My proposal to split XC services at Reading

[JamesRowden]

I have come up with an idea:

It is that once the HS2 route to Manchester and the northern WCML is open that the 2tph Crosscountry Paths between Reading and (1tph Bournemouth, 1tp2h Southampton) might be better transfered to Paddington to Bournemouth and/or Portsmouth services which would stop at Old Oak Common only between Paddington and Reading (running on the fast tracks [the service could be made an extension of the planned Reading-Twyford-Maidenhaed-Slough-Hayes&Harlington-EalingBroadway-Paddington service if there was not enough space on the fast tracks]) and then continue west with somethying similar to the present Crosscountry stopping pattern. I think that these services would create a much faster route to Birmingham and the North than the present Crosscountry services and it would reduce the number of people travelling to Waterloo and using the Northern Line between Waterloo and Euston because via Reading and changing at Old Oak Common should be a more attractive route.

I also wonder if it would be worth building Airtrack as an extension of the Heathrow express (with an additional stop at Old Oak Common) to run to Guildford via Woking to give the places along the route a direct service to Heathrow and Old Oak Common (route might also be usefull during engineering works).

 

[Wath Yard]

All diverting Bournemouth - Manchester services to Paddington would do is inconvenience people who want a direct service. No underground lines are at capacity throughout the day, therefore diverting a couple of 4 or 5 car units in the off peak, which are probably fairly lightly loaded anyway, would have no effect.

 

[JamesRowden]

All diverting Bournemouth - Manchester services to Paddington would do is inconvenience people who want a direct service. No underground lines are at capacity throughout the day, therefore diverting a couple of 4 or 5 car units in the off peak, which are probably fairly lightly loaded anyway, would have no effect.

The trains would need to be longer than that.

Times from Southampton to HS2:

Euston Via Waterloo:

Southampton Central-Waterloo (1h19m)
Waterloo-Euston (18m)
1h37m

Old Oak Common via Reading:

Southampton Central-Reading (49m)
Reading-Old Oak Common (~>20m)
1h9m

Considering that Euston to Manchester will be just 1h8m rather than 2h8m and that all HS2 journey times are presently being shown as stopping at Old Oak Common http://http://www.hs2.org.uk/phase-two/facts-figures#Journey%20times (which means that the route via Reading will be even more of a time advanatge than the times I have listed above) I think that almost everyone wanting to catch high speed two from anywhere along my services route would choose to take it (plus those travelling from/changing at Reading for Paddington when it is the first train to turn up). It would also attract those traveling to North West London away from the Waterloo route. When you then include those who would take the train from the South Coast to the North instead of drive because to the huge journey time advanatges it looks although my service idea might have to be 12-car (or IEP) because of demand.

 

[Wath Yard]

The trains would need to be longer than that.

Times from Southampton to HS2:

Euston Via Waterloo:

Southampton Central-Waterloo (1h19m)
Waterloo-Euston (18m)
1h37m

Old Oak Common via Reading:

Southampton Central-Reading (49m)
Reading-Old Oak Common (~>20m)
1h9m

Considering that Euston to Manchester will be just 1h8m rather than 2h8m and that all HS2 journey times are presently being shown as stopping at Old Oak Common http://http://www.hs2.org.uk/phase-two/facts-figures#Journey%20times (which means that the route via Reading will be even more of a time advanatge than the times I have listed above) I think that almost everyone wanting to catch high speed two from anywhere along my services route would choose to take it (plus those travelling from/changing at Reading for Paddington when it is the first train to turn up). It would also attract those traveling to North West London away from the Waterloo route. When you then include those who would take the train from the South Coast to the North instead of drive because to the huge journey time advanatges it looks although my service idea might have to be 12-car (or IEP) because of demand.

They're not longer than 4 or 5 cars. They are 4 or 5 car Voyagers. Not everybody, in fact virtually nobody, travelling on them travels the whole route and many people like the convenience of not changing trains.

 

[JamesRowden]

They're not longer than 4 or 5 cars. They are 4 or 5 car Voyagers. Not everybody, in fact virtually nobody, travelling on them travels the whole route and many people like the convenience of not changing trains.

