Reading electrification

Status
Not open for further replies.

Waddon

Member
Joined
15 Sep 2009
Messages
469
Just curious if anyone knows, but when Electrification gets to Reading, are there any plans for an electrified connection to the third rail lines, and if so where the voltage changeover will take place? If there is one, will it be on the approaches, or will third rail actually extend into one of the new platforms via the soon to be reinstated flyunder?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
25,686
I was told at one of the NR public briefings a couple of years ago that there will be dual electrification in a couple of the relief line platforms.

I'd have thought it would be less complex to put the changeover point on the single line through the eastern underpass, but at least it is being thought of.

Not a lot of use for it unless they do some more electrification eg on the Guildford - Redhill route...
 

Waddon

Member
Joined
15 Sep 2009
Messages
469
Well I was thinking that it could extend some journey options, for example services to Oxford from Guildford or something... but also, if any version of Airtrack gets built it would allow Heathrow access from the west maybe?
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
13,446
Putting the dual electrification switchover point into a couple of the relief platforms allows pure DC units to be used on the Reading-Waterloo trains even if the pure DC platforms are unavailable for whatever reason.

Otherwise you would need to keep dual voltage fitted units on hand for the backup service.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
25,686
Putting the dual electrification switchover point into a couple of the relief platforms allows pure DC units to be used on the Reading-Waterloo trains even if the pure DC platforms are unavailable for whatever reason.

You need some good reasons for such facilities though, and I'm not sure standby purposes for Waterloo trains is sufficient justification.

There will be three DC platforms before very long, and they can run the timetable from any one of them on its own, at least with a slight tweak to arrival and departure times.

(By the way, to save another thread, most of P5 came back into use this week, P6 is now closed for rebuild, posters suggest re-opening to be in July. P5 re-opening was about a month behind schedule, because of a late decision to completely rebuild the concrete deck.)
 

eastwestdivide

Established Member
Joined
17 Aug 2009
Messages
2,107
Location
S Yorks, usually
Is Reading-Basingstoke up for electrification under the current plans? And if so, as an extension of the Basingstoke 3rd rail or of the Reading 25kV? Presumably the latter would make more sense, tying in to the Newbury 25kV
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
5,844
Location
South Wales
Is Reading-Basingstoke up for electrification under the current plans? And if so, as an extension of the Basingstoke 3rd rail or of the Reading 25kV? Presumably the latter would make more sense, tying in to the Newbury 25kV

Neither are under plans for electrification although it would be good as it could eliminate a lot of services being worked by class 165/166 dmu's the same could be said for the Thames Valley branchlines.

I would have liked to see the wires extended from Newbury to say Westbury maybe perhaps allow a local service between Reading & Westbury.

The only down point to these is that there is unlikely to be enough class
319's to go around with all the electrification projects and the class 315's are supposed to be going to the Cardiff Valleys.

Although the DFT could order some brand new EMU's for the GW area and send the GW allocation of class 319's elsewhere.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
16,861
Location
Reston City Centre
Is Reading-Basingstoke up for electrification under the current plans?

Neither are under plans for electrification although it would be good as it could eliminate a lot of services being worked by class 165/166 dmu's the same could be said for the Thames Valley branchlines.

I would have liked to see the wires extended from Newbury to say Westbury maybe perhaps allow a local service between Reading & Westbury

Not on the cards at the moment, but remember that the Lancashire plans were fairly modest when first announced, but have had additional scope added to them - I wouldn't be surprised if the Thames Valley branches/ Basingstoke extension are next on the list once the GWML/ Crossrail has electrified the main routes in the area.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
the class 315's are supposed to be going to the Cardiff Valleys

Source? I thought that was idle speculation by members on here rather than a concrete plan.

Oft repeated, but still just speculation as you say. It's just as likely that the 315s will go to scrap, given their age.

