Ideas for South West franchise going forward

[infobleep]

I don't think they have] to change between Farnborough Main and Farnborough North. If I leave Overton at 0820 I can change at Woking, get a train to Guildford, and then use a North Down Line train to Gatwick. It would take one hours 39 minutes, which is only ten minutes longer than going via Clapham Junction outside the peak hour.

The suggested change between the Farnborough stations is one of the theoretically possible but impractical routes that National Rail Enquiries sometimes produce.

Is a route changing at Woking, then going down to Guildford allowed?

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Of course it is. Who in their right mind would want to go via Clapham anyway, it's a horrid station.

 

[The Ham]

Is a route changing at Woking, then going down to Guildford allowed?

Given that by using an "an permitted" for between Guildford and Farnborough allows you to change at Woking, then I would say yes.

(Even though there is a more expensive "Via Woking" ticket which only allows you to go that way and not use the North Downs Line, but that is the way of things.).

 

[455driver]

Extra slack is easy, just electrify the line.

There isnt actually that much to electrify either!

 

[The Ham]

The Camberley Society are campaing for a link to be built to the SWML:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-21988885

A Surrey residents' association is campaigning to restore a rail link axed in the 1960s to cut journey times into London.

The Camberley Society wants to be able to travel from Camberley to Waterloo in under 50 minutes by restoring the rail track between the town and Woking.

Spokesman David Powell said the journey from Camberley to Waterloo currently takes 1 hour 15 minutes via Ascot.

Surrey Heath Tory MP Michael Gove said he supported the campaign.

People travelling from Camberley to London now have to take the slow train or drive five miles to Farnborough to get a train which takes 43 minutes.

The Camberley Society said the railway lines for the Camberley to Woking link were in place until 1968, and one of the track beds was still visible.
'Political pressure'

It is looking for sponsors to help put together a business case for restoration of the line and volunteers to carry out market research.

"If there is a good case, with good public support and effective political pressure, we can get the government to implement it within five years, not withstanding that it is likely to cost upwards of £15m," said Mr Powell.

The society said it has had expressions of support from councillors on Surrey County Council (SCC) and Surrey Heath Borough Council.

Surrey Heath said it had long sought to improve rail services and connections in the borough and believed the link to Woking was a suitable project for further investigation.

It said it was working with SCC, which is developing a wider rail strategy.

They maybe in for a bit of a shock with regards to cost as SCC has the link (so the return from London avoids crossing the SWML on the flat) as £75m rather than £15m! I would have thought that £15m would only allow trains to run into London of a morning, which would be of fairly limited use.

Also, I do not see how (even if there were a spare path into Waterloo) that the TOC would pick to run a service from Camberley (0.5 million passengers, even adding Frimley and Bagshot doesn't even make it to over 1 million passsengers) over most other places which would desire more trains (even Hook has about 0.65 million passengers! Let alone Woking, Farnborough, Basingstoke, Southmapton, Portsmouth, Sailsbury or Guildford).

That then also leads to the point that even if a path existed and was allocated to Camberley I very much doubt that it would run fast once it joined the SWML.

Overall the best solution that they could hope for is an extension of the Woking stopping service, which wouldn't be that much slower than the existing route at about 65 to 70 minutes compared with 75 minutes. Although that would then allow people to change trains at Woking for a faster service, however allowing for a 5 minute change time (which is required in the morning peak as the bridge at woking can get very busy) that would be (just) about 50 minutes, however in reality it's more likely not to save that much time.

It then leads to the question, is it better to spend £75m on a east bound link which will require a change to get to London within a reasonable time and a change to head west or to spend the same money on a link west which requires a change to head to London but allows a direct link to Farnborough, Fleet and Basingstoke?

My vote would be for a west bound link, as the trains to London tend to be quiter at Farnborough then they would be at Woking (i.e. more likely to get a seat). With the extra passengers at Farnborough it could then see extra services calling there benefiting more people. It provides a direct rail link between Camberley and places like Farnborough, Fleet and Basingstoke which would likely generate more rail passengers than a direct link with Brookwood and Woking as there are many people who would want to travel between the two lines and can't so drive. It would also enable a new service to be run (possibly Basingstoke to Ascot) which would be self contianed and could be useful at time of delays east of Farnborough.

I can understand the case for the east bound link; less time standing on a peak hour train from Woking than from Farnborough. Why make the journey longer than needed by going the wrong way? Better connections with other stations heading towards London.