A lot more people would travel along the Southampton-Reading path once it is the fastestset route to a large proportion of the country. At the momment it is quicker via Waterloo (4hrs) than using the Crosscountry route. I think that people might change trains at a single station if it would save 2 hours by turning a 4.5 hour journey (probably not done much because of the time it takes) into a 2.5 hour journey. Since the train presently has to reverse at Reading I think that people travelling from south of Reading to a location between Reading and Birmingham would not have their journeys lengthened significantly and that the Birmingham-Reading services could run to Paddington/Heathrow(perhaps continue to Waterloo via Aitrack)/Gatwick/Brighton/Tonbridge (latter 3 locations would require electrifiaction of the North Downs line) providing what I see as far more usefull through services (or taking over some present Paddington-Oxford services to provide more capacity east of Reading) than the present Crosscountry service once HS2 opens (or possibly once Reading to Coventry is electrified).

 

[Wath Yard]

Again, and for the last time, people like through journeys. It isn't obligatory that every train has to go to London and many people couldn't care less whether their journey takes 3 hours or 2 1/2; they just want to get on a train that takes them to their destination..

 

[JamesRowden]

Again, and for the last time, people like through journeys. It isn't obligatory that every train has to go to London and many people couldn't care less whether their journey takes 3 hours or 2 1/2; they just want to get on a train that takes them to their destination..

Maybe you would take a through journey that would take a lot longer and only saves the simplest of changes but I would like to spend more time where I am travelling to or at home. Also, Old Oak Common will provide direct services to a lot more places than the Crosscountry service and so there might not be any advantage in simplicity of using the Crosscountry service at all (I would rather change at Old Oak Common than Birmingham New Street).

I did make it clear that it would save 2 hours not half an hour?

 

[joeykins82]

The radial routes from London aren't going anywhere; XC compliments and relieves those routes by providing semi-fast "missing link" services between neighbouring cities that aren't on a London mainline and offering passengers the choice of a single, direct service to their destination instead of travelling via London and changing somewhere en route. This is even more valuable to budget travellers who can get reasonably priced XC advance fares and are happy to spend an extra hour on the train (possibly in First) for less than the any permitted or via London fare. Yes, HS2 will make going via London the fastest route for more journeys, but axing the alternatives would be stark raving mental.

Also, as a quick example, I'm confident that any SWML station south of Basingstoke to any XC station between Oxford and Coventry will never be quicker via London than it is via XC. Even after HS2.

 

[JamesRowden]

The radial routes from London aren't going anywhere; XC compliments and relieves those routes by providing semi-fast "missing link" services between neighbouring cities that aren't on a London mainline and offering passengers the choice of a single, direct service to their destination instead of travelling via London and changing somewhere en route. This is even more valuable to budget travellers who can get reasonably priced XC advance fares and are happy to spend an extra hour on the train (possibly in First) for less than the any permitted or via London fare. Yes, HS2 will make going via London the fastest route for more journeys, but axing the alternatives would be stark raving mental.

Part of getting a cheap price should surely be not getting the most convinient service. The semi-fast services would still exist but in a different arrangement. Why deny the stations south west of Reading on Crosscountry route the fastest route to the north (and it includes no Underground) and North West London? An extra service could use the Reading West - Tilehurst Chord if direct services between Birmingham and Southampton are so important (saving a lot of time by not having to reverse at Reading).

 

[tbtc]

I have come up with an idea that would effect the demand for fast services into Waterloo and so effect Crossrail 2.

It is that once the HS2 route to Manchester and the northern WCML is open that the 2tph Crosscountry Paths between Reading and (1tph Bournemouth, 1tp2h Southampton) would be better transfered to Paddington to Bournemouth and/or Portsmouth services which would stop at Old Oak Common only between Paddington and Reading (running on the fast tracks [the service could be made an extension of the planned Reading-Twyford-Maidenhaed-Slough-Hayes&Harlington-EalingBroadway-Paddington service if there was not enough space on the fast tracks]) and then continue west with somethying similar to the present Crosscountry stopping pattern. I think that these services would create a much faster route to Birmingham and the North than the present Crosscountry services and it would reduce the number of people travelling to Waterloo and using the Northern Line between Waterloo and Euston because via Reading and changing at Old Oak Common should be a more attractive route

Are you saying that you'd replace the Newcastle/Manchester - Birmingham - Oxford - Reading - Southampton - Bournemouth services with Newcastle/Manchester - Birmingham - Oxford - Reading - London services and London - Reading - Southampton - Bournemouth services?

