Reading East MP proposes 'semi-fast' Crossrail Services

[JamesRowden]

The BBC website is presently showing the following report:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-25036342

Plans to extend Crossrail to Reading "are of little or no use", one of the town's MPs has said.

Rob Wilson said the metro link from Reading to London would be double the journey time offered by First Great Western's current service.

The Tory MP is in talks with Crossrail Minister, Stephen Hammond, about also offering "semi-fast services".

The Department for Transport (DfT), responsible for the planned extension, has yet to provide a comment.

No toilets

The £14.8bn rail link is set to open in 2018 and will provide an east-west route across London and the South East.

Both Transport Secretary Patrick McLoughlin and shadow infrastructure minister Lord Adonis have called for an extension to Reading.

But Reading East MP Mr Wilson said the current proposals were "highly unsatisfactory" and "inappropriate" for Reading commuters.

He said the main sticking points were the hour-long journey time - compared with First Great Western's 30-minute service - and the "Tube-style trains" which do not offer toilets, catering or "comfortable seats from which to work".

He is proposing semi-fast services of about 40 minutes a few times per hour to be competitive with First Great Western.

He added he would be having more talks with Mr Hammond and the DfT with a view to having outcome before Christmas.

It looks like the suggestion that he is making is to convert the planned Reading-Paddington semi-fast services into Crossrail services and fit them with some comfortable seating.

 

[Eagle]

Yeah... there won't be room for any extra services through Crossrail.

 

[swt_passenger]

I think he's quite right really. Using Crossrail stock to Reading is a popular idea, but I've never believed it will tempt people who've got used to commuting on HSTs.

Now maybe if they came up with a financial incentive such as much cheaper 'Crossrail only' fares, they might have a chance.

I also think the Reading MP is being naive if he thinks they can have some sort of special stock dedicated to any Reading extensions...

 

[Eagle]

But what is wrong with Reading commuters using the existing FGW fast/semifast services and changing at Paddington or Ealing Broadway to get to Crossrail stations?

 

[swt_passenger]

But what is wrong with Reading commuters using the existing FGW fast/semifast services and changing at Paddington or Ealing Broadway to get to Crossrail stations?

Nothing at all. That's the basic reason (irrespective of subsequent electrification and resignalling arguements) that Crossrail might as well terminate at Maidenhead...

 

[cle]

Although it's often said Reading has more inbound commuters than Reeading-originating commuters to London.

Especially with the station all redone and the GWML wired, it'll be even more of a hub and I don't see why it shouldn't have local Crossrail services.

Besides - some were scheduled to run semi-fast. I'm sure I saw plans for: Ealing/Hayes/Slough/Maidenhead type stopping patterns. Surely better than 1 hour?

 

[43074]

I'd have thought Maidenhead alone deserves more than two Crossrail services per hour: maybe the proposed 2tph semi fast services to Paddington Mainline could be worked by Crossrail trains to Shenfield/Abbey Wood, as an extension to those which start at Paddington Crossrail.

Another option with these Paddington Crossrail terminators would be to send them via a new/upgraded link to the WCML and up to Milton Keynes - at a possible 4tph this seems a contender (2 Tring, 1 Milton Keynes & 1 Northampton?) as we have that at the moment, to create more capacity at Euston.

The attached file shows Off Peak Crossrail services from Paddington, and shows that 8tph are planned to start/terminate at Paddington which ought to run beyond Paddington:

 

[swt_passenger]

Another option with these Paddington Crossrail terminators would be to send them via a new/upgraded link to the WCML and up to Milton Keynes - at a possible 4tph this seems a contender (2 Tring, 1 Milton Keynes & 1 Northampton?) as we have that at the moment, to create more capacity at Euston.

As per the proposals in the London and SE RUS then.

But hardly relevant to the issue at Reading, other than the same lack of seated capacity (average to be 45 seats per carriage) and no toilets...

 

[TEW]

Yeah... there won't be room for any extra services through Crossrail.

