Crossrail/Elizabeth Line. From construction to operation - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[eightf48544]

Seeing the comments re Crossrail taking over the relief lines my frequent comment that Crossrail does not work West of Padd seems to be coming true.


So I'll do another HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) won't work at least as intended.

[SandTEngineer]

They can also turnround from the East in Platform 2 Up Main but only from the Down Main back onto the Up. There is a stop signal at the West end of the platform 2.

That facility is mainly for Crossrail to be able to turnback at Maidenhead in the event of the Relief Lines to the East being closed. Won't do the GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) main line services much good if it is used though

[paul7575]

IIRC^▸ (if I recall/remember/read correctly) when the Crossrail timetable was being developed, electrification stopped at Maidenhead, and FGW^▸ (First Great Western) would still be running DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) on all local stoppers across the Reading area.   

Times change, and GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) now has 110 mph capable EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) that will potentially be running at twelve car length in the peaks. 

Just like on the WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line) to Milton Keynes it will presumably be possible to flight a few of these per hour in between 125 mph services as far as Reading.

The overall timetable isn't set in stone circa 2005...

Paul

[ChrisB]

I didn't think there were any spare paths in the peaks currently?

So if they were to fly sny EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) along the mains, something else has to give?
When does the HEX contract finish?

[stuving]

I didn't think there were any spare paths in the peaks currently?

So if they were to fly sny EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) along the mains, something else has to give?
When does the HEX contract finish?

Currently, peak "semi-fasts" (whatever that means in this context) use both mains and reliefs, some stopping on the mains and some switching. The extra time (or paths) on the mains that occupies is largely provided by HEX services, which leave unused paths further out than Airport Junction. But I've never counted up exactly how many there are of each kind, so can't say if five relief paths could be "donated" to Crossrail.

[stuving]

Crossrail's current Track Access Option is, I think this one dated 2014. It specifies, in part, as services into London:

From Paddington only: 8 tph all day plus 13 morning peak (for information - no access needed)
From Heathrow:         4 tph all day
From Maidenhead:      2 tph all day plus 6 morning peak
From West Drayton: none off-peak plus 6 morning peak

The morning peak is 7-10, and off-peak (called "inter-peak") is 10-16 and 19-21, timed at Tottenham Court Road.

Note that that does not even add up to the declared totals.

[Adelante_CCT]

The peak semi-fasts will be (were to be) regarded as the GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) Ealing, Slough, Maidenhead, Twyford, Reading, Tilehurst.... services. It looks as if crossrail are suggesting to remove altogether this halfhourly service in the peak in favour of more services for them. They are saying Maidenhead and Twyford pax can use the already planned faster mainline services, as for those heading westwards to/from Ealing or wishing for a faster service to Slough, tough.

Wouldn't have thought there are more paths available on the main than what was already planned.

[4064ReadingAbbey]

The peak semi-fasts will be (were to be) regarded as the GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) Ealing, Slough, Maidenhead, Twyford, Reading, Tilehurst.... services. It looks as if crossrail are suggesting to remove altogether this halfhourly service in the peak in favour of more services for them. They are saying Maidenhead and Twyford pax can use the already planned faster mainline services, as for those heading westwards to/from Ealing or wishing for a faster service to Slough, tough.

Wouldn't have thought there are more paths available on the main than what was already planned.

I would suggest that there are further implications. By my reading the document implies that no GWR trains will use the Relief lines, certainly in the peaks and most likely also off-peak. If this is to be the case then passengers making through journeys from Oxford and the Thames Valley line stations as far as Reading will be forced to change trains at Reading to reach stations east of Reading.

This does not seem like a customer-friendly act - but then again TfL^» (Transport for London - about) has no interest in events outside its boundary.

In addition GWR has made agreements to lease Class 387 trains to operate these semi-fast services between reading and London - if this proposal is accepted then I trust that TfL will pay the leasing costs for the no longer needed trains.

There is also no mention of freight traffic. As has already been mentioned this stretch of the Western is home to the heaviest freight trains in the country as well as container, car carrier and rubbish trains. They can't all operate at night as TfL will doubtless require that Network Rail keeps the track in good order...

[lordgoata]

If this is to be the case then passengers making through journeys from Oxford and the Thames Valley line stations as far as Reading will be forced to change trains at Reading to reach stations east of Reading.

This does not seem like a customer-friendly act - but then again TfL^» (Transport for London - about) has no interest in events outside its boundary.

That's been my fear since Crossrail extending to Reading was mentioned.

[SandTEngineer]

Interesting read here: http://www.londonreconnections.com/2017/one-of-the-family-crossrails-transition-to-being-a-tube/

[tom m]

Thanks for posting, very interesting. I can't imagine HEX are going to be very happy about running on the relief lines.

