|
grahame
|
 |
« Reply #885 on: July 03, 2017, 01:03:59 » |
|
You can't help but notice the vast amount of new development in the Hayes & Harlington area, and indeed now a big site is being cleared at Southall. I suspect it's not totally coincidental as it is well known that improved rail links tends to encourage development, but I do wonder how long before the additional capacity gets used up.
That development is very much an intent, isn't it? For 180 years, trains have brought - or attempted to bring in some of the less well worked out - economic and residential activity to the places they serve. "X grew when the railway came - it was just a couple of houses before" is a familiar line in railway histories. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
|
|
|
|
TaplowGreen
|
|
« Reply #886 on: July 03, 2017, 06:02:23 » |
|
You can't help but notice the vast amount of new development in the Hayes & Harlington area, and indeed now a big site is being cleared at Southall. I suspect it's not totally coincidental as it is well known that improved rail links tends to encourage development, but I do wonder how long before the additional capacity gets used up.
That development is very much an intent, isn't it? For 180 years, trains have brought - or attempted to bring in some of the less well worked out - economic and residential activity to the places they serve. "X grew when the railway came - it was just a couple of houses before" is a familiar line in railway histories. ..............and how much additional capacity year on year has been built into Crossrail/ GWR▸ to reflect this I wonder? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
4064ReadingAbbey
|
|
« Reply #887 on: July 03, 2017, 15:24:57 » |
|
You can't help but notice the vast amount of new development in the Hayes & Harlington area, and indeed now a big site is being cleared at Southall. I suspect it's not totally coincidental as it is well known that improved rail links tends to encourage development, but I do wonder how long before the additional capacity gets used up.
That development is very much an intent, isn't it? For 180 years, trains have brought - or attempted to bring in some of the less well worked out - economic and residential activity to the places they serve. "X grew when the railway came - it was just a couple of houses before" is a familiar line in railway histories. ..............and how much additional capacity year on year has been built into Crossrail/ GWR▸ to reflect this I wonder? How long is a typical GWR suburban train? And how long will all the Crossrail trains be? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
IndustryInsider
|
|
« Reply #888 on: July 03, 2017, 16:54:07 » |
|
2 to 8 carriages (with most, but by no means all, peak hour ones either 5,6 or 8 ). That compares with all Crossrail trains at 9-car length.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: July 03, 2017, 17:05:19 by IndustryInsider »
|
Logged
|
To view my GWML▸ 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/ |
|
|
|
grahame
|
|
« Reply #889 on: July 03, 2017, 16:57:33 » |
|
peak hour ones either 5,6 or  . I love the way you think an 8 car train is cool  . |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
|
|
|
|
4064ReadingAbbey
|
|
« Reply #890 on: July 04, 2017, 11:40:04 » |
|
2 to 8 carriages (with most, but by no means all, peak hour ones either 5,6 or 8 ). That compares with all Crossrail trains at 9-car length.
Thank you! That was the point I was trying to make, even without any increase in frequency the capacity on the suburban service as far as Maidenhead will increase considerably. In Reading's case the two off-peak terminators will also be longer - but there are only two of them! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
John R
|
|
« Reply #891 on: July 04, 2017, 11:47:34 » |
|
http://mediacentre.heathrow.com/pressrelease/details/81/Corporate-operational-24/8615An announcement today that an additional two Elizabeth Line services will run to Heathrow each hour, and to T5 rather than T4. With a feasibility study to increase that to four. Direct services to T5 will make the Elizabeth Line a very attractive alternative to HEx, albeit slightly slower. There's no information on what intermediate calls they will make. I suspect it will be all stations.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #892 on: July 04, 2017, 11:49:29 » |
|
But should also take railcards, including NSE▸ , so will be cheaper than HEX.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
IndustryInsider
|
|
« Reply #893 on: July 04, 2017, 11:54:18 » |
|
A further strain on the relief lines assuming these are additional trains that weren't originally going to be destined for Hayes/West Drayton?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
To view my GWML▸ 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/ |
|
|
|
ChrisB
|
|
« Reply #894 on: July 04, 2017, 11:59:15 » |
|
These must be diverted surely? THey can't get any more through the core area, can they?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SandTEngineer
|
|
« Reply #895 on: July 04, 2017, 15:10:15 » |
|
At one time (2010) a 'Dynamic Loop' (accessible from the Relief Lines) was proposed between West Drayton and Langley. That seems to have disappeared from the final track layout and now only the Up Relief platform at West Drayton will be reversible. I think the number of services on the Relief Lines will require such precision in operation that it will probably fail the first week its introduced (reminisces of 'Operation Princess')  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Adelante_CCT
|
|
« Reply #896 on: July 04, 2017, 15:16:59 » |
|
These must be diverted surely? THey can't get any more through the core area, can they?
It would simply be an extension of 2 of the trains per hour that are planned to terminate at Paddington having come through the core |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
stuving
|
|
« Reply #897 on: July 04, 2017, 15:39:05 » |
|
At one time (2010) a 'Dynamic Loop' (accessible from the Relief Lines) was proposed between West Drayton and Langley. That seems to have disappeared from the final track layout and now only the Up Relief platform at West Drayton will be reversible. I think the number of services on the Relief Lines will require such precision in operation that it will probably fail the first week its introduced (reminisces of 'Operation Princess') I thought the plan was (and still is) to relay the existing goods loop through Iver and West Drayton, make it into the Up Crossrail, and give it platform faces in both stations. The passenger loop would be the old Up Relief. Was there ever an approved plan to extend it to Langley? As far as I can see all of that has happened except building P5 on the back of P4 at Iver. But there's still time...the platforms need extending anyway. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
paul7575
|
|
« Reply #898 on: July 04, 2017, 16:04:03 » |
|
Perhaps those 2 extra trains all day into Heathrow remove the need for the original peak extras that were going to terminate at West Drayton.
I don't think they were necessarily there to deal with specific demand to/from West Drayton, maybe just that it was a convenient place to turn back...
Paul
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
SandTEngineer
|
|
« Reply #899 on: July 04, 2017, 18:27:25 » |
|
At one time (2010) a 'Dynamic Loop' (accessible from the Relief Lines) was proposed between West Drayton and Langley. That seems to have disappeared from the final track layout and now only the Up Relief platform at West Drayton will be reversible. I think the number of services on the Relief Lines will require such precision in operation that it will probably fail the first week its introduced (reminisces of 'Operation Princess') I thought the plan was (and still is) to relay the existing goods loop through Iver and West Drayton, make it into the Up Crossrail, and give it platform faces in both stations. The passenger loop would be the old Up Relief. Was there ever an approved plan to extend it to Langley? As far as I can see all of that has happened except building P5 on the back of P4 at Iver. But there's still time...the platforms need extending anyway. ....mmm. Not seen a Signalling Scheme Plan that shows that (yet!)..... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
