There are 'Thameslink only' fares from Brighton to Gatwick, so it depends on your interpretation of that restriction.Isn’t Brighton-Gatwick the same on all services?
Sounds like a flying junction before or after OOC has a pretty good business case - taking mainline non-stop/limited stop services from Heathrow and Reading into Paddington low level.Only repeated in threads every 6 months or so for the last ten years?
No chance.Sounds like a flying junction before or after OOC has a pretty good business case - taking mainline non-stop/limited stop services from Heathrow and Reading into Paddington low level.
Any chance?
Exactly. And use the vacated platforms to extend HS2 trains from Old OakWhy not then abolish the Heathrow Express and run the extra EL services non-stop from Paddington Low Level to Heathrow, if there are pathing issues?
How is removing Heathrow Express helping HS2? They are completely separate platforms and lines, there is no access from HS2 to GWML platforms.Exactly. And use the vacated platforms to extend HS2 trains from Old Oak
probably not now, but built a flying junction at Whitechapel, so could have built one to fast lines at Paddington, for fast trains to the airport.Sounds like a flying junction before or after OOC has a pretty good business case - taking mainline non-stop/limited stop services from Heathrow and Reading into Paddington low level.
Any chance?
The speed limit of the reliefs is already 90mph, not 110mph. Unless you're suggesting lowering the fast lines to 90mph and running the Elizabeth Line on them??? It would certainly make more of a difference than a few minutes, and would likely increase the journey times to anywhere in the West by at least 50%. Not to mention the fasts are near capacity and this would decrease the amount of trains that can run on the line without reksignalling, and therefore decrease the amount of trains the west gets.Also, when Old Oak Common is open, and everything stops there, what’s the point of keeping rating the track 110 between Reading and Paddington? Rating it at 90 is not going to adversely impact journey times on other trains from Reading by more than single minutes.
What option are you putting forward here? Certainly any option that slows down the fast lines is a no go. Far more people travel from Reading to London everyday than take the Heathrow Express or even travel from Heathrow by train. If this resulted in a reduced capacity on the fasts even worse, you’re disadvantaging a quarter of the country for the needs of a dwindling group, in the post Covid world, of the rich who think they need to get to work just that bit faster.Lastly there are still 12tph+ being turned around at Paddington it’s a scandalous waste of 25% of the central tunnel capacity, ridiculous. The government knows this and know it needs to create additional EL services into Paddington, somewhere - all the other options for additional services look even more expensive.
How does that create capacity?On the other hand, from a philosophical point of view, does running to Reading in 28 minutes (at 90mph) rather than 22 minutes (at 125mph) really make a difference if it could increase capacity?
XR trains have more capacity per trainHow does that create capacity?
Surely if the trains are slower, less of them can run?
In terms of seating capacity, a 9 car 800 has a lot more seatsXR trains have more capacity per train
How does that increase capacity? Except for fast services to Heathrow? Which would almost definitely be charged at a premium. Basically you’re saying everyone should suffer for the benefit of the rich who are willing to pay up for a faster transfer from their expensive flight. The Heathrow Express itself is proof more capacity isn’t needed.On the other hand, from a philosophical point of view, does running to Reading in 28 minutes (at 90mph) rather than 22 minutes (at 125mph) really make a difference if it could increase capacity?
My, probably fantasy, suggestion is “fast” Elizabeth line trains on the mainline into Paddington low level, from Reading and Heathrow. Hence the querying the possibility for a flying junction somewhere near Old Oak Common (which does not sound like it is being built).What option are you putting forward here? Certainly any option that slows down the fast lines is a no go. Far more people travel from Reading to London everyday than take the Heathrow Express or even travel from Heathrow by train. If this resulted in a reduced capacity on the fasts even worse, you’re disadvantaging a quarter of the country for the needs of a dwindling group, in the post Covid world, of the rich who think they need to get to work just that bit faster.
How many people would use this compared to the fasts though, the walk from Paddinton High to Low really isn't that bad.Whereas if a semi-fast service stopping only stopping Twyford Maidenhead, Slough and Old Oak Common before Paddington low level then Canary Wharf in less that an hour - that would really be something - similar for a mainline Heathrow non stop to Paddington low level.
My opinion is that there should only be one stopping pattern on each pair of tracks in order to maximise capacity, which means there should only be Elizabeth line services on the relief and fast services on the main.How many people would use this compared to the fasts though, the walk from Paddinton High to Low really isn't that bad.
