• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

NAO report on Crossrail - and the Reading argument again

Status
Not open for further replies.

transmanche

Established Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
6,018
I've not seen this mentioned elsewhere.

London Reconnections has a new article on a positive National Audit Office (NAO) report on Crossrail published recently.

London Reconnections said:
It is probably fair to say that, broadly speaking, this first report contains no real surprises. Were this truly a school report it is tempting to think that the verdict would be "B+ Good but can do better." Overall, the conclusions are that Crossrail is on time, on budget and well governed.

One interesting excerpt they have highlighted is this:

NAO said:
The Crossrail route currently terminates in the west at Maidenhead; the sponsors are considering whether it should run to Reading. The Department expects that this change would result in a slight reduction in the construction costs of the Crossrail programme, largely because some works at Slough and Maidenhead would no longer be required. The cost of electrifying the Great Western Main Line and of redeveloping Reading station is being paid for as a separate project. In addition to the relative costs and benefits of each option under consideration, the Department will need to consider the impact on the programme schedule.

So an extension to Reading is still up for consideration and it may actually work out to be cheaper to do so.

There are also some positive statements made about project governance; it's suggested by having TfL as a co-sponsor, TfL acts as a stabilising influence on the whole project.

Interesting reading.

The London Reconnections article is here: http://www.londonreconnections.com/2014/window-onto-crossrail-national-audit-office/

The NAO report is here: http://cdn.londonreconnections.com/2013/Crossrail.pdf
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

WatcherZero

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2010
Messages
10,272
The report was big in the news last week, main thing that media picked up on was the developer contributions not materialising so the Government having to pick up more of the tab.
 

Goatboy

Established Member
Joined
23 Jun 2011
Messages
2,274
Extend Crossrail to Reading. Make all outbound FGW IC services pick/up and inbound set/down only at Reading.
 

NotATrainspott

Established Member
Joined
2 Feb 2013
Messages
3,223
Extend Crossrail to Reading. Make all outbound FGW IC services pick/up and inbound set/down only at Reading.

You would still need a service on the fast lines though as otherwise the journey time would increase dramatically and the trains would be full well before they reached the Core. Class 345s will be much slower than anything else on the fast lines so they would have to run on the reliefs, which would get them in the way of stopping services if they ran fast. The trains aren't designed for long-distance passengers either unless a sub-fleet were ordered with toilets and first-class sections, which would make the route much more complicated to run and would increase cost considerably.
 

quantinghome

Established Member
Joined
1 Jun 2013
Messages
2,262
Extend Crossrail to Reading. Make all outbound FGW IC services pick/up and inbound set/down only at Reading.

You realise only 4tph are planned to maidenhead. I'd like to see you explain to Reading commuters why they should swap 12 intercity trains per hour for a 4 tph all shacks service. That said extending crossrail to Reading makes Sense purely for operational reasons.
 

LexyBoy

Established Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
4,478
Location
North of the rivers
I would think the GW franchisee would also have something to say about losing a massive revenue stream...

Reading has always made sense, otherwise there will have to be a lot of extra stops at Maidenhead or Slough.
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
6,518
Location
South Wales
Yes it has been ut forward that running Crossrail to Reading would reduce some of the costs on the Crossrail project as you wouldnt need to do all the work at Maidenhead or Slough.

It would also save the GW franchise running a Reading - Slough shuttle. Running Crossrail services to Reading I think would also help increase passenger numbers since there are a lot who commute in Reading during the peaks not just everyone heading towards London.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,628
You realise only 4tph are planned to maidenhead. I'd like to see you explain to Reading commuters why they should swap 12 intercity trains per hour for a 4 tph all shacks service. That said extending crossrail to Reading makes Sense purely for operational reasons.

Well we are not exactly short of Crossrail trains since we are turning some ridiculous number back at Paddington.

So just extend more trains, run at an actual tube frequency.
If crossrail runs to Reading there is no need for any 'stopping' service that isn't Crossrail.

EDIT:

Crossrail timetable implies a Maidenhead-Paddington time of only 37 minutes, rather than today's 48 minutes.
(I assume it only includes Crossrail services because its the Crossrail site and not some crazy London Transport site?)

That puts Reading-London at something like 53 minutes including the call at Twyford.
That doesn't sound too bad to me.

That is only 14 minutes slower than today's fast Reading train which means if people are heading anywhere that isn't Paddington they are probably better off on the Crossrail service.
 
Last edited:

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
6,518
Location
South Wales
Plus FGW will be running that semi-fast service between Oxford & London along the relief lines as well so I think commuters in the Thames Valley will be pretty well sorted for a couple of years.

As for terminating so many services at Paddington I really do hope the the proposed Old Oak Common interchange happens with perhaps some crossril services send to destinations Like Watford Junction or Ting.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,628
I'm not so sure its worth it.

It would probably be better to use those paths to run a more intensive extension of Crossrail to Reading and then just get people to change there.

How many people go from places like Maidenhead and so on to Oxford anyway? I would imagine it is swamped by the London flows.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,257
Yes it has been ut forward that running Crossrail to Reading would reduce some of the costs on the Crossrail project as you wouldnt need to do all the work at Maidenhead or Slough.

It's also fairly obvious when passing through Maidenhead that some of the work has already happened. I don't think they'd remove it anyway, it provides flexibility for any short workings as no-one really expects a massive number of trains going all the way to Reading, that would be no more than 4 and hour IMHO...
 

HowardGWR

Established Member
Joined
30 Jan 2013
Messages
4,983
I'm not so sure its worth it.

It would probably be better to use those paths to run a more intensive extension of Crossrail to Reading and then just get people to change there.

How many people go from places like Maidenhead and so on to Oxford anyway? I would imagine it is swamped by the London flows.

Respectfully, imagination is not what is important. On another thread I was given to understand flows between Reading and stations to Paddington, in each direction, are substantial, but the proof is in the counts, but these are normally ATOC 'commercially confidential'. I never quite understand why we as taxpayers have to put up with that excuse, given we are paying for most of it.
 
Last edited:

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,628
Respectfully, imagination is not what is important. On another thread I was given to understand flows between Reading and stations to Paddington, in each direction, are substantial,

Who would simply use the Crossrail service instead of the 'conventional' one that is ovten proposed.
The only problem with dividing the service at Reading is if there are substantial 'cross Reading' flows that do not Originate in Paddington.

but the proof is in the counts, but these are normally ATOC 'commercially confidential'. I never quite understand why we as taxpayers have to put up with that excuse, given we are paying for most of it.

Because a political decision has been made to support the current system no matter what.
 

D1009

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2012
Messages
3,166
Location
Stoke Gifford
Well we are not exactly short of Crossrail trains since we are turning some ridiculous number back at Paddington.

So just extend more trains, run at an actual tube frequency.
If crossrail runs to Reading there is no need for any 'stopping' service that isn't Crossrail.
Don't forget there is a substantial amount of freight traffic on the relief lines between Acton and Reading
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,628
Don't forget there is a substantial amount of freight traffic on the relief lines between Acton and Reading

And yet I am told that freight can easily keep up with stoppers which means they can be regulated into a stopping path.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top