One less HST stopping at Maidenhead from August 10th - pm?

[whole diary]

[eightf48544]

The running time Maidenhead Taplow for a a non defensive driver is 21/2 minutes, but it would goobble fuel.

Electric time should be 3 minutes.

I always reckoned the 07:23 to Padd stopping at Burnham Slough Hayes Ealing Broadway (7: 49) in NSE^▸ (Network South East) days had around 4 minutes in hand from Taplow  to Ealing.

The 7 minutes 07:49 - 07:56 from Ealing to Padd was a bit tight and required a clear run, but it's much better than the 12/13 minutes you get nowadays.

[ChrisB]

You can't timetable extra trains in case of cancellation! How would that work for every station across the network? Maidenhead pax are no more important than any other station's commuters!

Everyone wants fast trains and a trade off will always be necessary. Would suggest more pax travel from Surbiton for a start....

[IndustryInsider]

I think Maidenhead stands to gain off-peak come the arrival of Crossrail with the 4tph of Crossrail supplemented by the 2tph planned 'semi-fast' Greater Western services, presumably stopping at Slough, maybe Hayes, then Ealing Broadway.  There might also be the planned 2tph shuttle as far as Slough if the powers that be don't see sense and extend Crossrail to Reading from the outset.

The peak hour service is more questionable.  How many passengers will transfer to Crossrail knowing the journey time to Paddington will be around 37 minutes instead of just over 20 by fast train at the moment - but then they can stay on that same train and get direct to Farrington in 44 minutes or Canary Wharf in 54 minutes?  I'm guessing even the timetable modellers will have a hard time working out who will do what to any precise degree, but surveys to find out where people on the GW^▸ (Great Western) route actually go to work should determine the rough percentages.

My guess is that there won't be the demand for fast services that there is now, but there will still be enough people wanting to go direct to Paddington that fast peak trains (by which I mean a maximum of one stop at Slough and a journey time of 25 minutes or less) will still be provided from Maidenhead at similar intervals to now.

[James]

The running time Maidenhead Taplow for a a non defensive driver is 21/2 minutes, but it would goobble fuel.

Electric time should be 3 minutes.

I always reckoned the 07:23 to Padd stopping at Burnham Slough Hayes Ealing Broadway (7: 49) in NSE^▸ (Network South East) days had around 4 minutes in hand from Taplow  to Ealing.

The 7 minutes 07:49 - 07:56 from Ealing to Padd was a bit tight and required a clear run, but it's much better than the 12/13 minutes you get nowadays.

If it is 2 and half minutes, then the pdf timetable 8 is incorrect. I think the reason being is that fgw are trying to shave some minutes on the 0935 (formally 0932) so it doesnt take over 45 minutes but instead takes 41 minutes....
Also the time between ealing broadway and london paddington is silly. Problem with that is the silly greenford shuttle is in the way, made worse by calling at Acton Mainline. You come to London Paddington where the train waits for another train to depart thats blocking its path into either platforms 12/13 or 14 once cleared which takes i dunno 3-5 minutes. obviously there is nothing that can be done to improve the situation, until crossrail makes an appearence.

Now, I remember the First Great Western Link days (possibly thames trains also operated this timetable, although not sure about Network Southeast).

There were trains at these times, right;
1004, 1015, 1034, 1045 and so on.
Now the 1004 (i think) called at Taplow, Burnham, Slough, Hayes and Harlington and Ealing Broadway arriving at London Paddington at around 1042?
FGWL didnt have West Drayton in this service, however it now calls additionally at West Drayton for some unknown reason and departs 2 minutes earlier from Maidenhead at 1002 and arrives at 1046. So yes i agree with you totally the old days were the best, why FGW^▸ (First Great Western) didnt retain the previous thames trains and fgwl timetable is beyond me...

[James]

You can't timetable extra trains in case of cancellation! How would that work for every station across the network? Maidenhead pax are no more important than any other station's commuters!

Everyone wants fast trains and a trade off will always be necessary. Would suggest more pax travel from Surbiton for a start....

Yes, well if it balances out the passenger load on fast services into london then i would also agree that people look at that option.
If they cannot be any further fast trains from Maidenhead then add additional coaches... Oh wait theres a lack of them... ok what about pacers for thames valley routes that will make additional capacity wont it?, or are they banned from the thames valley? Why is planning a rail system this bad? I suppose its something to do with budget cuts...

