Thoughts about Heathrow Airtrack

[hawaii2468]

I am quite interested in Heathrow Airtrack as I live nearby and it would be a great convenience to have such a service. However, it was taken out from the project with various dilemmas. Here I would like to make a few points and my thoughts on this airlink and the local train services.

My home station is Staines, which has 6 services hourly towards London Waterloo, 2 to Reading, 2 to Windsor Eton Riverside and 2 to Weybridge.
Of the 6 services to Waterloo, 2 were fast services via Richmond from Reading which is always full or decently filled when it arrives Staines and it takes only 35 minutes to Waterloo. The Windsor service takes slightly longer at 43 minutes and it has plenty of seats at Staines. The slowest service from Weybridge to Waterloo via Houslow takes 55 minutes and is often the least popular service so it's pretty empty at Staines too.

Now, as the projection against Heathrow Airtrack is from the local residents considering about the traffics on some level crossings and based on my experience I have these thoughts which might be solutions for this airport link.

1. Replace the Windsor & Eton Riverside(WER) service with Heathrow Airtrack. I often find the WER line service quiet. The Annual ridership of WER is 1.2 million and the few stops between WER and Staines are very tiny as well, that means the daily ridership is about 3000 for more than 40 services per day. If Southwest Trains use this slot for Heathrow Airtrack and build new station Staines High Street station(SHS) as proposal, it would be terminal for WER. So the main line will be 2 tph Heathrow T5 - Waterloo, branch line SHS - WER. To maintain a 2tph service between WER and Waterloo, it needs at least 5 trains X 8 coachs + 5 drivers at a time. When WER becomes branch line it could be operated under 1-2 train X 1-2 coach + 1-2 driver at a time which will be more economical.
To compensate the inconvenience losing the direct service, the WER train can be arranged to a way that it is 1-2 minutes within connection to the mainline service.

2. Replace the service between Weybridge and Waterloo via Hounslow with Airtrack service between Reading and Heathrow T5 (2tph) . A new branch line would be between Virginia Water and Guildford via Chertsey (2tph).
It doesn't increase the railway traffic frequency on the level crossings in Egham, Virginia water area but provides a better way to travel to Heathrow airport from the West and a new service to Guildford. The branch operation will be similar to the WER branch line so that the connection will be within 1-2 minutes. Then Reading and Guildford will be the Gateways to London airports (LHR and LGW) for trains from the west(Great Western from Cornwall, Wales, Somerset etc) and southwest ( Southampton, Dorset etc).

Well, all above were just my thoughts, please point out any nonsense please.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Heathrow Airtrack Sevice from Waterloo calling at Vauxhall Clapham Junction, Putney, Richmond, Twickenham, Feltham, Ashford, Staines,Staines High Street and Heathrow T5. Whole Journey will take approximately 45 minutes( Currently WER line between WAT and Staines is 39 minutes).

Passengers travelling on Heathrow Airtrack Service from Heathrow T5 to London Waterloo can : AT Staines high street , change to Windsor and Eton riverside; At Tickenham change to Hounslow, Kingston and Wimbledon. At Richmond, change to district line and London overground; Clapham Junction, change to national rail services to London Victoria, East Croydon and Gatwick airport. At Vauhxall, change to Victoria line; London waterloo, change to various tube lines and Waterloo East.

Sounds great doesn't it?

 

[musicking1306]

Maybe this could use the Class 460 that was used on the Gatwick Express and run into the old platforms 20-24 to add capacity to Waterloo. Not sure if the 8 train sets would cover he whole service though.

It would be good to extend the number of direct routes out of central London to Heathrow as the Heathrow express and Connect can be massively delayed if something goes wrong on the GWML. It would also make for flexibility if one route was blocked.

 

[swt_passenger]

Maybe this could use the Class 460 that was used on the Gatwick Express and run into the old platforms 20-24 to add capacity to Waterloo. Not sure if the 8 train sets would cover he whole service though...

The 460s aren't available at all though are they...

 

[Wath Yard]

Your whole case seems to be based on Airtrack making it slightly easier for a few people in south London to get to Heathrow. There is no need for Reading services to access Heathrow via Airtrack as they are planning a western link from the GWML to the current Heathrow spur.

Sorry, but a lot of money for something which will only benefit a few people in London (where have we had that before!). The money could be better spent on other projects.

 

[Monty]

The OP seems to forget that Windsor line sees alot of midday tourist traffic outside of the peak, and especially during the summer months where you have passengers alighting and boarding at Staines for Thorpe Park the Windsor and Reading trains are often rammed to capacity.

Severing the line at Staines and forcing them to change at either Staines or a newly built station near the High Street is not practical nor would it be popular. You mention about only needing 1-5 drivers for the services but do not forget every train requires a guard so you can double those figures almost straight away, the 2 coach Class 456s that are to be cascaded to SWT will be deployed on the Guildford - Ascot branch in addition to strengthening other suburban services on the network. There will be no spare units to trundle up and down the Windsor or Weybridge branches.

