silverfoxcc
Member
- Joined
- 17 Apr 2012
- Messages
- 439
Is there anyone on here ITK who could give a good indication on frequency of trains when fully working, from Twyford to Stratford, or will a change be reqd?
TIA
TIA
When through running starts all trains from Reading and Heathrow will terminate at Abbey Wood. Therefore you’ll have to change somewhere in the central section, as all trains through Stratford will terminate at Paddington.Is there anyone on here ITK who could give a good indication on frequency of trains when fully working, from Twyford to Stratford, or will a change be reqd?
TIA
Not too sure it was directly ever sold as that, but the next timetable is not the final 24tph one, and as I understand it there are still ambitions to run Reading to Shenfield, or at least Maidenhead to Shenfield services in the full 24tph timetable.Wasn’t it sold as being able to travel from Reading in west through to Shenfield in east. If you have to change, that claim isn’t strictly true. Pedantic I know.
No, the junction is in the wrong place at Stratford and the frequency is needed on the Shenfield route in any case.So can i put forward a Maidenhead to Northumberrland Park routing?
The frequency of trains in West London is significantly more than it was before the work. The length of the trains serving the local stations between Reading and London is significantly more.What saddens me is that despite all the bells whistles overspending late delivery and associated Hooha That there the frequency from Reading will be no better or faster than at present
No one should ever have imagined trains every ten minutes from Twyford but it is likely from Maidenhead. Clearly with separate branches on the route on both sides it can only be 24tph between Paddington and Whitechapel.I think a lot of people have been hoodwinked by the 24 trains ph, claim which seems to be Padd to Liv St or just beyond, Whitecchapel?
I must admit i thought turning up at Tyford znd waith no more then 10 mins was going to be the norm
That would be quite inconvenient to the passengers . And no quicker journey times . The best journey times and reliability is going to be achieved by having all GWML trains terminating at abbey wood and all great eastern trains terminating at paddington .I assumed that given there are two end points either side of London (Heathrow/Reading and Shenfield/Abbey Wood) that there would be a similar number of trains doing the 4 combinations (H-S, H-AW, R-S, R-AW). If this is not the case, then I am a bit speechless tbh.
For a system with 2 branches at each end with four possible route combinations you cannot have a standard interval service on all four branches, and cannot have alternating destinations in both directions through the common or core part of the network..I assumed that given there are two end points either side of London (Heathrow/Reading and Shenfield/Abbey Wood) that there would be a similar number of trains doing the 4 combinations (H-S, H-AW, R-S, R-AW). If this is not the case, then I am a bit speechless tbh.
It is actually worse than this, when full running starts anyone travelling to Hayes or Ealing from Reading /Twyford will be worse off than at present, as GWR will stop calling thereWhat saddens me is that despite all the bells whistles overspending late delivery and associated Hooha That there the frequency from Reading will be no better or faster than at present
Well put.For a system with 2 branches at each end with four possible route combinations you cannot have a standard interval service on all four branches, and cannot have alternating destinations in both directions through the common or core part of the network..
If you simplify the question based on just a 15 min interval in the core, you end up with 2 branches with a 30 min interval at one end, and 15/45 min intervals on the branches at the other end. Then increasing the overall frequency always leaves the services unbalanced at one end. (We’ve had this discussion before somewhere, I think it was about TPE, but the issues are exactly the same whatever the example.)
Yes, I think it’s all a bit late to be discussing this, but it’s hopefully not a surprise to anyone who’s been following discussions here for the last so many years…Well put.
In any case, hasn't it been established from the outset that the GWML Relief lines between Westbourne Park and either Heathrow Airport or Reading couldn't ever support the volume of trains anticipated to run between Liverpool Street (Crossrail) and Paddington (Crossrail)? As such large numbers of trains will turn back there for the foreseeable future, and the service will always appear "unbalanced" in this way.
The BCR for the "express" option was slightly higher than the "all stations" (or as close as possible) option chosen. However more of the benefits fell to the Home Counties and fewer in London. As a result of the London elements of the funding, the slightly less good value for money option was progressed. But these ships sailed some 15 or more years ago now.It is actually worse than this, when full running starts anyone travelling to Hayes or Ealing from Reading /Twyford will be worse off than at present, as GWR will stop calling there
No they won't. There are no plans for GwR to reduce its frequency any further at these stationsIt is actually worse than this, when full running starts anyone travelling to Hayes or Ealing from Reading /Twyford will be worse off than at present, as GWR will stop calling there
Yes, GWR has a track access consultation to run trains fast after Slough, and therefore the olt direct services from Reading to these stations will be via the Elizabeth Line.No they won't. There are no plans for GwR to reduce its frequency any further at these stations
Isn't that the current peak time service though. Currently during peak GwR does not stop at Ealing, Hayes and SouthallYes, GWR has a track access consultation to run trains fast after Slough, and therefore the olt direct services from Reading to these stations will be via the Elizabeth Line.