Where are these semi-fasts running? You certainly can't have more than a stop at Slough on the fasts, and even that causes issues. To run them on reliefs you'd have to replace other Elizabeth Line services, the GWR services on the reliefs have already been kicked off where they are at capacity. It really isn't feasible to cut GWML fast services, I'd like to see you tell someone in Bristol or Plymouth they've lost their trains so someone in London can have a better commute.
All these complaints are well and good but it needs to be recognised that the Elizabeth Line is magnitudes better than any other public tranport system in the country, and we shouldn't be further disadvantaging the rest of the country, so people close to London can shave minutes off their journey, while in other areas of the country the trains just don't run half the time, and when they do thye are crowded beyond capacity and people are turned away.
How does that maximize capacity when Crossrail has to work around freight services?My opinion is that there should only be one stopping pattern on each pair of tracks in order to maximise capacity, which means there should only be Elizabeth line services on the relief and fast services on the main.
Shame if soprobably not now, but built a flying junction at Whitechapel, so could have built one to fast lines at Paddington, for fast trains to the airport.
Actually Paddington has ended up a bit of a muddle now, it has the long distance trains (as expected), many of its local trains now serve low level Elizabeth line platforms, but there is a confused residual of adding Heathrow Express to outer suburban and long distance in main platforms. Sort of feels like it is there when shouldn't be now.
Yesterday, MPs were backing the Heathrow Western rail link again, so saying access from the west is the problem, maybe if built will sort the problem with Thames Valley semi-fasts looping via Heathrow and using the express slots
I don’t really think not spending £50 million on something you have no foreseeable use for is shortsighted. The idea that we’re already spending x billion on something, so x million is insignificant is shortsighted, that x million could be spent on an entire project that makes a meaningful difference when it’s finished.Why you would not put the junction in whilst you are starting from scratch and spending £1.7bn (plus the overrun) on one station?
Even if you have no plans to take trains from the mainline into the Elizabeth line tunnel it’s seems massively short sighted not to provide for the option in the future.
If Heathrow Express is abolished, there will be path on the main to put the Didcot service running fast from Slough, which in turn allows more Crossrail trains to run on the relief to Terminal 5.I don’t really think not spending £50 million on something you have no foreseeable use for is shortsighted. The idea that we’re already spending x billion on something, so x million is insignificant is shortsighted, that x million could be spent on an entire project that makes a meaningful difference when it’s finished.
Besides XR services can’t run on the fasts without investment in more, faster stock, since even if you could find a way to allow them to run at 90, there aren’t the trains without service reductions to the rest of the line. This flyover would also be a drop in the pond for investment in any rolling stock improvement program.
Exactly. And use the vacated platforms to extend HS2 trains from Old Oak
My opinion is that there should only be one stopping pattern on each pair of tracks in order to maximise capacity, which means there should only be Elizabeth line services on the relief and fast services on the main.
Shame if so
Why you would not put the junction in whilst you are starting from scratch and spending £1.7bn (plus the overrun) on one station?
Even if you have no plans to take trains from the mainline into the Elizabeth line tunnel it’s seems massively short sighted not to provide for the option in the future.
How is ridership faring from West Drayton and west? I'd also like to see increased service there, it's more important than Heathrow. Which I appreciate is a useful turnback, ostensibly - with some airport traffic. It still has the tube, which is cheap and very well used.
The Didcot service is already running fast from Slough from May, using the old Bristol fast paths, all relief line trains past Slough are going to be XR or freight from May.If Heathrow Express is abolished, there will be path on the main to put the Didcot service running fast from Slough, which in turn allows more Crossrail trains to run on the relief to Terminal 5.
The station is designed to handle the full 24tph that Paddington currently does, using 2 platforms for turnarounds and 2 for running further west.Turn around 12tph at OOC - requires the space facilities to do this, is that possible? (no one on this chat thinks there is the space to build a junction never mind three turnaround bays, is this possible?)
Well that’s already designed for at OOC, and has been explained in a number of earlier threads. It’s not going to directly impact on Hex at all.…Therefore, as a minimum, the 12tph currently turning around at Paddington has to get to OOC somehow?
If so, the options appear to be:
1. Turn around 12tph at OOC - requires the space facilities to do this, is that possible? (no one on this chat thinks there is the space to build a junction never mind three turnaround bays, is this possible?)
That's a matter for stopping patterns though. I am saying that stations West Drayton-Reading need upping, vs the Heathrow stations themselves. But yes also the interim/trunk ones need improvement too. That Hayes bay could hopefully be the first call for another slow 2tph - which in turn could speed something else up (a T5 pair) ?Is it? Have you seen how busy Heathrow trains are? It's the passengers at West Ealing and Acton Main Line who are the most frustrated.