Confused about Greenford

[Harlesden]

Although Greenford is referred to in some summaries of future Crossrail services, and there is reference to Greenford losing its direct service to Paddington, I cannot find any further information about the future of Greenford services once Crossrail kicks in. Can anyone help?

 

[SWT_USER]

They are going to terminate at West Ealing. Can't see it being a success - think it will ultimately lead to a service reduction.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Its a shame there isnt room to extend the central line to West Ealing and convert it to Central line. Certainly wouldnt like to see a service reduction, would there be scope for chiltern to take it on?

 

[Nym]

Considering the frequency on the line will double and the lack of connections will make it significanly more reliable, how can one see a change at West Ealing as a massive inconvenience?

 

[SWT_USER]

Considering the frequency on the line will double and the lack of connections will make it significanly more reliable, how can one see a change at West Ealing as a massive inconvenience?

Have to admit I wasn't aware that the service frequency was doubling. Where is this documented?

 

[YorkshireBear]

Considering the frequency on the line will double and the lack of connections will make it significanly more reliable, how can one see a change at West Ealing as a massive inconvenience?

Yeah i had a total mind blank there. I had actually remembered the diesel???? shuttle will be double frequency and connect with Crossrail so its hardly going to be a huge inconvenience. Infact presuming it will us the bay on north side of station, there wont even be a bridge to cross on the way into London, be just cross platform.

Cant remember if its going to be electrified, if it is i imagine it would come as an add on to Chiltern electrification (should it ever happen) unless ofc there will be peak direct trains.

 

[SWT_USER]

Yeah i had a total mind blank there. I had actually remembered the diesel???? shuttle will be double frequency and connect with Crossrail so its hardly going to be a huge inconvenience. Infact presuming it will us the bay on north side of station, there wont even be a bridge to cross on the way into London, be just cross platform.

Cant remember if its going to be electrified, if it is i imagine it would come as an add on to Chiltern electrification (should it ever happen) unless ofc there will be peak direct trains.

Can't see there being direct peak trains as 2 coaches is a waste of a path in to London.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Can't see there being direct peak trains as 2 coaches is a waste of a path in to London.

Thats what i thought too, but if they electrified branch, it would be a 4 car EMU, and if it ran fast West Ealing to Paddington, once a day return i can imagine it being do able.
Key word imagine :P

 

[tsr]

I would suggest, in the somewhat unlikely event of infrastructure capability (i.e. room for the service on the track!), that it should terminate at Ealing Broadway. Far greater numbers of connection opportunities!

 

[rebmcr]

I would suggest, in the somewhat unlikely event of infrastructure capability (i.e. room for the service on the track!), that it should terminate at Ealing Broadway. Far greater numbers of connection opportunities!

Or OOC, because it's supposed to be the interchange.

 

[SWT_USER]

I would suggest, in the somewhat unlikely event of infrastructure capability (i.e. room for the service on the track!), that it should terminate at Ealing Broadway. Far greater numbers of connection opportunities!

It used to do this until some point in the 90's I believe. No room now though. Anyone know when they will start work on the bay at West Ealing?

And Jimmyowl - none of the platforms past West Ealing are long enough for 4 cars.

 

[Nym]

Have to admit I wasn't aware that the service frequency was doubling. Where is this documented?

It's burried somwehere in Crossrail documentation that I really don't have the motivation to dig out at the moment, but it has been the intention all the way back to feasability stage and seems to have carred through, the problem being that it would be a flat junction and would therefore cause many a conflict, and the platforms to Greenford and at Greenford really, really can't take 10 or 12 car units.

I would suggest, in the somewhat unlikely event of infrastructure capability (i.e. room for the service on the track!), that it should terminate at Ealing Broadway. Far greater numbers of connection opportunities!

