Today's Maidenhead Advertiser has a report on the inquest. Jury recorded a verdict of suicide the coroner did not comment.

Another problem initialy with the 6.25/25kv mix was the strain it put on the board equipment on the units such that it caused the transformers to blow up. This was especialy so in Glasgow where it was first used. I believe unfortunately there might have been fatalities on a train when its transformer blew. It was so bad that all EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) were withdrawn and some steam locos and stock were hastily put back into service. Although the units did come back into use with strengthened transformers and proved very successful, such that Glasgow now has an almost all electric suburban service with new lines and stations.

There were also several instances out of Liverpool Street particularly on the services via Hackney Downs.
   

I would dispute the conntention that the multiple TOCs run between Oxford and Reading without issue.  There was contention even in BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) days between Inter City, Cross Country, NSE^▸ (Network South East), Freightliner, Aggregates, Oil etc. freight  sectors. But at least they were basically worked by BR and the signalmen were also BR and their was a Fat Controller (General Manager) in Paddington to bang heads together when things got out of hand.

As one of the staion supervisors at Slough said to me soon after privatisation that there was now no way  he could  bag a loco from Langley oil terminal to push a failed train out of the way as he could in BR days. He couldn't even issue a special stop order without express permission from Thames control at Reading.

I would suggest that it's even worse now because of the late penalty system that, as we've seen from many posts on this board, sensible train regulation has gone by the board. No TOC is going say you can hold my stopper for 5 minutes and let buggins late running fast in front. No the stopper will run on time whilst the fast gets later. Also the signalmen are Networkrail now just signal the trains as they turn up they are no longer allowed to make regulating decisions without consulting all the controls involved. Which takes too long. An aphoracal story suggests that on Sunday at a large junction staion a train from one operator running on time but with a booked stop of 15 minutes was allowed to occupy the platform whilst another late running booked in front of the train ocuppying the station was held outside waiting for the platform to clear.

Having observed and reported on train regulation  in several boxes on the Southern, I know in that real time  just how quickly regulating decisions have to made if you are not to delay a whole sequences of trains.

That's why rail on rail competiton is not the same as many airlines using the same runway. If planes are late off the terminal other planes can have taken off in front off them and they can take their turn. Although they might technically delay a following flight, if you look at airport depature boards you often see several flights  with the same depature time, which of course is impossible. Once airbourne they are usually free to fly to their destination without much disruption, as they are not flying in the same part of the sky as the plane in front. Whereas, trains have to follow on the same line so if the train in friont stops at a station the following train has to stop behind it.

Also air timetiables are subject to even more padding than train times.

So by and large Rail on Rail competition is extremely hard to achieve, although as Hull and Wrexham Shrewsbury have shown they can provide a better services than the major TOCs on their routes. However, to make the railways work to their very best overall there has to be a Fat Controller in overall charge and thinner controllers in charge of specific smaller parts of the system,  who have absolute control over everything that goes on  between the boundary fences on their length of line. Oh dear I've seem to reinvented BR or at least GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) for our lines.

One of teh comments made by the DafT in their anti electrification phase was that electric traction was too compicated. Hopefully they've begun to get message that once you've got infrastructure EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) are a far simplier beast than DMU. Hence the best EMUs getting 50K between failures whilst most DMUs are luky to get 10K.

To make locos haulage viable auto couplers with a power connection for coach domestics would be required. Although you could use a generator van (old Mark2) when under diesel and a pan on the DVT^‡(resolve). As for layouts  a couple of crossovers at right places would solve the problem although hope fully with clever infill electrification a loco change on many routes  may not be needed e.g Euston Blackpool.

You could have a dual voltage electric loco hauled service from Bournmouth or anywhere else on the Southern) to Norwich with a few yards of conductor rail between the juctions at Kew and Bollo Lane.  What about wires between Acton main line and Acton Wells and and Dudding Hill and Acton Canal Wharf junction to Willesden. Loco hauled electrics from Heathrow to Birmingham and Manchester. EMU shuttles  Luton (Airport) Heathrow.

It seems to me that what this post is beginning to show is that the same DMU cannot be both a suburban/branch  and a cross country unit.

Agree choice is now only a 185 a ^2 million a coach and grossley overpowered and a 172 at around a ^1 million a coach.

Which is why loco and coaches is begging to look viable both for IC^▸ (Inter City) and Cross Country. Especialy if there is further electrification which enabl Cardiff Portsmaouth to be eletric may be dual voltage but that doesn't seem to be problem these days.

