Potential North Hampshire rail improvements

[The Ham]

Following the posting of this post I've created a thread to discuss measures which could be undertaken to improve rail in the North Hampshire areas, chances are there'll be overlap into some nearby areas:

Apologies for getting the crayons out here. But has it ever been considered to lay a very short chord from the Aldershot/Alton line joining to the northern part of the North Downs line? If it's really so difficult to manage conflicts at Guildford and on the Brighton line, why not make better use of the northern part of the NDL by running 2tph Reading to Farnham and 2tph Reading to Redhill/Gatwick.
Having 4tph from the northeast Hampshire conurbation into Reading would be a big improvement. It would benefit Reading's reach as a commercial centre and definitely help make new journey options getting people out of cars. I'd assume capacity exists on the Alton line to accommodate extra services.
Thoughts?!

In response to this posts: the problem with the Alton line is that it's single track beyond Farnham and the level crossing at Farnham.

The level crossing could be an easy fix by changing the road layout so that the crossroads were closed and a grade separated junction provided at the over bridge to the West. This would also benefit the road network by removing a significant bottleneck on the highway network.

Ideally you'd want to provide a pedestrian/cycle link across the A31 where the existing crossroads are (either by providing an over bridge or by rising the road so that it could pass under).

 

[peterson]

Thank you The Ham. Hadn't spotted this sub forum.

Interesting. I don't know Farnham well so that's useful. Reading-Aldershot feels like a missing connection on the local network. And the combined NE Hampshire area has a significant (if fragmented) population, which would benefit from more frequent services.
The Alton line joins the North Downs line to link Aldershot and Guildford, so why not the other way too for a Farnham, Aldershot, North Camp then all stations to Reading service to combine with existing NDL services. It appears land is available for the required chord (woodland) but again I don't know that area too well.

 

[swt_passenger]

Why not build a four platform two level station where the Wokingham and Waterloo lines intersect, and rationalise the other local stations...

 

[JonathanH]

Why not build a four platform two level station where the Wokingham and Waterloo lines intersect, and rationalise the other local stations...

The obvious problem with that would be that the intersection of the lines is at a bit of a 'nomansland' and is a reasonable distance from the area North Camp serves.

You would, in effect, be putting the needs of the people making an interchange over the users of the stations.

 

[swt_passenger]

The obvious problem with that would be that the intersection of the lines is at a bit of a 'nomansland' and is a reasonable distance from the area North Camp serves.

You would, in effect, be putting the needs of the people making an interchange over the users of the stations.

Sure, just adding it into the mix. I doubt there’s much of a proven need for through trains anyway, seems one of those “nice to haves” with no supporting evidence...

 

[RichT54]

Thank you The Ham. Hadn't spotted this sub forum.

Interesting. I don't know Farnham well so that's useful. Reading-Aldershot feels like a missing connection on the local network. And the combined NE Hampshire area has a significant (if fragmented) population, which would benefit from more frequent services.
The Alton line joins the North Downs line to link Aldershot and Guildford, so why not the other way too for a Farnham, Aldershot, North Camp then all stations to Reading service to combine with existing NDL services. It appears land is available for the required chord (woodland) but again I don't know that area too well.

There is no third rail between Wokingham and Aldershot South Junction and I've read on these forums several times that extension of third rail is extremely unlikely to be permitted in the future, so which TOC and what rolling stock do you think would operate the suggested new services?

 

[peterson]

Sure, just adding it into the mix. I doubt there’s much of a proven need for through trains anyway, seems one of those “nice to haves” with no supporting evidence...

Agreed, I put it forward speculatively without evidence.

The hypothesis is that frequency is the key attribute of rail services to provide the convenience to tempt people out of their cars. The northern section of the North Downs line acts as a commuter line into Reading but with only 2tph, some inconsistent timetabling and reliability challenges. The thread on 3tph plans is a story of constant difficulty, principally driven (apparently) by constraints on the Redhill-Gatwick section, at Guildford and at Reigate.

The logic then is to say if we're to increase frequency at the northern end of the NDL between NE Hants and Reading to 4 tph+ then you need somewhere else to send some trains. Farnham via Aldershot looks like a good option in terms of having line capacity to absorb further services. A new easier-than-90-degree chord required. The added advantage is new direct route opened up between Farnham/Aldershot and the Thames Valley and improved connectivity around the NE Hampshire urban area.

