Crossrail Rolling Stock Procurement

[junglejames]

Ahem, did we expect the 377/5 to go as badly as they did?

Probably not. Your point?
Im not taking sides here, which you seem to think i am. Look back and you will see that I am purely making out that for a new design, you just have no idea what it will be like, whether it be Siemens, Bombardier, Brush, EE or Bobs Builders of Cornwall.
So quite where the 377/5 fits, Im not sure.
It would fit into my other argument as an anomaly though. That if its an existing design, usually you can expect acceptable reliability from the off, unless of course its Bombardier going through one of their off days!

 

[RobShipway]

The third rail option is purely about extending beyond Abbey Wood onto Southeastern metals, and is not a new idea, it was in the original rolling stock announcements when they were calling for the shortlist.

But your other imaginary extensions are just that. The fleet is sized only for the timetable and routes allowed in the Crossrail Act, even the possible extension to Reading would need additional stock - that they aren't mentioning.

Anyway, where's the possible operational benefit of including Reading/Waterloo/Gatwick services in the franchise - they seem to have no synergies whatsoever...

Please explain to me if trains to Reading would need additional stock why in the Rail Magazone for March 7th - 20th March on page 23 in a box in the bottom left hand corner it statets the following:

Crosrail is a planned £15 billion east - west heavy rail route acroos London. It will link Reading and Heathrow Airport in the West to Shenfieled and Abbey Wood in the East.

Please also note that when Crossrail staff came to the Nicholson Shopping Centre over two years ago that the above wa stated to me not only by the staff but is also within a leaflet that Crossrail produced.

Now I may not be someone that works within the railway, but I do majority of the time as can be seen by the above investigate comments that I make before posting them.

 

[swt_passenger]

Please explain to me if trains to Reading would need additional stock why in the Rail Magazone for March 7th - 20th March on page 23 in a box in the bottom left hand corner it statets the following:

Crosrail is a planned £15 billion east - west heavy rail route acroos London. It will link Reading and Heathrow Airport in the West to Shenfieled and Abbey Wood in the East.

Rail are wrong (again) is almost certainly the simple explanation for that. Read the Crossrail, DfT or TfL announcements as correct. None of them mention Reading at all, eg:

http://www.crossrail.co.uk/news/press-releases/crossrail-issues-rolling-stock-depot-tender

But even if Rail were right, the Crossrail depot is still being built at Old Oak Common, not Reading, and your ideas about extending to places like Gatwick and Waterloo are still ridiculous...

 

[RobShipway]

Rail are wrong (again) is almost certainly the simple explanation for that. Read the Crossrail, DfT or TfL announcements as correct. None of them mention Reading at all, eg:

http://www.crossrail.co.uk/news/press-releases/crossrail-issues-rolling-stock-depot-tender

But even if Rail were right, the Crossrail depot is still being built at Old Oak Common, not Reading, and your ideas about extending to places like Gatwick and Waterloo are still ridiculous...

I wgrant you that the Depot is not in Reading but everyone that lives in Berkshire which is were I live knows that the Crossrail services will replace the existing FGW stopping services between London Paddington and Reading, it may not mention Reading by name within the Crossrail route details under http://www.crossrail.co.uk/route/ as there is no place for the rolling stock to be stored at Maidenhead once it has completed it's route and would just be in the way of stopping services to places like Oxford unless it goes on to Reading to the dead end platforms.

As another comment stated within the sam Rail magazine from a fellow reader, what would be better is if the Crossrail services also went on to Oxford when it is electrified as well as going to Reading/Heathrow.

 

[MCR247]

Stored? It will just go back to Shenfield/Abbey Wood....?

 

[swt_passenger]

I wgrant you that the Depot is not in Reading but everyone that lives in Berkshire which is were I live knows that the Crossrail services will replace the existing FGW stopping services between London Paddington and Reading, it may not mention Reading by name within the Crossrail route details under http://www.crossrail.co.uk/route/ as there is no place for the rolling stock to be stored at Maidenhead once it has completed it's route and would just be in the way of stopping services to places like Oxford unless it goes on to Reading to the dead end platforms.

