• We're pleased to advise that our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk, which helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase, has had some recent improvements, including PlusBus support. Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Suggestion: Chiltern clock face timetable post HS2

Status
Not open for further replies.

adrock1976

Established Member
Joined
10 Dec 2013
Messages
4,450
Location
What's it called? It's called Cumbernauld
As mentioned in the "...Is it all about London - Brum?" thread, I have had a not so easy task at designing a post HS2 timetable. The aims I had in mind were that (apart from wires and fleet replacement):

1) Look at improving the service at the stations between Marylebone and Gerrards Cross as that part of Middlesex has a poor London Terminals frequency service when compared with Enfield Town, the GWR Relief Lines, Watford DC, Twickenham, Hounslow, and Brentford
2) Introduce an Old Oak Common - High Wycombe service (future extensions (wishful thinking I may add) to Banbury and Lutterworth via Brackley every 30 minutes each may be possible)
3) All stations north of Gerrards Cross to have a frequency of at least every 30 minutes.
4) All trains to call at High Wycombe, Princes Risborough (for Aylesbury shuttle), Haddenham & Thame Parkway, both Bicester stations, both Warwick stations, Porridge, and Birmingham Snow Hill (Platform 4 is anticipated to be brought back into use if not already as the Midland Metro vacated that a while ago). Also, Islip is a request stop with all of the Marylebone - Oxford timetabled to call.

My starting point was to avoid having trains departing Marylebone at xx27 and xx57, and arriving at xx22 and xx52 as these are the paths for the Aylesbury via Harrow-on-the-Hill as they share track with London Underground north of Harrow. Also, I have avoided having trains departing Marylebone at xx12 and xx42, and arriving Marylebone at xx07 and xx37 in case the Aylesbury via Harrow is doubled in frequency to every 15 minutes in the future. For this timetable to work, quad track is required between Northolt Junction and Denham and Old Oak Common - Northolt Junction redoubled, which these sections seem the easiest and not too controversial to do.

Although I have not illustrated this in my suggested plan, no trains will run to Aylesbury via High Wycombe, however, an improved Princes Risborough - Aylesbury shuttle will provide connections every 30 minutes (double track required to the left of the formation between Monks Risborough and Little Kimble or thereabouts), and also I would anticipate Transport for London to take over the West Ealing - Greenford shuttle, doubled to every 15 minutes.

For each of the Marylebone - Gerrards Cross local all stations except Denham Golf Club, the Old Oak Common - High Wycombe, and the Oxford/Birmingham (every 30 minutes to each), I have the frequency every 15 minutes. Saunderton is served by the Oxford trains where a change can be made at either Princes Risborough or Haddenham & Thame Parkway for Banbury and Birmingham, whereas both of the golf club stations (Denham Golf Club and Seer Green & Jordans) are served by the Old Oak Common trains every 30 minutes. That was the only way I could get the timings to work being as north of Gerrards Cross, there are no two consecutive stations that are quiet which makes it tricky to have an alternating calling pattern.

Although Denham has their service quadrupled from every 60 minutes to every 15 minutes, bear in mind that London Underground's Central Line was supposed to end there, but presently ends at West Ruislip as of today. Also, it would save the residents from going to neighbouring Uxbridge for the Underground.

Regarding the service level for Kings Sutton and Stratford upon Avon, I anticipate the Oxford terminators (not the opposite half hour Cotswolds as that is planned to be extended to Moreton-in-Marsh or further on, but the other two) to extend to Banbury with a call at Kings Sutton every 60 minutes (maybe on request if need be), with a 2 hourly extension to Stratford upon Avon (or improve Leamington Spa - Stratford upon Avon service).

I have attached the file below.
 

Attachments

  • Chiltern post HS2 Taktplan.xlsx
    12.3 KB · Views: 61
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

peteb

Member
Joined
30 Mar 2011
Messages
979
Interesting! I had fun navigating the spreadsheet on my phone! Do you think this will work if some 1000 or 1030 deps continue to Stourbridge or Kidderminster, or did you foresee those as "extras" at rush hours only? Thanks for sharing this.
 

172007

Member
Joined
2 Jan 2021
Messages
646
Location
West Mids
No chance of platform 4 at Snowhill. Should have been reinstated immediately after the tram vacated. Absolutely kills a full non Covid service when a train requiring attention stands at Snowhill for more than about 7 mins. The current timetable works on paper and that's all the accountants look at. No contingency.
 

HST43257

Established Member
Joined
10 Apr 2020
Messages
1,303
Location
York
I like the idea of more frequent services to places, but it has to be said that places like Wycombe, Bicester, Banbury and Leamington need to retain fast services.
 

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
15,183
No chance of platform 4 at Snowhill. Should have been reinstated immediately after the tram vacated. Absolutely kills a full non Covid service when a train requiring attention stands at Snowhill for more than about 7 mins. The current timetable works on paper and that's all the accountants look at. No contingency.
Plenty of chance of it.
 

BrianW

Established Member
Joined
22 Mar 2017
Messages
1,246
Adrock- that's impressive. Thank you for sharing. It feels very much in the spirit of Metroland.
I guess the likelihood of something like this coming to pass depends on whether it's thought supply comes before demand.
Perhaps investment de-carbonising Marylebone will provide impetus and opportunity, or (just maybe?) a focus into OOC with better transfer opportunities there than at Marylebone will provide opportunity to close marylebone thus realising a 'development opportunity'?
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
94,835
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Perhaps investment de-carbonising Marylebone will provide impetus and opportunity, or (just maybe?) a focus into OOC with better transfer opportunities there than at Marylebone will provide opportunity to close marylebone thus realising a 'development opportunity'?