 

[infobleep]

Of course the reason Camberley figures might be less is because people are driving to other stations. If they do that there is no way the figures will be counted as part of Camberley. Far better would be to add the numbers driving from Camberley to other stations to the Camberley to London figures.

 

[evergreenadam]

How about constructing a west facing curve between Bagshot and Martins Heron just to the west of the Ascot junction. This would enable an Aldershot-Camberley-Bracknell-Wokingham-Reading service to operate, probably as a diversion of the existing Aldershot-Camberley-Ascot service in order to reduce extra operating costs.

Bracknell and Wokingham would receive an increased frequency into Reading on this busy commuter corridor, which is unlikely to be possible by increasing the frequency of the Reading-Waterloo service due to level crossing and track capacity issues elswhere on the line.

Camberley, Bagshot, Frimley, Ash Vale and Aldershot would receive a new service to Bracknell, Wokingham and Reading. While the North Downs line stations at Farnborough North, Ash and North Camp may offer a faster service to Wokingham and Reading, this new service would increase the areas within the Aldershot/Camberley conurbation with a direct service to Wokingham and Reading and offer some more attractive station locations closer to town centres eg. Aldershot and Camberley. The North Downs Line stations tend to be in out of town locations.

The biggest benefit would be the new links between Reading/Bracknell and Camberley/Aldershot which are not currently easy journeys by rail.
Usage of the Ascot-Aldershot shuttle outside of the peak through trains to London cannot be high and the link to employment/shopping/education opportunities in Reading and Bracknell would generate some healthy off-peak traffic. Direct access to the rail network in Reading would also open up extra journey opportunities and perhaps reduce crowding on the North Downs Line. Passengers from Bagshot etc for London could change at Martins Heron instead of Ascot.

 

[455driver]

Wasnt a rather large dual carriageway/motorway built across the trackbed meaning the railway cannot be built on its original alignment because the bridge would be too low for the road traffic?

 

[HarleyDavidson]

How about constructing a west facing curve between Bagshot and Martins Heron just to the west of the Ascot junction. This would enable an Aldershot-Camberley-Bracknell-Wokingham-Reading service to operate, probably as a diversion of the existing Aldershot-Camberley-Ascot service in order to reduce extra operating costs.

Bracknell and Wokingham would receive an increased frequency into Reading on this busy commuter corridor, which is unlikely to be possible by increasing the frequency of the Reading-Waterloo service due to level crossing and track capacity issues elswhere on the line.

Camberley, Bagshot, Frimley, Ash Vale and Aldershot would receive a new service to Bracknell, Wokingham and Reading. While the North Downs line stations at Farnborough North, Ash and North Camp may offer a faster service to Wokingham and Reading, this new service would increase the areas within the Aldershot/Camberley conurbation with a direct service to Wokingham and Reading and offer some more attractive station locations closer to town centres eg. Aldershot and Camberley. The North Downs Line stations tend to be in out of town locations.

The biggest benefit would be the new links between Reading/Bracknell and Camberley/Aldershot which are not currently easy journeys by rail.
Usage of the Ascot-Aldershot shuttle outside of the peak through trains to London cannot be high and the link to employment/shopping/education opportunities in Reading and Bracknell would generate some healthy off-peak traffic. Direct access to the rail network in Reading would also open up extra journey opportunities and perhaps reduce crowding on the North Downs Line. Passengers from Bagshot etc for London could change at Martins Heron instead of Ascot.

There used to be a hourly through service from Guildford to both Reading (Headcode 35) & Waterloo on the opposite ½ hour, which ran via either Hounslow or Richmond, it seemed to vary.

There is simply no need to create such a curve as it would miss out Ascot one of the main stations. The old 35 headcode used to simply come into Platform 1 or 2 the driver change ends and go within 5 or 10 minutes & it wasn't very well patronised then.

Now you have a frequent service from Waterloo & it arrives and departs about 5-10 minutes after the Guildford service terminates in Platform 3.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The Camberley Society are campaing for a link to be built to the SWML:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-21988885



They maybe in for a bit of a shock with regards to cost as SCC has the link (so the return from London avoids crossing the SWML on the flat) as £75m rather than £15m! I would have thought that £15m would only allow trains to run into London of a morning, which would be of fairly limited use.

Also, I do not see how (even if there were a spare path into Waterloo) that the TOC would pick to run a service from Camberley (0.5 million passengers, even adding Frimley and Bagshot doesn't even make it to over 1 million passsengers) over most other places which would desire more trains (even Hook has about 0.65 million passengers! Let alone Woking, Farnborough, Basingstoke, Southmapton, Portsmouth, Sailsbury or Guildford).

