trains.

Another possibility also mentioned in the past was quadrupling Feltham junction to Staines. That actually looks quite feasible because apart from Feltham and Ashford stations there are no buildings close to the line and the railway boundaries are certainly wide enough to fit in an additional two lines along most of the distance.

The current re-signalling scheme adds in additional block sections (now not needed), platform 4 at Twickenham made fully bi-directional and signalled turn-backs at Virginia Water and Bracknell. And that's it.

Far from taking advantage of these modest capacity enhancements, the opportunity has been taken cut back services by turning some evening services at Bracknell.

 

[gswindale]

I do know the area, I appreciate how bad some of the roads are round there, but Bracknell to Farnborough is grade separated dual carriageway for most of the journey.
Twyford/Maidenhead is a fair point, I don't deny that, but Bracknell was built for cars!
Reading down the A329 (M) is easy, same for most of the Blackwater Valley and even a Windsor line station wouldn't be terrible.
The interurban journeys are mostly fine, it's the E. Berks suburban villages and medium sized towns which are difficult from Brackers.


It's not the best solution, but, as I said, Bracknell is built for cars! It is one of the better options if the Waterloo via Staines line is up the spout, given bus options in Bracknell are rather limited.

I mentioned the roads towards GWML stations are mostly rubbish, which is why I said your best bet is Farnborough Main if the Waterloo via Staines is up the spout.

Train over bus into Reading from some areas of Bracknell, but, if you're in a rush and coming from anywhere in urban Bracknell itself plus Binfield/Popeswood, it's an easy drive down the A329 (M).

Looking at the journey I do on a regular basis, where it takes 30+ minutes to get from Bracknell (Great Hollands / Birch Hill) to the Oracle Riverside car park, the train is just about as competitive (in fact for my office which is in Apex Plaza, it is quicker), if the trains were more frequent and more reliable, it would actually be quicker, but I need the flexibility to leave at a moment's notice and get back home if necessary.

Depending on where in London I needed to be, the only reason I would drive into Reading would be because work are paying for my parking anyway, so it makes an easier expenses claim.

Anybody who claims that Bracknell to Reading via the A329(M) is an easy journey does not do it on a regular basis and certainly not around rush hour

 

[nw1]

1968 timetable: (but it looks the same as 1967)

1658 Reading/Guildford - Staines, Egham, Virginia Water, Longcross, Sunningdale, Ascot, all stations to Reading
1700 Weybridge/Windsor - Richmond, Twickenham, Whitton, Feltham, Ashford, Staines
1702 Teddington - all stations except Queens Road then onwards to Waterloo
1709 Hounslow (Twickenham) - all stations
1713 Reading/Camberley - Staines, Egham, Virginia Water, Sunningdale, Ascot, all stations to Reading
1715 Weybridge/Windsor - Richmond, Twickenham, Whitton, Feltham, then all stations
1720 Hounslow (Brentford) - all stations
1723 Shepperton - Richmond, then all stations
1726 Teddington - Clapham, Putney, Barnes, Mortlake, Richmond, then all stations
1728 Reading/Guildford - Staines, Egham, Virginia Water, Longcross, Sunningdale, Ascot, all stations to Reading
1730 Weybridge/Windsor - Richmond, Twickenham, Whitton, Feltham, Ashford, Staines, then all stations
1732 Teddington - all stations except Queens Road (to Kingston)
1739 Hounslow (Twickenham) - all stations
1743 Reading/Camberley - Staines, Egham, Virginia Water, Sunningdale, Ascot, then all stations to Reading
1745 Weybridge - Richmond, Twickenham, Whitton, Feltham, Ashford, Staines, then all stations
1748 Windsor (Brentford) - Hounslow, Feltham, Ashford, Staines, then all stations
1750 Hounslow (Brentford) - all stations
1753 Shepperton - Richmond, St. Margarets, Twickenham, then all stations
1756 Teddington - Clapham, Putney, Barnes, Mortlake, Richmond, then all stations
1758 Reading/Guildford - Staines, Egham, Virginia Water, Sunningdale, Ascot, then all stations to Reading

I have the working timetable for 1968.
Four trains non-stop to Staines (the Reading services) (five listed above, four in the hour 1658-1757)
Six trains non-stop to Richmond
One train non-stop to Hounslow

With two exceptions (1726 & 1756) Clapham Junction was part of the “all stations” stopping pattern, which differs radically from today.