Yup, it's just a suggestion at the moment - but these things have a habit of becoming remembered as "fact" (e.g. LOROL 378s on the FCC Moorgate branch)
 

bluenoxid

Established Member
Joined
9 Feb 2008
Messages
2,242
Neither are under plans for electrification although it would be good as it could eliminate a lot of services being worked by class 165/166 dmu's the same could be said for the Thames Valley branchlines.

I would have liked to see the wires extended from Newbury to say Westbury maybe perhaps allow a local service between Reading & Westbury.

The only down point to these is that there is unlikely to be enough class
319's to go around with all the electrification projects and the class 315's are supposed to be going to the Cardiff Valleys.

Although the DFT could order some brand new EMU's for the GW area and send the GW allocation of class 319's elsewhere.

An additional point about Westbury is that electrification of the yard would allow powerful electric locomotives to take stone trains into London and possibly even effectively fight for paths on to Crossrail to Acton. They will need all the power they can get and acceleration will be the crucial crux for paths.
 

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
2,725
Good point about the Lancashire plans - didn't it start with just Liverpool and Manchester to Wigan? And via Bolton and to Blackpool were both added.

I would have thought the Basingstoke line would make a lot of sense. It would allow locals to interwork with Newbury shuttles, as today. It might also allow Voyagers with pan-cars (getting a bit ahead of myself now) to run using wires from Basingstoke to Oxford, saving some diesel.

I would also expect Westbury as a next step after Newbury, rather than Bedwyn, which is only arbitrarily an important stop and doesn't interchange with anything - criminal for a terminus!
 

tripleseis

Member
Joined
7 Sep 2008
Messages
200
Well I was thinking that it could extend some journey options, for example services to Oxford from Guildford or something... but also, if any version of Airtrack gets built it would allow Heathrow access from the west maybe?
That used to happen with some diesel services. I think there used to be an Oxford to Gatwick Airport service operated by FGW. It certainly would be a good idea to electrify the North Downs line with a third rail. Whether it's cost effective, I don't know. Perhaps it will become apparent once the wires are up. It will certainly free up a lot of turbo units.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
16,861
Location
Reston City Centre
Good point about the Lancashire plans - didn't it start with just Liverpool and Manchester to Wigan? And via Bolton and to Blackpool were both added

...and then the line from Manchester to Leeds and York...

...and maybe then the line from Leeds to Selby and Hull?

Once a team is working in an area, it becomes easier to add on additional projects (esp small branches that are relatively self contained). No point in announcing everything all at once - let the mainline work be done then get the brownie points for announcing additional "investment" - whilst the Cardiff Valleys is probably the best scope for electrification, the Thames Valley branches could be wired up in a very short time and would be a cheap "add on" if the mainline work has gone well.
 

Chris125

Established Member
Joined
12 Nov 2009
Messages
2,911
There's also scope for franchise bidders to include small scale electrification in their bids - its been frequently suggested that West Coast bidders are likely to include wiring to Chester, while someone quoted a staff briefing from Mark Hopwood a year or so back which suggested FGW were looking at various branches to wire in their bid, including Reading-Basingstoke, along with a new EMU order for Thames Valley services. Whether that remains the case is anyone's guess however...

Chris
 

gwr4090

Member
Joined
9 Nov 2011
Messages
144
Good point about the Lancashire plans - didn't it start with just Liverpool and Manchester to Wigan? And via Bolton and to Blackpool were both added.

I would have thought the Basingstoke line would make a lot of sense. It would allow locals to interwork with Newbury shuttles, as today. It might also allow Voyagers with pan-cars (getting a bit ahead of myself now) to run using wires from Basingstoke to Oxford, saving some diesel.

I would also expect Westbury as a next step after Newbury, rather than Bedwyn, which is only arbitrarily an important stop and doesn't interchange with anything - criminal for a terminus!