Again, I very much dowbt that will happen, as it's very unlikely that post crossrail there will be anything shorter than eight coaches on the great western slows, or even on the fasts, perhaps we'll see four car units in the very off peak. But I'd expect most services to be run in 8 car formation into the evening or by crossrail with their fixed formation 10/12 car units. But the calling pattern to be determined here is very unlikely to be all stations so we could see some Reding semi-fasts if it extends up there. If you dig about you can see some draft/daft timetables I've thrown together. Basically taking 8 slow and 8 semi fast / fast paths between ROP and Airport Junction, but this relies (in my TT) on services also running to High Wycombe and Tring / Watford Junction (Possibly Milton Keynes if toilets are fitted, but Tring is a better ending point IMO).

 

[SWT_USER]

Considering the frequency on the line will double and the lack of connections will make it significanly more reliable, how can one see a change at West Ealing as a massive inconvenience?

I've had a bit of a search - it's only doubling frequency in the peak so for the majority of the day passengers won't be any better off. Also disappointing (from a selfish commuting point of view) to see that Acton Main Line will get 4tph whilst Hanwell will still only get 2.

 

[Nym]

I've had a bit of a search - it's only doubling frequency in the peak so for the majority of the day passengers won't be any better off. Also disappointing (from a selfish commuting point of view) to see that Acton Main Line will get 4tph whilst Hanwell will still only get 2.

Bear in mind that at the feasability stage it would have likely been a case of putting something together to get it through parliment where essential works would need to be carried out, it doesn't nessesarally reflect the final timetable that is nowhere near even being drafted yet as it will depend on the performance of the rolling stock and signalling systems to be used (ETCS / ERTMS is likely to be installed at a later date) and if it is extended to Reading and all or most Ex. Paddington services run via the Fasts then we could well see a very different timetable to what is currently published on wikipedia.

 

[SWT_USER]

Bear in mind that at the feasability stage it would have likely been a case of putting something together to get it through parliment where essential works would need to be carried out, it doesn't nessesarally reflect the final timetable that is nowhere near even being drafted yet as it will depend on the performance of the rolling stock and signalling systems to be used (ETCS / ERTMS is likely to be installed at a later date) and if it is extended to Reading and all or most Ex. Paddington services run via the Fasts then we could well see a very different timetable to what is currently published on wikipedia.

although just to be clear I wasn't going off wikipedia!

 

[jopsuk]

A stupidly expensive could take the central and/or District line at Ealing Braodway and dive down into a tunnel, surfacing at West Ealing, with the Underground then taking over the line. The intermediate stations to Greenford probably could be extended if you really invested.

Taking the District and extending the service to West Ruislip would probably be the ideal. Alternatively, alter the lines around Ruislip depot and run into Uxbridge.

 

[Nym]

although just to be clear I wasn't going off wikipedia!

I know, but it saves me looking at some other source, or tapping it out myself
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

A stupidly expensive could take the central and/or District line at Ealing Braodway and dive down into a tunnel, surfacing at West Ealing, with the Underground then taking over the line. The intermediate stations to Greenford probably could be extended if you really invested.

Taking the District and extending the service to West Ruislip would probably be the ideal. Alternatively, alter the lines around Ruislip depot and run into Uxbridge.

But does it need it? I mean really?

If it shows significant growth when it gets jacked up to 4tph/2tph then yeah, it might warrant some more investment in through crossrail services (that would just need a flyover by the way) but for now, it really isn't worth it, is it?

 

[swt_passenger]

Have to admit I wasn't aware that the service frequency was doubling. Where is this documented?

The GWML RUS (page 100) had this to say in 2011:

4.2.3.3 West Ealing bay platform
As featured in the Thames Valley Regional Planning Assessment (2007) this scheme will provide additional capacity into London Paddington for other services. Greenford services will terminate at a new west facing bay platform at West Ealing and could be increased in frequency. The scheme is included within the Crossrail proposals and as such implementation forms part of the Crossrail programme and is currently scheduled for 201.

I guess it depends how many DMUs are available at the time, is it about 10 mins end to end Greenford to West Ealing?

 

[Nym]

I guess it depends how many DMUs are available at the time, is it about 10 mins end to end Greenford to West Ealing?

