GWML Electrification - Campaign against bi-mode

[whole diary]

[anthony215]

Seem's Nick clegg has someone to say about this:

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/2011/09/14/nick-clegg-great-western-electrification-is-a-priority-91466-29417115/

Now how about expanding the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) scheme to include the Thames Valley Branches, Reading - Bassingstoke (Some trains running through to London Paddington possibly using the paths freed up by withdrawing the Heathrow express services this could help reduce some of the overcrowding into London Waterloo), Cardiff - Swansea/Maesteg and how about wiring the severn tunnel diversionary route as well as wiring from Bristol/Newbury to Plymouth/Penzance.

[ChrisB]

I think the paths freed up by HEX woulsd more usefully be used by additional GW^▸ (Great Western) paths from their own network, stuff the SW lines....

[paul7575]

I think the paths freed up by HEX woulsd more usefully be used by additional GW^▸ (Great Western) paths from their own network, stuff the SW lines....

It is a London and SE RUS^▸ (Route Utilisation Strategy) suggestion to link Basingstoke - Reading.  Proposals A5 in the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) section, and F6 in the SWT^▸ (South West Trains) section, are cross referenced as follows:

Option A5
20tph main line (9 IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.), 1 HST^▸ (High Speed Train), 6 outer suburban EMUs^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) from Oxford/Newbury as planned,
plus 4 new outer suburban shuttles between Reading or beyond and London Paddington)

Option F6
This would be a variant of Option A5 as described earlier, with some of the Thames Valley peak services to London Paddington
commencing from Basingstoke, to which additional electrification would be provided. This option provides new journey opportunities
and appears to have significant merit in the context of a 20tph peak GWML main line service, but would not resolve the SWML^▸ (South Western Mail Line) capacity
gap in isolation.

So it isn't at the expense of the existing proposals for the GW Reading - Paddington shuttles.  It could be just a replacement for the Basingstoke - Reading FGW^▸ (First Great Western) shuttles in the peak periods, providing direct journeys for people from Bramley and Mortimer; I don't see it as some sort of SWT takeover really...

Paul

[Btline]

Great, now "Calamity Clegg" is onboard it probably won't happen...

Once again, they are announcing something that's already happening. The only reason for this announcement is to appease the people moaning about HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) sucking jobs away from Wales. They've wheeled out Clegg to the angry mob - just like they did in Brum with the riots. Let's hope he doesn't get attacked this time!

Basingstoke to Paddington shuttles, are not about a SWT^▸ (South West Trains) takeover, but simply a relief for the SWML^▸ (South Western Mail Line) fast lines which are full from Woking (reliefs full from Rayners Park). Just like Airtrack would have helped, so Crossrail trains could have started from somewhere like Woking. The main way the Waterloo lines will be relived will be Crossrail 2, which intends to divert "Metro" services from SW London into the tunnel, freeing up capacity for more Surbiton/Woking shuttles (a la Reading).

[ChrisB]

There's no point in starting Crossrail from Woking. THey are going to be full enough into Padd whether or not they start from MAI^▸ (Maidenhead station) or RDG^‡(resolve).

[paul7575]

I assumed Btline's idea was that some of Crossrail's 'spare' trains could have run to/from Woking as well as the 6 tph on the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line), but I can't see an obvious route for them to take to get to the Paddington corridor - new build lines would be out of the question, and running round via Virginia Water, Staines and Heathrow would have had all the same problems as Airtrack...

Paul

[ChrisB]

I assumed he meant up the relief's as part of the 6tph on the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line), but as usual he failed to explain himself properly.

[Btline]

I assumed he meant up the relief's as part of the 6tph on the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line), but as usual he failed to explain himself properly.

Really?

Just like Airtrack would have helped, so Crossrail trains could have started from somewhere like Woking.

My post clearly states that it would be using Airtrack, thus the 10 tph to Heathrow continuing and not the 6tph up the GWML. I'm getting a little tired at you hijacking every thread I post in with an attack - normally when you haven't read the post. We all make mistakes, we all mis-read documents and I'll admit that I have an imagination. But the above was unnecessary.

