New diveunder line to the east of Reading station

[cle]

We did until XC was cut back to provide capacity on its core routes, but not through the underpass - I don't think it was ever used for passenger services - the through services went via the double-track spur at Reading New Jn onto the Main lines (which predates the 1965 closure of Reading Southern).

I think he is referring to today's North Downs services from Reading to Gatwick - which occasionally started back from Banbury and Oxford, and sometimes continued to on Brighton.

A useful service I would think - I wonder if it could be viable again with the dive-under.

 

[dysonsphere]

In relation to the first post would anyone have a copy of the proposed new layout at reading (a proper track plan not the dreadfull network rail sketch) or a link to somewhere with the details.

 

[Surreyman]

All valid points, however the point is that with XC as it is at the moment it could help the business case to electrify the line.

Also even if XC services were cut back there could be a case to provide a direct (with reversal at Reading) service between between Heathrow and Gatwick (given the number of coaches which run between both airports), in which case it provides a good case for electrifying the line.

However even as a diversionary route for XC services it would make sense for it to be fairly high up the list of routes to be electrified once the electric spine project is complete.

The main un-electrified parts of Cross-Country routes are top of the priority list for Electrification (maybe CP6?), I wonder if one reason for them not being given the go-ahead in CP5 was the rolling stock issue?
I.E Plan to convert Voyagers to Bi-Mode with an extra Pantograph, seemingly has too many technical problems to overcome.
If this proves to be the case (too difficult)then you would require new electric stock (Bi-Mode to serve extremities) (expensive) and not many suitable places to cascade overpowered 125mph long distance stock.
Can't see the logic of a rail service between LGW & LHR via Reading - Coaches are faster and more direct via M23/M25 even if the 'western rail link' is built at LHR, it's @ 85 mins LGW - Reading via North Downs line now.
The North Downs line is probably the only compelling case for extending 3rd rail electrification in the UK, Uckfield, Salisbury/Exeter could be 25Kv AC, with dual voltage stock.
Maybe one day!

 

[The Ham]

The main un-electrified parts of Cross-Country routes are top of the priority list for Electrification (maybe CP6?), I wonder if one reason for them not being given the go-ahead in CP5 was the rolling stock issue?
I.E Plan to convert Voyagers to Bi-Mode with an extra Pantograph, seemingly has too many technical problems to overcome.
If this proves to be the case (too difficult)then you would require new electric stock (Bi-Mode to serve extremities) (expensive) and not many suitable places to cascade overpowered 125mph long distance stock.
Can't see the logic of a rail service between LGW & LHR via Reading - Coaches are faster and more direct via M23/M25 even if the 'western rail link' is built at LHR, it's @ 85 mins LGW - Reading via North Downs line now.
The North Downs line is probably the only compelling case for extending 3rd rail electrification in the UK, Uckfield, Salisbury/Exeter could be 25Kv AC, with dual voltage stock.
Maybe one day!

Current fastest train Reading to Gatwick is:
09:34Reading Station
09:43Wokingham
09:51Blackwater
09:57North Camp
10:10Guildford Station
10:26Dorking Deepdene
10:34Reigate
10:41Redhill
10:50Gatwick Airport

Which is 76 minutes, however if it was run by an EMU rather than a DMU it would have a faster journey time. It should be feasible to run a train between the two airports in about 90 minutes compared with 65 minutes for the coaches.

However the trains maybe able to undercut the coaches as the cost of a return fare for tomorrow (so basicly turn up and go) is £41, however from Maidenhead to Gatwick (via Reading) is £29 for an any time return. Also there is the option (if you travel enough by train in the South East to justify the cost of it) that it is possible for everyone to get a rail card to reduce the cost further.

Also (even if the train fares where comparable) there would be people that would rather travel by train than coach anyway, as you can have access to your luggage, the facilities are nicer, you can walk about, you are not going to get stuck on the M25 in the rush hour, it's greener, the stations are more sheltered than the coach drop off/pick up,

The other thing is that although there may not be lots and lots of people travelling between the two airports there will be a lot of people from the catchment area from the above stations which would like to go to Heathrow, which would make such a service a viable option. As the train doesn't have to travel very far from Gatwick before it becomes quicker than getting to Gatwick before getting the coach to Heathrow.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Also with a direct train from Guildford to Heathrow it would be possible to get there from the likes of Portsmouth with just one change.