I think the problem is that it's impossible to reconcile the needs of a fast service to Bracknell coupled with the vastly increased need to stop at stations closer to London - non-stop to Richmond or even Staines won't cut it today. 55 years ago places like Clapham were a wilderness with relatively little reason to stop. I lived in the area in the early 1980s and it hadn't changed much then either. Now not just Clapham but Vauxhall are pretty important stops, and then Putney and Barnes also, so you've got four stops before Richmond pretty much all the time. Twickenham and Feltham aren't unimportant either. There's not the track capacity to do both - so today we have plenty of trains but they stop a lot.

Interesting - thanks for filling in the stopping details.

Interesting how they "flighted" the faster services so that the Windsors left immediately after the Readings. The full 1963 timetable is available on Timetable World and in that, the Windsors were also fast to Richmond - though both Reading and Windsor seemed to be on a 20-min pattern in 1963, so clearly improvements from 1963 to 1967.

These days speed improvements for the Readings would be easier to handle outside of London, such as running non stop Staines to Ascot and re-introducing through trains to the Camberley line to take up the intermediate stops. But inward from Staines I think they should stick with the 4 existing stops and not try to add more.

 

[Goldfish62]

Looking at the journey I do on a regular basis, where it takes 30+ minutes to get from Bracknell (Great Hollands / Birch Hill) to the Oracle Riverside car park, the train is just about as competitive (in fact for my office which is in Apex Plaza, it is quicker), if the trains were more frequent and more reliable, it would actually be quicker, but I need the flexibility to leave at a moment's notice and get back home if necessary.

Depending on where in London I needed to be, the only reason I would drive into Reading would be because work are paying for my parking anyway, so it makes an easier expenses claim.

Anybody who claims that Bracknell to Reading via the A329(M) is an easy journey does not do it on a regular basis and certainly not around rush hour

Absolutely spot-on. For me it's exacerbated further by having to get through Bracknell town centre from the east. Ascot - Bracknell along the A329 is often one elongated car park in the peaks.

The train to Reading wins every time on speed. The let down is frequency as you have highlighted, plus increasingly poor reliability.

 

[nw1]

You're absolutely right that running fast from Waterloo to Staines wouldn't cut it these days. The whole line is almost an urban conurbation right from Waterloo to Reading.

Mind you isn't it relatively rural (ish) between about Egham and Ascot, with only small towns, large villages and a lot of heathland (and golf courses)? (Admittedly that isn't Waterloo to Staines - hence my suggestion above that it's probably west of Staines where there might be scope for acceleration).

 

[Goldfish62]

Mind you isn't it relatively rural (ish) between about Egham and Ascot, with only small towns, large villages and a lot of heathland (and golf courses)? (Admittedly that isn't Waterloo to Staines - hence my suggestion above that it's probably west of Staines where there might be scope for acceleration).

It's deceptive. If you look on Google Earth you'll see that the heavily wooded territory does a good job of hiding all the housing from the railway line. Really the only country stretch is through Chobham Common.

Having said that I agree with you on service patterns. I think something along these lines:

2tph Reading, all stations to Ascot, Staines, Feltham, Twickenham, Richmond, CJ, Waterloo.
2tph Aldershot, all stations to Staines, Feltham, Twickenham, Richmond, CJ, Waterloo.
2tph Ascot, Bracknell, Wokingham, Reading (calling all stations in the peaks). Also perhaps projected to/Waterloo in the peaks if the pre-Covid service levels were ever considered again.

The fast services would result in a journey time saving of about 15-20% for stations Ascot and westwards. That's significant.

 

[nick parish]

I went to Bracknell for a job interview in 1996. Have I remembered correctly that inbetween the two trains an hour to Reading there were shorts from Ascot - Reading? I think I got a train going to Aldershot and changed at Ascot to the Reading train from there.

 

[Craig1122]

Skipping stations is likely to be very unpopular with people at those stations though. Egham for example has about the same annual usage as Bracknell and has very heavy college & university traffic.

Virginia Water is very much quieter as an origin/destination but is the junction towards Weybridge and a reasonable number of people change there.