 

[peterson]

There is no third rail between Wokingham and Aldershot South Junction and I've read on these forums several times that extension of third rail is extremely unlikely to be permitted in the future, so which TOC and what rolling stock do you think would operate the suggested new services?

Yes, certainly a challenge. If it's GWR that's to have tri-mode rolling stock for the North Downs Line patchwork quilt of a network then I guess it would need to be them. But SWT would be more logical geographically.

 

[30907]

Yes, certainly a challenge. If it's GWR that's to have tri-mode rolling stock for the North Downs Line patchwork quilt of a network then I guess it would need to be them. But SWT would be more logical geographically.

Six and two threes really. The North Downs line has never interworked with the SW!
Reading to Aldershot slow, Reading-Wokingham-North Camp-(Ash?)-Guildford on beyond, both 2tph, would be simple and not overtax Farnham. However, would it be better than running the stoppers to Guildford with prompt cpnnections at Ash?

 

[peterson]

Six and two threes really. The North Downs line has never interworked with the SW!
Reading to Aldershot slow, Reading-Wokingham-North Camp-(Ash?)-Guildford on beyond, both 2tph, would be simple and not overtax Farnham. However, would it be better than running the stoppers to Guildford with prompt cpnnections at Ash?

I think it would be far better for people wanting that direct Aldershot to Reading journey. Transfer at Ash is traveling 2km the wrong way (and back) and would take longer even if the whole timetable were to be based on timely interchanges at Ash. Commuting daily that route would leave you exposed to missed connections and long waits to a far greater degree than a direct service. And my rationale for the suggestion is around increasing frequency at the northern end of the North Downs Line, so the 2tph to each of Guildford (and beyond) and Aldershot/Farnham is clearly one more than 3tph to Guildford. (Although both enhancements might be a longer term solution).
It feels to me that with the growth in populations in both the central Thames Valley and NE Hants, and the environmental imperative to get motorists onto the train, options like this should come into the reckoning.

 

[Meerkat]

Just do Reading to Aldershot, where people can connect to the Guildford to Farnham service.
The Farnham crossroads needs fixing whatever though.

 

[peterson]

I presume Aldershots platform capacity would be sufficient to turn around a Reading shuttle alongside its existing Ascot/Guildford reversals plus London/Farnham services then?
I'd assumed continuing my Reading proposal to Farnham would be more pragmatic (granted hadn't considered level crossing)

 

[swt_passenger]

I presume Aldershots platform capacity would be sufficient to turn around a Reading shuttle alongside its existing Ascot/Guildford reversals plus London/Farnham services then?
I'd assumed continuing my Reading proposal to Farnham would be more pragmatic (granted hadn't considered level crossing)

There isn’t an Ascot to Guildford through service Mon - Sat nowadays, it’s Ascot to Aldershot and Farnham to Guildford. The latter service also affects crossing downtimes at Farnham.

 

[peterson]

There isn’t an Ascot to Guildford through service Mon - Sat nowadays, it’s Ascot to Aldershot and Farnham to Guildford. The latter service also affects crossing downtimes at Farnham.

Thanks. So I see. If you had Reading services in the mix as well you'd presumably have either the Reading's or the Guildford's (as is) continue beyond Aldershot to Farnham, but not both.
All conjecture, but conceivably Aldershot could manage that set of services; Reading's three bay platforms have capacity; so it's possibly a viable option to boost North Downs northern-end frequency?
What sort of ball park cost would the new chord cost to build?

 

[The Ham]

Thanks. So I see. If you had Reading services in the mix as well you'd presumably have either the Reading's or the Guildford's (as is) continue beyond Aldershot to Farnham, but not both.
All conjecture, but conceivably Aldershot could manage that set of services; Reading's three bay platforms have capacity; so it's possibly a viable option to boost North Downs northern-end frequency?
What sort of ball park cost would the new chord cost to build?

It probably wouldn't be that cheap.

An improvement which could be made to improve journeys between Aldershot and Reading would be to build a new "Farnborough Gate" station just the other side of the A331 to Frimley. It would result in a shortened walk of about half a mile to change from one line to the other.

You could potentially have a ramp up to the A325 over bridge and then it's just a walk around to Frimley station by only crossing the one road (Frimley High Street).

If there was an increase in service frequent on both lines then the risk of missing services lessens.

Guildford Reading would likely happen anyway.