Also with group save 3 or 4 people could travel between Heathrow & Gatwick for about £60 to.

 

[joeykins82]

Well there'll be direct Reading-Heathrow services "at some point" and it's entirely possible that some of the XC services that currently terminate at Reading will be extended to Heathrow. As for a direct Heathrow to Gatwick service though I don't think it's strictly necessary; even EMU operated I don't think it would be faster or cheaper than taking the Piccadilly line to Hammersmith, the District line to Blackfriars and FCC to Gatwick. That journey comes in under £10 off peak with a railcard (assuming Oyster from Heathrow to Blackfriars) and is step free throughout (with the exception of the train-platform height diffrence at Hammersmith).

 

[swt_passenger]

In relation to the first post would anyone have a copy of the proposed new layout at reading (a proper track plan not the dreadfull network rail sketch) or a link to somewhere with the details.

Here's one as an attachment below.

When interpreting the colour coding, that shows the main use of various routes, not the only use. That's a subtle difference but ties in to stuff like freight and XC.

 

[JamesRowden]

Well there'll be direct Reading-Heathrow services "at some point" and it's entirely possible that some of the XC services that currently terminate at Reading will be extended to Heathrow. As for a direct Heathrow to Gatwick service though I don't think it's strictly necessary; even EMU operated I don't think it would be faster or cheaper than taking the Piccadilly line to Hammersmith, the District line to Blackfriars and FCC to Gatwick. That journey comes in under £10 off peak with a railcard (assuming Oyster from Heathrow to Blackfriars) and is step free throughout (with the exception of the train-platform height diffrence at Hammersmith).

There might also be the possibility of running direct services from Gatwick/Brighton to Old Oak Common via the West London Line (or an extra change at Clapham Junction) where connections could be made for all HS2 services, Crossrail (including to Heathrow), Heathrow Express (if it is still running) and services towards Reading (planned presently are Paddington-Reading semi-fast services (2tph) that will run along the slow tracks and there might be some fast services towards Reading that stop at Old Oak Common).

 

[OliverS]

Well there'll be direct Reading-Heathrow services "at some point" and it's entirely possible that some of the XC services that currently terminate at Reading will be extended to Heathrow. As for a direct Heathrow to Gatwick service though I don't think it's strictly necessary; even EMU operated I don't think it would be faster or cheaper than taking the Piccadilly line to Hammersmith, the District line to Blackfriars and FCC to Gatwick. That journey comes in under £10 off peak with a railcard (assuming Oyster from Heathrow to Blackfriars) and is step free throughout (with the exception of the train-platform height diffrence at Hammersmith).

Once we have Crossrail, Heathrow to Gatwick is one change at Farringdon. As is Heathrow to Luton. Heathrow to Stansted is one change at Liverpool St.

 

[Surreyman]

Current fastest train Reading to Gatwick is:
09:34Reading Station
09:43Wokingham
09:51Blackwater
09:57North Camp
10:10Guildford Station
10:26Dorking Deepdene
10:34Reigate
10:41Redhill
10:50Gatwick Airport

Which is 76 minutes, however if it was run by an EMU rather than a DMU it would have a faster journey time. It should be feasible to run a train between the two airports in about 90 minutes compared with 65 minutes for the coaches.

However the trains maybe able to undercut the coaches as the cost of a return fare for tomorrow (so basicly turn up and go) is £41, however from Maidenhead to Gatwick (via Reading) is £29 for an any time return. Also there is the option (if you travel enough by train in the South East to justify the cost of it) that it is possible for everyone to get a rail card to reduce the cost further.

Also (even if the train fares where comparable) there would be people that would rather travel by train than coach anyway, as you can have access to your luggage, the facilities are nicer, you can walk about, you are not going to get stuck on the M25 in the rush hour, it's greener, the stations are more sheltered than the coach drop off/pick up,

The other thing is that although there may not be lots and lots of people travelling between the two airports there will be a lot of people from the catchment area from the above stations which would like to go to Heathrow, which would make such a service a viable option. As the train doesn't have to travel very far from Gatwick before it becomes quicker than getting to Gatwick before getting the coach to Heathrow.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Also with a direct train from Guildford to Heathrow it would be possible to get there from the likes of Portsmouth with just one change.

Also with group save 3 or 4 people could travel between Heathrow & Gatwick for about £60 to.

