Western Access to Heathrow

[SwindonPkwy]

Unless, of course, the Old Oak Common idea for HS2 becomes an acceptable place to change from all main line services to a Heathrow shuttle, in which case all the millions spent on a western link into Heathrow are a waste!

Once Heathrow's terminals spread beyond the central area, the possibility of a single train station pretty much ended. If and when OOC is developed for HS2 and GWML services, I do not see the Western access as being a waste. Suburban services to Reading, Basingstoke and Oxford, for example, would undoubtedly continue. OOC would be for longer distance destinations. Likewise, there is every chance that the Piccadilly Line could be extended to Slough.

 

[gwr4090]

That's the easy bit compared with two major projects.

Building 'Colnbrook West Junction' (or whatever it's to be called), which will either involve cutting a golf course in half or going under the GWML and through several lakes. Either way, it will then have to link to the GWML, grade-separated (so probably over the top, underneath is more tricky) and connect to the line roughly underneath the M25.

Linking the current Colnbrook terminal to the station, which involves crossing a landfill site, diving under the M25 at about the point where it meets with the Western Approach Road and cutting under a corner of the car park to make an end-on junction.

The route is not yet finalised, but I don't think it will use any part of the Colnbrook branch. Instread it will run largely in tunnel more less directly from Terminal 5 towards Iver or maybe a little further west nearer Langley emerging to to a flying junction with the main line.

David

 

[The Ham]

Much depends how the 'SW England' in yesterday evening's post by Solaris is defined.

In some contexts is natural to think of it as much of the area served by FGW, but if you included SWT's area as well it looks completely different. What if a significant number are heading to Heathrow through Woking?

A train from Basigstke (via Reading) to Heathrow I think would significantly reduce the number of people using the rail air coach at Working as why change at Woking for bus that takes a fair amount of time & can get stuck in the same traffic as if you drove, when you can just get on another train. You may not see many people East of Farnbrough using the new service, but there would be a number from Farnborough (although most would use the North Downs Line to Reading), Fleet, Winchfield and Hook who would no longer use the bus from Woking and would "go back on themselves" by going via Basingstoke.

There have also been rumours (maybe using the western approach) to provide a link between Heathrow & Gatwick.

 

[Stats]

As it's not been mentioned in 7 pages I assume we are ruling out the Windsor Link Railway proposal for western access to Heathrow?

 

[lj9090]

Another advantage of moving from Woking for SWT services is that Heathrow access from the coast sees strong competition from direct services from National Express.

I've come back from Heathrow to Bournemouth a couple of times now, train once and direct bus the other. The bus was easy, quicker, and cheaper. It's not as frequent at only once every 2 hrs instead of effectively once every hour, but with the time saving it's worth hanging around at the airport a little longer as it gets to the destination at about the same time.
And it's far cheaper.

 

[D365]

The plans sound like a good idea, unless "Boris Island" goes ahead. How can London have two hub airports?

Actually, if HS2 and 1 are connected and a spur is built from HS1 to the proposed island, [Mini] Heathrow - Thames Hub services could be run. Any ideas about the future-proofability of "Airtrack"?

 

[tbtc]

You could also add the Reading-terminating XC services. How long do they sit in the bays at Reading? I wonder if an extension to Heathrow would be covered with that

True, but that's only one train every two hours at the moment.

It would tick a lot of boxes in terms of being a direct Heathrow link to/from Birmingham/ Sheffield/ Newcastle (albeit slow).

 

[swt_passenger]

There have also been rumours (maybe using the western approach) to provide a link between Heathrow & Gatwick.

I suggest that will remain rumour as well.

It is highly unlikely to be provided once a connection using Crossrail and Thameslink via Farringdon exists.

 

[SwindonPkwy]

As it's not been mentioned in 7 pages I assume we are ruling out the Windsor Link Railway proposal for western access to Heathrow?

IIRC, this is/was part of the proposal for a Piccadilly Line extension to Slough via Sunnymeads and Datchet. Unlikely to happen IMO as TfL will probably look at Crossrail 2 next.

 

[LE Greys]

I suggest that will remain rumour as well.