Aldershot Ascot would be less likely to happen, however if you built a new grade separated junction at Farnborough to allow trains to run Frimley Farnborough Main that could justify extra services. As you could have Basingstoke Ascot services. You're unlikely to generate a lot of end to end traffic, however there's the potential for the intermediate traffic to fairly good.

If you ever get a peak hour train, either from Farnborough or to Farnborough in the morning peak (in the London direction) there's a lot of people who get on, however there's almost the same number getting off. This indicates the sort of demand that there is for local travel. As such increasing the frequency by 1tph or even 2tph could make rail more attractive in an area where there's a lot of people. The Farnborough Urban Area has just over quarter of a million people in it, as well as a lot of business located in it, leaving that an off peak frequency of 4tph (or maybe 5tph) between it and Fleet would make rail fairly attractive when considering wait times.

There's also the potential for 5,000 new homes at Winchfield, with discussions of this even being increased to 10,000 over time (say 2040 ish). That's in addition to the nearly 1,000 homes currently being delivered at Hook.

As such it's likely that Hook could see it's station see usage figures of around 1 million within the next few years and Winchfield teaching a similar value within the next 10 to 20 years. (Combined of both were just over 1 million each that would be a near doubling of passenger numbers from those two stations).

That's quite a few extra people to fit onto trains which are mostly full length trains in the peak hours and are already seeing significant numbers of people standing at Fleet in the morning peak heading towards London.

Create local services to take some of the strain and they are likely to be well used. Even on the trains heading away from London.

Especially if you create new journey options such as Frimley Fleet or Hook Camberley which are currently very long by rail or require a change to a bus which can get stuck in peak hour traffic.

 

[RichT54]

It probably wouldn't be that cheap.

An improvement which could be made to improve journeys between Aldershot and Reading would be to build a new "Farnborough Gate" station just the other side of the A331 to Frimley. It would result in a shortened walk of about half a mile to change from one line to the other.

You could potentially have a ramp up to the A325 over bridge and then it's just a walk around to Frimley station by only crossing the one road (Frimley High Street).

If there was an increase in service frequent on both lines then the risk of missing services lessens.

Guildford Reading would likely happen anyway.

Aldershot Ascot would be less likely to happen, however if you built a new grade separated junction at Farnborough to allow trains to run Frimley Farnborough Main that could justify extra services. As you could have Basingstoke Ascot services. You're unlikely to generate a lot of end to end traffic, however there's the potential for the intermediate traffic to fairly good.

If you ever get a peak hour train, either from Farnborough or to Farnborough in the morning peak (in the London direction) there's a lot of people who get on, however there's almost the same number getting off. This indicates the sort of demand that there is for local travel. As such increasing the frequency by 1tph or even 2tph could make rail more attractive in an area where there's a lot of people. The Farnborough Urban Area has just over quarter of a million people in it, as well as a lot of business located in it, leaving that an off peak frequency of 4tph (or maybe 5tph) between it and Fleet would make rail fairly attractive when considering wait times.

There's also the potential for 5,000 new homes at Winchfield, with discussions of this even being increased to 10,000 over time (say 2040 ish). That's in addition to the nearly 1,000 homes currently being delivered at Hook.

As such it's likely that Hook could see it's station see usage figures of around 1 million within the next few years and Winchfield teaching a similar value within the next 10 to 20 years. (Combined of both were just over 1 million each that would be a near doubling of passenger numbers from those two stations).

That's quite a few extra people to fit onto trains which are mostly full length trains in the peak hours and are already seeing significant numbers of people standing at Fleet in the morning peak heading towards London.

Create local services to take some of the strain and they are likely to be well used. Even on the trains heading away from London.

Especially if you create new journey options such as Frimley Fleet or Hook Camberley which are currently very long by rail or require a change to a bus which can get stuck in peak hour traffic.

Perhaps they could rebuild the chords that once connected both the NDL and the Ascot - Aldershot line to the SWML?

see: http://www.RailMapOnline.com/UKIEMap.php?lat=51.30829&lng=-0.74540&zoom=14

(make sure "Historic Rlys" is switched on in the "Layers" menu).

