Any why did they only extend the platforms to take 10 carriages, when they obviously knew they would be increasing to 12?! The front 7 already suffer extra loading due to mainly being the ones most accessable at the prior stations, and then at one of the busiest loading points, they can still not get into all carriages from the platform.
I should imagine that will be down to who was paying for the extensions. At Maidenhead Crossrail will have paid as they need to get their 9-car 345s to fit. They’re roughly the same length as ten coaches worth of 387. The number of longer formations of 387s or
IETs▸ operated by
GWR▸ is small - i.e. not an all day operation like at Slough, so I expect nobody wanted to cough up any more money.
That being said, the down relief platform at Maidenhead (and Twyford) are both good for 12-car 387s, so at least all doors open on the way home!
Network Rail's project W004 "Thames Valley Electric Multiple Unit Capability Works" included platform lengthenings to take 387s throughout their operating routes, though the work at Slough and Maidenhead was noted as jointly funded with Crossrail. The list of 13 platforms required to reach 12-car length was:
Slough – Platforms 2, 3, 4 and 5.
Maidenhead – Platforms 1, 2 ,3, 4 and 5.
Twyford – Platforms 1, 2 and 3.
Didcot - Platform 3 – funded by
IEP▸ but still delivers 12 car
EMU▸ capability
In September 2018 this work was described in the plan as:
"Milestone:
EIS▸ Infrastructure authorised (Paddington to Didcot)
Description: Infrastructure authorised for passenger use
Date: December 2017
Status: Complete"
