What is the point of Old Oak Common?

[The exile]

Not really an issue for the foreseeable future though. MetroWest enhancements have already happened and GWR doesn't have the stock for current services, let alone more. If anything there will be less services in the future because the MetroWest services added between Bath and Bristol are funded by them using money that they won't necessarily always have (Mostly Government grants).

Add in St Anne’s Park (can’t imagine why they want to), Saltford, Corsham and Royal Wootton Bassett and capacity will soon get tight. Incidentally - does anyone know what the off peak loadings on the enhanced stoppers to Westbury are like. They look good both ways between Bristol and Bath in the afternoon peak / early evening.

 

[Benjwri]

Add in St Anne’s Park (can’t imagine why they want to), Saltford, Corsham and Royal Wootton Bassett and capacity will soon get tight. Incidentally - does anyone know what the off peak loadings on the enhanced stoppers to Westbury are like. They look good both ways between Bristol and Bath in the afternoon peak / early evening.

Will any of those happen though? Wouldn't imagine the fasts will stop anyways. If you mean the ones stopping at Oldfield and Keynsham, Off Peak they have a decent loading, but you'll almost definitely find a seat.

 

[BrianW]

That document does not really cover discussions about the route and connectivity before the initial HS2 proposal in 2010. Serving Heathrow was part of the remit given to HS2, and in the route development it became closely linked with OOC, seen as alternatives. Serving Heathrow en route (like Frankfurt or Amsterdam) was too big a detour, and with most passengers not wqanting to go there a spur for separate trains was inefficient.

In the published proposal Heathrow spur was already a "maybe later on" option, not part of Phase 1. So OOC was by then necessary, and had to be expanded to become the permanent interchange for Heathrow after the idea of building a spur in Phase 2 was droipped in 2015. It was designed as an interchange witth the GWML simply because it obviouly could do that, so why not?

OOC is the interchange station between HS2 and Heathrow; it also provides opportunities to readily reach some parts of London (and Britain?) more easily than does Euston- though Euston will still be best for some. The journeys that folk make will change once OOC is open. If OOC provides more GWML platforms and capacity than the then travel patterns require, then (more) non-stop services can be provided, eg some/all Bristol services can be 'sped up' or slowed to serve Keynsham etc. OOC is a long way off. We may have significant changes between now and then. Chopping and changing ( esp while work is in progress costs time and money). Overground (and Tube) services can be developed as-and-when demand is demonstrated.

 

[The Ham]

If only HS2 could feed trains into the Elizabeth Line, with calls at OOC, central London and terminating at Stratford (for Europe)!

So much more connectivity, value for money in the Elizabeth line for those of us in the provinces, direct connections to HS1, and no need for billions of pounds investment in Euston.

I have suggested elsewhere (and probably not one to discuss here) HS Wales and West and HS East Coast.

The latter would have a new central terminal as well as new hub (similar to OOC) in the suburbs before heading to Cambridge and then northwards.

However the Wales and West wouldn't have central terminal, but would ruin from the west to Old Oak Common, then into the East Coast hub and through to Stratford (for HS1) in doing so would create a link between the three HS lines without needing to go through the mess which is Central London.

 

[Horizon22]

They did run, I travelled on one and it wasn't empty, but not anywhere near as busy as the normal trains, and I'd estimate the majority got off at Bristol Parkway. To me that says that perhaps it's a sign the superfasts aren't the answer.

They did but only for about 3 months or so and hadn't fully embedded before they were all canned due to Covid timetables. Who knows what might have happened to loadings after a sustained period.

All lines and routes start lower for at least 6-9 months, the Elizabeth line is a good recent example of this even comparing now to 1 year ago (comparing like-for-like through running of services)

 

[AlbertBeale]

Actually the Central Line is above ground in the vicinity of OOC and there's plenty of land available along most of the likely alternative route, since it's mostly park, so the cost of diverting it should be reasonable. It would probably mean you'd either lose or have to move East Action station though.

This is ridiculous. It’s protected land and there’s still plenty of houses in the way. Then where do you go after? Close North Acton too and bulldoze a load of Park Royal?

Surely the only option physically possible for the Central Line to serve OOC would be if there was a third western branch, veering north between East Acton and North Acton - and either simply terminating at OOC or continuing along one of the myriad rail routes west and north of there to give somewhere else a tube connection too. Fun for crayonistas, but unlikely to work in terms of the overall capacity of the Central Line...

This is the Central Line (red arrow) all the way from North Acton to the site of OOC station (blue). I don't see a single house in the way.

But it doesn't get the Central Line actually to the OOC station site - unless you have a west-facing spur from OOC onto the Central...

