False destinations on trains from Reading heading towards Paddington

[cholsey-choose]

Are you sure about this? On Monday evening while I was waiting to head in the other direction out of Reading there was a service on the departures summary screens which was shown as running to Acton Main Line - just as well given the series of eastbound IETs leaving shortly before and after its departure time either non-stop or with just a Slough call on the way into Paddington.

I wouldn't stake my life on it, but I'm pretty sure. I was getting off at 9:30 I think (from the first cheap train from Cholsey to Reading) at platform 15 or thereabouts. As I walked along the platform I was surprised to hear the electronic voice say that the train for platform 15 was for Paddington, because it's normally announced as Ealing. Then she rattled off the remaining stations, and Ealing was not there -- I think it was Southall then Paddington.

 

[cholsey-choose]

The so-called 'false destination' is only shown on the departure screens of the train's originating station, in the case of the Western this essentially means Paddington, Oxford (at the moment this is Didcot ) and Reading. From Paddington the Reading terminators will be labelled 'Twyford' and the Oxford terminators 'Radley'. From Oxford (currently Didcot) and Reading the stoppers will be labelled 'Ealing Broadway'. It should be noted that the platform displays from the first station call onwards will always show the actual destination.

False. The stopping services from Oxford and Didcot to Paddington definitely have their false destinations displayed at Reading, which is not the originating station.

 

[Ken H]

(or indeed from Oxford to London, but yes

Absolutely, you and I (and most people here!) would work that out pretty readily, and I do understand the rationale behind the strategy. These people didn't, though, and for whatever reason, had an extended journey home as a result! … and yes, I don't know the status of the internal displays nor the presence (or absence) of audible announcements on the train (a 165/6 no doubt, some time between 2005-2009).

I definitely agree that there should be a way to indicate to passengers which train they should take to get to their destination soonest. (There's a “next fastest train to” board at Oxford I think, which clearly helps with that! …) but I still think that the way to do this is to use clear concise expressive words that are present and well understood in the english language, rather than to lie about the destination of trains.

Even when there's no disruption it will confuse some people (though I completely get the point that it's quite possible that more people take the “right” train as a result of skimming final destinations for “London Paddington”, so the balance between the option of “lie” with that of “do nothing” is in favour of “lie”, … it's just that “provide more true information” (i.e. use words such as “all stations” and “fast” or whatever) would be better still in my view), … and as soon as trains start getting delayed or cancelled, all bets are off and the misinformation may actually cause people to be delayed in reaching their final destination. As well as (or as an alternative to) “fast” etc., adding the arrival time at each destination station (or even just the final destination) would unambiguously and clearly show which was the right train to get for those willing and able to do the extra reading … whereas the single short word/phrase “fast”, “all stations” (etc.) should guide most that aren't doing such a detailed analysis.

I was a bit puzzled by the old “Bicester Village … [wait for display to change] … & London Marylebone” signs too … but that's tourism for you, … now if only we had high-enough resolution matrix displays to hold Chinese characters (or indeed display Arabic with any degree of legibility!), we could fit far more information on the screens

However do people at Otley bus station cope, given a choice of 34 or X84/X85 to Leeds. 34 takes 90 minutes, X84/5 takes 41 minutes. Both say 'Leeds' on the front. You could even got on a 34 at Leeds bus station going to 'Otley' rather than an X84 going to Skipton on Ilkley.

 

[cholsey-choose]

However do people at Otley bus station cope, given a choice of 34 or X84/X85 to Leeds. 34 takes 90 minutes, X84/5 takes 41 minutes. Both say 'Leeds' on the front. You could even got on a 34 at Leeds bus station going to 'Otley' rather than an X84 going to Skipton on Ilkley.

Just guessing here, but probably not too many people from out of town or (especially) out of country taking that bus route?

 

[mildertduck]

A far few years ago, I was at Peterborough and catching the (then: One Railway) service to London Liverpool Street, which was always advertised as Shenfield, to prevent Kings' Cross passengers getting it. This makes a lot of sense, until the adjacent departure was announced, being an (if I recall correctly, East Midlands) train to Sheffield. Cue chaos due to unclear announcements, and people getting on the wrong train. To their credit, the staff on the trains did well "This is a train to Essex, if you want to go to Yorkshire, use the other platform", and checked most tickets before leaving Peterborough (there was a reasonably long layover).

False destination was probably a good idea, but maybe they should have picked Chelmsford to avoid sounding like Sheffield!!!