It is highly unlikely to be provided once a connection using Crossrail and Thameslink via Farringdon exists.

It's vaguely possible that it might be a way to restore the XC Brighton service, but I agree that it's unlikely.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

IIRC, this is/was part of the proposal for a Piccadilly Line extension to Slough via Sunnymeads and Datchet. Unlikely to happen IMO as TfL will probably look at Crossrail 2 next.

I've always thought that Crossrail 2/Chelney was focused too much on the south and not enough on the west. A line up the Thames to Heathrow via West Brompton, Fulham, Barnes, Chiswick, Kew Bridge and Feltham - maybe with a spur parallel to the Brentford branch from Southall - would not only give Heathrow access from the south, it would take a lot of strain off the District and Piccadilly west of Earl's Court, provide a direct line from Euston and give an option to link T4 and T5 directly. Once again, it would weaken the case for Crossrail, but depending on loading gauge, it would also provide access to Staines from the east or Richmond/Clapham Junction from the west. It all depends on the Heathrow Hub, and whether it will work or not.

 

[Stats]

IIRC, this is/was part of the proposal for a Piccadilly Line extension to Slough via Sunnymeads and Datchet. Unlikely to happen IMO as TfL will probably look at Crossrail 2 next.

Nothing to do with TfL. The ORR have allegedly said it should be considered as one of the options for Heathrow western access.

http://windsorlink.co.uk/?p=537

The Office of the Rail Regulator (ORR) has today confirmed that the Windsor Link Railway proposal should be considered in developing a potential solution to satisfy the recently announced requirement for a connection from Heathrow to the west.

Map of proposal: http://windsorlink.co.uk/?page_id=238

 

[WatcherZero]

Saw a new detail today in that the Government said they envisage a through service using the current Terminal 5 station (possibly another two platforms built) with no totally new or relocated stations built.

 

[swt_passenger]

Is that in addition to the two unused platforms that are already there?

 

[WatcherZero]

Wernt they put there with future expansion in mind anyway? I thought they were some future proofing leaving room for future platforms and not physically built.

 

[swt_passenger]

Airtrack first consultation in Feb 2008, (no longer online) said they just needed fitting out:

The elements of this scheme are:
1. fitting out two platforms at the Terminal 5 station which has already been built.
2. etc tc...

I'd expect at least the two boxes and platform structures are present, but odd that there are no easy to find pictures online.

I'm still wondering about whether there are junction positions already built east of the platforms, or if they are just designed for terminating trains, as I mentioned in post #54...

 

[The Ham]

Nothing to do with TfL. The ORR have allegedly said it should be considered as one of the options for Heathrow western access.

http://windsorlink.co.uk/?p=537


Map of proposal: http://windsorlink.co.uk/?page_id=238

Interestingly there is a long term vision for the link, which includes an option to run from the SWML in Farnborough Via Camberley and Ascot into the Airport, which could mean two Heathrow routes from Basingstoke one provided by SWT and one by FGW (or either of their successors).

http://windsorlink.co.uk/?page_id=412

 

[Mystic Force]

The way I would do it would be to extend any Paddington-heathrow service through to reading on the western link therfore becoming a shuttle from reading and Paddington to heathrow. Secondly I would send 1 tph from long distance services that way maybe alternating southwest/Wales services. At other times there would always be a short connection at reading available. If we have to add on Oxford to that might get a little complicated but extensions of cross-country services might be able to fill that need.

 

[LE Greys]

Interestingly there is a long term vision for the link, which includes an option to run from the SWML in Farnborough Via Camberley and Ascot into the Airport, which could mean two Heathrow routes from Basingstoke one provided by SWT and one by FGW (or either of their successors).

http://windsorlink.co.uk/?page_id=412

That's an interesting proposal, combining a lot of potentially useful ideas. A bit far-fetched, though, I'm not sure we'll see it for a few decades yet.

 

[SwindonPkwy]

It will be interesting to see what each of the different options is predicted to deliver in terms of passenger numbers versus the cost to implement. I just hope we don't get bogged down in consultation and vested interests as Airtrack seemed to.