The great advantage seems to me that coaches are relatively cheap, give a better journey experience, no diesel engine under the floor, and last a lot longer, consider the remaining Mark 1s on charters. They can be hauled by diesel or electric and thus aren't redundant when the wires go up. Performance under the wires should be better than a high powered DMU with considerably less carbon emissions.  It should also encourage sensible infill electrification to eliminate loco changes on through routes.  Anglia had different length sets which they carefully rostered throughout the day to meet demand.

A quick look at National Rail Enquiries gives 1:41 for the 11:21 off Warwick Parkway to Marylebone
^5 Advanced Single.

Putting via Reading gives 2:06 for 11:21. 2 changes. Actual running time 1:40. with 168, Voyager, HST so would be rough running time for through train.

^28 Advaced single. Although ^16.90 at 12:21.

So time would be roughly the same but considerably cheaper to Marylebone.

Your guess was correct.

Maybe it would be better to go back to graphing trains.

I did an exercise on one of the previous timetables a couple of years back. What it showed graphically was the bunching at Ealing and the Greenford trying to get onto the Relief as the fast from Slough was crossing the junction.

Even the non cognoscenti  could see that if the first train of the sequence was delayed it would ripple back. Just like the  waves on the motorway.
 

You are being too generous 45 minutes for 32.5 miles is only 43 mph.

You ought to be looking at 40 minutes even with the stops. After all over half the journey is on a 125 mph mainline. So say 20 minutes to Chippenham for 21.52 miles which gives 20 minutes for less than 11 miles.

Also noticed some strange paddingitis on the Down off peak TV service between Twyford and Reading where time varies between 8 (eg 18:25 ex padd) and 15 (11:12 ex Padd) minutes, but it's not consitant otherr XX:12 departures eg 16:12 are allowed 9.

It doesn't make sense.

Thanks for confirming my suspistions.

It used to be very annoying when in the Down Peak from Padd if the semi for Taplow was late for any reason you'd be held to leave behind the next stopper to Slough (pre Dec 2004!) and thus be around 20/25 late at Slough after say a 7 late at Padd. It always struck me then that it was the PPM^‡(resolve)  at fault. As you had one trian on time and one very late  50% punctual rather than 2 late but only by a few minutes each at 0% punctual.

Given the padding in the timetable, even then, if the semi was given a clear run it could have knocked a couple of minutes off by Slough and the stopper would leave a couple of minutes down. It is likely both would be under 5 minutes before the end of their journies and thus 100% punctual.

As poster elesewhere padding between teh last stations leads to sloppy working.

I also agree with your comments that a few minutes down on more journies is better than an hour down on fewer journies.

 

Possibly Exeter St Davids with an Up and Down FGW^▸ (First Great Western) HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) reversing going/from  to Yeovil.

Very interesting, I think your table above highlights the problems with the way lateness is currently measured.

In my days on the Southern we added all the delay minutes and divided by the number of trains to give average lateness as well as the % of trains late. I think the threshold was 3 late.

Thus in your example what happened would have given an average dealy of 22.5 minutes. Whereas what could have happened is an average delay of 11.25.

Nowadays the measure seems to be percentage of trains over 5 late compared with total trains run. Thus what happened is best because only 3 out of 4 trains were over 5 late or 25% on time whereas, what could have happened is 4 out of 4 trains 5 late or 0% on time.

Is my assumption correct?

Smokey may not be so far off the mark. I know an aero engineer. He never flys his own airline.

I was going for Grafton because in the question you said it closed a long time ago.

But hedging my Bets with Savernake LL.

Go with Bedwyn for open although if you'd asked I would have said Bedwyn in Berkshire but I see the boundary is to the East.

How  about Grafton on MSWR or Savernake LL on the main line? They seem to be the nearest closed staions. I'll go for Grafton as it  closed in 1961 pre Beeching, Savernake LL  was 66 a victim of the Beeching intermediate station cuts.

Always an interesting dilemma, is a seat in one train worth two in another.

Used to get this problem when travelling regularly from Taplow to Padd.

In the morning if there was disruption did you go to Maidenhead to catch the Bourne End or if you were really lucky a non stop from platform 3 which was booked out just before the Taplow train arrived on 4? Worked if it was only Up trains delayed and down trains on time, but was often successful.

Similarly in the evening did you catch a first stop Slough hoping it might pass a stopper on the way or get jam packed  on the stopper.  This was far more dodgy and Murphy's law tended to apply, and as in your case, one made the wrong choice. You'd either be jammed on the stopper and the fast would go wizzing by or you'd get to Slough to see the tail-lights of the Taplow stopper disappearing past Horlicks. The only thing was it was your wrong choice as you unlikely to get advice from the staff.