Passenger flows are also much heavier towards Reading than Camberley/Aldershot so forcing people from the skipped stations to change at Ascot would be problematic. I've come back from Reading in the evening peak a few times recently and the trains have been pretty full with a decent churn of passengers at most of the stations so the non London business is pretty significant. (Not something I'm sure that Dft/SWR management really understand)

It's a tough one to solve because there are so many conflicting demands along the route with similar volumes of business.

I went to Bracknell for a job interview in 1996. Have I remembered correctly that inbetween the two trains an hour to Reading there were shorts from Ascot - Reading? I think I got a train going to Aldershot and changed at Ascot to the Reading train from there.

Think there have been iterations of the timetable in various eras with short workings at that end.

 

[Goldfish62]

Skipping stations is likely to be very unpopular with people at those stations though. Egham for example has about the same annual usage as Bracknell and has very heavy college & university traffic.

Virginia Water is very much quieter as an origin/destination but is the junction towards Weybridge and a reasonable number of people change there.

Passenger flows are also much heavier towards Reading than Camberley/Aldershot so forcing people from the skipped stations to change at Ascot would be problematic. I've come back from Reading in the evening peak a few times recently and the trains have been pretty full with a decent churn of passengers at most of the stations so the non London business is pretty significant. (Not something I'm sure that Dft/SWR management really understand)

It's a tough one to solve because there are so many conflicting demands along the route with similar volumes of business.


Think there have been iterations of the timetable in various eras with short workings at that end.

All fair comment.

The break of journey at Ascot needs to of course be weighted against the new through journey opportunities from the Camberley line, then further assessed against the reduced journey time to /from west of Ascot. A classic public transport planning exercise, provided there is sufficient data.

But you're right that I don't think that DfT/SWR really understand. Their only suggestions have always been to skip stations west of Ascot.

 

[nw1]

All fair comment.

The break of journey at Ascot needs to of course be weighted against the new through journey opportunities from the Camberley line, then further assessed against the reduced journey time to /from west of Ascot. A classic public transport planning exercise, provided there is sufficient data.

But you're right that I don't think that DfT/SWR really understand. Their only suggestions have always been to skip stations west of Ascot.

Indeed, presumably there would be same-platform interchange, with only a short wait, at Ascot anyway with the Camberley line service maybe 5 mins behind the Reading.

While I am not a Bracknell or Wokingham resident I'd agree that the main things this line needs are a) faster trains to London, which is most easily accomplished by running fast Ascot to Staines and b) more frequent services to Reading. A variation of @Goldfish62's suggestion would be to run all four London trains per hour from Reading, on an X, X+10, X+30, X+40 pattern (fast Ascot-Staines at 00,30 and all stations to Staines 10,40) and keep the Aldershot-Ascot as a shuttle. That way you don't lose any of the existing through services to Reading - but introduce two new fasts. The fasts might gain say 8 mins by Staines, so at Staines the pattern would be Y, Y+18, Y+30, Y+48 - providing an almost-even-interval semi-fast from Staines to Waterloo.

Also are 701s the right choice for this line anyway, given it's not really inner-suburban; could it not just stick with 450s and 458s?

 

[Goldfish62]

Indeed, presumably there would be same-platform interchange, with only a short wait, at Ascot anyway with the Camberley line service maybe 5 mins behind the Reading.

While I am not a Bracknell or Wokingham resident I'd agree that the main things this line needs are a) faster trains to London, which is most easily accomplished by running fast Ascot to Staines and b) more frequent services to Reading. A variation of @Goldfish62's suggestion would be to run all four London trains per hour from Reading, on an X, X+10, X+30, X+40 pattern (fast Ascot-Staines at 00,30 and all stations to Staines 10,40) and keep the Aldershot-Ascot as a shuttle. That way you don't lose any of the existing through services to Reading - but introduce two new fasts. The fasts might gain say 8 mins by Staines, so at Staines the pattern would be Y, Y+18, Y+30, Y+48 - providing an almost-even-interval semi-fast from Staines to Waterloo.

Also are 701s the right choice for this line anyway, given it's not really inner-suburban; could it not just stick with 450s and 458s?

Good suggestion!

It was SWT that started the downgrade of the service when they introduced 455s on evening and weekend services, thus softening up passengers for inner suburban stock as standard.

Personally I prefer the 450s to 458s. Overall better ambience.

I think the 701s would be fine if they had seat back tables, but they don't.