If you managed to add a station on the curve under the bridge taking the Central under the Paddington main line (the nearest point), it would still be another long-distance trudge from the main OOC site (like it would be to any Overground link station currently proposed).

If only HS2 could feed trains into the Elizabeth Line, with calls at OOC, central London and terminating at Stratford (for Europe)!

So much more connectivity, value for money in the Elizabeth line for those of us in the provinces, direct connections to HS1, and no need for billions of pounds investment in Euston.

Though this might not leave much capacity for existing Crossrail route services... (even if the rather significant height difference at OOC weren't an impediment). The [a] Stratford problem, of course, is the need to connect via a long schlep through a depressing shopping complex to reach the "international" platforms.

I have suggested elsewhere (and probably not one to discuss here) HS Wales and West and HS East Coast.

The latter would have a new central terminal as well as new hub (similar to OOC) in the suburbs before heading to Cambridge and then northwards.

However the Wales and West wouldn't have central terminal, but would ruin from the west to Old Oak Common, then into the East Coast hub and through to Stratford (for HS1) in doing so would create a link between the three HS lines without needing to go through the mess which is Central London.

How would trains get from OOC to the East Coast hub, other than via London? Or do you mean there's be a new (outer) north London bypass line??

 

[Falcon1200]

RDG -> OOC -> North appeals greatly to me, especially if the HS2 trains (eventually) run through to oxenholme (or nearby).

As a regular traveller between Oxford and Glasgow, I agree; Via OOC will be faster, and more frequent, than via Birmingham, especially given Avanti's current 4-hour gaps in the Birmingham/Glasgow service. I would suggest that from as far west as Swindon and Newbury, OOC will be the best option for passengers for the north, beyond those points via Bristol and an improved (and hopefully, one day, electrified) Cross Country service will be better.

 

[The Ham]

How would trains get from OOC to the East Coast hub, other than via London? Or do you mean there's be a new (outer) north London bypass line??

Given how busy Central London is, going around the edge could be a better option.

Whilst it would be longer, traveling at speed would mean that the journey time may not be much slower.

I had been thinking the East Coast hub could be somewhere well connected like Seven Sisters (more so in a post Crossrail 2 world).

 

[MPW]

Looks like just under 500m from western of future ooc station to nearest bit of central line. That's like a 6 minute walk. How long would that take with travelators? What's the longest distance in-station connection in London?

The stratford schlep is similar distance in a straight line, but instead of travelators there is quicksand, in the form of slow walking shoppers in the mall.

 

[irish_rail]

As a regular traveller between Oxford and Glasgow, I agree; Via OOC will be faster, and more frequent, than via Birmingham, especially given Avanti's current 4-hour gaps in the Birmingham/Glasgow service. I would suggest that from as far west as Swindon and Newbury, OOC will be the best option for passengers for the north, beyond those points via Bristol and an improved (and hopefully, one day, electrified) Cross Country service will be better.

This is the point. Yes OOC is a little useful to some eastern locations like Oxford and Newbury, but surely there is means of stopping the Oxford and Newbury trains without needing to stop the Swanseas and Plymouths.

 

[JamesRowden]

Might it be possible to have 4tph of Thames Valley fast services terminate in the centre 2 fast platforms at Old Oak Common, and the Great Western Intercity services run non-stop to/from Paddington through the outer fast platforms?

 

[BrianW]

Looks like just under 500m from western of future ooc station to nearest bit of central line. That's like a 6 minute walk. How long would that take with travelators? What's the longest distance in-station connection in London?

The stratford schlep is similar distance in a straight line, but instead of travelators there is quicksand, in the form of slow walking shoppers in the mall.

A good question- and the answer is ...? Some tube interchanges are hugely long; let alone a Euston-Paddington journey via Euston Square.
As a callow youth/ trainspotter rail enthusiast I often made the schlep from North Acton to 81A (aka Old Oak Common shed) AND on to 1A (Willesden)- seemed like no distance at all, but then I only had a rucksack (duffle bag?) with a sandwich and notebook and maybe fruit pie and pop?

 

[irish_rail]

Might it be possible to have 4tph of Thames Valley fast services terminate in the centre 2 fast platforms at Old Oak Common, and the Great Western Intercity services run non-stop to/from Paddington through the outer fast platforms?

Quite probably but there will be plenty of people out there desperate to find a reason why some kind of pragmatic solution such as this can't be found.

 

[SynthD]

Might it be possible to have 4tph of Thames Valley fast services terminate in the centre 2 fast platforms at Old Oak Common, and the Great Western Intercity services run non-stop to/from Paddington through the outer fast platforms?

Yes, as long as you cut some services because terminating takes more time/paths than stopping. What do the other TV services do, as they are all on the fast?

 

[JamesRowden]

Yes, as long as you cut some services because terminating takes more time/paths than stopping. What do the other TV services do, as they are all on the fast?

