Heathrow Southern Link proposals

[IainG81]

A report in today's GetWestLondon reports that Heathrow has given it's support to a proposed link up to the Southern Rail network just west of Staines and would include a direct link to the Cargo terminal for fright to be loaded straight onto trains instead of lorries in some cases.

https://www.getwestlondon.co.uk/news/west-london-news/heathrow-expansion-airport-gives-nod-14174403

Heathrow Airport has lent support to the campaign for a £1.2 billion Southern Rail Link at the airport, as part of its expansion consultation.

The link would connect the UK's busiest airport with the Southern Rail network, with connections to Waterloo, Clapham Junction, Hounslow , Putney, Twickenham, Richmond , Staines and stations in Surrey.



According to the HSR website, the £1.2bn scheme would aim to deliver:

• Fast, direct and frequent rail access to Heathrow from the south and south west where services are not offered by rail
• Frequent service to Waterloo via Richmond and Putney and giving major connecting opportunities to south London, Sussex and Kent through Clapham Junction and Waterloo East
• Direct trains to Paddington from the south and south west via Heathrow creating an alternative London terminal to Waterloo and with Elizabeth Line providing connections to the West End, the City and Docklands
• Direct trains to Old Oak common, providing a "one stop" connection to High Speed 2 and access to the proposed major development site
• Continuation of a fast Heathrow to Paddington service with the same journey times to the current Heathrow Express

Wonder if you think a good idea? The freight not going onto the Western Region probably a good idea with that line already crowded with frieght and with Crossrail coming i think it makes sense to take it south.

 

[rebmcr]

I can't see Crossrail going to Staines.

 

[cle]

If Crossrail is going to Staines, then the SW access would be akin to the Airtrack triangle - and bring up all the Egham level crossing dramas.

If there is a separate, new line to connect to Woking - the line from T5 to Staines won't also be built.

I thought Crossrail or HEx to Staines was a nice added bonus to the overall scheme, but it doesn't stand up by itself. Staines is well served to Waterloo and that is about to increase further in tph (upped to 4tph both Reading and Windsor, with all stopping there).

Shame as I still think more could have been done with Crossrail and branches. The most egregious being Windsor. A simple single track dive-under at Slough could have enabled a clean 2-4 tph service to Windsor and kill the shuttle. That line is single-track but short enough to handle.

 

[hwl]

I'm sure there has been a thread on this before (August 2017 ish?)

Here is the website of the promoters:
https://heathrowrail.com/proposed-route/

The design work so far seems to have been done by AECOM with involvement form those involved in HS1, Chilterns infra projects (Evergreen) and GNER

 

[furnessvale]

As much as I support railfreight, in the absence of a wagonload network, I cannot see ANY airport generating the sort of tonnage required to support a railfreight terminal.

 

[swt_passenger]

I'm sure there has been a thread on this before (August 2017 ish?)

There have been a few in the last year. Every time the local press mention it a new thread seems to start.

This was under discussion July to September 2017: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...n-connection-to-heathrow.151199/#post-3114108

 

[hwl]

As much as I support railfreight, in the absence of a wagonload network, I cannot see ANY airport generating the sort of tonnage required to support a railfreight terminal.

Agreed - the only logic I can see is that Air Cargo generate lots of goods vehicle traffic and diesel emissions in the greater Heathrow area so potentially the option of having the Logistic Companies have a co-located base away from the airport then bring the air cargo that goes on passenger flights (from 2-5) in over night, but even that is unlikely to happen far easier to insist on electric vehicles for those firms doing the off-site base to Heathrow runs. (The stock for the WHSmith and restuarants could also come in on the same over night train(s). The problem with Overnight is then when do you do the maintenance. I can't see them wanting to move the existing fall back fuel delivery to the tunnels either.

 

[infobleep]

I saw a news report on the BBC News Channel tonight about a vacuum tunnel being tested in America. The person said such a thing could be built between Gatwick Airport and Heathrow and passengers could be transported in 4 minutes. London to Scotland would be 50 minutes.