But there are plenty of trains terminating at Westbourne Park which could quite easliy run on to other destinations. I don't see running semi-fast Crossrail trains to Reading as a particularly crazy idea. I'd imagine there will be problems pathing them though, the Crossrail stock is to be limited to 90mph so not really suitable for the main lines once the 90mph Turbos are displaced with, and running fast trains on the relief lines will eat up capacity.

Regarding the on-board facilities, surely nothing has been announced yet regarding what the interiors are going to be like. I think no Catering can be taken for granted, but it's never been said that they'll have tube or 378 style interiors, actually that would be a rather inappropriate interior for the Crossrail stock. Surely something more akin to Thameslink is more likely.

 

[swt_passenger]

Surely something more akin to Thameslink is more likely.

It's been stated by Crossrail that they'll have 450 seats per ten car train, (hence my 45 seats per car average, because some will have wheelchair spaces) which practically rules out 378 style interiors, because you cannot fit 45 or more seats down the sides of a 20m carriage.

TfL have also previously said that there'll be no toilets on the units.

He's still quite wrong to describe them as 'tube style', as you point out.

Each train will have around 450 seats and a capacity for 1,500 passengers overall. Wide throughgangways
between carriages, and ample space in the passenger saloons, and around the doors,
will reduce passenger congestion while allowing room for those with heavy luggage or pushchairs.
Four designated wheelchair spaces will be provided on each train.

http://www.crossrail.co.uk/assets/download/4962

 

[Bald Rick]

Pretty much like the TL trains then, just without the toilets and first class.

 

[cle]

But there are plenty of trains terminating at Westbourne Park which could quite easliy run on to other destinations. I don't see running semi-fast Crossrail trains to Reading as a particularly crazy idea. I'd imagine there will be problems pathing them though, the Crossrail stock is to be limited to 90mph so not really suitable for the main lines once the 90mph Turbos are displaced with, and running fast trains on the relief lines will eat up capacity.

Regarding the on-board facilities, surely nothing has been announced yet regarding what the interiors are going to be like. I think no Catering can be taken for granted, but it's never been said that they'll have tube or 378 style interiors, actually that would be a rather inappropriate interior for the Crossrail stock. Surely something more akin to Thameslink is more likely.

I understand there will be skip-stopping, and even more so if the Heathrow Express takeover plans are adopted.

So either there will be random patterns with gaps (bad for local use) or they could do flights of 4 trains per 15 mins: fastest, almost as fast just behind, semi and stopping - then a gap for a the fast - like Thameslink northbound in the peaks.

 

[LexyBoy]

But what is wrong with Reading commuters using the existing FGW fast/semifast services and changing at Paddington or Ealing Broadway to get to Crossrail stations?

Obviously nothing. Mr Wilson seems to believe that Crossrail will disadvantage London-bound commuters unless there are fast services from Reading, forgetting that not everyone wants to get to London, and even an "express" Crossrail would be slower than changing at Paddington.

I wouldn't put too much stock in his views on Crossrail: although now he is pro-extension I think this is just because it's popular in Reading. As an excellent example of missing the point (sauce):

“I am slightly struggling to see the benefit to Reading of a slow service to East London. I accept there are capacity issues but I am not sure slow trains to the east of London are the best and financially efficient way to solve it.”

Although it's often said Reading has more inbound commuters than Reeading-originating commuters to London.

I've heard that said before: I'm sure it's true that more people travel into Reading for work than out of it; I am doubtful that this is true of rail specifically however. There certainly are a lot of passengers who travel into Reading though.

 

[Eagle]

Of course with rail there will also be commuters travelling through Reading (e.g. Oxfordshire to London).

 

[JamesRowden]

I think that the more important issues are:

• Is it worthwhile to provide Maidenhead and Slough with faster Crossrail services?
• Is it worthwhile to provide Twyford with Crossrail services?
• Should the existence of through services between Reading and all of the stations to Hayes & Harlington be maintained contrary to the present plan?

