More dangerous overcrowding to the Westcountry

[whole diary]

[broadgage]

I agree, at busy times I foresee a need for a mixture of trains that serve the true long distance destinations and those that serve the nearer bits of the west country.

Something like XX-15, fast to Plymouth and then principle stations to Penzance.
Followed by the XX-20, Principle stations to Plymouth, including Newbury, Westbury, Castle Cary, Taunton, and others.

Alternatively, restore to use the extended platform 1 at Paddington and run a few much longer trains such as 9+9 IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train) therefrom to Taunton, which also has very long platforms.
At Taunton these services could divide into perhaps a fast to Plymouth service, and a slower service.
Note that this does in effect provide several "extra" trains from Paddington, by providing 9+9 instead of 9 car, but without needing any extra paths in the London area.

Someone needs to keep a VERY CLOSE eye on network rail to stop them shortening these long platforms.

[TaplowGreen]

I agree, at busy times I foresee a need for a mixture of trains that serve the true long distance destinations and those that serve the nearer bits of the west country.

Something like XX-15, fast to Plymouth and then principle stations to Penzance.
Followed by the XX-20, Principle stations to Plymouth, including Newbury, Westbury, Castle Cary, Taunton, and others.

Alternatively, restore to use the extended platform 1 at Paddington and run a few much longer trains such as 9+9 IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train) therefrom to Taunton, which also has very long platforms.
At Taunton these services could divide into perhaps a fast to Plymouth service, and a slower service.
Note that this does in effect provide several "extra" trains from Paddington, by providing 9+9 instead of 9 car, but without needing any extra paths in the London area.

Someone needs to keep a VERY CLOSE eye on network rail to stop them shortening these long platforms.

Agreed, that's more like it but with your model I'd probably have the xx15 stopping at the two other significant South West towns (Taunton & Exeter) too, but no more than that before Plymouth.

[PhilWakely]

One thing that has not been mentioned anywhere in this thread is the attitude of GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) at Paddington to pax bound for Reading and Newbury (under normal circumstances). Virtually all of the Westcounty-bound services on Fridays are supposedly 'Pick-up Only' at Reading, but this is ignored by the GWR Paddington philosophy of 'get pax out of London as quickly as possible'.

If there was any sensible way of putting the 'Pick-up Only' rule into practice, then I am sure much of the overcrowding would vanish. Couple that with relief services on peak holiday weekends.

[grahame]

One thing that has not been mentioned anywhere in this thread is the attitude of GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) at Paddington to pax bound for Reading and Newbury (under normal circumstances). Virtually all of the Westcounty-bound services on Fridays are supposedly 'Pick-up Only' at Reading, but this is ignored by the GWR Paddington philosophy of 'get pax out of London as quickly as possible'.

Sorry to any Paddington to Reading passengers here, but at times I have a feeling that the first half hour of my journey from London is made darned uncomfortable, and the quality use of my time diminished, by those people who are using a longer distance service for a one stop hop.

When looking at economic cases and the value of people's time, various algorithms factor in a certain amount per minute of hour. Does the figure get varied for seated versus standing passengers, and should it get varied?  I would rather take a 100 minute journey from London to Chippenham on which I can get a seat and work or do something else useful than a 70 minute journey on which I'm standing for the first 30. 

Mathematician's logic suggest that if there is overcrowding east of Reading, but seats available to the west, that some trains should run a London to Reading shuttles even if services are thinned a little to the west.

Readers may not agree with my thoughts and the things they suggest could be looked at, but looking in this way certainly helps me understand the issue that GWR have.

[Timmer]

Until you stop long distance peak time trains calling at Reading this problem will never go away. Something the new timetable, when it happens, should go some way to sorting?

[martyjon]

In my college days services to the west in rush hours used to skip a stop at Reading and ran non stop to Didcot / Swindon / Newbury forcing pax to use other services. My home run on a Friday used to be local all stops Slough to Didcot, Red Dragon, Didcot to Swindon then Paddington - WSM from Swindon (first stop). Sunday return was Bristol - Reading then local service to Slough.