 

[JN114]

False. The stopping services from Oxford and Didcot to Paddington definitely have their false destinations displayed at Reading, which is not the originating station.

No it’s definitely advertised at Didcot as Ealing Broadway. Oxford doesn’t have any stoppers to London anymore; and the stoppers from Oxford to Didcot and Reading do not have a false destination applied.

I’ll explain how it works, and why it falls down in disruption like the other day - it's not quite as smart or automated as some posters have implied upthread. It doesn't know about journey times etc.

As each train is imported from the CIF file overnight when the timetable rebuilds in the system, rules are applied to each schedule to insert false destinations at Reading and Didcot for up stopping trains. (Paddington CIS is run by the Network Rail staff, I can't be sure their methods are the same but I suspect they are). It's been a few years since I last worked the CIS desk but the rules are worded something like: "if destination PADTON and stopsAt EALINGB then falseDest RDNGSTN EALINGB". As I said before these rules are run once when the timetable is built, they're also re-applied to trains if an alteration is applied such as a cancellation, or stops are taken out. So as each train was edited on Tuesday to run non-stop Hayes to Paddington apply the rule:- "if destination PADTON (TRUE) and stopsAt EALINGB (FALSE) then...." so altering the train strips the false destination out. It isn't practical to put in a rule for every conceivable scenario - the only FalseDest rules for TV suburban services are for Acton ML and Ealing at Reading and Didcot. It's too edge-casey to cater for anything else.

The process for dealing with that is when those alterations are made, the CIS controller should be reapplying them, where relevant, manually. Why this didn't happen I can't answer.

As for whether they should be so advertised, I may be biased but I think it's a good idea. If you're savvy enough to work out the occasions where you would want to use the stopping service from origin to destination, then you'll be able to understand the concept of a false destination. If you can't then it's a fair presumption that you don't need the stopping service anyway. Those trains which are not overtaken etc - very late night Padd - Reading stoppers for example are excluded from the rules, they're advertised at Paddington as "Reading" trains.

 

[cactustwirly]

No it’s definitely advertised at Didcot as Ealing Broadway. Oxford doesn’t have any stoppers to London anymore; and the stoppers from Oxford to Didcot and Reading do not have a false destination applied.

I’ll explain how it works, and why it falls down in disruption like the other day - it's not quite as smart or automated as some posters have implied upthread. It doesn't know about journey times etc.

As each train is imported from the CIF file overnight when the timetable rebuilds in the system, rules are applied to each schedule to insert false destinations at Reading and Didcot for up stopping trains. (Paddington CIS is run by the Network Rail staff, I can't be sure their methods are the same but I suspect they are). It's been a few years since I last worked the CIS desk but the rules are worded something like: "if destination PADTON and stopsAt EALINGB then falseDest RDNGSTN EALINGB". As I said before these rules are run once when the timetable is built, they're also re-applied to trains if an alteration is applied such as a cancellation, or stops are taken out. So as each train was edited on Tuesday to run non-stop Hayes to Paddington apply the rule:- "if destination PADTON (TRUE) and stopsAt EALINGB (FALSE) then...." so altering the train strips the false destination out. It isn't practical to put in a rule for every conceivable scenario - the only FalseDest rules for TV suburban services are for Acton ML and Ealing at Reading and Didcot. It's too edge-casey to cater for anything else.

The process for dealing with that is when those alterations are made, the CIS controller should be reapplying them, where relevant, manually. Why this didn't happen I can't answer.

As for whether they should be so advertised, I may be biased but I think it's a good idea. If you're savvy enough to work out the occasions where you would want to use the stopping service from origin to destination, then you'll be able to understand the concept of a false destination. If you can't then it's a fair presumption that you don't need the stopping service anyway. Those trains which are not overtaken etc - very late night Padd - Reading stoppers for example are excluded from the rules, they're advertised at Paddington as "Reading" trains.

The late night stoppers from Reading are also advertised as 'London Paddington'

 

[JN114]

The late night stoppers from Reading are also advertised as 'London Paddington'

Yeah Padd - Reading was only an example.

 

[Bikeman78]

Of course the answer is what they do elsewhere in the country and not use false destinations.
A combination of "next fastest service to" and additional descriptions such as "stopping service" should be more than good enough.

It's strange that some routes do this but others don't. E.g. stoppers from King's Cross to Cambridge used to be shown as going to Foxton; is that still the case? However, GN trains to Peterborough are shown as such (rather than Huntingdon) even though they nearly always get overtaken by a non stop train.