Yes, however as XR run a 4tph service at peak times, the peak time service won’t be affected, but the off peak service loses 2tph.Isn't that the current peak time service though. Currently during peak GwR does not stop at Ealing, Hayes and Southall
But my understanding is even with this track access consultation. GwR will still be calling at the intermediate stations in the off peak. The track access consultation is about which lines the peak trains run onYes, however as XR run a 4tph service at peak times, the peak time service won’t be affected, but the off peak service loses 2tph.
The track access consultation shows the amount of trains and what routes they can run on. It does not include the provision for any GWR trains to run on the relief lines past Slough.But my understanding is even with this track access consultation. GwR will still be calling at the intermediate stations in the off peak. The track access consultation is about which lines the peak trains run on
For a system with 2 branches at each end with four possible route combinations you cannot have a standard interval service on all four branches, and cannot have alternating destinations in both directions through the common or core part of the network..
If you simplify the question based on just a 15 min interval in the core, you end up with 2 branches with a 30 min interval at one end, and 15/45 min intervals on the branches at the other end. Then increasing the overall frequency always leaves the services unbalanced at one end. (We’ve had this discussion before somewhere, I think it was about TPE, but the issues are exactly the same whatever the example.)
Quite so. I read that all ex Shenfields will terminate at Paddington, which, if is the case, is appalling.I assumed that given there are two end points either side of London (Heathrow/Reading and Shenfield/Abbey Wood) that there would be a similar number of trains doing the 4 combinations (H-S, H-AW, R-S, R-AW). If this is not the case, then I am a bit speechless tbh.
It really is not appalling - quite an overreaction. Delays on the eastern branch would affect the western if through running occurred and the opposite way also. Therefore Abbey Wood services continuing on to the western minimises risks and delays as it is contained.Quite so. I read that all ex Shenfields will terminate at Paddington, which, if is the case, is appalling.
Jesus, some of this moaning really is pathetic. It's a same-platform interchange!Quite so. I read that all ex Shenfields will terminate at Paddington, which, if is the case, is appalling.
I appreciate both your point and your desire to critique every post I make, but when Crossrail was heavily promoted as something that would boost connectivity between East and West, you’d surely expect them to run direct services from East to West at least.Jesus, some of this moaning really is pathetic. It's a same-platform interchange!
Surely it can be said that it is hugely boosting east-west connectivity, no? Shenfield-end passengers will have direct access past Liverpool Street to Paddington, and Western-end passengers will have direct access past Paddington to Liverpool Street - both of which are significant improvements over the pre-Crossrail arrangements. The relatively-small proportion (IIRC) of passengers who wish to from the Western branches on to the Shenfield branch and vice-versa will, granted, not be able to enjoy a single-seat journey but will be able to 'drop back' to a suitable following service by simply waiting for a few minutes on a comfortably enclosed and spacious platform. Maybe it's not perfect, but it's pretty bloody good.I appreciate both your point and your desire to critique every post I make, but when Crossrail was heavily promoted as something that would boost connectivity between East and West, you’d surely expect them to run direct services from East to West at least.
I just think that Stratford as such a major interchange hub would benefit greatly from direct trains to Heathrow, but I suppose you’re right in saying that a simple change wouldn’t be the end of the world.Surely it can be said that it is hugely boosting east-west connectivity, no? Shenfield-end passengers will have direct access past Liverpool Street to Paddington, and Western-end passengers will have direct access past Paddington to Liverpool Street - both of which are significant improvements over the pre-Crossrail arrangements. The relatively-small proportion (IIRC) of passengers who wish to from the Western branches on to the Shenfield branch and vice-versa will, granted, not be able to enjoy a single-seat journey but will be able to 'drop back' to a suitable following service by simply waiting for a few minutes on a comfortably enclosed and spacious platform. Maybe it's not perfect, but it's pretty bloody good.
Ahh, well, I can put my pride aside for now thenAnd on a point of honour: anybody taking such an opinion on this as you did was going to get my critique - on that front I am almost entirely author-agnostic. There are even, in fact, a handful of your posts with which I find myself in complete agreement! Just bad timing for you this time around
If the trains ran to a mixture of Shenfield and abbey wood it from the west it would provide everyone with a slower than average journey. The interchange penalty at paddington for trains to Shenfield is going to be an average of 2.5 minutes and few people are going to be making that journeyI appreciate both your point and your desire to critique every post I make, but when Crossrail was heavily promoted as something that would boost connectivity between East and West, you’d surely expect them to run direct services from East to West at least.