 

[JamesRowden]

Are you saying that you'd replace the Newcastle/Manchester - Birmingham - Oxford - Reading - Southampton - Bournemouth services with Newcastle/Manchester - Birmingham - Oxford - Reading - London services and London - Reading - Southampton - Bournemouth services?

Almost,

Replace:

Bournemouth-Manchaester

Southampton/Reading-Birmingham-Newcastle

Waterloo-Basingstoke-Portsmouth (possibly)

Reading-Gatwick (possibly)

Birmingham-Glasgow (possibly)

Birmingham-Liverpool (possibly)

Paddington-Oxford (possibly)

With:

Bournemouth/Southampton/Portsmouth-Basingstoke-Reading-Paddington X2

(Paddington/Heathrow/[{Gatwick/Brighton/Tonbridge}-Guildford]-)Reading-Birmingham-Liverpool/Manchester/Glasgow X2

(possibly Paddington/Heathrow)-Reading-Oxford-Bedford-Sheffield-(possibly beyond)

 

[Wath Yard]

It isn't because you live in Reading by any chance and believe Reading is the centre of the universe?

 

[JamesRowden]

It isn't because you live in Reading by any chance and believe Reading is the centre of the universe?

My suggestion (running Paddington-Bournemouth services) does not effect the level of service that Reading would get. Some other services could run from Reading to Old Oak Common (no bias). I just thought that HS2 might metophorically become the centre of the rail network's universe.

 

[tbtc]

Almost,

Replace:

Bournemouth-Manchaester

Southampton/Reading-Birmingham-Newcastle

Waterloo-Basingstoke-Portsmouth (possibly)

Reading-Gatwick (possibly)

Birmingham-Glasgow (possibly)

Birmingham-Liverpool (possibly)

Paddington-Oxford (possibly)

With:

Bournemouth/Southampton/Portsmouth-Basingstoke-Reading-Paddington X2

(Paddington/Heathrow/[{Gatwick/Brighton/Tonbridge}-Guildford]-)Reading-Birmingham-Liverpool/Manchester/Glasgow X2

(possibly Paddington/Heathrow)-Reading-Oxford-Bedford-Sheffield-(possibly beyond)

Virtually nobody is going to travel from Bournemouth/ Southampton/ Basingstoke to Paddington (when there are faster services to Waterloo) and virtually nobody is going to travel from Manchester/ Sheffield/ Birmingham - Paddington (when there are faster services to Euston/ St P).

The idea of western access to Heathrow is attractive, but I think that this needs to be considered seperately

 

[Wath Yard]

My suggestion (running Paddington-Bournemouth services) does not effect the level of service that Reading would get. Some other services could run from Reading to Old Oak Common (no bias). I just thought that HS2 might metophorically become the centre of the rail network's universe.

However, your argument that everybody who currently uses the XC network should be inconvenienced so that a Reading - Tonbridge service can be introduced does look a bit fishy. You state your location as Reading/Hastings and Tonbridge just so happens to be quite a convenient place to change for Hastings.

 

[JamesRowden]

However, your argument that everybody who currently uses the XC network should be inconvenienced so that a Reading - Tonbridge service can be introduced does look a bit fishy. You state your location as Reading/Hastings and Tonbridge just so happens to be quite a convenient place to change for Hastings.

And Kent

But it was only a suggestion of a possibility.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Virtually nobody is going to travel from Bournemouth/ Southampton/ Basingstoke to Paddington (when there are faster services to Waterloo) and virtually nobody is going to travel from Manchester/ Sheffield/ Birmingham - Paddington (when there are faster services to Euston/ St P).