I once did a Bristol - Slough using all stops services, Bristol TM^‡(resolve) - Bath, Bath to Swindon, Swindon - Didcot, Didcot - Slough, took me about 5 hours.

[eightonedee]

The problem is that Reading is a major interchange in its own right. According to the figures, some 4 million change trains at Reading each year, and many commuters to stations to Didcot and Oxford further up the Thames Valley, and to stations on the Kennet Valley and Basingstoke branches will often change at Reading. As a Thames Valley commuter (albeit transferring to the North Downs line), I understand why many of my fellow Tilehurst/Pangbourne/Goring/Cholsey commuters who go onto London do so.

Since the franchises were combined in 2006, our stopping trains have been treated as an extension of stopping services east of Reading, so most stoppers take an hour or so to stop at many/most of the stations between Paddington and Reading before they get to Reading. Understandably many take a non stop train to Reading to halve this time, and change.

Back in the early to mid-1980s, when I commuted into London, the peak time service was mostly non-stop to Reading (some stopping at Twyford) and then all stations to Didcot - about 40 minutes to Tilehurst, my home station then. Only if you travelled later would you have to change to a stopping train at Reading.

Hopefully, when Crossrail/Elizabeth Line, finally opens fully in December 2019 (fingers crossed?), the Thames/Kennet valley locals will run non-stop from Reading to London, and there will be no need to change onto Inter City services at Reading. A nice Electrostar all the way - who would need to cram into a Hitachi (especially after reading some of the reviews here!)? However it looks like the reality may instead be Bi/Trimode converted 1980s train instead! You may therefore still have to put up with us.   

[IndustryInsider]

I sometimes wish that, for one day only, we actually operated a timetable from a specific date in the 80s with equivalent capacity, just to show how utterly inadequate it would be for the number of people travelling currently!

[devonexpress]

One thing that has not been mentioned anywhere in this thread is the attitude of GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) at Paddington to pax bound for Reading and Newbury (under normal circumstances). Virtually all of the Westcounty-bound services on Fridays are supposedly 'Pick-up Only' at Reading, but this is ignored by the GWR Paddington philosophy of 'get pax out of London as quickly as possible'.

If there was any sensible way of putting the 'Pick-up Only' rule into practice, then I am sure much of the overcrowding would vanish. Couple that with relief services on peak holiday weekends.

Yes this is another issue, I get Paddington staff want to make sure the station is safe and this is one way of ensure that, but its then making trains themselves unsafe.  Its getting to the point where maybe the old royal mail depot at Paddington may need to be converted into additional platforms?

edited to close quote box

[SandTEngineer]

One thing that has not been mentioned anywhere in this thread is the attitude of GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) at Paddington to pax bound for Reading and Newbury (under normal circumstances). Virtually all of the Westcounty-bound services on Fridays are supposedly 'Pick-up Only' at Reading, but this is ignored by the GWR Paddington philosophy of 'get pax out of London as quickly as possible'.

If there was any sensible way of putting the 'Pick-up Only' rule into practice, then I am sure much of the overcrowding would vanish. Couple that with relief services on peak holiday weekends.

Yes this is another issue, I get Paddington staff want to make sure the station is safe and this is one way of ensure that, but its then making trains themselves unsafe.  Its getting to the point where maybe the old royal mail depot at Paddington may need to be converted into additional platforms?

edited to close quote box

...hmmm.  Not too sure about that last point.  The capacity of most terminal stations is determined by the ability to get the trains into and out of the station without (too much) conflict.  Now then, one of my big bugbears about modern signalling installations.  Automatic Route Setting (ARS^▸ (Automatic Route Setting)) has a pre-programmed route within it for every timetabled service.  The ARS will not diverge from that, so when a conflict occurs, say due to late running, then the service concerned will be held back pending its booked path becoming available.  For example, if you watch the Open Train Times map for the Paddington approaches (https://www.opentraintimes.com/maps/signalling/d3_1) you will see many train services being delayed when actually alternative routes are free.  Now then, signallers are instructed not to intervene in such cases (its all about that blame game/money game) and things start to go awry.  In some cases it can take up to half an hour for things to get back on track (pun intended), only for it all to start over again.