It could actually free up paths. Since fewer paths would cross at Paddington. No new path crossing is created at Old Oak Common (except for the easy to time timetable 2tph of terminating services crossing the other 2tph of terminating services west of the station), compared with the present proposal of all services calling, if the crossovers are built in the right way. So such a setup could allow more services to operate rather than fewer.

 

[The Planner]

Its all trains stopping still as far as Im aware, you would likely still need to slow non stoppers down regardless.

 

[Falcon1200]

surely there is means of stopping the Oxford and Newbury trains without needing to stop the Swanseas and Plymouths.

Yes, but it would require platforms on loops to avoid eating up GWML capacity.

Might it be possible to have 4tph of Thames Valley fast services terminate in the centre 2 fast platforms at Old Oak Common,

Many, if not most, passengers will not be changing to HS2 at OOC and will be better served for onward connections at Paddington.

 

[RailWonderer]

Its all trains stopping still as far as Im aware, you would likely still need to slow non stoppers down regardless.

Such a waste. Seems absurd to stop a 5 hour plus Penzance train 6 mins from London. Even Clapham Junction has a decent number of trains passing through.

 

[MarkyT]

Such a waste. Seems absurd to stop a 5 hour plus Penzance train 6 mins from London. Even Clapham Junction has a decent number of trains passing through.

Mainly in the peaks, for layout reasons, on the South Western, something that might plausibly be fixed in the future in which case more could stop, and the need for such a super intense peak service uplift in the tight morning rush might be less of an issue with today's more hybrid working patterns. On the Brighton line, only Gatexes miss Clapham Jn routinely today and it's been suggested these should stop there too (for connectional possibilities). A city region the size of a medium-sized nation can have more than one station on its main long-distance routes to the rest of the country, especially if the edge city stops offer significant additional connectivity over the city centre terminal alone. Contrary to some opinions in this thread I'm sure the LO connection via the proposed Old Oak Common Lane station site will be convenient and popular. the walk will be around 300m between concourses and on what could be a completely segregated pedestrian route with no road crossings, alongside the major new bus hub proposed. It could plausibly be at least partially covered and wouldn't be much more than many Underground passageway connections in the city centre. It will clearly not be a 'railside' link, but even if the LO platforms were right alongside the HS2 and GWR station I doubt whether interchange between long-distance high speed and TfL services would be allowed without some kind of barrier check between. Japanese Shinkansen services in polycentric Tokyo also stop at a more peripheral hub on their respective routes as well as their city centre terminus, to spread the load and increase interchange opportunities, including to and from the Japanese capital's multiple airports. Even the highest-tier Nozomi and similar express trains do this, apart from a tiny handful of headline additional peak runs which don't save any significant time by missing the call as these stations aren't designed for high through speed.

 

[PGAT]

Is it possible for OOC to overtake Paddington in passenger numbers?

 

[Benjwri]

Is it possible for OOC to overtake Paddington in passenger numbers?

I think it’s possible and also a significant risk. With all trains stopping I wonder if journey planners will route people out to OOC if travelling on the Elizabeth Line then GWR. The platforms at OOC aren’t huge and I wonder if it’s been considered that that’s a risk of overcrowding that isn’t really controllable. You’re going to have a lot of trains going from a single island platform at a high frequency, at a station with potentially a lot of interchanging passengers. And unlike many stations with this setup the trains aren’t going to the same place after the first stop. So people are going to be waiting potentially large times on the platforms.

My question is are they going to be big enough or is this asking for significant overcrowding to a dangerous level?

 

[Nottingham59]

Is it possible for OOC to overtake Paddington in passenger numbers?

It's quite possible. Given the relative ease of access to EL platforms, I'd expect OOC to be the preferred interchange point for all long-distance GWML passengers arriving in London who are heading into Central London. Which is most of them. The only passengers staying on board will be those who want the circle line or local to Paddington.

Going the other way, I'd expect more people to change at Paddington. Except for those who have cut it too fine, when staying on the EL for one more stop will make for a faster connection.

 

[The Ham]

As I understand it there's quite a reasonable flow which results in doubling back at Paddington for Heathrow, which is something which OOC would help with.

 

[Trainbike46]

I'm starting to think Old Oak Common would be a better option than terminating at Euston...

Euston is already a crowded mess, the underground is already near enough at capacity and it's not exactly a central location, it requires a tube journey to get anywhere else.

If Old Oak is to be a new, custom built for HS2 station served by the Elizabeth line that will connect it with most of central London that isn't going to pile a load of extra pressure on Euston, then to me that may actually be a better long term option.

I wouldn't agree with that - Euston is walking distance from the British Library, St Pancras (for Eurostar & HS1), King's Cross, and is better for connecting if heading into much of North London.