If they were able to build such a thing above gtound or underground, would that put pay to additional rail lines to Heathrow?

I'm not quite certain where they would fit the tunnel myself but the principle at least, ignoring the location issues, seemed interesting.

 

[The Ham]

I saw a news report on the BBC News Channel tonight about a vacuum tunnel being tested in America. The person said such a thing could be built between Gatwick Airport and Heathrow and passengers could be transported in 4 minutes. London to Scotland would be 50 minutes.

If they were able to build such a thing above gtound or underground, would that put pay to additional rail lines to Heathrow?

I'm not quite certain where they would fit the tunnel myself but the principle at least, ignoring the location issues, seemed interesting.

Hyperloop or any similar system would only really work on longish difference runs and so getting to Heathrow to join the system would mean that there was more traffic for local train services getting to Heathrow.

 

[The Ham]

A report in today's GetWestLondon reports that Heathrow has given it's support to a proposed link up to the Southern Rail network just west of Staines and would include a direct link to the Cargo terminal for fright to be loaded straight onto trains instead of lorries in some cases.

Wonder if you think a good idea? The freight not going onto the Western Region probably a good idea with that line already crowded with frieght and with Crossrail coming i think it makes sense to take it south.

For passengers it would be great, it looks like they've been cleaver and linked from Basingstoke/Guildford to Old Oak Common which will boost passenger numbers by enabling people to join HS2 without going into central London.

 

[Taunton]

I do find it extraordinary how nonsense suggestions make it so far. Air cargo, by its very nature, comprises a lot of small-sized consignments, the very opposite of what rail freight is willing to handle. The only part-load traffic on rail nowadays is ISO containers, each being shipped individually but consolidated into trainloads. Air freight does not travel in such containers, which are far too heavy to be used in aircraft, and far too large for most as well; there are very few all-freight aircraft at Heathrow, the bulk of the freight moves under the floor of the passenger aircraft. And unlike shipping, only unloading say at Felixstowe, air freight does not commonly travel onwards long distances suitable for rail. It doesn't get sent on from Heathrow to Manchester; if it was headed there it would have been put on an aircraft direct to Manchester in the first place.

We also, yet again, have the Heathrow-Gatwick passenger link brought up. Hardly any passengers change flights between Heathrow and Gatwick, the handful that might do in no way constitute a trainload for a regular passenger service.

 

[furnessvale]

I do find it extraordinary how nonsense suggestions make it so far. Air cargo, by its very nature, comprises a lot of small-sized consignments, the very opposite of what rail freight is willing to handle. The only part-load traffic on rail nowadays is ISO containers, each being shipped individually but consolidated into trainloads. Air freight does not travel in such containers, which are far too heavy to be used in aircraft, and far too large for most as well; there are very few all-freight aircraft at Heathrow, the bulk of the freight moves under the floor of the passenger aircraft. And unlike shipping, only unloading say at Felixstowe, air freight does not commonly travel onwards long distances suitable for rail. It doesn't get sent on from Heathrow to Manchester; if it was headed there it would have been put on an aircraft direct to Manchester in the first place.

We also, yet again, have the Heathrow-Gatwick passenger link brought up. Hardly any passengers change flights between Heathrow and Gatwick, the handful that might do in no way constitute a trainload for a regular passenger service.

Not necessarily true. Years ago as a PC, I pulled a speeding HGV on the A74 to find it loaded with air cargo from Glasgow to Heathrow. The driver was keen to get there fast as they were charging air fright rates for it.

 

[edwin_m]

Not necessarily true. Years ago as a PC, I pulled a speeding HGV on the A74 to find it loaded with air cargo from Glasgow to Heathrow. The driver was keen to get there fast as they were charging air fright rates for it.

Does that mean the cargo had to go on a truck as it was too scared to go on a plane?

Another issue with air-rail freight trans-shipment is that air freight is likely to be time-critical, otherwise it would have been sent by slower but much cheaper surface modes. This means the shipper will probably have a truck organised to deliver/collect it at the airport "just in time". Rail intermodal is fairly fast but the services are timetabled and because the economics rely on filling a long train they aren't very frequent, so it is likely any freight transferred to or from air would have to wait too long.