TheHam
Sorry but I just don't see that it adds up, A coach is always going to be quicker/cheaper (Ok the M25 is slow during the rush hour).
Ref Portsmouth,(or anywhere on outer SW trains network) you can alight at Woking & catch the Railair coach, every 30 minutes and the drivers know all the back doubles when the M25 is bad.
Please understand, I am not against electrifying the North Downs line or improving the inter airport service, it is just that the extra time/distance doesn't make it competitive or practical.
Worked in conjunction with the proposed 'Airtrack' (would have been a change at Guildford) via Woking, Virginia Water, Staines might have been an option but has been ruled out due to the lack of paths/level crossing occupation times etc.
There was a recent Government/Dft 'spin'/PR Bull****, ref 'Heathwick' supposedly linking the 2 airports with a fast rail link, presumably built next to the M25, before reality intervened.
Out of interest, anybody know how many passengers per annum interline between the 2 airports?

 

[30907]

I think he is referring to today's North Downs services from Reading to Gatwick - which occasionally started back from Banbury and Oxford, and sometimes continued to on Brighton.

Yes, I'd forgotten those odd through workings....

There were, I think, more Guildford line services into the "main" station than now in the days of the Tadpoles (3-R DEMU), because Platform 4b (as was) wasn't there at first. They mostly used the East bay (6) from memory. And then there was the Crompton plus Mark 1s which needed one of the through roads...

 

[HSTEd]

As I understand it the reason that OLE is considered cheaper than refurbishment of the third rail on the SWML is beacuse of the insane power demands of main line operations these days, especially if we are going to have high power freight electrics running around.

Third rail may well be cheaper on a route which is relatively lightly used like the North Downs line, thanks to the lack of gauge enhancements et al.

 

[The Ham]

Out of interest the number of passengers over a year to and from the five stations between Wokingham and Ash which are on a non electrified section of track is just over 1.5 million (OK there will be a number of people who are double counted on this, but then there will be a number of people who travel between say Reading and Guildford and Wokingham and Gatwick who aren't counted). By my calculations (assuming every train is equally loaded all day - 18 hours - every day - 365 days) that is 117 passengers per train (or about 42% of the capacity of the class 166's which run the service).

Given that loadings are not equal there are likely to be some very busy trains over this section of line. Which is another reason that it is always highlighted as a line that should be electrified.

 

[09065]

I doubt there will ever been any extension to the thrid rail network considering the current policy of conversion to OHLE.

It is almost a no-go for any extension of the 3rd Rail System (if not impossible) because a multitude of factors. As it stands now there are trains that run under current limited conditions because of the strain that it puts on an inefficient source of power. DC EMU's draw in excess of 10 times amp-age of their equivalent in AC.

With the number of passengers appearing to increase each year, there is an inevitable situation where the DC system will become overloaded. AC is a more likely scenario as you noted with the conversion to OHLE; I suppose that you could consider upgrading the 750v to the levels in some European countries but that would probably be just as expensive as converting everything to AC.

Until the DC equipment life expires, I doubt anyone will know what the long-term strategy on a nationwide basis is.

 

[JGR]

It is almost a no-go for any extension of the 3rd Rail System (if not impossible) because a multitude of factors. As it stands now there are trains that run under current limited conditions because of the strain that it puts on an inefficient source of power. DC EMU's draw in excess of 10 times amp-age of their equivalent in AC.

Surely by simple physics the equivalent DC current draw should be at least 35 times the AC RMS current?

It would be easy enough to "solve" the need for localised power rationing in LV DC systems with more substations, but there are significant cost issues associated with that.

 

[09065]

Last time I looked into such things JGR (and I did try to find the RSSB document to give you a precise figure) the figure was between 10x and 20x and I was going to say just under 20 times but erred on the side of caution. What the reasons were for any anomalies I could not tell you as I do not know - regretfully I have to believe what I get to read on subjects like that.

I suspect the cost question for introducing new subs either by upgrade or new build would be the lifespan cost compared to converting to AC. With the drive to keeping costs down the increased number of locations would also have impact on staffing, competencies, even down to continual maintenance for two different complete sets of tools.

Accountants Heaven!

 

[andyfrommk]

I found these webcam feeds over at skyscapercity that update every 15 minutes

Cams mostly looking from the carpark
New Entrance
Entrance to new depot
Exterior and interior shots of new depot