Train GraphicClick on the map to explore geographics
 
I need help
FAQ
Emergency
About .
Travel & transport from BBC stories as at 13:55 29 Mar 2024
- Delays at Dover as millions begin Easter getaway
- Attempted murder charge after man stabbed on train
- KFC Nigeria sorry after disabled diner refused service
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 02/06/24 - Summer Timetable starts
17/08/24 - Bus to Imber
27/09/25 - 200 years of passenger trains

On this day
29th Mar (1913)
Foundation of National Union or Railwaymen (*)

Train RunningCancelled
12:30 London Paddington to Weston-Super-Mare
13:15 London Paddington to Cardiff Central
13:48 Bedwyn to Newbury
14:12 Newbury to Bedwyn
14:19 Westbury to Swindon
14:57 Bedwyn to Newbury
15:14 Swindon to Westbury
15:22 Newbury to Bedwyn
15:28 Weston-Super-Mare to London Paddington
15:50 Bedwyn to Newbury
15:54 Cardiff Central to London Paddington
16:15 Newbury to Bedwyn
16:23 Westbury to Swindon
16:55 Bedwyn to Newbury
17:36 Swindon to Westbury
18:37 Westbury to Swindon
20:13 Swindon to Westbury
21:16 Westbury to Swindon
22:30 Swindon to Westbury
Short Run
10:55 Paignton to London Paddington
12:35 London Paddington to Exeter St Davids
13:10 Gloucester to Weymouth
13:42 Exeter St Davids to London Paddington
13:46 Bristol Temple Meads to Warminster
13:55 Paignton to London Paddington
14:36 London Paddington to Paignton
15:42 Exeter St Davids to London Paddington
16:35 London Paddington to Plymouth
16:50 Plymouth to London Paddington
17:03 London Paddington to Penzance
17:36 London Paddington to Plymouth
18:03 London Paddington to Penzance
18:36 London Paddington to Plymouth
19:04 Paignton to London Paddington
20:03 London Paddington to Plymouth
21:04 London Paddington to Plymouth
Delayed
09:10 Penzance to London Paddington
10:04 London Paddington to Penzance
10:20 Penzance to London Paddington
11:03 London Paddington to Plymouth
12:03 London Paddington to Penzance
12:15 Penzance to London Paddington
13:03 London Paddington to Plymouth
13:15 Plymouth to London Paddington
13:50 London Paddington to Great Malvern
14:03 London Paddington to Penzance
14:15 Penzance to London Paddington
15:03 London Paddington to Penzance
15:15 Plymouth to London Paddington
16:03 London Paddington to Penzance
16:15 Penzance to London Paddington
etc
PollsOpen and recent polls
Closed 2024-03-25 Easter Escape - to where?
Abbreviation pageAcronymns and abbreviations
Stn ComparatorStation Comparator
Rail newsNews Now - live rail news feed
Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
March 29, 2024, 14:12:46 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most recently liked subjects
[153] 2024 - Service update and amendment log, Swindon <-> Westbury...
[97] Infrastructure problems in Thames Valley causing disruption el...
[53] Travel for free on the m2 metrobus - Bristol - 4,5,6 April 202...
[41] would you like your own LIVE train station departure board?
[38] West Wiltshire Bus Changes April 2024
[37] Reversing Beeching - bring heritage and freight lines into the...
 
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 53 54 [55] 56 57 ... 114
  Print  
Author Topic: Crossrail/Elizabeth Line. From construction to operation - ongoing discussion  (Read 587221 times)
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 12334


View Profile Email
« Reply #810 on: March 08, 2017, 10:05:46 »

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

Surely the Western Route Study superceded this?
Logged
SandTEngineer
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3485


View Profile
« Reply #811 on: March 08, 2017, 10:19:00 »

I think the key point being made in the LR document is that they see the Elizabeth Line very much like a tube line, running all day as a turn up and go railway (i.e. in theory you don't need a timetable to use it) with no peak/off peak differentation.  How Heathrow Express fits into all of that is really a bit of a side show at the moment.
Logged
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 7156


View Profile
« Reply #812 on: March 08, 2017, 10:24:57 »

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

Surely the Western Route Study superceded this?