But IF the Crossrail terminus remains at Maidenhead, there will be extra reversing and stabling sidings built there, at the country end of the station. The fact there is nothing there today is not relevant, a significant rework of the track layout there is currently allowed for.

IF at some stage in the future, Crossrail is extended to Reading, the reversing and stabling sidings at Maidenhead may or may not still be required, depending on if the whole service is extended, or not as the case may be.

You must be aware though, that the Crossrail spec is for a high standing capacity train, 450 seats spread over ten cars, with no toilets. What use will that be to passengers from beyond Reading...

And believe it or not, I really don't care, the number of trains being ordered is to allow for 57 in service, which is what is needed to run the peak services stated in the Crossrail Act, without any extensions to Reading. If a Reading extension happens, more stock will be needed.

 

[RobShipway]

But IF the Crossrail terminus remains at Maidenhead, there will be extra reversing and stabling sidings built there, at the country end of the station. The fact there is nothing there today is not relevant, a significant rework of the track layout there is currently allowed for.

IF at some stage in the future, Crossrail is extended to Reading, the reversing and stabling sidings at Maidenhead may or may not still be required, depending on if the whole service is extended, or not as the case may be.

You must be aware though, that the Crossrail spec is for a high standing capacity train, 450 seats spread over ten cars, with no toilets. What use will that be to passengers from beyond Reading...

There has been no plans put into Royal Maidenhead and Windsor Borough Council or East Bekshire County Council for any reversing sidings to be created from details that I have and any timings may mean that the Crossrial train certainly off peak working on the basis of the current timetable would be at Maidenhead station for up to 10 - 15 minutes before going back to Shenfield or Abbey Wood. Whereas in Reading after the station changes there would be a stabling point for the train to wait for this period which even Crossrail has admitted to me that they may need having the train go on to Reading because of pathing issues with trains that maybe coming behind it on the line.

 

[swt_passenger]

There has been no plans put into Royal Maidenhead and Windsor Borough Council or East Bekshire County Council for any reversing sidings to be created from details that I have and any timings may mean that the Crossrial train certainly off peak working on the basis of the current timetable would be at Maidenhead station for up to 10 - 15 minutes before going back to Shenfield or Abbey Wood.

The Crossrail Act already allows for the railway to be built. Planning applications don't really come into it, the local authority only has a remit over minor design details - but only when the Act directs that those details have to be vetted by the local authority.

The ORR website has the detailed Crossrail WTT available, it defnitely includes the use of turnback sidings at Maidenhead.

 

[RobShipway]

The Crossrail Act already allows for the railway to be built. Planning applications don't really come into it, the local authority only has a remit over minor design details - but only when the Act directs that those details have to be vetted by the local authority.

The ORR website has the detailed Crossrail WTT available, it defnitely includes the use of turnback sidings at Maidenhead.

I also cannot see the Residents of Reading putting up with loosing a Service or having to change at Slough so that they can get back to go to Maidenhead either, when the service should rightly start at Reading as it currently does now under FGW.

 

[HSTEd]

I also cannot see the Residents of Reading putting up with loosing a Service or having to change at Slough so that they can get back to go to Maidenhead either, when the service should rightly start at Reading as it currently does now under FGW.

Parliamentary Supremacy I'm afraid, unless someone has an attack of good sense its not going to happen.

 

[RobShipway]

Well, you can be sure that I am going to be mentioning it to not only those at Crossrail,but those in Government making the decisions as to what a stupid idea it is not to have the trains continue on into Reading from where not everyone wants to go to London!!.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Well, you can be sure that I am going to be mentioning it to not only those at Crossrail,but those in Government making the decisions as to what a stupid idea it is not to have the trains continue on into Reading from where not everyone wants to go to London!!.

I think you will find the GW franchise (whoever operates it post-Crossrail) will have to devise a timetable for their outer Thames Valley EMUs to interchange with Crossrail at either Maidenhead or Slough (or both).
This will give a headache if they do this on the fast lines because it will reduce capacity.
If they do it on the slow there will need to be new S&C to get them over to the fast for the trip into Paddington.