Paddington, for example, has a very flexible track and signalling layout, but most of it never gets used to make the train running more efficient and timely.

So my point is, its not really platform capacity that's the issue, but station throat capacity not being used effectively.

End of ARS rant.....

[grahame]

One thing that has not been mentioned anywhere in this thread is the attitude of GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) at Paddington to pax bound for Reading and Newbury (under normal circumstances). Virtually all of the Westcounty-bound services on Fridays are supposedly 'Pick-up Only' at Reading, but this is ignored by the GWR Paddington philosophy of 'get pax out of London as quickly as possible'.

If there was any sensible way of putting the 'Pick-up Only' rule into practice, then I am sure much of the overcrowding would vanish. Couple that with relief services on peak holiday weekends.

Yes this is another issue, I get Paddington staff want to make sure the station is safe and this is one way of ensure that, but its then making trains themselves unsafe.  Its getting to the point where maybe the old royal mail depot at Paddington may need to be converted into additional platforms?

What changes to passenger flows through the terminal platforms at Paddington, and on journeys to Reading, do we expect to see when the Elizabeth line opens?

How many passengers will no longer be transferring from Tube / SubSurface Railway / Bus / Taxi to trains starting at Paddington, but will instead be joining their train in the heart of London, the City, or indeed further east?

Will the big flow of Reading passengers currently using TfL^» (Transport for London - about) services to reach Paddington then getting an InterCity express to Reading still do the same thing, or will they choose to stay on the train they're already on when they arrive at Paddington?

It may be that there's relief at Paddington and on the first leg of long distance trains coming from the works already in progress, and no need to instigate any more works.

[simonw]

If a major issue with overcrowding is the continual use of ALL trains from London Paddington is the use of Intercity trains for 'short' commutes, then the easiest solution is to make these trains ticket only leaving Paddington.

Ticket barriers can be programmed to accept specific tickets only.

Finally, I'd much rather suffer overcrowding at a station, than on a train.

[eightonedee]

Some points dealing with responses to my post yeaterday-

I was not advocating a return to 1980s timetables, but to the pattern of services along the Thames and Kennet Valley lines west of Reading. In the intervening period we have had massive investment in signalling, trains and the reconstruction west of Reading with the flyover. Surely this means more capacity, with faster trains and reduced gaps between them, to accommodate this pattern? If stopping services east of Reading become largely Crossrail/Elizabeth Line, and the remaining Electrostar services non stop or limited to Reading, there will be more services that take half an hour or less to get to Reading, so this should take some pressure off the Inter City services.

If you could "ban" commuters from the Inter Cities at present, and confined them to the current slow stopping trains, this will cause increased misery to thousands. They just want to get home as soon as they can after a hard day at work. Why should they cram into a train that takes another half an hour to get to Reading, and which (from my limited experience of using them a few years back when I had to attend meetings in Ealing in the afternoon) are often already rammed full too. These are the "base load" of fare payers who provide a substantial part of the income that helps support less well used services elsewhere.

If you took out the Reading stops from Inter City services, what would happen to the considerable number of medium to long distance commuters who travel to work in Reading from Swindon and other stations west on each of the main lines converging on Reading?

As regards ticketing to stop use of fast trains, bear in mind that the gate lines at Paddington do not control entry to individual platforms - most gates admit to at least two platforms and some are not behind gate lines at all. I would have thought it would be almost impossible to control access on a train by train basis.