Although Reading-Basinsgtoke electrification is not part of the current plan, there are indications that it might actually still be included as a low cost add-on. Bidders for the next GW franchise are being encouraged to table proposals for GW branch electification along with Reading-Basingstoke. Indeed the Great Western RUS proposes a regular Basingstoke-Reading-Paddington service.
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
5,844
Location
South Wales
Although Reading-Basinsgtoke electrification is not part of the current plan, there are indications that it might actually still be included as a low cost add-on. Bidders for the next GW franchise are being encouraged to table proposals for GW branch electification along with Reading-Basingstoke. Indeed the Great Western RUS proposes a regular Basingstoke-Reading-Paddington service.

I would think a Bassingstoke - London Paddington would be good as it could provide some relief to the overcrowding on swt services from Bassingstoke into London Waterloo especially once crossrail is up and running.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
16,861
Location
Reston City Centre
I would think a Bassingstoke - London Paddington would be good as it could provide some relief to the overcrowding on swt services from Bassingstoke into London Waterloo especially once crossrail is up and running.

Problem is that the Reading - Paddington line seems to be one of the worst for "over" crowding in the UK (with services into Paddington regularly featuring in surveys of the most cramped trains). Putting Basingstoke passengers into that mix may just make things worse.

Does anyone know off the top of their head how that would compare with the existing Basingstoke - London times?
 

wintonian

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2010
Messages
4,889
Location
Hampshire
Problem is that the Reading - Paddington line seems to be one of the worst for "over" crowding in the UK (with services into Paddington regularly featuring in surveys of the most cramped trains). Putting Basingstoke passengers into that mix may just make things worse.

Does anyone know off the top of their head how that would compare with the existing Basingstoke - London times?

Could we third rail Basingstoke to Reading and have a 1/2TPH slow train Basingstoke to Waterloo via reading instead of the current FGW shuttle?

I'm expecting Reading's track layout to need another redisign to achive this but the thought just floated past me.
 

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
2,725
Problem is that the Reading - Paddington line seems to be one of the worst for "over" crowding in the UK (with services into Paddington regularly featuring in surveys of the most cramped trains). Putting Basingstoke passengers into that mix may just make things worse.

Does anyone know off the top of their head how that would compare with the existing Basingstoke - London times?

It's 25 mins to Reading, and 22 on a XC to Basingstoke from there, giving 47.

That's all diesel though. Might come down to 42-44 with wires on both stretches and better reliability through Reading.

I can find Basingstoke to Waterloo at 44 mins currently. So it wouldn't beat it to the City, or Canary Wharf for that matter due to Jubilee.

The only benefit might be if Crossrail ran trains on the fast lines which were non-stop Paddington to Reading and then to Basingstoke. Avoiding the tube/W&C and having a seat all the way might be worth it.
 

John55

Member
Joined
24 Jun 2011
Messages
800
Location
South East
Problem is that the Reading - Paddington line seems to be one of the worst for "over" crowding in the UK (with services into Paddington regularly featuring in surveys of the most cramped trains). Putting Basingstoke passengers into that mix may just make things worse.

Does anyone know off the top of their head how that would compare with the existing Basingstoke - London times?

The trains you refer to are those reported in a document from the DfT; "The ten most overcrowded London and South East train services arriving at or departing from London during the morning and afternoon peaks".

There is no measure of the most overcrowded trains in the UK as yet. They may be the most crowded but who knows, certainly not the DfT. None of them compare to Underground crowding.
 

LexyBoy

Established Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
4,472
Location
North of the rivers
Problem is that the Reading - Paddington line seems to be one of the worst for "over" crowding in the UK (with services into Paddington regularly featuring in surveys of the most cramped trains). Putting Basingstoke passengers into that mix may just make things worse.

I've not read the RUS but wouldn't these new services have to take up new paths (possibly HeX paths, which I know the GW RUS wants for longer-distance services)? If this is the case then it would help overcrowding as I would expect the trains to be predominantly Reading-Paddington shuttles, with most Basingstoke commuters - except those who already travel via Reading - choosing to go direct to Waterloo. I think cle's timings are reasonable, though I would have used the stopping service rather than XC, as I would think this service would take its place. No chance of Crossrail reaching Basingstoke though!