Airtrack has been cancelled. Thus the Basingstoke idea is a good one and will have a similar (i.e. limited but useful) effect.

Has it been confirmed that HeX will be axed? I hope so!

[TerminalJunkie]

"Calamity Clegg"

So which adjective do we apply to you, "Bonkers Btline"?

[Btline]

"Calamity Clegg"

So which adjective do we apply to you, "Bonkers Btline"?

Fine by me. But (fortunately/unfortunately) I'm not deputy PM!

[ChrisB]

Really?

Just like Airtrack would have helped, so Crossrail trains could have started from somewhere like Woking.

My post clearly states that it would be using Airtrack

"Airtrack would have helped" Airtrack what? trains, route, platforms..?....
Both Paul7755 and I made the assumption you wwere referring to accessing the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) corridor. So yes, I don't think you made yourself clear. "By using the same corridor as Airtrack would have done" is what I would deem clear.

I'm getting a little tired at you hijacking every thread I post in

Pot calling kettle here (you do understand that term? Just checking I'm clear), methinks. Replying to any post in any thread is what makes a board work. Better still if your 'bonkers' (not my description) ideas are taken apart and shown for what they are.

And telling the truth is in no way an attack. You weren't clear.

Remember, people with less knowledge than you & I and other members here read this forum, so threads need to show the sense or not in any posted suggestion. It isn't only I that tells you that you keep coming up with bonkers ideas either. I'm hoping one day you'll actually stop and think whether your ideas are sensible for the actual cost of them. You seem to think money grows on trees.

But the above was unnecessary.

No it wasn't, for the reasons I give above. Two of us misunderstood, god knows how many others couldn't be bothered to respond. It wasn't clear, as usual for your posts.

Airtrack has been cancelled. Thus the Basingstoke idea is a good one and will have a similar (i.e. limited but useful) effect.

Do you actually mean running from Basingstoke/Woking to where Airtrack would have branched off to T5, and then following the old Airtrack route into the airport?

Do you understand why Airtrack was cancelled by BAA? Money. Even though an extra platform was being provided free of charge at Reading. Still too expensive. So where are you going to get even more money from for your idea?

Has it been confirmed that HeX will be axed? I hope so!

Not sure. Obviously Connect is being consumed by CrossRail. I thought HEX was staying as a fast service?

[inspector_blakey]

Gentlemen, I don't think it would be unreasonable of me to suggest that the two of you have very different opinions on a range of issues. However the descents into bickering between two parties on numerous threads are starting to become tedious. It would be much appreciated by the Mod Squad, and I suspect everyone else reading these threads, if you could try and keep the tone of debate civilized and polite, rather than squabbling. Can I suggest a bit of a pause for reflection before posting, to avoid inflaming these arguments any further?

We've asked you on several occasions in the last week to keep things civil but our pleas seem to be falling on deaf ears. Please give some thought to this request.

Edited to add...

Just to make things absolutely clear, no sides are being taken here. I am asking both of you to raise your game and stop continually reducing threads to personal squabbles. As you know, we've taken a pretty "light touch" so far, but if things continue on the way they're going then at some stage we'll have to become more pro-active.

[TerminalJunkie]

Can I suggest a bit of a pause for reflection before posting [...]

Excuse me, but I did - you didn't see my first draft!

[ChrisB]

Nor my last one - I edited it 4 times!

[inspector_blakey]

I'm not interested in scoring points here. You may indeed have made several edits before posting but, IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion), the tone is still rather confrontational.

Please read, reflect and act on what was posted above. The internecine aggro taking over several different threads has become wearisome to the point of farce, and I'm getting bored of intervening, asking politely for a moderation or cessation of hostilities, and being roundly ignored or rebuffed with a self-justifying comment from one or both sides.

This needs to stop, and soon. There have been enough warnings.