Stopping Chiltern in a Godforesaken western suburb is like terminating Greater Anglia services at Stratford. No, just no.

Perhaps a couple of services an hour might make sense, but not all of it.
 

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
15,183
Adrock- that's impressive. Thank you for sharing. It feels very much in the spirit of Metroland.
I guess the likelihood of something like this coming to pass depends on whether it's thought supply comes before demand.
Perhaps investment de-carbonising Marylebone will provide impetus and opportunity, or (just maybe?) a focus into OOC with better transfer opportunities there than at Marylebone will provide opportunity to close marylebone thus realising a 'development opportunity'?
I have heard of blue sky thinking, but that is stratospheric! Marylebone won't close.
 

30907

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Sep 2012
Messages
17,036
Location
Airedale
Impressive piece of work, though I am not sure I agree that Gerrards Cross etc are under-served compared with eg Maidenhead (traditionally 2tph fast-ish ex Padd.), and I am not sure their residents will prefer OOC as their London interchange.
I can see that 4tph for Sudbury etc is the only way to revive those stations, but I really doubt that there is a market.
I would go for more than 4tph beyond Wycombe, because that's where the money is!
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
94,835
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Impressive piece of work, though I am not sure I agree that Gerrards Cross etc are under-served compared with eg Maidenhead (traditionally 2tph fast-ish ex Padd.), and I am not sure their residents will prefer OOC as their London interchange.

Agreed. It's useful, but it's not a main London station. As I've said before it'd be like terminating Greater Anglia services at Stratford, or perhaps SWR ones at Vauxhall or Clapham Jn.
 

CW2

Established Member
Joined
7 May 2020
Messages
1,904
Location
Crewe
It would be interesting to see what proportion of passengers using Marylebone are actually for the local area (i.e. continue on foot or short bus ride).
Using Old Oak Common as an alternative Interchange might not be as negative as you first think.
I guess somebody In Chiltern Railways is looking at this?
 

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
15,183
It would be interesting to see what proportion of passengers using Marylebone are actually for the local area (i.e. continue on foot or short bus ride).
Using Old Oak Common as an alternative Interchange might not be as negative as you first think.
I guess somebody In Chiltern Railways is looking at this?
It is being looked at by NR as well.
 

CW2

Established Member
Joined
7 May 2020
Messages
1,904
Location
Crewe
It is being looked at by NR as well.
That's good to know.
I'm not quite sure where in the OOC station the Chiltern line platforms are supposed to sit, so the platform-to-platform transfer times may have some influence over the attractiveness of this option. Perhaps a couple of platforms underneath Acton Wells junction, with some high level platforms for connectivity onto the North London and Dudding Hill lines, and cross-platform connection into the Central Line. That would favour connection into those routes, but would still leave some distance to the main HS2 / GWML / Crossrail platforms, so maybe some form of travelator would be needed.
 

BrianW

Established Member
Joined
22 Mar 2017
Messages
1,246
That's good to know.
I'm not quite sure where in the OOC station the Chiltern line platforms are supposed to sit, so the platform-to-platform transfer times may have some influence over the attractiveness of this option. Perhaps a couple of platforms underneath Acton Wells junction, with some high level platforms for connectivity onto the North London and Dudding Hill lines, and cross-platform connection into the Central Line. That would favour connection into those routes, but would still leave some distance to the main HS2 / GWML / Crossrail platforms, so maybe some form of travelator would be needed.
Is there a 3D which will clarify the arrangement of platforms, esp bearing in mind the web of lines around too which connections may or may not be made to?
Impressive piece of work, though I am not sure I agree that Gerrards Cross etc are under-served compared with eg Maidenhead (traditionally 2tph fast-ish ex Padd.), and I am not sure their residents will prefer OOC as their London interchange.
I can see that 4tph for Sudbury etc is the only way to revive those stations, but I really doubt that there is a market.
I would go for more than 4tph beyond Wycombe, because that's where the money is!
An old WR timetable I have showed Gerrards X to be 1.75 miles closer to Paddington than Marylebone; not sure what that may mean in terms of passengers' onward travel into 'London' via OOC? For me a possible cross-platform change at OOC onto Elizabeth Line may well be attractive (eg to Farringdon) than down to the Bakerloo at Marylebone or a walk in the wind and rain from Marylebone to Baket Street for the Met/Circle.

Regarding the stations West Ruislip- Marylebone, I would imagine 'regulars' may well make good use of the limited serice, knowing times etc; infrequent travellers will use the 10-12tph Central or Piccadilly Lines- a longer journey almost certainly but more 'known'. Maybe a more frequent service would draw more local custom but at the expense of 'better-off' outer-suburban Bucks folk 'losing' trains and/or taking longer?

If anything I would imagine a more 'parliamentary service' for those relatively poor people.

How much is known about 'onward travel' destinations of folk arriving at Marylebone? I know many people will have chosen where they live according to connectivity to their place of work (or vice versa) but these things are susceptible to change, including what more 'working from home' brings and the (increasing?) draws of Birmingham, (Oxford?) and Milton Keynes for work and/or face-to-face meetings. Any 'evidence'?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top