What is the point of Old Oak Common?

[Skimpot flyer]

Willesden Junction is on that list?? HS2 trains disgorging hundreds of passengers onto Ye Old Bakerloo Line

 

[stuving]

For those asking about Euston vs Paddington, the HS2 railway, UK: route optioneering document details the station selection, on page 7, from 27 initial options, to 10, then to 4 and finally to 1 preferred (Euston) and two alternatives (Euston double-deck and "King's Cross Lands - cut and cover").
Paddington was ruled out into the second stage.

It's an interesting document that details a lot of the thought that went into route selection along all of Phase 1.
Screen capture of the relevant page:

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?

 

[Benjwri]

Agree. Those Bristol trains certainly feel slow, and are no quicker than in BR days, despite the far quicker traction. Old oak common certainly does very little for GWR intercity. One can only hope a compromise is found that prevents trains from the likes of Bristol and Plymouth having to stop there for marginal benefit. I don't believe it is necessarily a done deal, so we can only hope. GwR is slow enough as it is in comparison with Avanti and Lner.

But with limited paths, what do you suggest other than stopping at Bath, Swindon etc? You only have to look at the platforms on those stations to see that they more than make up for the stop in passenger numbers…

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?

 

[takno]

For those asking about Euston vs Paddington, the HS2 railway, UK: route optioneering document details the station selection, on page 7, from 27 initial options, to 10, then to 4 and finally to 1 preferred (Euston) and two alternatives (Euston double-deck and "King's Cross Lands - cut and cover").
Paddington was ruled out into the second stage.

It's an interesting document that details a lot of the thought that went into route selection along all of Phase 1.
Screen capture of the relevant page:

Interesting. So they really only messed up in the last round by not selecting Kings Cross

 

[Chris Butler]

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?

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.

 

[Benjwri]

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.

The idea I was replying to was to divert the Central line up to OOC. That is what I mean by there being many houses in the way, as there are houses you would have to go through to either side.

 

[geoffk]

Agree. Those Bristol trains certainly feel slow, and are no quicker than in BR days, despite the far quicker traction. Old oak common certainly does very little for GWR intercity. One can only hope a compromise is found that prevents trains from the likes of Bristol and Plymouth having to stop there for marginal benefit. I don't believe it is necessarily a done deal, so we can only hope. GwR is slow enough as it is in comparison with Avanti and Lner.

A long time since I used the Bristol service but it does appear slow compared with the 1976 HST timetable. Swindon is the same distance from Paddington as Peterborough is from Kings Cross but the latter route has the semi-fast GTR service in addition to LNER, whereas Swindon only has Inter-City trains. Add to that the fact that there's no airline competition on the GW route so speed is probably seen as of less importance. As for Old Oak Common, why not just call it "shed 81A"!

 

[Benjwri]

A long time since I used the Bristol service but it does appear slow compared with the 1976 HST timetable. Swindon is the same distance from Paddington as Peterborough is from Kings Cross but the latter route has the semi-fast GTR service in addition to LNER, whereas Swindon only has Inter-City trains. Add to that the fact that there's no airline competition on the GW route so speed is probably seen as of less importance. As for Old Oak Common, why not just call it "shed 81A"!

Also worth remembering the actual by rail route is no as direct or high speed to Bristol as it is Peterbourgh. Regardless of stops at other stations, I don’t think ~1hr30 Paddington to Bristol is bad, it is a reasonable time for the distance, and is almost an hour quicker than driving.

Realistically these stations have to have a service, and without quad tracking there isn’t a way to give them one without stopping.

 

[Horizon22]

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.

The area right next to that arrow is all part of the building site for OOC including that 'triangular space' between Central line / GWML / WLL.

The idea I was replying to was to divert the Central line up to OOC. That is what I mean by there being many houses in the way, as there are houses you would have to go through to either side.

It wouldn't be impossible to build a curved platform as part of the overal OOC complex, but that's obviously extra expense and requires additional buy-in from TfL. What would be easier would be a good walking/cycling route (perhaps along the alignment of the old New North Main Line) to North Acton station.

 

[Benjwri]

The area right next to that arrow is all part of the building site for OOC including that 'triangular space' between Central line / GWML / WLL.



It wouldn't be impossible to build a curved platform as part of the overal OOC complex, but that's obviously extra expense and requires additional buy-in from TfL.

Yeah i was more meaning the original post I was replying to mentioned diverting the entire line to the point East Acton might have to be closed, which would cause a significant change in alignment and require a lot of demolition.

 

[21C101]

What is the point of Clapham Junction. Its not even in Clapham and you couldn't even change and get a train to Clapham until the East London Line was extended there.
(note: rhetorical question).

Indeed. Let's be grateful it's not at North Pole Junction!

Wormwood Scrubbs International

 

[quantinghome]

As a very regular user of trains between Bristol and London who has already lost the "non stop" trains we briefly had before covid, I am fed up enough with nearly every train to Bristol stopping at Reading, Didcot , Swindon, Chippenham, Bath ..and to add Old Oak to that .. Let alone the issue of trains being filled with people getting off a few moments later, and even worse the prospect of the line being closed during construction... is really making the M4 look a much better option. HS2 might be making journeys to Birmingham marginally faster but at the expense of making GWR trains even slower.