The idea of western access to Heathrow is attractive, but I think that this needs to be considered seperately

Earlier in the thread I posted:

Times from Southampton to HS2:

Euston Via Waterloo:

Southampton Central-Waterloo (1h19m)
Waterloo-Euston (18m)
1h37m

Old Oak Common via Reading:

Southampton Central-Reading (49m)
Reading-Old Oak Common (~>20m)
1h9m

It will not be much slower to Paddington than the services to Waterloo (Paddington to Reading can be done in 20 mins by an HST) (as I said it would be far quicker to North West London if the Interchange at Old Oak Common with the Underground lines that run just north is done). The services that I have suggested are not neccasirlly ones that you would travel the whole route on but I think it gives people the option of a through service if they want and it saves the congestion (and the time of changing trains) caused by splitting them up into services that terminate at the same station (but of course additional crossing paths and additional timetable constraints might be a problem with my idea).

 

[Wath Yard]

Your agrument is people don't care about changing trains or crossing London as long as they get to their destination quicker. Reading - Kent via Tonbridge would take longer than via London, so why would anybody want to use such a service?

 

[LexyBoy]

For those who wish to go Southampton-Manchester as quickly as possible (for example), what would be wrong with them changing onto a service for OOC at Reading, and continuing the current XC pattern? This wouldn't add much time given the frequency of trains between Reading and Paddington. IME whilst Reading is a big interchange there are many passengers travelling on to Oxford and north who would be inconvenienced by having to change.

Plus, paths out of Paddington are precious and using them on services to Southampton and Birmingham, both well served by other routes from London, isn't going to be popular with people in Bristol, Wales and the SW. Which trains would you propose cutting to provide paths for your service?

 

[JamesRowden]

Your agrument is people don't care about changing trains or crossing London as long as they get to their destination quicker. Reading - Kent via Tonbridge would take longer than via London, so why would anybody want to use such a service?

Actually it would be faster from Reading to Tonbridge (which is in West Kent which is not served by HS1) via Guildford if a Crosscountry stopping pattern was employed:

Reading - Redhill 64m (on FGW semi-fast)
Reverse at Redhill ~ 5 minutes
Redhill - Tonbridge 30m (on Southern stopper)
Total Journey 99 minutes (minus the time that would be saved by a Crosscountry stopping pattern and possibly electric trains if the route is electrified by then [HS2 Phase 2])

Reading - Paddington (27mins is fastest)
Paddington - Charing Cross (have to leave 30 minutes because the line can be slow if busy)
Charing Cross - Tonbridge (40 mins is fastest)
Total is 97 minutes (plus the time waiting at Charing Cross for a connecting service)

A Reading to Tonbridge Crosscountry service would actually be faster in comparison to Reading to Manchester when comparing it with the times via London (via London is 25 minutes faster from Reading to Manchester on the current WCML). Do you not think that some people might just possibly want to aviod the inconvience of travelling via London from Kent to the Great Western Mainline (especially during the peak).

But I am not saying that Crosscountry a service between Reading and Tonbridge should happen just that it might be usefull (a FGW semi-fast service could also be extended to Tonbridge (or beyond) to provide similar benefits).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

For those who wish to go Southampton-Manchester as quickly as possible (for example), what would be wrong with them changing onto a service for OOC at Reading, and continuing the current XC pattern? This wouldn't add much time given the frequency of trains between Reading and Paddington. IME whilst Reading is a big interchange there are many passengers travelling on to Oxford and north who would be inconvenienced by having to change.

Plus, paths out of Paddington are precious and using them on services to Southampton and Birmingham, both well served by other routes from London, isn't going to be popular with people in Bristol, Wales and the SW. Which trains would you propose cutting to provide paths for your service?

A Paddington to Oxford service could be extended to Birmingham (and beyond). Some of the spare off-peak paths (following Reading Station Rebuilding (more platforms/flyover junctions) and new trains that will have a lot more seats than the present lot and the introduction of ERTMS) between Paddington and Reading.