According to OTT it's 10mins, with a 5min turnaround at Greenford. Is this line 2 track or a single track line?

Seems to have some two track, so two units could work the line for a 4tph service with a nice layover at each end for delay recovery, or add an extra unit for 6tph?

 

[tbtc]

From my limited experience of using the line (a few years ago, admittedly), a half hourly DMU is about right - four or six trains an hour seems a massive over-provision

 

[Nym]

From my limited experience of using the line (a few years ago, admittedly), a half hourly DMU is about right - four or six trains an hour seems a massive over-provision

So if we simply dedicated one unit to the line and ran say, 2tph, or two units to the line and run 3tph with some very good secure layover times that would be plenty...?

 

[YorkshireBear]

The GWML RUS (page 100) had this to say in 2011:



I guess it depends how many DMUs are available at the time, is it about 10 mins end to end Greenford to West Ealing?

I presume theres no passing Loops on the line (will go check in sec) so id say one unit, 3tph running shuttles up down up down up down all day. One passing loop and you could be looking at 4-6tph from 2 units.

 

[tbtc]

So if we simply dedicated one unit to the line and ran say, 2tph, or two units to the line and run 3tph with some very good secure layover times that would be plenty...?

Based on my very occasional use of the line, I'd say that two or three two coach 165s an hour would be sufficient - there are plenty of more deserving lines if there are other DMUs "spare" (like adding capacity on Marylebone services)

 

[lancastrian]

According to OTT it's 10mins, with a 5min turnaround at Greenford. Is this line 2 track or a single track line?

Seems to have some two track, so two units could work the line for a 4tph service with a nice layover at each end for delay recovery, or add an extra unit for 6tph?

The track from West Ealing to almost Greenford is double track, just before the line enters the bay platform it becomes single.

 

[SWT_USER]

It is double track almost all the way.

Was putting the wires up to Greenford and back round to Old Oak Common via Hanger Lane considered as they use this frequently to turn trains? It would also have prevented the need to have a couple of 165's in London all day.

 

[317 forever]

Alternatively, it could be converted to LUL Central Line as a seperate self-contained service from Greenford to West Ealing. It seems pointless remaining a short NR route that links with the Underground anyway.

 

[leytongabriel]

Wouldn't hurt if somebody banged heads together so that there was actually some indication at street level at Greenford that there are still trains to Ealing. You have to go right into the station to see a solitary timetable panel, if it isn't being obscured by a mobile TfL board. Writing to FGW just produces the answer that it's all LU's fault. And do they care? All depressingly reminiscent of BR's 'how to run down an unwanted branch line' strategy.

If it's not even that sure that the service frequency will be increased when the service is cut back to West Ealing then the good burghers of Ealing and Greenford should get busy. If Wimbledon can do it.....

 

[Waddon]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I always sort of assumed that the service was being cut back to West Ealing because the platforms at West Ealing would need extending for longer Crossrail trains, thereby severing the part of the junction which the Greenford services need to access the main line?

 

[swt_passenger]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I always sort of assumed that the service was being cut back to West Ealing because the platforms at West Ealing would need extending for longer Crossrail trains, thereby severing the part of the junction which the Greenford services need to access the main line?

No, the operational reason is only to avoid down trains towards Greenford having to cross up trains from further west. Platform extensions are not an issue, because the track layout shows the physical junction and crossovers will still be there to get the units on and off the branch at start and end of service. That's not to say that the exiting junction will remain in exactly the same place, but it is shown on the final track layout.

 

[mister-sparky]

No, the operational reason is only to avoid down trains towards Greenford having to cross up trains from further west. Platform extensions are not an issue, because the track layout shows the physical junction and crossovers will still be there to get the units on and off the branch at start and end of service. That's not to say that the exiting junction will remain in exactly the same place, but it is shown on the final track layout.

It's also to do with the branch only being able to handle (and only needing) 2-3 coach trains, and short formations are a waste of a path on the main line.