I recall DB tried out rail-air interchange, at Frankfurt I think, using freight multiple units which were the basis of the design Network Rail uses as multi-purpose maintenance vehicles. Even in the more railfreight-friendly environment of Germany I don't think they could make it pay.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Designing this link for freight would also make it much more expensive. If it will only be served by EMUs, it can have much steeper gradients and a lower track weight loading. Tunnels are easier when diesel emissions and fuel isn't a worry too.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Personally I feel they are missing a trick.

They should open a line from Heathrow Terminal 5 and down to be next to the M25 with a grade-separated junction near Hythe End. In Staines they should build 3 stations to replace the existing one - one at Two Rivers, one off the Staines Bypass in the East ("Staines Parkway") and one at Thorpe Road ("Staines Bridge").

In the process, you'd also build a triangle railway so that the quarter-hourly trains from Windsor (Slough?) can run to Waterloo calling at Two Rivers and Parkway, given connections to a quarter-hourly service from Heathrow Terminal 5 to the Woking area calling at Two Rivers and Staines Bridge and they in turn could connect with the quarter-hourly service from Waterloo to Reading calling at Parkway and Staines Bridge. In theory, every journey can be made with one change and same platform except something like Heathrow to Windsor which you'd probably do via Slough on the Western Rail Link anyway. The other positive benefit is the ability to still run a service from Waterloo via Richmond or Hounslow to the Airport anyway as it would share the infrastructure of the Southern Link anyway.

The Heathrow services should be designed to go to as many different places as possible. One option could be to replace the 'new' semi-fast Waterloo to Portsmouth via Godalming and Liphook south of Guildford to provide a connection from Heathrow to the likes of Godalming, Haslemere, Liphook, Havant, Fratton and Portsmouth; with the Waterloo to Portsmouth 'semi fast' (aka the old Haslemere terminator) terminating at Guildford; and the 'other' half-hourly from Heathrow in the hour to run to Basingstoke semi-fast as a new journey; with the other two trains running to Weybridge via local stops.

Then on the Piccadilly line, a simple extension to the new terminal to provide connections and 3 trains every 10 minutes (aka 18tph) vice the current 12. I'd also be inclined to suggest the Heathrow West Rail Link should be served by GWR on a Paddington - Heathrow - Reading basis. It would decelerate some trains to the West but it would add in the connections so it's a necessary evil. One service I'd probably suggest for that would be the new Paddington to Temple Meads 'super fast' they're planning via Parkway. That way you get the best of both worlds in that the existing service via Bath isn't slowed and the new service goes to Parkway to connect to South Wales and Temple Meads, stopping in at Didcot and Swindon on the way.

The other good option would be to run an 8 car 387 to Newbury to replace the current Bedwyn and run an 8 car 387 to somewhere like Oxford when they finally juice it.

The reason for not wanting to mix Paddington with the Southern Rail Link should be obvious - what would power the trains? 25kV to start, then a switch to DC? Would you have to 25kV Basingstoke and Guildford? Does NR have the money or the resource? Keep them separate - a DC railway to the South, 25kV AC north and west. Easy does it.

 

[edwin_m]

Almost every modern design of EMU is equipped for dual voltage or is designed so dual voltage equipment can easily be added, so the difference in electrification systems isn't a reason not to run through services. Ironically one of the few that isn't is the 332, so they couldn't be used for through workings onto the third rail.

 

[Class 170101]

Remember though there are expensive immunisation issues between 3rd Rail and 25KV overhead electrifications systems that have been discussed elsewhere.

 

[edwin_m]

Remember though there are expensive immunisation issues between 3rd Rail and 25KV overhead electrifications systems that have been discussed elsewhere.