Or it could be an extension of the planned Reading to Paddington semi-fast servcies (2tph post-crossrail):

• 
  Reading
  Twyford
  Maidenhead
  Slough
  Hayes & Harlington (could be dropped following western access to Heathrow)
  Ealing Broadway
  (Old Oak Common)
  Paddington

I just thought that a through service to Old Oak Common would be usefull for people and that a direct service to Heathrow (this would run along the slow paths east of Reading Calling at Twyford, Maidenhead and Slough) would be usefull for people who want to travel from the Birmingham direction and do not want to have the hasle of changing onto and off HS2 (asuming no HS2 Heathrow Chord) and that the present services to Paddington from the West should not be rereouted to/via Heathrow because quantity of people in that direction who want to go to Heathrow will be so small compared with those who want to go to London.

 

[Wath Yard]

Now you're really confusing me. If you don't think that the XC trains should be diverted to other routes then why are you saying they should be taken off their existing routes? There are already enough trains from Reading - London so you don't need ones from Bournemouth.

 

[JamesRowden]

Now you're really confusing me. If you don't think that the XC trains should be diverted to other routes then why are you saying they should be taken off their existing routes? There are already enough trains from Reading - London so you don't need ones from Bournemouth.

But it might benefit Bournemouth to have a service that provides a faster simpler journey to HS2 and parts of North West London.

 

[Wath Yard]

Who cares about Bournemouth?

I used the Bournemouth - NW service quite a lot a few years ago and believe me it wasn't busy from Bournemouth.

 

[JamesRowden]

Who cares about Bournemouth?

I used the Bournemouth - NW service quite a lot a few years ago and believe me it wasn't busy from Bournemouth.

It has got to terminate somewhere. When a train terminates it will be pretty empty unless the station is a place where people especially want to go to/from (like London) somewhere that a lot of people want to make connections at.

 

[Wath Yard]

So if you are saying there isn't much point running the service to Bournemouth, there isn't much point running the service from Bournemouth - Paddington. The core sections of the XC route are the busiest so removing the core sections in order to have additional dodgy add-ons at the extremities would be pointless.

 

[JamesRowden]

So if you are saying there isn't much point running the service to Bournemouth, there isn't much point running the service from Bournemouth - Paddington. The core sections of the XC route are the busiest so removing the core sections in order to have additional dodgy add-ons at the extremities would be pointless.

I am not saying that it is pointless for the Crosscountry services (or my Paddington service idea) to run to Bournemouth. I am saying that a train being rather empty at one end of the line does not mean that it should be chopped back. One has to consider the additional cost of running it beyond another potential terminus and the extra revenue that is produced by people using the train over the length of the route as a result of it running the extra bit (e.g. Bournemouth to Southampton).

What I am basically saying is that the present service appears to match the present situation (no HS2 no spare capacity between Reading and Paddington). If we add these occurances it will create a new need for people to travel via Old Oak Common if they want to get to the north faster than at the momment. It will also mean that the people who might presently use the Crosscountry service might be inclined to take the faster route. This means that the justification for the present Crosscountry services between a place in the North and a place in the south for which people will be able to travel by a faster route via London reduces.

It think that places on the GWML that could get to the North significantly faster via HS2 would get get great benefit from a service to Old Oak Common. However from Bristol it will still be fastest to use its Crosscountry services to get straight to Birmingham (and beyond).

Because of Birmingham Interchange station being on the other side of the airport from Birmingham International station, I think that there will be a bus/underground service between the two stations to allow connections and that some slower HS2 services will make connections possible. Oxford station and those to the north of it are the stations that I think might make use of this route.

Therefore I thought that direct services to Old Oak Common would be a good idea for the major stations out of Paddington to the end of the semi-fast services on the Newbury line and those which could be accessed via Basingtoke.

I also thought it a good idea to have a frequency of every 15 minutes from Reading to Old Oak Common (same as is planned for Heathrow) so that good connections are possible.

Perhaps a compromise would be to run:

Present Bournemouth-Manchester Crosscountry service 1tph

Heathrow-Reading-Birmingham-Liverpool 1tph

Southampton-Reading-Oxford-Bedford-Sheffield-Doncaster/Leeds-York 1tph

Basingstoke-STOPPING-Reading-Paddington (Stopping at Old Oak Common) 2tph

Newbury(beyond if electrified)-SemiFast-Reading-Paddington 2tph (Stopping at Old Oak Common)

And scrap:

(Southampton-)Reading-Birmingham-Newcastle (because the route is so indirect and is surpassed by both HS2 and East West Rail) (another new service would fill the gap between Birmingham and Newcastle).