 

[greatkingrat]

It's strange that some routes do this but others don't. E.g. stoppers from King's Cross to Cambridge used to be shown as going to Foxton; is that still the case? However, GN trains to Peterborough are shown as such (rather than Huntingdon) even though they nearly always get overtaken by a non stop train.

The difference is the fast and slow Peterborough services are operated by two different companies. Some passengers will have TL/GN Only tickets to Peterborough so need to know that the slow train is going to Peterborough as well.

 

[edwin_m]

I was returning from Gatwick yesterday and this part of Thameslink is a definite case for a false destination. There were two trains to Bedford three minutes apart from adjacent platforms formed of identical rolling stock, but the first one makes extra stops to London Bridge and is overtaken by the second. I think this happens every 30min through the day.

 

[MarlowDonkey]

I wonder what the plans for Reading will be when the full Crossrail service becomes operational. It's still likely to be faster from Reading to take the non-stop GWR service and change at Paddington for destinations further along the Elizabeth line in Central and East and South East London. For that matter will they distinguish between the current Paddington and new under Eastbourne Terrace Paddington stations.

 

[cactustwirly]

I wonder what the plans for Reading will be when the full Crossrail service becomes operational. It's still likely to be faster from Reading to take the non-stop GWR service and change at Paddington for destinations further along the Elizabeth line in Central and East and South East London. For that matter will they distinguish between the current Paddington and new under Eastbourne Terrace Paddington stations.

Probably shown as 'Abbey Wood via Ealing Broadway' or something like that. Since it will still be a lot quicker to take a GWR fast and change at Paddington, especially since the entrance to Crossrail is adjacent to the intercity platforms.

 

[edwin_m]

I wonder what the plans for Reading will be when the full Crossrail service becomes operational. It's still likely to be faster from Reading to take the non-stop GWR service and change at Paddington for destinations further along the Elizabeth line in Central and East and South East London. For that matter will they distinguish between the current Paddington and new under Eastbourne Terrace Paddington stations.

False destinations aren't generally used if the slower train provides through service beyond where the false destination would be, that the faster service doesn't. Virtually all Crossrail trains from the west will continue beyond Paddington so I would expect these just to show their final destinations, perhaps supplemented by "next fastest train to" indicators to advise people for Paddington whether to take Crossrail or wait for a faster following service. There may be a few terminators ad Paddington from the west, when the peak service runs down or at the end of the day when trains go out of service and return to Old Oak, but the layout at the new underground station isn't designed for easy terminating from that direction so I imagine they will use the main station.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I was returning from Gatwick yesterday and this part of Thameslink is a definite case for a false destination. There were two trains to Bedford three minutes apart from adjacent platforms formed of identical rolling stock, but the first one makes extra stops to London Bridge and is overtaken by the second. I think this happens every 30min through the day.

Trouble is that Thameslink punctuality is so utterly awful that a lot of the time they might actually end up running the other way round.

This kind of thing is one reason I dislike the idea.

 

[cactustwirly]

False destinations aren't generally used if the slower train provides through service beyond where the false destination would be, that the faster service doesn't. Virtually all Crossrail trains from the west will continue beyond Paddington so I would expect these just to show their final destinations, perhaps supplemented by "next fastest train to" indicators to advise people for Paddington whether to take Crossrail or wait for a faster following service. There may be a few terminators ad Paddington from the west, when the peak service runs down or at the end of the day when trains go out of service and return to Old Oak, but the layout at the new underground station isn't designed for easy terminating from that direction so I imagine they will use the main station.

Reading has the next fastest train to boards, but these only show direct services, on terms of Reading to Canary Wharf for example, it'll still be much quicker to change at Paddington than take the direct train

 

[Bletchleyite]

Reading has the next fastest train to boards, but these only show direct services, on terms of Reading to Canary Wharf for example, it'll still be much quicker to change at Paddington than take the direct train

Just like quite a lot of people take Thameslink from Bedford. Sometimes directness is valued over speed. False destinations only make *any sense at all* if the fast train is to the exact same destination.

 

[cactustwirly]

Just like quite a lot of people take Thameslink from Bedford. Sometimes directness is valued over speed. False destinations only make *any sense at all* if the fast train is to the exact same destination.

Even if that means waiting 25 minutes for the next XR service, then spending an hour traveling to Paddington, when you can get a GWR express from Reading within 10 minutes and end up at Paddington 20 minutes later, where XR services are much more frequent! Saving yourself an hour!