But I agree with swt_passenger, no likelihood of a Reading Crossrail extension.
In any case, think "nasty little trains"; the outer Thames Valley commuters won't like them anyway (nor will those at Maidenhead...).

 

[SwindonPkwy]

Given that the majority of London bound Reading passengers will be traveling to Paddington or beyond, there is no real advantage in extending Crossrail to Reading. IIRC, the latest SE RUS calls for a separate fleet of EMU's to operate nonstop between Paddington and Reading, with some extending to Oxford, for example. Passengers transferring to Crossrail at Paddington for, say, Canary Wharf would still be saving time over the current journey time. As swt_passenger has said, any rolling stock for Reading would be outside the current tender process.

 

[RobShipway]

Given that the majority of London bound Reading passengers will be traveling to Paddington or beyond, there is no real advantage in extending Crossrail to Reading. IIRC, the latest SE RUS calls for a separate fleet of EMU's to operate nonstop between Paddington and Reading, with some extending to Oxford, for example. Passengers transferring to Crossrail at Paddington for, say, Canary Wharf would still be saving time over the current journey time. As swt_passenger has said, any rolling stock for Reading would be outside the current tender process.

That does not help anyone that maybe living in Reading or Working in Shenfield or vice versa for that matter or persuade anyone doing any part of that route by car because it is easier. The reason I say this is that train services where they can should be competing with being able to drive a car to the same place, this is the only to get people back to public transport.

For instance, I live 5 minutes walk from Martins Heron station on the Waterloo - Reading line, flor me to travel to Slough it would take me well over an hour to get there because of having to travel by train to Reading and then on to Slough which would be the stopping service unless I time it correct and get a service that just stops at Slough before going on to London Paddington. Whereas if I go by car along the A329/A329M/M4 I can be there within 40 minutes.

With Crossrail starting from Reading as it should, there is more of a chance to get drivers out of their cars because even if they are working in the centre of London they will not have to change trains more than once if at all depending on where they work. This to my mind is the logical thinking this and any other Government of this country should be doing as fuel resources are going to be none existant in the not too distant future and they will not have the fuel duty going into the countries bank account, so they need to make sure the railway system is right such that it can cope when that happens.

 

[MCR247]

I don't see why you are trying to convince a few members of a Rail Forum that extending Crossrail to Reading is a good idea....?

 

[tbtc]

Big difference between "I would like..." and "this will happen" (sadly)

And I can't imagine anyone wanting to travel from Oxford to London on a toiletless train with few seats (per coach)

 

[CP165]

I read on the Crossrail website that there will still be FGW services between Reading and Paddington calling at Twyford, Maidenhead, Slough, Hayes & Harlington, and Ealing Broadway when Crossrail is operating. I'll try and get a link to it

 

[Waddon]

Back to the original thread, and the tender process, it seems a bit pointless to me, as the government is almost 100% certain to give it to Bombardier after all the fuss they kicked up over Thameslink. Can you imagine the headlines if they give this one to Siemens too?

I bet the other manufacturers are fuming, but keeping going on their tender documents 'just in case'. Also I expect a flurry of legal cases after the announcement of the job being given to Bombardier, on the basis of breach of EU fair competition rules (I'm not saying there will be a breach, but that the other manufacturers will want some compensation so they will imply there has been favouritism...they might even win too)

 

[Peter Sarf]

If there was capacity on Cross rail then some could argue that intercity services should run through towards the City and Docklands. So where does the argument end ?.

I must say that one way of doing it would be to give preference to services that people are already on for a long time. So only intercity and Oxford services would go down the tunnel !. I know its not practical untill all GW is electrified.

A significant practicality is to choose services that are less likely to be affected by perterbations beyond the Crossrail core route. A service from Maidenhead is not going to pick up delays from Bristol or Reading as it does not start there. Lesson to be learned from Thameslink is that delays at Bedford can have trouble fitting in with the limited capacity across London on Southern. But if the service started from Nottingham then Southern would be coping with the effects of problems caused by a cross-country service going nowhere near London.

Reading :-
I will admit that my instinct is that Reading would be a good endpoint for Crossrail because it is a junction and also where most intercity/long-distance services call. But then is there a risk that a Crossrail service from Reading might go fast enough to not call at Maidenhead or Slough ? - so no benefit for Robbies argument.