 

[hawaii2468]

Your whole case seems to be based on Airtrack making it slightly easier for a few people in south London to get to Heathrow. There is no need for Reading services to access Heathrow via Airtrack as they are planning a western link from the GWML to the current Heathrow spur.

Sorry, but a lot of money for something which will only benefit a few people in London (where have we had that before!). The money could be better spent on other projects.

The Reading - Heathrow T5 was in BAA's Heathrow Airtrack proposal. Also it doesn't only benefit the passengers from Reading but stations between REading and Staines. If like you said there will be another link from GWML then a direct service can move to between Guildford and T5 via Virginia Water and Chertsey. It would not only benefit Guildford but also further southwest England towns.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The OP seems to forget that Windsor line sees alot of midday tourist traffic outside of the peak, and especially during the summer months where you have passengers alighting and boarding at Staines for Thorpe Park the Windsor and Reading trains are often rammed to capacity.

Severing the line at Staines and forcing them to change at either Staines or a newly built station near the High Street is not practical nor would it be popular. You mention about only needing 1-5 drivers for the services but do not forget every train requires a guard so you can double those figures almost straight away, the 2 coach Class 456s that are to be cascaded to SWT will be deployed on the Guildford - Ascot branch in addition to strengthening other suburban services on the network. There will be no spare units to trundle up and down the Windsor or Weybridge branches.

In terms of Thorpe Park that passengers off at Staines, they can use Reading and Heathrow airtrack service for Staines from London Waterloo, Heathrow and Reading directions. This will be a particular good idea for tourists waiting to connect for a flight.

In terms of midday tourists for Windsor, I think if the connection is good it's OK. The currently frequency between Staines and Windsor is 2tph if one can increase it to 4 tph that could balance the inconvenience. Special direct service can be added in summers between London and Windsor.

In terms of the number of Guards, let's make this calculation:
the current journey time is 14 minutes between Windsor and Staines, and will be even shorter from Staines high street. A round trip can be finished within 30 minutes so if the frequency is 2tph, one train is needed for the whole route or 2 trains for frequency of 4tph.

A service between WER and Waterloo is 55 minutes, a round trip takes at least 110 minutes and that needs 4 trains for the frequency of 2tph.

According to the daily ridership between WER and Staines, the Windsor branch line only needs 1-2 cars per train. 1 guards needed for 2tph senario and 2 guards needed for 4tph senario.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
In fact, according to my own experience on the branch lines in Cornwall, guards were not always seen on trains for the whole journey. In the case of 4tph WER to Staines 1 guard might only be needed.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Your whole case seems to be based on Airtrack making it slightly easier for a few people in south London to get to Heathrow. There is no need for Reading services to access Heathrow via Airtrack as they are planning a western link from the GWML to the current Heathrow spur.

Sorry, but a lot of money for something which will only benefit a few people in London (where have we had that before!). The money could be better spent on other projects.

I think if the Heathrow airtrack use Windsor service slot then only a new rail line between Staines and Heathrow and a new station are needed and shouldn't cost too much.

 

[Wath Yard]

A tunnel under west London shouldn't cost too much?! Nearly £700 million is quite a lot in my book. By comparison, Northern Hub, which will improve service frequencies and journey times between several major northern cities is going to cost approx £500 million and will benefit a hell of a lot more people.

 

[GodAtum]

It would be nice to be able to get to heathrow without having to go to into London and get the Heathrow Express!

 

[cle]

Once Airtrack threw in the towel, wasn't there a plan for a Airtrack-lite scheme, with connection to Staines (and Crossrail/HEx?) - but no western access, so avoiding the Egham and Wokingham issues?

Trains would run via Hounslow which has capacity and less level crossings, even though demand is probably higher through Richmond and Twickenham.

2tph to Waterloo, and then whichever extensions from T5 to Staines too.

But it's gone quiet...

 

[Chris125]

I think any Airtrack-lite scheme (a local authority proposal?) will have been superseded by western access from the GWML.

Chris

 

[jopsuk]

Would it be physically possible to have a layout that would allow both Airtrack and western access to the GWML from the "spare" platforms at T5? With celever timetabling two platforms should be plenty of capacity.

 

[tsr]

Wandsworth Council proposed Airtrack Lite in October 2011... so not too long ago!

I'll do a bit more research on this, if I have a mo!

I have been reading the article http://www.disused-stations.org.uk/c/colnbrook/index.shtml on the old Colnbrook station, with history of the Staines West branch, which is interesting. Looking on Google Maps' satellite view, I feel something could be made of part of the line, but I think there would need to be very careful planning to avoid further over-urbanisation (if that's even a term ) of the area, and also to ensure that a suitable alignment and perhaps connections with the BAA Sidings at Colnbrook could be achieved.

I think plans have been suggested to minimise any local LC disruption (I think I saw these on Wikipedia - not the most reliable source, of course, but nonetheless interesting - but I have lost the link in the mists of internet browsing history, I should imagine).

 

[OuterDistant]

Does anyone else keep reading it as "Heathrow Air Attack"? :?