 

[Rational Plan]

It will be interesting to see what each of the different options is predicted to deliver in terms of passenger numbers versus the cost to implement. I just hope we don't get bogged down in consultation and vested interests as Airtrack seemed to.

All the Western link will have to fight against is a Golf course. Unlike Airtrack which had new viaducts through town centres and vastly increased traffic over level crossings. Slough council has been actively campaigning for a link.

Politically this is much easier than Airtrack.

 

[Old Yard Dog]

It's vaguely possible that it might be a way to restore the XC Brighton service, but I agree that it's unlikely.
[/

The XC service to Reading should be extended to Heathrow and terminate there.

We can debate where it should go north of Birmingham. Crewe - Manchester - Scotland would seem to have the strongest case but some workings should also go via Yorkshire.

It is a pity that the XC timetable is less varied in its service patterns than it used to be. The whole point of XC used to be to help people get from A to B with as few changes as possible avoiding London. Even if they are just a few through trains a day, these are appreciated. I used to use the infreqent Liverpool - Portsmouth XC train quite regularly (even though it was often an overcrowded 158)

 

[BananaRepublic]

The XC service to Reading should be extended to Heathrow and terminate there.

We can debate where it should go north of Birmingham. Crewe - Manchester - Scotland would seem to have the strongest case but some workings should also go via Yorkshire.

Beyond Birmingham, a slow service like XC would lose its attractiveness. It's currently a 3hr 20min journey from Manchester to Reading, on often crowded trains. Something only a backpacking student on a ultra-cheap below cost fare would tolerate.

It is a pity that the XC timetable is less varied in its service patterns than it used to be. The whole point of XC used to be to help people get from A to B with as few changes as possible avoiding London. Even if they are just a few through trains a day, these are appreciated.

The reverse is the case. The shift to a regular "clock face" timetable with frequent services, is the biggest reason why cross country services reversed from a declining and unpopular service into the success that it has been over the last decade.
It is the regular and frequent service that has brought in the passengers, in bigger numbers than anticipated too. Hence the overcrowding on the 4 and 5 car trains.
A return to the previous sparse two or three trains a day services, at irregular hours, would be a disaster for XC

I used to use the infreqent Liverpool - Portsmouth XC train quite regularly (even though it was often an overcrowded 158)

Having experienced it once, most sane people would not return unless desperate.

 

[cle]

If you lived in Reading and wanted to get to Manchester, would you go via London?

I agree XC is rubbish for longer journeys, but I would have thought it best for that trip - not just among skint backpackers.

 

[tbtc]

The XC service to Reading should be extended to Heathrow and terminate there

If you lived in Reading and wanted to get to Manchester, would you go via London?

I agree XC is rubbish for longer journeys, but I would have thought it best for that trip - not just among skint backpackers.

At the moment the XC services terminating at Reading are only one train every couple of hours.

Even if you had time to extend them to/from Heathrow (and space at Heathrow for an infrequent service like these) then for most of the day it'd be faster/simpler for Manchester passengers at the airport to travel into central London.

 

[Stats]

I don't understand all this talk of extending XC services to Heathrow. Surely neither DMUs or Bi-modes would be permitted in a deep level tunnel or station.

 

[BananaRepublic]

.....Even if you had time to extend them to/from Heathrow (and space at Heathrow for an infrequent service like these) then for most of the day it'd be faster/simpler for Manchester passengers at the airport to travel into central London.

For those using Terminal 5, it is mostly "faster/simpler" for Manchester passengers to use a connecting flight, rather than make the trek through London, getting on and off 3 trains and carrying their luggage through a myriad of tunnels and escalators.




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

I don't understand all this talk of extending XC services to Heathrow. Surely neither DMUs or Bi-modes would be permitted in a deep level tunnel or station.

DMU's wouldn't.
Plus, there is no capacity for them in the Heathrow tunnel network with the proposed levels of service to London. They certainly can't turn back there.

As it stands, Reading - Heathrow shuttles would probably have to share paths with the London - Heathrow trains (even if designated as separate services using the same train), or terminate at T5.

 

[LE Greys]

I don't understand all this talk of extending XC services to Heathrow. Surely neither DMUs or Bi-modes would be permitted in a deep level tunnel or station.