Stock types :-
I suspect that if Crossrail reached Reading then there might be stock with loos and more seats. I find it sad that places like Shenfield or Maidenhead are viewed as near enough to allow for the use of stock with a high proportion of people standing and no loo. I occaisonally use the East London line West Croydon to Highbury and Islington. I start at Waddon changing at West Croydon but there is no loo at West Croydon - my bladder hates it. So I prefer to go via Victoria.

 

[junglejames]

I don't see why you are trying to convince a few members of a Rail Forum that extending Crossrail to Reading is a good idea....?

Good point. No reason trying to convince everybody else, when he is happy in himself that he knows its the best solution. I totally agree.

Oh, and at this rate Reading is looking very likely.
It has been said very recently (cant remember where i saw it) that Crossrail will more than likely to go to Reading from the start.

 

[HSTEd]

Since we don't know anything about the contract itself as of yet (only the initial tender as I understand it) we do not know if they will have options added into the contract to cover the future likely expansions (in this case Reading basically).

 

[Martin222002]

I also cannot see the Residents of Reading putting up with loosing a Service or having to change at Slough so that they can get back to go to Maidenhead either, when the service should rightly start at Reading as it currently does now under FGW.

I think a read of Network Rail's London South East RUS (See here) would be worth a read (pages 104 to 111).

To summaries what it says, it basically suggest that there will be 20tph fast between Reading and London Paddington at peak times, made up of 10 intercity trains per hour (9tph IEP 1tph HST), 6 non-stop EMUs per hour, and 4 semi fast EMUs per hour (which will use the fast lines till Sough or Maidenhead and then use the relief lines). This is achieved by removing the 4 Heathrow Express services from the fast lines, and replacing them with an increased frequency Crossrail service to Heathrow of 10tph. In addition to the fast line services there would be the Crossrail services using the relief lines with 4tph to Maidenhead and 2tph to Slough proposed in the RUS.

The RUS also suggests that the fast line EMU services should be 12 car formation (most likely 4+4+4) and be capable of at least 100mph (though it states that 110mph capability would be desirable).

I think the commuters of Reading and the wider Berkshire area should be very happy with all that.

 

[colchesterken]

I am not sure how journies are going to work out.you would need a packed lunch to go from Shenfield to say Slough,most people would get a fast to Stratford and change there
but that place is too spread out now ,what is needed is cross platform change to crossrail at Stratford and on the other side.I can see me going to liverpool st on the fast then changing there.would a shuttle from Stratford to Say Acton be better with cross platform changes to crossrail at both ends.I cannot see anyone going all the way on crossrail

 

[RobShipway]

I think a read of Network Rail's London South East RUS (See here) would be worth a read (pages 104 to 111).

To summaries what it says, it basically suggest that there will be 20tph fast between Reading and London Paddington at peak times, made up of 10 intercity trains per hour (9tph IEP 1tph HST), 6 non-stop EMUs per hour, and 4 semi fast EMUs per hour (which will use the fast lines till Sough or Maidenhead and then use the relief lines). This is achieved by removing the 4 Heathrow Express services from the fast lines, and replacing them with an increased frequency Crossrail service to Heathrow of 10tph. In addition to the fast line services there would be the Crossrail services using the relief lines with 4tph to Maidenhead and 2tph to Slough proposed in the RUS.

The RUS also suggests that the fast line EMU services should be 12 car formation (most likely 4+4+4) and be capable of at least 100mph (though it states that 110mph capability would be desirable).

I think the commuters of Reading and the wider Berkshire area should be very happy with all that.

First I would like to thank Peter Sarf for his earlier comment and also like to thank Martin222002 for the above details which makes more sense than the details either on Crossrail or any of the Rail Magazines which have seem to suggest that Crossrail would replace the stopping services to Reading without possibly going to Reading, which the same Rail magazines Crossrail should do.

I think you hve to view the Crossrail route in the same context as the North London Line from Richmond to Stratford, although personally I think both routes are too long to be going the full distance without a loo on the train.... But like the North London Line, it is meant to be a hop on/hop off service.