[IndustryInsider]

There were trains at these times, right;
1004, 1015, 1034, 1045 and so on.
Now the 1004 (i think) called at Taplow, Burnham, Slough, Hayes and Harlington and Ealing Broadway arriving at London Paddington at around 1042?
FGWL didnt have West Drayton in this service, however it now calls additionally at West Drayton for some unknown reason and departs 2 minutes earlier from Maidenhead at 1002 and arrives at 1046. So yes i agree with you totally the old days were the best, why FGW^▸ (First Great Western) didnt retain the previous thames trains and fgwl timetable is beyond me...

The advent of Heathrow Connect meant that West Drayton, Iver and Langley had to be served by longer distance trains as the Slough stoppers were withdrawn.  The extended journey times from stations such as Twyford, Maidenhead, Taplow, Burnham and Slough are indeed disappointing, but as usual there are also many positive aspects to the current timetable to that which was in operation around ten years ago:

• West Drayton has now grown to the stage that a stopping train every 30 minutes (as was the case in this timetable you want reinstating) would be totally inadequate as they now enjoy twice as many trains which are faster.
• West Drayton, Langley and Iver passengers now have a direct service to Maidenhead, Reading and Oxford
• Taplow used to only have one train per hour, now it has two
• Hayes now has an extra train each hour

[James]

I think Maidenhead stands to gain off-peak come the arrival of Crossrail with the 4tph of Crossrail supplemented by the 2tph planned 'semi-fast' Greater Western services, presumably stopping at Slough, maybe Hayes, then Ealing Broadway.  There might also be the planned 2tph shuttle as far as Slough if the powers that be don't see sense and extend Crossrail to Reading from the outset.

The peak hour service is more questionable.  How many passengers will transfer to Crossrail knowing the journey time to Paddington will be around 37 minutes instead of just over 20 by fast train at the moment - but then they can stay on that same train and get direct to Farrington in 44 minutes or Canary Wharf in 54 minutes?  I'm guessing even the timetable modellers will have a hard time working out who will do what to any precise degree, but surveys to find out where people on the GW^▸ (Great Western) route actually go to work should determine the rough percentages.

My guess is that there won't be the demand for fast services that there is now, but there will still be enough people wanting to go direct to Paddington that fast peak trains (by which I mean a maximum of one stop at Slough and a journey time of 25 minutes or less) will still be provided from Maidenhead at similar intervals to now.

Ye i agree, just a mess to be honest, but anyway what comes will need to be accepted if trains call additionally at Slough then at least its something.

[ChrisB]

If they cannot be any further fast trains from Maidenhead then add additional coaches... Oh wait theres a lack of them... ok what about pacers for thames valley routes that will make additional capacity wont it?, or are they banned from the thames valley? Why is planning a rail system this bad? I suppose its something to do with budget cuts...

You're right - all to do with mammoth underinvestment in rail over decades.

But you can see the taxpayer's (read Govt of the day) point - why should anyone north of, say, Banbury have their tax-pounds spent on rail in areas that they'll never use it?.....Also, you might be surprised to learn that the GWL isn't the only line with this problem either....

[lordgoata]

Everyone wants fast trains ...

Bzzzt! No they don't.

I would rather a nice  regular, on time, comfy, air conditioned, spacious (by which I mean sufficient carriages for the passengers, not massive armchairs and tables!) slow stopper, over fast trains requiring changes, any day of the week.

Call me old fashioned, but if I am paying through the nose for something, then I want to get as much out of it as possible!

[James]

There were trains at these times, right;
1004, 1015, 1034, 1045 and so on.
Now the 1004 (i think) called at Taplow, Burnham, Slough, Hayes and Harlington and Ealing Broadway arriving at London Paddington at around 1042?
FGWL didnt have West Drayton in this service, however it now calls additionally at West Drayton for some unknown reason and departs 2 minutes earlier from Maidenhead at 1002 and arrives at 1046. So yes i agree with you totally the old days were the best, why FGW^▸ (First Great Western) didnt retain the previous thames trains and fgwl timetable is beyond me...