Having all HS2 passengers at 1 place, whether that be Euston or OOC, is less practical for passenger dispersion and onwards travel compared to splitting them across 2 places

In any case, terminating at OOC was considered and not selected

 

[43096]

That's a question beyond my paygrade. But I know for a fact that an OOC stop is certainly not going to speed up the journey, quite the opposite. I'd like to see something official to on how long exactly OOC stops are going to cost to GWR services. I cannot envisage less than 2 to 3 minutes at the actual platform, plus I'd estimate a couple of minutes for braking from 100mph into the platform and then half a minute to get back up to 50mph. So I reckon , typically an OOC stop will add 5 to 6 minutes onto the current schedule, and as others have also pointed out, for very little benefit to GWR users.

There's some very obvious benefits for GWR users, as presumably a very large number of them are not going to the immediate area around Paddington:
- quicker and easier journeys to Heathrow, either via the Elizabeth line (rather than change for the bus at Reading or change at Reading and Hayes) or Heathrow Express (which I assume would stop).
- better interchange with the Elizabeth line heading into London at a station where that interchange is (hopefully) "designed in" rather than bolted on.
- interchange with HS2. May well be a better bet than getting XC from Reading or HS2 from Euston?

 

[MarkyT]

I wouldn't agree with that - Euston is walking distance from the British Library, St Pancras (for Eurostar & HS1), King's Cross, and is better for connecting if heading into much of North London.

Having all HS2 passengers at 1 place, whether that be Euston or OOC, is less practical for passenger dispersion and onwards travel compared to splitting them across 2 places

Euston is well sited, well known and understood by the public and together with KX and St P forms a cluster of major termini whose pedestrian interconnection could be further improved if desired in the future

Stopping at both stations, splits the load between the two and provides the wider connectivity of their separate onward dispersal networks.

In any case, terminating at OOC was considered and not selected

With the network as originally envisaged, that would be taking all the fastest services to the north and Scotland away from their central London termini completely, and any easy one change walk/bus/taxi connections from those stations would be lost. For those arriving and going to central London who like and can afford (or their business can afford) to jump straight in a taxi, the additional fare from OOC would be rather stiff I suspect, and exposed to much more traffic and its potential disruption en-route. Those using public transport from OOC would be faced with paying for more zones. People in the West End or City and especially in the fast developing area around Kings Cross and St Pancras may find the extra faff of getting to OOC compared to Euston for HS2 services relatively unattractive for WCML destinations, especially nearer ones in the Midlands where time savings including terminal access may not be dramatic.

 

[lachlan]

With family in Scotland and in Yorkshire, HS2 delivered in full would make journeys much easier from Bristol and Chippenham, with a change at OOC. Avoiding slow CrossCountry trains or a change in London. OOC is for journeys like this, along with access to Crossrail, Heathrow Airport, etc.

Regarding the fast Bristol trains, in my experience colleagues will drive to Parkway to catch fast trains from there. I've never heard these fast trains discussed anywhere except on here so I don't think their presence is missed at least at my work.

Bath and Chippenham are both busy stations that warrant the half-hourly London trains they currently have.

 

[Topological]

OOC seems completely sensible, the trains are hardly flying through the area normally anyway.

We are talking about a few minutes onto long-distance trains that already take a very long time. IF time is really so critical then accompany OOC with other interventions further west to speed up the lines (for others to determine what specfic interventions).

I just do not get the obsession with running trains "fast" when our "fast" is still nowhere near fast for trains. We should be looking at how the railway can provide connections and make life as easy as possible for people who need connections.

 

[JonathanH]

I just do not get the obsession with running trains "fast" when our "fast" is still nowhere near fast for trains.

Running trains in competitive journey times, once account is taken of time taken for transfer to and from the ultimate origin and destination, is an important factor is people's decisions to take a train.

 

[Topological]

Running trains in competitive journey times, once account is taken of time taken for transfer to and from the ultimate origin and destination, is an important factor is people's decisions to take a train.

Yes

So lets take Plymouth to London. The next departure from Plymouth today takes 3 hours 15 minutes. IF an OOC stop costs 5 minutes that would be a 2.5% increase in journey time. The train has a 9 minutes booked wait at Reading in that too.

The question is whether 3 hours 10, 3 hours 15, 3 hours 20 or even 3 hours 25 make a huge difference to the psychology of choosing between train and alternatives. I can see that 2 hours 30 would be game changing, even sub 3-hours for every train might attract business, but that would need either huge investment or missing out other stops. To me we are obsessed with small margins that do not make a huge difference, but the additional options of OOC will.

Let us not forget there will be a lot of journeys which become faster and more convenient as a result of OOC stops too.