 

[edwin_m]

If it's always quicker to change at Paddington then the "next train to" screen at Reading just needs a notice next to it explaining this - or just doesn't show destinations beyond Paddington. It gets more complicated if the best option varies during the day.

 

[cactustwirly]

If it's always quicker to change at Paddington then the "next train to" screen at Reading just needs a notice next to it explaining this - or just doesn't show destinations beyond Paddington. It gets more complicated if the best option varies during the day.

During the day yes, but during the late evening/early morning it may be quicker to get the XR train as there are fewer IC services.
It sort of depends what the 24hr services look like post XR and who operates them

 

[cholsey-choose]

No it’s definitely advertised at Didcot as Ealing Broadway. Oxford doesn’t have any stoppers to London anymore; and the stoppers from Oxford to Didcot and Reading do not have a false destination applied.

Thanks for the response! So we are in agreement? Sorry I forgot about the Oxford-London stoppers abolition. The person I was responding to they were only advertised falsely at the originating station. I said that they are falsely advertised at Reading-- the Didcot to Paddington stoppers are advertised as for Ealing Broadway at Reading. So are you agreeing with me?

As each train is imported from the CIF file overnight when the timetable rebuilds in the system, rules are applied to each schedule to insert false destinations at Reading and Didcot for up stopping trains. (Paddington CIS is run by the Network Rail staff, I can't be sure their methods are the same but I suspect they are). It's been a few years since I last worked the CIS desk but the rules are worded something like: "if destination PADTON and stopsAt EALINGB then falseDest RDNGSTN EALINGB". As I said before these rules are run once when the timetable is built, they're also re-applied to trains if an alteration is applied such as a cancellation, or stops are taken out. So as each train was edited on Tuesday to run non-stop Hayes to Paddington apply the rule:- "if destination PADTON (TRUE) and stopsAt EALINGB (FALSE) then...." so altering the train strips the false destination out. It isn't practical to put in a rule for every conceivable scenario - the only FalseDest rules for TV suburban services are for Acton ML and Ealing at Reading and Didcot. It's too edge-casey to cater for anything else.

So my guess about the crude logic above was essentially correct?

The process for dealing with that is when those alterations are made, the CIS controller should be reapplying them, where relevant, manually. Why this didn't happen I can't answer.

As for whether they should be so advertised, I may be biased but I think it's a good idea. If you're savvy enough to work out the occasions where you would want to use the stopping service from origin to destination, then you'll be able to understand the concept of a false destination. If you can't then it's a fair presumption that you don't need the stopping service anyway. Those trains which are not overtaken etc - very late night Padd - Reading stoppers for example are excluded from the rules, they're advertised at Paddington as "Reading" trains.

I'm actually fairly sympathetic in the 'to London' case. But leaving Paddington, there are trains advertised as for Cholsey, and I can imagine the confusion if you get on and the robot voice says "Welcome aboard this GWR service to Didcot Parkway"!

Do we know of any other countries that use this system?

 

[cholsey-choose]

I wonder what the plans for Reading will be when the full Crossrail service becomes operational. It's still likely to be faster from Reading to take the non-stop GWR service and change at Paddington for destinations further along the Elizabeth line in Central and East and South East London. For that matter will they distinguish between the current Paddington and new under Eastbourne Terrace Paddington stations.

Yes I saw an advert recently which said that Crossrail will make travel to parts of London substantially faster. (I think it was on an apartment building near Reading station.) Isn't this an outright lie?

 

[MarlowDonkey]

Yes I saw an advert recently which said that Crossrail will make travel to parts of London substantially faster. (I think it was on an apartment building near Reading station.) Isn't this an outright lie?

I think it will, but not without a change of a train. Crossrail is mostly parallel to the Central Line except for the slight detour to Farringdon. Regular commuters for Central Line destinations would regularly leave the station for the short walk to Lancaster Gate. Only having to go as far as Eastbourne Terrace and with a faster service from there will be a time saver, as will not having to cross to Bishops Road to pick up the H&C/Circle for Farringdon and Liverpool Street.

If an IEP/HST and a Crossrail train left Reading at the same time, where would the Crossrail train be when the non-stop arrived at Paddington?

 

[cholsey-choose]

I think it will, but not without a change of a train. Crossrail is mostly parallel to the Central Line except for the slight detour to Farringdon. Regular commuters for Central Line destinations would regularly leave the station for the short walk to Lancaster Gate. Only having to go as far as Eastbourne Terrace and with a faster service from there will be a time saver, as will not having to cross to Bishops Road to pick up the H&C/Circle for Farringdon and Liverpool Street.