Yes, and these are minimised by minimising the extent of dual electrification and having the transition between the two systems in a relatively simple bit of track. So all in all better to have dual-voltage trains rather than dual-electrified track. However if Crossrail is to run through to Staines it's probably better to extend 25kV there rather than fitting all the Crossrail trains with third rail shoes (unless, perhaps, they have been fitted already by then for running beyond Abbey Wood).

 

[randompixel]

In today's Times (paywall) there is a story about Chris Grayling announcing this to be built outside the remit of Network Rail. I'll quote what I can.

A new privately built railway line would be constructed into Heathrow from Waterloo station in London under government plans to expand Britain’s rail network without using taxpayer money upfront.

Chris Grayling, the transport secretary, will announce today that a new private operator will be invited to build the eight-mile link from Britain’s busiest railway station to the mainline near its busiest airport outside the usual scope of Network Rail, the state-funded infrastructure company.

The move will be billed as a significant step by the government, signalling an intention to give big rail upgrades to the private sector in the future. A line between Oxford and Cambridge is already being built using a similar model.

The disclosure will be criticised by Labour, which has advocated more…

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/private-railway-to-heathrow-from-waterloo-xg2npgr9d

 

[SAPhil]

We also, yet again, have the Heathrow-Gatwick passenger link brought up. Hardly any passengers change flights between Heathrow and Gatwick, the handful that might do in no way constitute a trainload for a regular passenger service.

Perhaps the provision of such a link might encourage people to do this?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

DfT announcement and papers here: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/...-the-way-for-future-transport-funding-schemes
The Heathrow Southern Rail Link is being put up as the first in a new Rail Network Enhancements Pipeline programme.
It's also meant to trial the new investment policy for Network Rail, so there is no pre-existing design or funding plan for it.
DfT is expecting investors (pension funds, construction firms, local authorities) to come up with ideas and funding proposals.

 

[swt_passenger]

In today's Times (paywall) there is a story about Chris Grayling announcing this to be built outside the remit of Network Rail. I'll quote what I can.

The Times aren’t describing what needs to be built very well. I doubt anyone is expect any work to be carried out AT Waterloo itself...

 

[felixthebadger]

This is one of the prospective bidders, gives more detail of proposed route & infrastructure.

https://heathrowrail.com

Heathrow Southern Rail is a privately funded proposal for Southern rail access to Heathrow Airport

‘Heathrow Southern Railway is all about allowing fast, easy and relaxing access to Heathrow Airport through the construction of 8 miles of new infrastructure from the west end of the existing Terminal 5 station, linking the south western and great western rail corridors. HSR would open up access to and through Heathrow from the South West and South East by enabling trains to operate between Heathrow and Waterloo via Clapham Junction, Putney, Hounslow, Twickenham, Richmond, Staines and other intermediate stations.

Our new railway will also improve connectivity between Surrey and London for commuters, creating a new route to London from train service between Basingstoke/Guildford and to Paddington via Woking, Heathrow and Old Oak Common (for HS2 and the Elizabeth Line). Trains could set out on these journeys from as far away as the south coast.

Whether or not a third runway is built, many more passengers and airport workers need to be accessing Heathrow by train. The Government’s recent M25 South West Quadrant Study ruled out widening the motorway. HSR provides the alternative, switching traffic from the roads and contributing to improving local air quality. We estimate that HSR will reduce use of this section of the M25 by over three million car trips a year.

Appraised under the Department for Transport’s formula, HSR has an unparalleled business case if the airport is expanded, and still provides very high value for money with Heathrow’s current passenger numbers and two runways. HSR will be financed privately at no cost to taxpayers and could open by 2025.

Our construction plans minimise the impact on neighbouring communities by building a short tunnel from Terminal 5 and then a mainly surface route parallel with the M25 to the Windsor-Staines line. HSR will then continue alongside the M25 to the Virginia Water–Weybridge line north of Chertsey. Unlike the previous “Airtrack” proposals, HSR avoids level crossings in the Egham area.

Through this website we introduce our project. Further information will be posted as the plans for HSR are developed. We welcome enquiries from residents, communities, elected representatives, media, businesses and other stakeholders. Please go to our contact page if you would like to get in touch.