Could we third rail Basingstoke to Reading and have a 1/2TPH slow train Basingstoke to Waterloo via reading instead of the current FGW shuttle?

You mean to connect up the Reading-Basingstoke shuttle with the SWT Reading-Waterloo service? Unless there were a significant operational benefits I can't see the point in this - it would be too slow for London commuters and I can't see a huge demand for Basingstoke - Wokingham/Staines journeys. And as you say it would need layout changes - P7 could be used but it's already planned for XC services.
 

Ivo

Established Member
Joined
8 Jan 2010
Messages
7,307
Location
Bath (or Southend)
I appreciate the paths may not be available considering the nature of this suggestion, but why would BSK services need to be fast from RDG? Why couldn't they have a semi-fast pattern, along the lines of all stations to Maidenhead (I note Green Park is no longer expected to happen), then Slough, Ealing Broadway, PAD.
 

wintonian

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2010
Messages
4,889
Location
Hampshire
I've not read the RUS but wouldn't these new services have to take up new paths (possibly HeX paths, which I know the GW RUS wants for longer-distance services)? If this is the case then it would help overcrowding as I would expect the trains to be predominantly Reading-Paddington shuttles, with most Basingstoke commuters - except those who already travel via Reading - choosing to go direct to Waterloo. I think cle's timings are reasonable, though I would have used the stopping service rather than XC, as I would think this service would take its place. No chance of Crossrail reaching Basingstoke though!



You mean to connect up the Reading-Basingstoke shuttle with the SWT Reading-Waterloo service? Unless there were a significant operational benefits I can't see the point in this - it would be too slow for London commuters and I can't see a huge demand for Basingstoke - Wokingham/Staines journeys. And as you say it would need layout changes - P7 could be used but it's already planned for XC services.

Just extending the Reading - Waterloos to Basingstoke, just seems like a fairly odd SWTless bit between Basingstoke and Reading, but as you say it may not be worth it.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
16,861
Location
Reston City Centre
It's 25 mins to Reading, and 22 on a XC to Basingstoke from there, giving 47.

That's all diesel though. Might come down to 42-44 with wires on both stretches and better reliability through Reading.

I can find Basingstoke to Waterloo at 44 mins currently. So it wouldn't beat it to the City, or Canary Wharf for that matter due to Jubilee.

The only benefit might be if Crossrail ran trains on the fast lines which were non-stop Paddington to Reading and then to Basingstoke. Avoiding the tube/W&C and having a seat all the way might be worth it.

Cheers - I'm surprised that the times are so close (though I guess Waterloo would be better for more of central London - and Canary Wharf etc) - would be interesting to see which terminus people preferred (assuming no difference in comfort/ price etc).

Could we third rail Basingstoke to Reading and have a 1/2TPH slow train Basingstoke to Waterloo via reading instead of the current FGW shuttle?

I'm expecting Reading's track layout to need another redisign to achive this but the thought just floated past me.

I don't think that's part of the plan for the redesign of Reading, but it would be a neat solution (avoids crossing over the "main line" tracks, matches the frequency etc).

The trains you refer to are those reported in a document from the DfT; "The ten most overcrowded London and South East train services arriving at or departing from London during the morning and afternoon peaks".

There is no measure of the most overcrowded trains in the UK as yet. They may be the most crowded but who knows, certainly not the DfT. None of them compare to Underground crowding.

Thanks - I couldn't remember the report I was quoting but generally the Thameslink corridor and Thames Valley services were top of the list.

I've not read the RUS but wouldn't these new services have to take up new paths (possibly HeX paths, which I know the GW RUS wants for longer-distance services)? If this is the case then it would help overcrowding as I would expect the trains to be predominantly Reading-Paddington shuttles, with most Basingstoke commuters - except those who already travel via Reading - choosing to go direct to Waterloo. I think cle's timings are reasonable, though I would have used the stopping service rather than XC, as I would think this service would take its place. No chance of Crossrail reaching Basingstoke though!