 

[bluenoxid]

Is heading into London actually the best destination for this service. Personally, I thought that running the services through to Staines-ish and terminating the vast majority there would be the best option, then through services should head south??

 

[TEW]

The R
In fact, according to my own experience on the branch lines in Cornwall, guards were not always seen on trains for the whole journey. In the case of 4tph WER to Staines 1 guard might only be needed.

All passenger trains in Cornwall and indeed all passenger trains from Staines-Windsor need a guard on at all times.

 

[Monty]

All passenger trains in Cornwall and indeed all passenger trains from Staines-Windsor need a guard on at all times.

Indeed, currently it's a franchise commitment for SWT to have a guard on all of it's trains.

 

[cle]

Regarding the platforms at terminal 5, good point.

If Crossrail/HEx was extended to Staines, obvioulsy they would use the current ones.

But if Western access services were due to be through Crossrail services also, then they could presumably use the same through platforms, assuming everything was nicely grade separated.

This is assuming now that nothing from the Paddington direction now terminates at T5 in normal service, but either Staines or 'WRAtH'.

This would leave two platforms spare at T5. 2tph to Waterloo would only need one platform - leaving another for flexibility, Crossrail/HEx terminators or indeed originating faster Western services beyond Reading to Bristol, Oxford or Cardiff for example. Again, 2tph could use one platform.

The key would be that all 4 platforms were accessible from Heathrow Central, bi-directional, accessible from both Western route and Staines, and separated out to avoid conflicts. On leaving T5 the four lines could merge with crossovers and be two-tracked for a bit to then simplify the junction where Staines and Western lines would meet.

 

[Rational Plan]

Simple fact is Airtrack ended up promising Staines and Egham major pain yet dropped any benefits when they cut the High street station. The whole scheme was not thought out politically. At the start they said 'we'll be able to sort something out about the level crossings' but they couldn't. Everyone was against it in the end.

On the other hand Western access to Greatwestern has the full support of all the local authorities along the route and most people (except those who will lose a chunk of the Golf course in Riching s Park) support it.

I expect in the future a Southern link to Staines will revive, but will only be a London facing link. Crossrail could terminate in Staines, and new semi fasts to Waterloo could previde serious crowding relief as well as providing easy Heathrow access at Clapham Junction.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Simple fact is Airtrack ended up promising Staines and Egham major pain yet dropped any benefits when they cut the High street station. The whole scheme was not thought out politically. At the start they said 'we'll be able to sort something out about the level crossings' but they couldn't. Everyone was against it in the end.

'Dropped any benefits'? Surely having two extra trains an hour to London (the new Waterloo-Heathrow service) would have constituted some benefits? Plus the possibility of extending the Heathrow Express to Staines.

I am though puzzled why the proposed Heathrow-Guildford and Heathrow-Reading services weren't scheduled to call at Egham? Presumably that would have provided considerable benefits to the area if they'd revised the plans to do that?

 

[SussexSpotter]

Deleted

 

[Skimpot flyer]

It would be nice to be able to get to heathrow without having to go to into London and get the Heathrow Express!

It would also be nice, in a supposedly 'free-market' economy, to be able to get to Heathrow from the south, the west or the south-west without having to pay the exhorbitant fares on Heathrow Express. Yes, I accept you can use Heathrow Connect or the Piccadilly Line, but the price differentials on Heathrow Express are enormous.
I recently flew into Heathrow Terminal 5 having - unusually for me - not had the foresight to book my onward rail ticket in advance. The clerk at the HX counter could not sell me a ticket to my station in Hertfordshire, but suggested I could buy a 'London Terminals' single, which would cover me to Kings Cross, where I could then purchase a single to my home station. The price of the London Terminals ticket (pre-Jan fare increase) ? £19.80 !!!
Having my Oyster card with me, I of course elected for the tube, at a fare of £2.90 (off-peak, pre-increase), with all the consequent intermediate stops.

Now I am not a stupid person. I do understand the concept of 'premium pricing', and do expect to pay more for a faster service. But that level of differential cannot possibly be justified, surely? Nearly 7x the price, for a total journey time, even with good connections at Paddington, of perhaps 10-15 minutes less (compared to just shy of an hour on the Picc journey). Even the Heathrow Connect fare weighs in at over 3x the Oyster fare, for a journey of 27mins + tube to KX, which would save even less time.

The Oyster fares to Paddington are the same as to KX, and with a change at Earls Court, the journey to Paddington is probably do-able in under an hour by tube, and even then the Heathrow Express fare is more than 3x the 'cash' fare by tube !!

Will trains over the western chord (when built) into Heathrow be available at normal National Rail fare levels, I wonder ? Or will the fare-paying public have to endure a Slough-Heathrow service also run by Heathrow Express at rip-off (sorry, premium) prices ??

 

[Monty]

Depends on who operates the service, the track beyond Heathrow Junction is BAA owned, and I figure they'll either want to run the services from the west themselves or charge a premium in track access charges to use their track.

 

[Waverley125]

I imagine that when London finally manages to force through its demands for Crossrail two at the expense of worthier projects round the rest of the country, Airtrack will be built as part of that.