If an IEP/HST and a Crossrail train left Reading at the same time, where would the Crossrail train be when the non-stop arrived at Paddington?

Not sure precisely, but from https://www.londonreconnections.com/2018/crossrail-timetable-for-success/ it's implied that the Reading semi-fast will be 20 minutes slower in reaching Paddington:

"This new semi-fast service will now provide a real incentive for passengers from Reading to Crossrail stations in central London to travel direct using a single Elizabeth line train rather than change at Paddington. The extra time (around 20 minutes) is offset by avoiding the need to change at Paddington and having an almost guaranteed seat for the entire journey. This must play very well with TfL’s finances."

EDIT: found a journey time calc on http://www.crossrail.co.uk/route/western-section/heathrow-airport

It says Reading to Paddington 50 mintues.

 

[cactustwirly]

I think it will, but not without a change of a train. Crossrail is mostly parallel to the Central Line except for the slight detour to Farringdon. Regular commuters for Central Line destinations would regularly leave the station for the short walk to Lancaster Gate. Only having to go as far as Eastbourne Terrace and with a faster service from there will be a time saver, as will not having to cross to Bishops Road to pick up the H&C/Circle for Farringdon and Liverpool Street.

If an IEP/HST and a Crossrail train left Reading at the same time, where would the Crossrail train be when the non-stop arrived at Paddington?

Probably in the Maidenhead/Slough area

 

[IainG81]

It is an interesting one for example both fast and stopping services to Oxford say Oxford. I have seen overnight stopping services say Paddington up until about 5am when they switch to Acton ML or Ealing Broadway.

Just wonder when Crossrail does start there's a place close to Reading called Shinfield and I'm thinking there's possibly some confusion there. They might say Shenfield via Ealing Broadway or something like that.

 

[jimm]

I'm actually fairly sympathetic in the 'to London' case. But leaving Paddington, there are trains advertised as for Cholsey, and I can imagine the confusion if you get on and the robot voice says "Welcome aboard this GWR service to Didcot Parkway"!

Why would anyone be confused?

The passengers on board that train at Paddington should all be going to stations as far out as Cholsey - you know, all the stations listed on the departure boards and the screens inside the trains. They couldn't care less about where it eventually finishes its journey.

Passengers travelling from London to Didcot won't be on board, which is the whole point of the system - to keep people wanting to travel to the end point off the slower stopping trains and get them on to other trains that will get them to those places much more quickly.

Yes I saw an advert recently which said that Crossrail will make travel to parts of London substantially faster. (I think it was on an apartment building near Reading station.) Isn't this an outright lie?

Ever heard of marketing? They add up the fastest GWR journey time to Paddington and the Crossrail time through the tunnel, which will knock about 10 minutes off getting to Canary Wharf, compared with the Tube, for example. It didn't say 'substantially faster while sitting on a Crossrail train for the entire journey from Reading', did it?

 

[coppercapped]

False. The stopping services from Oxford and Didcot to Paddington definitely have their false destinations displayed at Reading, which is not the originating station.

This is a classic example of what I was trying to explain - people don't completely read what is written.

As there are two sets of services which make stops between Reading and Paddington - one being the (Oxford) - Didcot - Reading -<selected stations to Paddington> and the other being the half hourly Paddington - Reading terminators - what is inaccurate about my statement?

From Oxford (currently Didcot) and Reading the stoppers will be labelled 'Ealing Broadway'.

On further consideration - Mea Culpa! Maybe if I had written 'At Oxford...and at Reading...' it would have been clearer. The platform and other station displays at Reading will show the penultimate stop for all of these trains.

I really don't understand why you have a problem with the station destination displays. It has been used for years and it is a very simple way of steering people who have little or no knowledge of railway geography or little or no interest in or understanding of arcane railway expressions away from unsuitable trains. Jimm in post No. 57 has explained the issue exactly.

One further point - the half hourly Reading terminators will become the terminating Crossrail trains when Crossrail finally opens. It will be interesting to see how the railways then manage passenger handling because sitting on a Crossrail train from Reading to get to, say, Bond Street will take some 15 or 20 minutes longer than taking a non-stop train to Paddington and changing there. Plenty of fertile ground there for creating a lot of unhappy passengers...
I suspect the Crossrail trains will still be shown as 'Ealing Broadway' at Reading (but not of course at Twyford and stations further east where I would expect the actual route will be shown) as changing at Paddington will be faster for journeys through London; as half the eastbound Crossrail trains will start at Paddington the chances of getting a seat onwards will be pretty high. It will also be a very easy change - it will be closer than the Praed Street Circle line station and less narrow than the way to the Bakerloo line.
I suspect that the platform displays for the westbound Crossrail trains from Paddington to Reading will show 'Reading' as the destination rather than 'Twyford' since the passengers for the stations out to Maidenhead and Twyford will go to the Crossrail platforms and be mostly removed from the main train station. As a result the possibility for confusion will be much reduced. The only trains out of the main station making intermediate calls out to Reading will be the two per hour (off peak frequency) to Didcot and, one hopes before too long, again to Oxford.