Yes, in that it's dated 2015 (see above - I sneaked in before you). But while it's newer, it isn't a single self-consistent replacement. In part this is covered by labelling the future plans "options", but the degree of incompatibility isn't spelled out.

So, as well as wanting to push all Heathrow trains onto the Reliefs, NR» (Network Rail - home page) also talk about doing the same with the semi-fasts, meaning anything that stops inside Reading. Obviously that's not the same future that TfL» (Transport for London - about) are presuming.
Logged
Oxonhutch
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1244



View Profile
« Reply #813 on: March 08, 2017, 13:10:03 »

Reading the article (which has been revised by the author [PoP] after correcting comments) the HEx services are not to be forced onto the Reliefs but still accommodated on the Mains.  That is good news for the TV semi-fasts as they provided stopping paths on the Mains at either Twyford or Maidenhead - for stopping patterns see one on the comments posted today (8/3/17). These articles tend to get written by those in the know and quite close (in past lives) to the heart of government - not withstanding that they are personal opinions, I weigh them quite seriously.
Logged
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6435


The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!


View Profile
« Reply #814 on: March 08, 2017, 19:24:35 »

These articles tend to get written by those in the know and quite close (in past lives) to the heart of government - not withstanding that they are personal opinions, I weigh them quite seriously.

Sometimes, it isn't just what is being said that matters, but who is saying it.

Take my utterances with a pinch of salt.
Logged

Now, please!
Oxonhutch
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1244



View Profile
« Reply #815 on: March 08, 2017, 20:35:57 »

Take my utterances with a pinch of salt.

If you are sitting in seat 0A, and I can hear you, I will take your utterances very seriously!  Smiley
Logged
paul7575
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5316


View Profile
« Reply #816 on: March 09, 2017, 08:53:37 »

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

Surely the Western Route Study superceded this?

It is an iterative process agreed, but I was really only trying to highlight that the debate about Paddington to Stockley track usage is not something that only TfL» (Transport for London - about) have raised this month...

Paul
Logged
Tim
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2738


View Profile
« Reply #817 on: March 09, 2017, 09:30:55 »

How Heathrow Express fits into all of that is really a bit of a side show at the moment.

I agree.  As I understand it HEx only has access rights until sometime in the 2020s.  After that I think it would be open to NR» (Network Rail - home page)/Government/ORR» (Office of Rail and Road formerly Office of Rail Regulation - about)/someone to allocate HEx paths to someone else. 
Logged
eightf48544
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4574


View Profile Email
« Reply #818 on: March 09, 2017, 10:02:32 »

What about the very vague proposals for a 6 track railway from Padd tp Slough or at least in parts.
Logged
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 7156


View Profile
« Reply #819 on: March 09, 2017, 10:12:21 »

What about the very vague proposals for a 6 track railway from Padd tp Slough or at least in parts.

There is a fifth track in places, but I don't think I've seen much more proposed. But I'm sure it's clear now that the Crossrail tunnel ought to run to OOC (Old Oak Common (depot)), and that was clear (to those who built it) before they had finished digging it. There is quite a lot of lineside land much of the way to Stockley, which is the important bit, but with some tricky bits. Ealing Broadway would have to be rebuilt, and any station further out you want to stop semifasts at (e.g. Slough) needs a fast through bypass rather than six tracks in between.