The advent of Heathrow Connect meant that West Drayton, Iver and Langley had to be served by longer distance trains as the Slough stoppers were withdrawn.  The extended journey times from stations such as Twyford, Maidenhead, Taplow, Burnham and Slough are indeed disappointing, but as usual there are also many positive aspects to the current timetable to that which was in operation around ten years ago:

• West Drayton has now grown to the stage that a stopping train every 30 minutes (as was the case in this timetable you want reinstating) would be totally inadequate as they now enjoy twice as many trains which are faster.
• West Drayton, Langley and Iver passengers now have a direct service to Maidenhead, Reading and Oxford
• Taplow used to only have one train per hour, now it has two
• Hayes now has an extra train each hour

There were trains at these times, right;
1004, 1015, 1034, 1045 and so on.
Now the 1004 (i think) called at Taplow, Burnham, Slough, Hayes and Harlington and Ealing Broadway arriving at London Paddington at around 1042?
FGWL didnt have West Drayton in this service, however it now calls additionally at West Drayton for some unknown reason and departs 2 minutes earlier from Maidenhead at 1002 and arrives at 1046. So yes i agree with you totally the old days were the best, why FGW didnt retain the previous thames trains and fgwl timetable is beyond me...

The advent of Heathrow Connect meant that West Drayton, Iver and Langley had to be served by longer distance trains as the Slough stoppers were withdrawn.  The extended journey times from stations such as Twyford, Maidenhead, Taplow, Burnham and Slough are indeed disappointing, but as usual there are also many positive aspects to the current timetable to that which was in operation around ten years ago:

• West Drayton has now grown to the stage that a stopping train every 30 minutes (as was the case in this timetable you want reinstating) would be totally inadequate as they now enjoy twice as many trains which are faster.
• West Drayton, Langley and Iver passengers now have a direct service to Maidenhead, Reading and Oxford
• Taplow used to only have one train per hour, now it has two
• Hayes now has an extra train each hour

This is what is so difficult. Got to give everyone a decent service, which is fair enough.
Ok this is what i would do. I would;
^ Insert two tracks between Hayes and Harlington and London Paddington (low level). Also requires an additional two platforms to make 4 platforms (2 for slow and 2 for fast services).
Clear the whole Paddington area from those houses and build the houses or flats on top of the railway.
^ Then rebuild Acton Mainline to insert 2 further tracks
^ Then at Ealing Broadway redevelop the whole area, moving the house and flats over the railway towards the east of Ealing Broadway. Then remodel the tube layout by moving it northwards.
^ At West Ealing, Hanwell and Southall remodel the whole area so additional 2 tracks can be inserted.
^ At Hayes and Harlington a total rebuild to provide two platforms for Down Loop Heathrow and Up Loop Heathrow for the fast crossrail lines. The same design applies to the slow crossrail lines. Keep the Flyover, and after the flyover you can bring the two slow crossrail lines onto the fast lines after Hayes via another flyover to link up with the down and up relief lines to remove the conflicts from changing points.
^ Rebuild Slough Station with 4 crossrail platforms, with the other two being for highspeed trains for speeds up to 170mph...
^ Build a dive under west of slough to connect the windsor branch onto the Reading relief line.
^ Rebuild Taplow to a 2 platform station. The other two platforms arent really needed, since when engineering works are running, you have a replacement bus between Slough and Maidenhead.
^ Build turnback siding's at Maidenhead in the middle of the relief lines to allow for 2 tph crossrail services to terminate if disruption occurs.
^ No need to change Twyford, although one additional platform could be constructed for peak services.
And Reading. Now here, theres a few options. Extend some crossrail services to Tilehurst, which needs reverse sidings or terminate them at Reading, by building two dedicated crossrail platforms. Also two through tracks for high speed trains should be inserted, as well as two freight tracks that have two tracks that dont come into platforms, thus speeds can be increased.
Crosscountry trains should have two dedicated platforms of its known.
Thats what should happen in my eyes but i wont happen. Think it has a dream world paradise railway or whatever. After all you can see what benefits you could have by operating this railway or not depending on your view point

[James]

If they cannot be any further fast trains from Maidenhead then add additional coaches... Oh wait theres a lack of them... ok what about pacers for thames valley routes that will make additional capacity wont it?, or are they banned from the thames valley? Why is planning a rail system this bad? I suppose its something to do with budget cuts...

You're right - all to do with mammoth underinvestment in rail over decades.

But you can see the taxpayer's (read Govt of the day) point - why should anyone north of, say, Banbury have their tax-pounds spent on rail in areas that they'll never use it?.....Also, you might be surprised to learn that the GWL isn't the only line with this problem either....

Yes i'll admit and hold my hands up,  that i saw problems elsewhere in the UK^▸ (United Kingdom). Although again i say its due to bad planning...