DMU's wouldn't.
Plus, there is no capacity for them in the Heathrow tunnel network with the proposed levels of service to London. They certainly can't turn back there.

As it stands, Reading - Heathrow shuttles would probably have to share paths with the London - Heathrow trains (even if designated as separate services using the same train), or terminate at T5.

The idea is that DMUs would have to use the open-air western link as a method to get to T5 at least. Ideally, that would mean a rail/air codeshare, enabling BA to reduce the number of flights to link to Birmingham and Manchester. If they also go south (which is unlikely) it would have to be via Staines and the open-air link.

I've mentioned the tunnel capacity problem before, and the fact that anything terminating at T5 from the west would make it difficult to reach Central and especially difficult to reach T4 because it would necessitate a double-change. I've done T4-->T5 on an airport bus before, and even that took ages. Extending HEX through would (IMO) be the ideal solution, even if the tunnel section required a fare suppliment to travel. There would need to be some precautions, such as only announcing it as a service to Heathrow when not at the airport (similar to the 'Foxton' trains at King's Cross or the 'Finsbury Park' trains at Cambridge). However, that requires a lot of co-operation from BAA, which we might not get.

 

[Old Yard Dog]

Beyond Birmingham, a slow service like XC would lose its attractiveness. It's currently a 3hr 20min journey from Manchester to Reading, on often crowded trains. Something only a backpacking student on a ultra-cheap below cost fare would tolerate.


The reverse is the case. The shift to a regular "clock face" timetable with frequent services, is the biggest reason why cross country services reversed from a declining and unpopular service into the success that it has been over the last decade.
It is the regular and frequent service that has brought in the passengers, in bigger numbers than anticipated too. Hence the overcrowding on the 4 and 5 car trains.
A return to the previous sparse two or three trains a day services, at irregular hours, would be a disaster for XC


Having experienced it once, most sane people would not return unless desperate.

You really don't get it. Not everybody is obsessed with speed. Many "normals" simply want to get from A to B with their luggage and kids with as few changes and as little hassle as possible.

A regular clock-faced XC pattern may have increased patronage and it is fine for those people who are lucky enough to live upon the chosen route. But it is a nightmare for those of us who don't.

The railways should be there to serve passengers wherever they may live, not just the lucky few and the TOCs. My main gripe against HS2 is that it simply duplicates existing "inter-city" services. The money would be better spent providing faster services to less fortunate towns and cities which are off the main routes.

 

[LexyBoy]

A couple-of-times-a-day service is only of any use if it's at a time that suits. I think most normals are perfectly happy with a change if trains are at the same times each hour, changing at the same places. And remember that the government is continually reducing subsidies, so fares can only be kept at affordable levels by increasing ridership.

My main gripe against HS2 is that it simply duplicates existing "inter-city" services. The money would be better spent providing faster services to less fortunate towns and cities which are off the main routes.

This will be one of the benefits of HS1 - there will be capacity on the WCML to run services to more places. Of course more investment in new routes is needed too.

 

[Old Yard Dog]

A couple-of-times-a-day service is only of any use if it's at a time that suits. I think most normals are perfectly happy with a change if trains are at the same times each hour, changing at the same places. And remember that the government is continually reducing subsidies, so fares can only be kept at affordable levels by increasing ridership.
This will be one of the benefits of HS1 - there will be capacity on the WCML to run services to more places. Of course more investment in new routes is needed too.

It depends what sort of journey you are on. If I'm going to a business meeting or a football match, I can cope with changing trains. If I'm going to an airport with my wife and heavy luggage I can't.

I live in Ellesmere Port and often have fly from Heathrow. There is no simple way of getting there by train or bus without multitudinous changes. And even then there is no guarantee of a seat or space to put your suitcases. And often your flight times mean you have to travel in the peak. This leaves us with no choice but to take a taxi to Manchester Airport and catch a domestic flight. And I'm a train enthusiast.

Everything would be so much simpler if there were direct XC trains fo Heathrow from Liverpool, Runcorn or Crewe.

But no - people like your good selves insist that all the XC trains have to go from Manchester to Bournemouth via Stoke, Bournemouth of course being the centre of the known universe.