 

[PTR 444]

If a chord existed between Aldershot and North Camp, I think there would be merit in diverting one North Downs Line train per hour via Aldershot with a reversal there. You could then have a service pattern like this:

• Waterloo - Alton services operate same as now.
• Existing SWR Farnham - Guildford service replaced with a new route Reading - Guildford via Aldershot. This will call at all stations on the North Downs Line south of Wokingham before diverting via Aldershot between North Camp and Ash. This service would then go on to call at Ash and Wanborough before terminating at Guildford.
• Remaining 2tph on the NDL to Gatwick operate a skip-stop pattern between Wokingham and North Camp to speed up journey times. Combined with the Reading - Guildford service above, there will be a total of 3tph on this section of the NDL.
• Ascot - Aldershot service extended to Farnham, with possibility of more through services to London Waterloo at the Ascot end.

 

[Meerkat]

Existing SWR Farnham - Guildford service replaced with a new route Reading - Guildford via Aldershot.

That would be very unpopular. The Farnham - Guildford service is new after much pressure from local councils to reduce the pressure on the A31 Hogs Back.

 

[swt_passenger]

That would be very unpopular. The Farnham - Guildford service is new after much pressure from local councils to reduce the pressure on the A31 Hogs Back.

I expect (unsurprisingly) that the DfT and SWR have also assessed that was the best option because research had proved an existing unmet demand.

Assuming that (operationally at least) either Ascot to Farnham or Aldershot to Guildford options were probably equally “pathable”, then Farnham to Guildford quite possibly what the existing fares data supported?

 

[Meerkat]

I doubt is much related to current journeys - it is aimed at those currently driving through Farnham, along the Hogs Back and into Guildford town centre.

 

[Tobbes]

Until I worked on a Reading-based project recently, I didn't know that more people commute into Reading than from Reading; and given the business park developments <10 min walk from Reading station, this demand is only likely to grow. As a result, more connectivity from N Hampshire seems eminently sensible, however it can be accomplished - and a combination of greater frequencies as well as longer trains (vice GWR 165s) would seem appropriate.

 

[peterson]

Thanks Tobbes.

There's a constant clamour for more services to London. This trend threatens orbital routes like the North Downs Line. It appears to me that demand for improved services from Portsmouth to London limit scope at Guildford, whilst London-Brighton/Thameslink dominate thinking to the south.
I firmly believe the right thing to do is to drive employment growth in other hubs with strong public transport, such as Reading (and Guildford).
Having Aldershot /Farnham as an alternative destination from Reading could provide 4 to 5 tph between North Camp/Farnborough N and Reading, without going head-to-head with constraints at Reigate,Redhill or Gatwick.

Farnham-Guildford connectivity must be safeguarded, and maybe the option for Basingstoke to Ascot described above could be pursued too. In summary, NE Hampshire's connectivity to non-London employment centres should get investment.

 

[Tobbes]

In summary, NE Hampshire's connectivity to non-London employment centres should get investment.

Especially when the required investment is, in the grand scheme of things, pretty low. Perhaps @Bald Rick could opine on the capacity and constraints, but Alton-Farnborough-Wokingham-Reading alternating with an enhanced NDL service seems like a good idea - especially if/when WRAtH to T5 comes on stream, making it much easier for those from the SW to get to Heathrow by changing at Reading. Indeed, in that scenario more Basingstoke - Reading services would be very useful.

 

[Meerkat]

Until I worked on a Reading-based project recently, I didn't know that more people commute into Reading than from Reading

I think that’s quite common for the towns in the outer commuter belt. Certainly at Woking and Guildford the trains disgorge hordes of commuters in the later peak. Quite a bit of pupil/student commuting too.

 

[The Ham]

I think that’s quite common for the towns in the outer commuter belt. Certainly at Woking and Guildford the trains disgorge hordes of commuters in the later peak. Quite a bit of pupil/student commuting too.

Trains into Guildford from Woking in the morning peak rarely have spare seats and quite a few people standing (clearly not as busy as trains going the other way, but not as low as many would expect).

Guildford isn't an isolated example, many towns in the area attract a lot of people travelling to those towns for work.

One reason is that if you need to attend a meeting in London you can do so without needing to take up too much of the working day. However it means that on a personal level:
a) you aren't paying for your rail travel for getting to to London
b) you don't have to travel into or out of London every day during the peaks

 

[peterson]

Completely agree we should boost commercial centres in the South East outside London by making rail improvements, especially orbital routes.

The new transport for the South East strategy appears to support that concept, so I've responded to the currently live consultation with my support, and pushing the suggestion of the Reading-Aldershot link. Perhaps you'd like to do likewise:
https://transportforthesoutheast.org.uk/transport-strategy/