It is an interesting one for example both fast and stopping services to Oxford say Oxford. I have seen overnight stopping services say Paddington up until about 5am when they switch to Acton ML or Ealing Broadway.

Just wonder when Crossrail does start there's a place close to Reading called Shinfield and I'm thinking there's possibly some confusion there. They might say Shenfield via Ealing Broadway or something like that.

Firstly, as there are very few limited stop services between Oxford and London at night it is quite possible that a stopping service will arrive at its destination before the next faster service from the same originating point. In this case there is no need to dissuade people from taking the stopping service so both stopping and fast services will show the actual destination.
Secondly, as Shinfield does not have, and never has had, a railway station the chances of confusion are very, very, very small. Don't worry about it.

Added in edit: remarks about Crossrail destination displays.

 

[Dren Ahmeti]

If an IEP/HST and a Crossrail train left Reading at the same time, where would the Crossrail train be when the non-stop arrived at Paddington?

IET runs RDG-PAD in roughly 23 mins (if they get a clear run through Stockley and Heathrow Airport Junctions )

On a RDG-PAD 2Pxx service, you’d be stopped in Slough in exactly 23-24 mins.

 

[cholsey-choose]

This is a classic example of what I was trying to explain - people don't completely read what is written.

As there are two sets of services which make stops between Reading and Paddington - one being the (Oxford) - Didcot - Reading -<selected stations to Paddington> and the other being the half hourly Paddington - Reading terminators - what is inaccurate about my statement?

On further consideration - Mea Culpa! Maybe if I had written 'At Oxford...and at Reading...' it would have been clearer. The platform and other station displays at Reading will show the penultimate stop for all of these trains.

I really don't understand why you have a problem with the station destination displays. It has been used for years and it is a very simple way of steering people who have little or no knowledge of railway geography or little or no interest in or understanding of arcane railway expressions away from unsuitable trains. Jimm in post No. 57 has explained the issue exactly.

One further point - the half hourly Reading terminators will become the terminating Crossrail trains when Crossrail finally opens. It will be interesting to see how the railways then manage passenger handling because sitting on a Crossrail train from Reading to get to, say, Bond Street will take some 15 or 20 minutes longer than taking a non-stop train to Paddington and changing there. Plenty of fertile ground there for creating a lot of unhappy passengers...
I suspect the Crossrail trains will still be shown as 'Ealing Broadway' at Reading (but not of course at Twyford and stations further east where I would expect the actual route will be shown) as changing at Paddington will be faster for journeys through London; as half the eastbound Crossrail trains will start at Paddington the chances of getting a seat onwards will be pretty high. It will also be a very easy change - it will be closer than the Praed Street Circle line station and less narrow than the way to the Bakerloo line.
I suspect that the platform displays for the westbound Crossrail trains from Paddington to Reading will show 'Reading' as the destination rather than 'Twyford' since the passengers for the stations out to Maidenhead and Twyford will go to the Crossrail platforms and be mostly removed from the main train station. As a result the possibility for confusion will be much reduced. The only trains out of the main station making intermediate calls out to Reading will be the two per hour (off peak frequency) to Didcot and, one hopes before too long, again to Oxford.

Firstly, as there are very few limited stop services between Oxford and London at night it is quite possible that a stopping service will arrive at its destination before the next faster service from the same originating point. In this case there is no need to dissuade people from taking the stopping service so both stopping and fast services will show the actual destination.
Secondly, as Shinfield does not have, and never has had, a railway station the chances of confusion are very, very, very small. Don't worry about it.

Added in edit: remarks about Crossrail destination displays.

I'm not quite sure whether you are agreeing or disagreeing with me anymore! I was just responding to your statement that "The so-called 'false destination' is only shown on the departure screens of the train's originating station..."

Unless I'm very much mistaken, this is false. The stopper from Didcot to Paddington is listed as for Ealing Broadway at both Didcot (I think) *and* Reading, which is most certainly not the originating station.