 

[swt_passenger]

This is one of the prospective bidders, gives more detail of proposed route & infrastructure.

https://heathrowrail.com

Heathrow Southern Rail is a privately funded proposal for Southern rail access to Heathrow Airport

Yes it does, but it is still the same proposal as discussed in this thread earlier, back in January, and in a few previous threads. Reporting this new announcement from DfT is simply keeping the pot boiling as far as I can see. Local media reports do the same, it is just the same basic idea updated a couple of times each year for the last few years.

 

[WatcherZero]

Governments set up a arms length company for the concession and is now inviting bidders for build and operate.

 

[swt_passenger]

Governments set up a arms length company for the concession and is now inviting bidders for build and operate.

I agree that’s news. What isn’t news is most of the detail about the route in post #23.

 

[Cosmicismsx]

In today's Times (paywall) there is a story about Chris Grayling announcing this to be built outside the remit of Network Rail. I'll quote what I can.

DfT announcement and papers here: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/...-the-way-for-future-transport-funding-schemes
The Heathrow Southern Rail Link is being put up as the first in a new Rail Network Enhancements Pipeline programme.
It's also meant to trial the new investment policy for Network Rail, so there is no pre-existing design or funding plan for it.
DfT is expecting investors (pension funds, construction firms, local authorities) to come up with ideas and funding proposals.

Ugh, just what we need. More rail links thought up by outside parties, without considering the context of it applying to the whole network. Theres multiple options and service patterns to link to Windsor line, Woking, or even Crossrail from the north of Heathrow.

 

[The Ham]

From the document linked to from the link above:

Government is taking a new approach to the way it enhances the railway. It is creating a rolling programme of investment that continues to focus on outcomes that deliver real benefits for passengers, freight users and the economy. This continuous approach to Enhancements builds on the progress already made and the process set out in the Memorandum of Understanding between Department for Transport and Network Rail on Rail Enhancements and moves the investment in Enhancements away from a rigid five year cycle. This document sets out this new approach and illustrates the pipeline that it has created.

Basically the government us going to provide funding and the choice what projects best meet its requirements (including value for money, but also new passenger journeys and a more reliable railway). It also allows others to provide some of the funding (which will mean that the government funding can go further).

I think that it had the potential to work well, it will almost certainly mean the end of projects like the electric spine being sprung on the industry from MP's.

 

[Bald Rick]

Governments set up a arms length company for the concession and is now inviting bidders for build and operate.

That’s not my reading of it.

The news is the publication of the process for how enhancements will be considered and taken forward, and is also an open call for ideas that could fit into that process. There is also a specific call for ideas regarding a rail link to Heathrow from the south. It notes there are already many proposals. Nowhere does it say it is setting up a company for the concession; indeed that would be contrary to the process.

My reading of it is that it is asking for proposals (for a southern link to Heathrow) to be submitted to the department, including how it would be funded and financed. Government may they take forward the one that fits best and / or has the lowest call on the public purse. Obviously the Heathrow Southern Link people will be submitting.

 

[WatcherZero]

Company being set up is being reported, presumably would work like London and Continental Railway and HS1 as the formation of a PLC acting to limit the governments risk, the appendix also indicates that all MLP's will be off the Treasuries books unless a public body is both the financer (source of capital) and funder (source of revenue). The Dft have indicated they are keen to act as the commissioners, that if a local authority/private investment consortium come up with a plan and financing it would be the Dft that would run the competition to decide the contractor and at the end of the process the infrastructure would be added to the RaB, Dft has also indicated they want competition so if say a infrastructure builder comes to them with plan and funding then other companies/investors would be invited to submit rival tenders for the scheme before deciding the best value bidder (the exception being category 1 MLP's where there is no direct or indirect government funding or guarantees and the bidder has no exclusive rights to the resulting infrastructure, the example given is a port paying to gauge clear a line for freight but expecting no exclusivity or financial return from doing so).

Investors have been given a 2 month deadline to deliver their proposals to the Dft with them publishing their response in the Autumn.