[Chris from Nailsea]

Ok this is what i would do. I would;
^ Insert two tracks between Hayes and Harlington and London Paddington (low level). Also requires an additional two platforms to make 4 platforms (2 for slow and 2 for fast services).
Clear the whole Paddington area from those houses and build the houses or flats on top of the railway.
^ Then rebuild Acton Mainline to insert 2 further tracks
^ Then at Ealing Broadway redevelop the whole area, moving the house and flats over the railway towards the east of Ealing Broadway. Then remodel the tube layout by moving it northwards.
^ At West Ealing, Hanwell and Southall remodel the whole area so additional 2 tracks can be inserted.
^ At Hayes and Harlington a total rebuild to provide two platforms for Down Loop Heathrow and Up Loop Heathrow for the fast crossrail lines. The same design applies to the slow crossrail lines. Keep the Flyover, and after the flyover you can bring the two slow crossrail lines onto the fast lines after Hayes via another flyover to link up with the down and up relief lines to remove the conflicts from changing points.
^ Rebuild Slough Station with 4 crossrail platforms, with the other two being for highspeed trains for speeds up to 170mph...
^ Build a dive under west of slough to connect the windsor branch onto the Reading relief line.
^ Rebuild Taplow to a 2 platform station. The other two platforms arent really needed, since when engineering works are running, you have a replacement bus between Slough and Maidenhead.
^ Build turnback siding's at Maidenhead in the middle of the relief lines to allow for 2 tph crossrail services to terminate if disruption occurs.
^ No need to change Twyford, although one additional platform could be constructed for peak services.
And Reading. Now here, theres a few options. Extend some crossrail services to Tilehurst, which needs reverse sidings or terminate them at Reading, by building two dedicated crossrail platforms. Also two through tracks for high speed trains should be inserted, as well as two freight tracks that have two tracks that dont come into platforms, thus speeds can be increased.
Crosscountry trains should have two dedicated platforms of its known.

Just as a matter of interest, James: have you costed any, or indeed all, of those projects? 

[James]

Ok this is what i would do. I would;
^ Insert two tracks between Hayes and Harlington and London Paddington (low level). Also requires an additional two platforms to make 4 platforms (2 for slow and 2 for fast services).
Clear the whole Paddington area from those houses and build the houses or flats on top of the railway.
^ Then rebuild Acton Mainline to insert 2 further tracks
^ Then at Ealing Broadway redevelop the whole area, moving the house and flats over the railway towards the east of Ealing Broadway. Then remodel the tube layout by moving it northwards.
^ At West Ealing, Hanwell and Southall remodel the whole area so additional 2 tracks can be inserted.
^ At Hayes and Harlington a total rebuild to provide two platforms for Down Loop Heathrow and Up Loop Heathrow for the fast crossrail lines. The same design applies to the slow crossrail lines. Keep the Flyover, and after the flyover you can bring the two slow crossrail lines onto the fast lines after Hayes via another flyover to link up with the down and up relief lines to remove the conflicts from changing points.
^ Rebuild Slough Station with 4 crossrail platforms, with the other two being for highspeed trains for speeds up to 170mph...
^ Build a dive under west of slough to connect the windsor branch onto the Reading relief line.
^ Rebuild Taplow to a 2 platform station. The other two platforms arent really needed, since when engineering works are running, you have a replacement bus between Slough and Maidenhead.
^ Build turnback siding's at Maidenhead in the middle of the relief lines to allow for 2 tph crossrail services to terminate if disruption occurs.
^ No need to change Twyford, although one additional platform could be constructed for peak services.
And Reading. Now here, theres a few options. Extend some crossrail services to Tilehurst, which needs reverse sidings or terminate them at Reading, by building two dedicated crossrail platforms. Also two through tracks for high speed trains should be inserted, as well as two freight tracks that have two tracks that dont come into platforms, thus speeds can be increased.
Crosscountry trains should have two dedicated platforms of its known.

Just as a matter of interest, James: have you costed any, or indeed all, of those projects? 

I didnt bother doing that, as it was a draft idea at the back of my head. However if i did bother to cost it i reckon it will be in the billions, and not sure the local population would like to move (even if it is only a metres away from where they currently live).
Also they wouldnt accept the compensation even if it was reasonable, cause life is worth more than dollars, opps pounds
At the end of the day a better and improved railway will make people happy and cheerful right?   

[bobm]

At the end of the day a better and improved railway will make people happy and cheerful right?   

Ask some of those living near the proposed route of HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) and I think you might get a different answer.

[James]

At the end of the day a better and improved railway will make people happy and cheerful right?   

Ask some of those living near the proposed route of HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) and I think you might get a different answer.

Well ye thats true, however without running off topic for too long, i dont understand why there are no stations proposed in the chilterns, surely this would be built if a station was provided say at Amersham... anyway i finish it there.