This compromise service idea would mean that there would be four journeys per hour from Southampton to Old Oak common that would require a change at either Basingstoke or Reading.

 

[tbtc]

It will not be much slower to Paddington than the services to Waterloo (Paddington to Reading can be done in 20 mins by an HST)

paths out of Paddington are precious and using them on services to Southampton and Birmingham, both well served by other routes from London, isn't going to be popular with people in Bristol, Wales and the SW

I agree with LexyBoy - this would only be a competative time if you gave these Bournemouth - Paddington services fast paths through the Thames Valley. That assumes that there are spare fast paths available and that there's no need to give them to additional Oxford - London or Henley - London or Devon - London (etc) services.

 

[JamesRowden]

I agree with LexyBoy - this would only be a competative time if you gave these Bournemouth - Paddington services fast paths through the Thames Valley. That assumes that there are spare fast paths available and that there's no need to give them to additional Oxford - London or Henley - London or Devon - London (etc) services.

The extra from Paddington paths should be allocated to Bristol, South Wales and the South West if there is demand for them (the new trains will have more seats, [apart from devon untill new stock is ordered/transfered]).

The London South East RUS actually suggested running extra services between Paddington and Reading during the peak. It thought that there could be 11 IEP services, 1 HST from devon, 4 Thames Valley fast services and 4 extra fast services between Paddington and Reading during the peak (at the expense of not running Heathrow Express along the fast lines). It also suggested that some of these extra Paddington to Reading services should run to Basingstoke if it were electrified (which is now the plan) in order to reduce capacity problems on the SWML into London. That is a total of 20tph non-stop between Reading and Paddington (compared with up to 11tph at the momment plus 4 Heathrow Express) (it stated that this level of service was not required for at least a decade or two).

Obviously having some fast services stopping at Old Oak Common will reduce the capacity. But I think that there may be enough space offpeak (I think that Old Oak Common could replace Slough as the station that some fast services stop at since I think that the planned Paddington to Reading semi-fast services should be fast enough to serve Slough OK).

During the peak my Bournemouth-Paddington service idea could run non-stop between Reading and Paddington. Since I would expect that there are far more commuters rather than long distance travellers during peak it should not be a great loss to have to change at Reading (to catch a semi-fast service) to get to Old Oak Common and not have to travel on a crowded underground train.

 

[mister-sparky]

Paddington to Charing Cross takes 30mins?! I do it almost daily and it takes no more than 15 mins on the Bakerloo Line.
Also, no TOC would introduce services from the Reigate direction crossing the BML to Tonbridge anymore. Due to the time it takes to wait at Redhill to reverse across paths.

 

[JamesRowden]

Paddington to Charing Cross takes 30mins?! I do it almost daily and it takes no more than 15 mins on the Bakerloo Line.
Also, no TOC would introduce services from the Reigate direction crossing the BML to Tonbridge anymore. Due to the time it takes to wait at Redhill to reverse across paths.

I do Paddington to Charing Cross via Bakerloo line often and the tube train is scheduled to take 12 minutes at quiet times. When one adds the time walking between the tube and rail stations it is 18 minutes minimum. One has to account for the possibility of having to wait at least 3 minutes for the tube train. The tube being busy makes the journey take longer (more time for people getting on/off at the six intermediate stations, more slowmos to get around). The time that I allowed was what would be required to make me certain to make the connection (I have found it can be quite busy on Saturdays).

A service between Reigate to Tonbridge has only to cross the slow tracks of the Brighton Mainline (the fast tracks do not go through Redhill). Off-peak there are only 6tph between Redhill and London. Also a new platform is to be built at Redhill.

 

[43167]

If its not broke dont fix. The current XC service is fine. Manchester/North east-Bournemouth/Southwest works well.

Sadly the days of 1V97, 1V98 & 1V99 to Paddington in the evening are long gone.