There was a relatively short time period after the introduction of IC125s when the GWML was the fastest line in the country (and one of the fastest in the world at the time). But this triggered a huge growth in longer distance commuting from Reading, Swindon etc. and it ceased to be a long distance express route sometime in the late 80s / early 90s as the service was adapted to serve this demand. The horse has bolted on this one I'm afraid, galloped over the horizon, settled down with a lady horse, had kids and a mid-life crisis and is now pottering around the garden looking after its rose bushes.

 

[The Planner]

A long time since I used the Bristol service but it does appear slow compared with the 1976 HST timetable. Swindon is the same distance from Paddington as Peterborough is from Kings Cross but the latter route has the semi-fast GTR service in addition to LNER, whereas Swindon only has Inter-City trains. Add to that the fact that there's no airline competition on the GW route so speed is probably seen as of less importance. As for Old Oak Common, why not just call it "shed 81A"!

I will drag out the question I always do with this, how fast should it be?

 

[Horizon22]

Also worth remembering the actual by rail route is no as direct or high speed to Bristol as it is Peterbourgh. Regardless of stops at other stations, I don’t think ~1hr30 Paddington to Bristol is bad, it is a reasonable time for the distance, and is almost an hour quicker than driving.

Realistically these stations have to have a service, and without quad tracking there isn’t a way to give them one without stopping.

Yes the geography is a notable difference to the ECML.

 

[Benjwri]

I will drag out the question I always do with this, how fast should it be?

I think this also hits a key point in that speed of the train is not the only aim of a railway. Living near Bristol the number of people who think the line is slow is very low. In fact the number of people I’ve heard say they use it because it is still significantly faster than by car is far higher. It stops in all these places because there is significant demand from them.

 

[Horizon22]

I think this also hits a key point in that speed of the train is not the only aim of a railway. Living near Bristol the number of people who think the line is slow is very low. In fact the number of people I’ve heard say they use it because it is still significantly faster than by car is far higher. It stops in all these places because there is significant demand from them.

Let's not forget of course about the intention of the Bristol "super-fast" services from the December 2019 timetable which never came to fruition and indeed I doubt will be seen again in the near future.

 

[norbitonflyer]

The area right next to that arrow is all part of the building site for OOC including that 'triangular space' between Central line / GWML / WLL.



It wouldn't be impossible to build a curved platform as part of the overal OOC complex, but that's obviously extra expense and requires additional buy-in from TfL. What would be easier would be a good walking/cycling route (perhaps along the alignment of the old New North Main Line) to North Acton station.

The west end of Old Oak Common station is closer to North Acton station than it is to the east end of the same station. And the Central Line passes even closer.

 

[Benjwri]

Let's not forget of course about the intention of the Bristol "super-fast" services from the December 2019 timetable which never came to fruition and indeed I doubt will be seen again in the near future.

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.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Realistically these stations have to have a service, and without quad tracking there isn’t a way to give them one without stopping.

It's generally impossible to provide a service to ANY station without stopping the trains there

 

[thenorthern]

As others have said it's meant to be an interchange with Crossrail so that passengers can (in theory) get to most parts of London with one change as Euston isn't really well served by the Tube or Overground compared to other station.

Presumably though Old Oak Common would be set down only on trains going to Euston and pick up only with trains going the other way in a similar way to how Watford Junction is? Otherwise at peak times the trains would be rammed with commuters.

 

[SynthD]

Presumably though Old Oak Common would be set down only on trains going to Euston and pick up only with trains going the other way in a similar way to how Watford Junction is? Otherwise at peak times the trains would be rammed with commuters.

Yes. HS2 will be reserved bookings only, and not available for Eus-Ooc journeys.

 

[450.emu]

Just imagine a single London Hbf and how busy it would be...

(Not suggesting that such a thing should ever be considered, just a thought experiment....)

Harlesden Hbf?

 

[irish_rail]

But with limited paths, what do you suggest other than stopping at Bath, Swindon etc? You only have to look at the platforms on those stations to see that they more than make up for the stop in passenger numbers…

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?

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.

 

[M&NEJ]

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.

 

[matthenj]

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.

Current users maybe. The train will still smash the car in average journey time.

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

Currently the choice is CrossCountry to Birmingham New Street and change, or across London to Euston, both of which suck in different ways, and I doubt I'm alone.

 

[Russel]

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.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Current users maybe. The train will still smash the car in average journey time.

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

Currently the choice is CrossCountry to Birmingham New Street and change, or across London to Euston, both of which suck in different ways, and I doubt I'm alone.

The problem with that is you really don't want to encourage more people to make short Reading-London journeys on the GWR long distance trains. Those trains are intended for and as I understand it already often full with people travelling much longer distances.

 

[The exile]

Let's not forget of course about the intention of the Bristol "super-fast" services from the December 2019 timetable which never came to fruition and indeed I doubt will be seen again in the near future.

Until they need to create capacity between Bathampton and Bristol and can gain a couple of paths by slowing the Londons between Bristol and Bath. Only real losers would be Chippenham to Bristol passengers.

 

[Benjwri]

Until they need to create capacity between Bathampton and Bristol and can gain a couple of paths by slowing the Londons between Bristol and Bath. Only real losers would be Chippenham to Bristol passengers.

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).

 

[matthenj]

The problem with that is you really don't want to encourage more people to make short Reading-London journeys on the GWR long distance trains. Those trains are intended for and as I understand it already often full with people travelling much longer distances.

The route planner takes you that way anyway if you go to Euston: it's either that or the slow train to Waterloo.