I do not think that Crossrail will make much difference to the number using Inter City trains to commute from Reading. The published times indicate 50 minutes to Paddington (still much longer than a fast GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) service), and about an hour to Farringdon and Liverpool Street. Much will depend on what the travelling experience on board the trains will be, whether commuters will switch. For most other destinations in Zone 1 I'd guess it will still be quicker to change at Paddington and use the Tube. It will make short distance commuting along the western end of Crossrail easier, but these passengers are not the ones vexing contributors to this thread. 

Nobody likes overcrowded trains, but it affects all users, be they Reading commuters or travellers going further west. At least the latter have part of their journey with less crowding....

GWR have indicated that their remaining service east of Reading will be a faster limited stop service - so the  problem should be alleviated if it provides a step change in the capacity for those who want to get home from London to our part of the world after a hard day's work.

   

[JayMac]

You don't have to cram into a train that takes half an hour longer to get to/from Reading. You can take one that takes 31-37 minutes. 8 carriages long, around 450 seats and better standing provision.

But no, it has to be a long distance service because it saves less than 10 minutes.

I know I'd certainly prefer a better guarantee of a seat, or standing in a bright modern commuter train than cramming myself in next to a luggage rack or toilet on a long distance train. Isn't that worth trading less than 10 minutes for?

And once we have the timetables fully settled next year there will be even more fast electric commuter services between Reading and Paddington.

I do hope that when said timetable recast is done that more long distance services become set down only at Reading toward Paddington, and pick up only at Reading from Paddington. With a system to ensure compliance. And warnings and penalties for non compliance.

[grahame]

Some points dealing with responses to my post yesterday

...

If you could "ban" commuters from the Inter Cities at present, and confined them to the current slow stopping trains, this will cause increased misery to thousands. They just want to get home as soon as they can after a hard day at work. Why should they cram into a train that takes another half an hour to get to Reading, and which (from my limited experience of using them a few years back when I had to attend meetings in Ealing in the afternoon) are often already rammed full too. These are the "base load" of fare payers who provide a substantial part of the income that helps support less well used services elsewhere.

If you took out the Reading stops from Inter City services, what would happen to the considerable number of medium to long distance commuters who travel to work in Reading from Swindon and other stations west on each of the main lines converging on Reading?

As regards ticketing to stop use of fast trains, bear in mind that the gate lines at Paddington do not control entry to individual platforms - most gates admit to at least two platforms and some are not behind gate lines at all. I would have thought it would be almost impossible to control access on a train by train basis.

...

You don't have to cram into a train that takes half an hour longer to get to/from Reading. You can take one that takes 31-37 minutes. 8 carriages long, around 450 seats and better standing provision.

But no, it has to be a long distance service because it saves less than 10 minutes.

I know I'd certainly prefer a better guarantee of a seat, or standing in a bright modern commuter train than cramming myself in next to a luggage rack or toilet on a long distance train. Isn't that worth trading less than 10 minutes for?

And once we have the timetables fully settled next year there will be even more fast electric commuter services between Reading and Paddington.

I do hope that when said timetable recast is done that more long distance services become set down only at Reading toward Paddington, and pick up only at Reading from Paddington. With a system to ensure compliance. And warnings and penalties for non compliance.

I would hate to guess what balance there will naturally be for passengers heading out from London to (or changing at) Reading. Will they prefer the continuity of a through train from central London?  Or will they hate those through trains because they'll see expresses whizz past overtaking them (even if they would not have time to connect)? Will they take next train out, or fastest train even if it involves a wait?  How will comfort and reliability factor in?   How about pricing / any difference in cost? Will we even need the rules and regulations you advocate, or can the balance be achieved with a carrot, not needing a stick?

If Reading were to become enforced pick up only on (some/certain) outbound expresses, would you not have the commercial stupidity of the very busiest section of the route (London to Reading) having to carry enough spare capacity for those who joined at Reading as the train headed onwards to be able to fit on in the required comfort?