If Crossrail goes with Bombardier, what happens to the Siemens trains currently being used for the Heathrow Connect or Heathrow Express services? Or are these still to be used to go to Heathrow from London Paddington surface station?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I don't see why you are trying to convince a few members of a Rail Forum that extending Crossrail to Reading is a good idea....?

For arguments sake, let's say that you worked in Birmingahm and I know at the moment that they is quite a regular service from Nottingham to Birmingham, then London Midland and or Cross Country decides to cut that service in half or make it such that you had to travel to Leicester to change trains whne you did not have to before the cut in service, how would you feel?

 

[MCR247]

For arguments sake, let's say that you worked in Birmingahm and I know at the moment that they is quite a regular service from Nottingham to Birmingham, then London Midland and or Cross Country decides to cut that service in half or make it such that you had to travel to Leicester to change trains whne you did not have to before the cut in service, how would you feel?

I wasn't having a go, you just missed my point.

So carrying on with this, if I was very outraged about this, what would me trying to convince you that NOT-BHM needs 2tph direct do? Even if I did convince you, whats that going to do? So what I'm saying, is that you're trying to convince us, but even if we did agree, it wont achieve anything. Trying to convince someone that actually has a say would be more beneficial.

See what I mean?

 

[RobShipway]

I wasn't having a go, you just missed my point.

So carrying on with this, if I was very outraged about this, what would me trying to convince you that NOT-BHM needs 2tph direct do? Even if I did convince you, whats that going to do? So what I'm saying, is that you're trying to convince us, but even if we did agree, it wont achieve anything. Trying to convince someone that actually has a say would be more beneficial.

See what I mean?

That is what I am doing anyway as well as making the point in this forum.... The person that I have been having the discussion with is actually within the decision making process at the DFT.

 

[Chris125]

If Crossrail goes with Bombardier, what happens to the Siemens trains currently being used for the Heathrow Connect or Heathrow Express services? Or are these still to be used to go to Heathrow from London Paddington surface station?

The 360's will be cascaded elsewhere by Crossrail regardless of who wins the order, and if/when Heathrow Express is replaced they will be too, perhaps to join the 333's oop north.

Chris

 

[transmanche]

I read on the Crossrail website that there will still be FGW services between Reading and Paddington calling at Twyford, Maidenhead, Slough, Hayes & Harlington, and Ealing Broadway when Crossrail is operating. I'll try and get a link to it

http://www.crossrail.co.uk/route/surface/western-section has the indicative timetable summary of peak/off-peak services.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If Crossrail goes with Bombardier, what happens to the Siemens trains currently being used for the Heathrow Connect or Heathrow Express services? Or are these still to be used to go to Heathrow from London Paddington surface station?

The plan (AIUI) is for Heathrow Connect to be subsumed into Crossrail (and thus disappear as a separate brand). Heathrow Express will remain as the 4tph 'premium'/express service. (All this, of course, subject to the changes as outlined in the RUS mentioned above. Does anyone know when the BAA's paths for HEX 'expire'?)

 

[Chris125]

Does anyone know when the BAA's paths for HEX 'expire'?)

I've seen 2023 mentioned.

Chris

 

[paulravuslante]

http://www.crossrail.co.uk/route/surface/western-section has the indicative timetable summary of peak/off-peak services.

I've looked at that summary before. If I read it correctly is it saying that West Drayton, Iver and Langley are losing two trains per hour off peak, but West Drayton gaining two additional trains per hour during the peak? I can see the sense in improving peak capacity, but is cutting off peak capacity to these stations sensible? As a West Drayton resident I like the current 4 trains per hour off peak service as it means I can just turn up and go at the station without having to consult the timetable. Am I missing the point here?

The plan (AIUI) is for Heathrow Connect to be subsumed into Crossrail (and thus disappear as a separate brand). Heathrow Express will remain as the 4tph 'premium'/express service. (All this, of course, subject to the changes as outlined in the RUS mentioned above. Does anyone know when the BAA's paths for HEX 'expire'?)

Us employees at HEx have been told 2023 as well and management still seem adament that we'll still be running beyond that date.