The choice of bored tunnel for WRAtH (Western Rail Access to Heathrow) was based on the idea that once your megamole is down its hole and scrabbling away it's cheaper to keep going than to surface and build two bridges, under the M4 and A4. The same logic is being applied to HS2 (The next High Speed line(s)), and if applied to Crossrail it would have ended up differently.
Logged
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 7156


View Profile
« Reply #820 on: March 09, 2017, 10:24:51 »

All of this squabbling over track capacity is really a symptom of something that's been known far longer - two track pairs just isn't enough. "A Railway Plan for London" in 1965 includes a section of the "1949 London Plan Working Party Report" called "Essentials of Practical Railway Plan". This spells out that what it labels an "urban type service" and an "outer suburban type service" can't sensibly operate over the same pair of tracks. As it's about London it isn't concerned about high-speed long distance services, but we know now (and did in 1965) they can't share with either if you want the maximum capacity. Put another way, adding a service of the "wrong" type to a track pair takes out more than one path.

In 1965, the priority was to increase the "outer suburban" service without disrupting the long distance one, and their proposal was to scrap the stopping service to Hayes, closing Acton, West Ealing, Hanwell and Southall stations. It says as justification, "traffic on the short-distance service to Hayes is small and is not rising"; and "The traffic potential of this service is too small to warrant replacement by a London Underground service. Preliminary examination suggests that an experss bus service between Hayes and a railhead at Ealing Broadway might be capable of meeting the need."

That report is in the Railways Archive - it's scanned off a poor printed copy, so hard to reproduce here.  It does have traffic numbers for London commuters which make an interesting comparison with the last London and South East RUS (Route Utilisation Strategy). So does their estimate of the capacity of a track pair: for "urban type" (i.e. metro) service 40 tph, and for "outer suburban" 25 tph. How many lines can do that now?
« Last Edit: March 09, 2017, 11:30:15 by stuving » Logged
IndustryInsider
Data Manager
Hero Member
******
Posts: 10096


View Profile
« Reply #821 on: March 09, 2017, 11:06:10 »

Wharncliffe and Hanwell viaducts would also be very significant obstacles to a 6-track railway as well as those that have been mentioned.  Can't see it ever happening in a traditional 6-track sense.  A more likely (but still unlikely) way forward would be a tunnelled separate High Speed route from
London to a significant way out.
Logged

To view my GWML (Great Western Main Line) Electrification cab video 'before and after' video comparison, as well as other videos of the new layout at Reading and 'before and after' comparisons of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/
paul7575
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5316


View Profile
« Reply #822 on: March 09, 2017, 12:09:40 »

So does their estimate of the capacity of a track pair: for "urban type" (i.e. metro) service 40 tph, and for "outer suburban" 25 tph. How many lines can do that now?

If they are talking about 2 way capacity (as is sometimes the case), then quite a few?

Paul
Logged
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 7156


View Profile
« Reply #823 on: March 09, 2017, 12:31:19 »

So does their estimate of the capacity of a track pair: for "urban type" (i.e. metro) service 40 tph, and for "outer suburban" 25 tph. How many lines can do that now?

If they are talking about 2 way capacity (as is sometimes the case), then quite a few?

Paul

That would make the numbers too low, wouldn't it? And while the meaning isn't stated in plain words there, other places do contain references to 24 tph as a standard figure each way for one BR (British Rail(ways)) track pair. For example, it states with impressive certainty that one track pair delivering 24 tph into a terminus needs just 4 platforms.

The fast lines at Waterloo are, according to NR» (Network Rail - home page), capable of running at 2 minutes headway = 30 tph as a maximum, though with one every half hour left blank for recovery. However, I don't think it's ever been done even for the "busy hour", and as to whether humans could construct such a timetable, let alone operate to it, ...
Logged
SandTEngineer
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3485


View Profile
« Reply #824 on: March 09, 2017, 15:34:44 »

Quote
The fast lines at Waterloo are, according to NR» (Network Rail - home page), capable of running at 2 minutes headway = 30 tph as a maximum, though with one every half hour left blank for recovery. However, I don't think it's ever been done even for the "busy hour", and as to whether humans could construct such a timetable, let alone operate to it ...

....they tried in 1967 on the South Eastern at Charing Cross/Cannon Street/London Bridge and it was an outstanding....... Shocked Roll Eyes Tongue
Logged
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: 1 ... 53 54 [55] 56 57 ... 114
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by customers of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link to report). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page