Extending Crossrail to Reading - ongoing discussion, merged topic

[whole diary]

[Lee]

Transport for London is likely to gain control of suburban rail services currently operated by First Great Western and the National Express One franchise when the London Crossrail project is completed - scheduled for 2017 (link below.)
http://www.rmtbristol.org.uk/2007/12/crossrail_toc_set_to_swallow_o.html#more

The Crossrail TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) would take over the operation of certain existing services currently running out of London Paddington and Liverpool Street stations , to Maidenhead and Shenfield respectively , when the FGW^▸ (First Great Western) and One franchise agreements end. The new TOC would receive revenues for the routes assumed and would also inherit the 'operator of last resort' obligations that accompany the services.

[Btline]

Transport for London is likely to gain control of suburban rail services currently operated by First Great Western when the London Crossrail project is completed.
The Crossrail TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) would take over the operation of certain existing services currently running out of London Paddington station, to Maidenhead, when the FGW^▸ (First Great Western) franchise agreement ends. The new TOC would receive revenues for the routes assumed and would also inherit the 'operator of last resort' obligations that accompany the services.

Excellent, a competent company can run the services (what a shame it won't be to Reading, or even further!).

[John R]

I reckon it will be to Reading. The only reason it stops short at Maidenhead is that they didn't want to include the costs of remodelling and resignalling Reading (or the complication of wiring and then a couple of years later doing the Reading scheme). Now Reading is ahead of Crossrail, it has to be a no-brainer to electrify the additional few miles. Just think, currently no trains start or terminate at Maidenhead, and Reading has a huge traffic to London. There will be lots of Crossrail trains terminating at Paddington. So for a small (in the context of Crossrail) incremental cost, Reading commuters will be able to get right through to the West End and City without changing.   

[tom-langley]

I believe that Reading was considered as a terminus for crossrail in the initial planning stage but discounted because crossrail will be a local stopping service and currently most people going to Reading from Paddington catch fast trains. The business case for crossrail at reading is limited as the only people using it are likely to be people wanting to go to intermediate stops. Although having said that I believe that is should be extended to Reading because I hope it will be a trigger for electrifying much more of the national rail network.

A letter co-singed by Network rail and ATOC^» (Association of Train Operating Companies See - here) to the government recently urged the government to reconsider the plan to spend ^1 billion on a fleet of new diesel trains and consider mass electrification. I think that we are lagging being the rest of Europe in our national rail infrastructure by a long way and something must be done to improve it. The article on this can be found in issue 21, volume 20 of Professional Engineering, if any of you are interested.

[Lee]

Theresa May, MP^▸ (Member of Parliament) for Maidenhead and Twyford, believes the line should terminate at Reading and says people will lose out if this does not happen.
http://www.maidenhead-advertiser.co.uk/news_article.php?section=5&category=89&story=5168

[Lee]

The ^16bn Crossrail scheme to build a new rail line under London could be extended to Reading, under plans being considered by ministers (link below.)
http://www.rmtbristol.org.uk/2007/12/minister_ponders_lengthening_c.html#more

The rail minister, Tom Harris, is to say in the new year whether the route from Reading to Maidenhead, where the western extension of Crossrail starts under current plans, will be added. It is understood that the decision is "evenly balanced".

[Btline]

It should be extended to Ebbsfleet as well.

Would the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) have capacity? If X-Rail took up the relief lines, would there be enough capacity on the fast lines?

I understand that they want a 5th track on the route...

[Shazz]

reading is enough of a bottleneck as it is without  crossrail, i dread to think how bad it would be with it...

[John R]

Extending Crossrail to Reading is only viable if the recently authorised Reading project goes ahead. (I'm sure the government will reannounce the Reading project half a dozen times before work actually commences.) 

[Jim]

(I'm sure the government will reannounce the Reading project half a dozen times before work actually commences.) 

As little as that!

[willc]

My memory may be playing tricks on me, but I thought a key reason the backers of Crossrail settled on Maidenhead as its western terminal was because they did not want to be asked for a contribution to the cost of rebuilding Reading.

Now that this obstacle seems to have been removed, if the rebuilding does actually happen, I can't see any reason why Crossrail shouldn't go to Reading, which is the logical place for its trains to turn back, so it could replace the bulk of the FGW^▸ (First Great Western) stopping services.

Turning back at Maidenhead will involve building stabling sidings on the old goods yard, which seems to provide much of the car parking at the station. I can't see where any replacement car park could go. Maybe someone with better local knowledge could enlighten me? Or have Crossrail just brushed that little problem under the carpet?

[gpn01]

Or have Crossrail just brushed that little problem under the carpet?

More likely they're planning to brush it under a JCB earth digger!

Could it make White Waltham airfield a good contender for a new depot ?  That seems to be the only suitably sized brownfield site nearby.

[tom-langley]

Crossrail should be extended to reading!

I believe current plans for terminating at Maidenhead mean that FGW^▸ (First Great Western) run local trains to maidenhead and terminate there and crossrail runs local services beyond that. It seems a bit mad to terminate at maidenhead, because if your coming long distance from the west if you want to get to one of the intermediate stops between Paddington and maidenhead, it will involve changing from a fast at Reading, get a local FGW to maidenhead then change again onto crossrail for stops beyond that. Because as far as I know FGW will not be stopping fast services at Maidenhead.

If crossrail were terminated at Reading it would remove the bulk of local services from FGW and leave them to long distance. It would also create a much smoother interchange between FGW and Crossrail. Most of the congestion at Reading is on long distance services because they can only stop on 2 platforms. I think in the plans for the improvements at Reading will increase the number of platforms that the long distance trains can stop on, thus cutting some of the congestion.

Now that there are plans to sort out Reading why not extend Crossrail to terminate there?

[berksandhants]

Yes, Reading is a bottleneck, but only for through services. In the northern corner of the station there is Platform 10 which isn't used much and another track which runs along the northern side of Platform 9. If necessary, not all trains need to terminate at Reading but it seems crazy not to extend it to Reading. Crossrail says its a connecting service, so why not extend it to Reading and connect Reading, Henley-on-Thames, Basingstoke, as well as even Birmingham (connected to Reading by CrossCountry) to Essex?.

[Btline]

And to Ebblefleet International, so that the car park is not overcrowded!