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Crossrail 1 had a plan for 4 tph Reading - Shenfield all day - (calling all station to Slough) - then Ealing Broadway - and down the tunnel. Seemed fair enough in the day. 2 Maidenhead peak only starters - all to Hayes, then Ealing and tunnel - and 4 off Slough - all stops to Paddington. Mind you that was 1993......no "Connect" service then for example.

The plan was for Aylesbury also - 4 off there (fast Ricky to Harrow) , 2 all day through off Chesham and 4 off Amersham.

The planned traffic levels off the Thames Valley were much higher than off the Met / Chiltern corridor.....

 

[Bald Rick]

Crossrail 1 had a plan for 4 tph Reading - Shenfield all day - (calling all station to Slough) - then Ealing Broadway - and down the tunnel. Seemed fair enough in the day. 2 Maidenhead peak only starters - all to Hayes, then Ealing and tunnel - and 4 off Slough - all stops to Paddington. Mind you that was 1993......no "Connect" service then for example.

The plan was for Aylesbury also - 4 off there (fast Ricky to Harrow) , 2 all day through off Chesham and 4 off Amersham.

The planned traffic levels off the Thames Valley were much higher than off the Met / Chiltern corridor.....

20 trains an hour? Pah!

 

[anthony263]

I can see some of the Paddington terminators being extended to the proposed interchange station at Old Oak Common if it and HS2 is constructed.

Of course if there is room perhaps at least 2tph which terminate at Paddington could run semi-fast to Reading a bit like some of the Thameslink services do north of St Pancras except all the Crossrail services would use the relief lines

 

[ChiefPlanner]

20 trains an hour? Pah!

There were awkward options for the other 4 tph - a controversial turnback at Nrth Harrow (difficult environmentally and socially) - and a better one for West Ealing - with the (peak) trains into service at Ealing Broadway.....


Course it all came to zilch as a result of a certain Act of Parliament which came in 20 years ago to this week....still , we have Crossrail firmly on the agenda and in reality ......(timetables can always be amended down line - as can seating plans on train sets...)

 

[gwr4090]

I understand there will be skip-stopping, and even more so if the Heathrow Express takeover plans are adopted.

So either there will be random patterns with gaps (bad for local use) or they could do flights of 4 trains per 15 mins: fastest, almost as fast just behind, semi and stopping - then a gap for a the fast - like Thameslink northbound in the peaks.

There are NO plans for Crossrail to take over the Heathrow Express service. But what may happen when the HEX agreements expire and the Heathrow Western access is opened is that HEX will be replaced by a fast Paddington-Heathrow-Slough-Reading-Basingstoke service using the HEX paths on the main lines with the proposed 110mph emus. This is suggested in the London RUS.

 

[swt_passenger]

There are NO plans for Crossrail to take over the Heathrow Express service. But what may happen when the HEX agreements expire and the Heathrow Western access is opened is that HEX will be replaced by a fast Paddington-Heathrow-Slough-Reading-Basingstoke service using the HEX paths on the main lines with the proposed 110mph emus. This is suggested in the London RUS.

However the same London and SE RUS you quote from also clearly explains another scenario (whereby Crossrail provides a 10 tph service to Heathrow, thereby releasing the HEx mainline paths for a fast Paddington to Reading service that doesn't go through Heathrow. It then goes on to propose Crossrail extending 4 tph to Reading and 4 tph to Staines.

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. [The fast Paddington to Readings]
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.
Linked to the above the RUS emphasises the
desirability of extending Heathrow services
westwards to improve connectivity, as described
later. Beyond Terminal 5 a potential split towards
the end of the RUS period could be four trains per
hour to Reading (via Slough) and four trains per hour
to Staines.

That sounds rather like Crossrail taking over from HEx to me...

 

[jopsuk]

the idea of having some of the trains through the core be "lower density" with loos etc at peak time is a bit daft. It's one of the weaknesses of Thameslink that you have long distance services/stock acting as almost a tube service- and CrossRail WILL be faster than tube, unlike Thameslink