[stuving]

Thanks for posting, very interesting. I can't imagine HEX are going to be very happy about running on the relief lines.

They aren't, but then AFAIK^▸ (as far as I know) they aren't going to (though they might have to later on). I think he's misread that service pattern, as also in assuming the Henley and Bourne End through services would overlap with Crossrail. They are due to stop in SLC2, i.e. this May, though the Henley ones now have a reprieve due to the lack of you-know-Watts.

So while he's no doubt right about what TfL^» (Transport for London - about) want to do, he's added 2 and 2 from evidence to get 6 as the current plan.

[IndustryInsider]

Yes, an entertaining and informative article but there were a few errors and omissions in it.

[paul7575]

Here's the mid 2020s proposal from the 2011 London and SE RUS^▸ (Route Utilisation Strategy) executive summary:

With respect to Heathrow Airport services the
emerging position is that providing a 10 trains
per hour Crossrail route service from central
London would provide an overall improvement in
connectivity relative to commited schemes only, and
is likely to become necessary by the mid 2020s to
facilitate the additional peak Thames Valley services
described above. At peak times the airport services
would need to operate on the relief lines with
increased journey times from London Paddington
station itself (compared to the current Heathrow
Express), but the additional Crossrail services would
more than double the planned frequency and avoid
passengers needing to choose between Heathrow
Express and Crossrail on arrival at Paddington
station. This would therefore involve 16 trains per
hour at peak times from the Great Western route
into the new central London tunnel, compared to
10 trains per hour under current plans. This would
fully utilise all relief line capacity at peak times, so
freight operations would need to be outside the
high peak hours.

Note that they are suggesting there that the HEx replacement by Crossrail would run on the reliefs only in the peaks.   The same document also does mention in option A5 that there will be 4 fast EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) per hour running on the mains east of Reading in the peaks, covering calls at Slough, Twyford and Maidenhead.

In fact reading it again, 6 years from publication, hardly anything being proposed recently is actually new...

Paul

[stuving]

Here's the mid 2020s proposal from the 2011 London and SE RUS^▸ (Route Utilisation Strategy) executive summary:
[...]
Note that they are suggesting there that the HEx replacement by Crossrail would run on the reliefs only in the peaks.   The same document also does mention in option A5 that there will be 4 fast EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) per hour running on the mains east of Reading in the peaks, covering calls at Slough, Twyford and Maidenhead.

In fact reading it again, 6 years from publication, hardly anything being proposed recently is actually new...

Paul

The Western Route Study, more recently, does take a step further in that NR^» (Network Rail - home page) now want those four tph for long-distance services all day, not just in the peaks. They don't mention HEx by name, but do point out its track access agreement runs out in 2023. For NR, whether they continue or are replaced by Crossrail is unimportant - just so long as they get off the Mains Lines (but of course don't fill the Relief Lines to the exclusion of goods trains).

They claim TfL^» (Transport for London - about)'s support for this, though the bit they quote is really talking about these four trains going down the 'ole, not to Paddington High level.

Capability analysis identifies that eight passenger services per
hour could be accommodated on the existing Relief Line
infrastructure; subject to further assessment. Analysis provided
by Transport for London shows that there would be a positive
Generalised Journey Time (GJT) impact for passengers travelling
between points east of London Paddington and Heathrow
Airport who currently use the London Underground network to
reach London Paddington. There would be a small negative GJT
impact for those who continue to interchange at Paddington
Station with other modes, e.g. walk and taxi.

HAL have a different view (surprise!). Roughly it's that their business customers can't be expected to slum it in Crossrail's cattle trucks, they need what is in effect an all-first-class train to a taxi in central London. their supporting arguments are, of course, rather different:

• Analysis provided by Heathrow Airport Limited shows the
following potential impacts:
– Mode share – analysis shows that a combination of express
and Relief Line services provides the highest rail and overall
public transport mode share. Removal of the fast services
could increase car trips to and from the airport and related
emissions
– Passenger experience – passengers value the speed and
reliability of the current express service. Removing this will
reduce passenger experience and reduce choice for travelling
to Heathrow Airport by rail
– Resilience – a mix of services by different operators could offer
better resilience and ensures that the airport can continue to
provide public transport alternatives during times of
disruption due to incidents, maintenance or industrial action
– Economic value – Heathrow Airport is an important asset and
engine for growth generating jobs and global opportunities.
Business passengers from both the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) and abroad
particularly value the express service, with two thirds of its
passengers travelling on business.

And there the argument rests, until someone (probably the minister) decides something.