I agree that Crossrail won't reach Basingstoke (a long way on a toiletless train).

With the plan for London - Bristol to be doubled to four trains an hour (with the additional services running via Bristol Parkway) - rumours of Cheltenham being increased to hourly - and Crossrail not really freeing up many FGW Paddington slots (due to it only running to Maidenhead, the current FGW stoppers will presumably continue in similar number to right now?), so I don't know how the HeX paths will be divvied up (assuming that HeX is replaced by Crossrail - which I would like to see but hasn't been confirmed).

Having shorter distance Reading "shuttles" would be one way of trying to free up seats for longer distance passengers, if you could time them right. At the moment there's nothing to stop Reading passengers dominating a service to Swansea/ Plymouth (which the Swansea/ Plymouth passengers have no alternative to).
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
25,686
I don't think that's part of the plan for the redesign of Reading, but it would be a neat solution (avoids crossing over the "main line" tracks, matches the frequency etc).

A non-conflicting route from Basingstoke and through the relief side at Reading and then via the eastern underpass onto the Southern lines in the up direction is possible under the rebuilt layout anyway - and a much more straightforward down route will be possible through P7 (formerly P4) as now, so there'd be no major alterations necessary - it just needs another dual voltage changeover position. A route from the Reading Spur lines at New Jn directly into P7 without joining the down main would be useful though.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

And as you say it would need layout changes - P7 could be used but it's already planned for XC services.

P7 isn't actually dedicated to XC, nor is it the only platform XC services can reverse in, as it is also available for down trains heading for the Newbury direction. I'd expect to see the XC Reading terminators at least using P12-P15. Indeed the track plans I've got also show routes for XC into P3 and P8. Loads of options.
 
Last edited:

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
2,725
tbtc:
Having shorter distance Reading "shuttles" would be one way of trying to free up seats for longer distance passengers, if you could time them right. At the moment there's nothing to stop Reading passengers dominating a service to Swansea/ Plymouth (which the Swansea/ Plymouth passengers have no alternative to).

That is absolutely what happens. Any long distance train you take in the peaks is rammed, and then empties at Reading.

Shuttles leaving 3-4 mins before the Bristol/Cardiff rotations would be good. However you're right, the Penzance and Swanseas should be targeted having the longest journeys.

Bristol trains are more like commuter trains these days! The fast ones via BPW will make it even quicker - possibly 1 hour 15 mins?
 

LexyBoy

Established Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
4,472
Location
North of the rivers
P7 isn't actually dedicated to XC, nor is it the only platform XC services can reverse in, as it is also available for down trains heading for the Newbury direction. I'd expect to see the XC Reading terminators at least using P12-P15. Indeed the track plans I've got also show routes for XC into P3 and P8. Loads of options.

I didn't mean to say that P7 would be dedicated to XC, but with at least 2 XC through services per hour, plus as you say down trains heading down the B&H line, I would think it would be hard to fit extra trains through P7, especially if they would be expected to include some recovery time at Reading. I thought the bay platforms weren't considered in the long term for XC as they can only take 5 carriages though?

I'll admit I hadn't thought about the XC terminators, it would make sense for them to use P12-15 as you say.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
25,686
I thought the bay platforms weren't considered in the long term for XC as they can only take 5 carriages though?

That could be an issue, but only if there is any real likelihood of 6 car Voyagers in the near future, however there are some unpublished improvements planned to P3 during its closure in 2013 - perhaps it can be extended? They'd still have the capacity to reverse any of the XC services in P12-P15 though, and on another look at the track diagrams, P11 could be used as well, although that would have to be pathed with the up trains from the Westbury route.
 

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
2,725
What units would run an electrified Basingstoke - Reading line's local services - surely a 4 car 319 would be overkill?

If all the branches are wired, we might need an order for 2 and 3 car EMUs. Might tie in nicely with the Valleys and some Northern locals which would also need short EMUs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top