That then also leads to the point that even if a path existed and was allocated to Camberley I very much doubt that it would run fast once it joined the SWML.

Overall the best solution that they could hope for is an extension of the Woking stopping service, which wouldn't be that much slower than the existing route at about 65 to 70 minutes compared with 75 minutes. Although that would then allow people to change trains at Woking for a faster service, however allowing for a 5 minute change time (which is required in the morning peak as the bridge at woking can get very busy) that would be (just) about 50 minutes, however in reality it's more likely not to save that much time.

It then leads to the question, is it better to spend £75m on a east bound link which will require a change to get to London within a reasonable time and a change to head west or to spend the same money on a link west which requires a change to head to London but allows a direct link to Farnborough, Fleet and Basingstoke?

My vote would be for a west bound link, as the trains to London tend to be quiter at Farnborough then they would be at Woking (i.e. more likely to get a seat). With the extra passengers at Farnborough it could then see extra services calling there benefiting more people. It provides a direct rail link between Camberley and places like Farnborough, Fleet and Basingstoke which would likely generate more rail passengers than a direct link with Brookwood and Woking as there are many people who would want to travel between the two lines and can't so drive. It would also enable a new service to be run (possibly Basingstoke to Ascot) which would be self contianed and could be useful at time of delays east of Farnborough.

I can understand the case for the east bound link; less time standing on a peak hour train from Woking than from Farnborough. Why make the journey longer than needed by going the wrong way? Better connections with other stations heading towards London.

Sorry if this seems a bit out of order, but this lot are a sandwich short of a picnic.

The Sturt lane solution is completely impractical, as it would be a single line chord to & from the mainline. This creates a serious bottleneck as the mainline services would have to be double blocked to allow a movement to or from the Sturt lane chord, which is simply unacceptable as it would mean trains being held at Pirbright junction or Farnborough West crossover, which is simply not on, especially as people who live on the SWML pay a darn sight more for their service than those at Camberley do.

You could have a Farnborough facing chord, however you would need two separate ones to avoid the same Sturt lane issues of confliction. Then you have the problem of a deep fishing lake, two quite expensive houses in the way and the A331 Blackwater valley dual carriageway, the NDL & a school playing field to deal with.

It would be better if they built a flyover at Ash Vale, again this has issues regarding land take, as it means using part of Ash firing ranges and using a part of the land behind the now redundant & soon to be demolished Ash Vale junction signalbox and extending the line towards Mytchett to get the long shallow grade, the curve could then be a long sweeping one. It would also require a cross over near Bridge Hill TPH or Foxhills Tunnel, so that the service could then use the standard Alton branch to/from Pirbright.

I should point out that the ground around this area is mainly sand, which isn't an ideal medium to build on & this of course would bring extra difficulties & the project is really prohibitively expensive for the level of patronage.

 

[infobleep]

Trains regularly get held at Woking Junction and Havant Junction. So why not add another Junction much the same. More the marrier.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

You dont get held at Woking junction if you coast from Whitmore Common doing around 60-65 mph or Havant junction if you let em roll from just outside Buriton tunnel!

You dont need to chase fasts (1Pxx) down from Buriton unless youre late,the only one you do is the 2Pxx which call at Rowlys Castle at xx20,those you need to chase down to be RT there and hence Havant,from Rowlys Castle to Havant is a gentle stroll at about 50 mph and not much more between Bedhampton & Fratton.

Easy if you use RTT for reference.

 

[swt_passenger]

Trains regularly get held at Woking Junction and Havant Junction. So why not add another Junction much the same. More the marrier.

If they rebuild Woking with a flyover (as per the £100 million option in the Waterloo remodelling ITT), then they'll have a four track flat junction spare they can stick somewhere else to wreck a different timetable...

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Woking needs a comprehensive rebuild.

In reality, it needs a dive under at the London end to provide unrestricted access to/from the up bay and it needs a flyover from the Portsmouth direct line.

An easy fix to remove the long standing 20 mph TSR on Woking junction, what it needs is the down slow line to be slewed over towards the down main fast line to straighten it and a shallower angle of approach from the Portsmouth direct. What are the chances of any of this happening? Zilch, Zero, Nada!

 

[hotelmode]

Wasnt a rather large dual carriageway/motorway built across the trackbed meaning the railway cannot be built on its original alignment because the bridge would be too low for the road traffic?

I think that's the curve from the S/bnd North downs line to E/bnd SWML. The 2 curves from the Camberley line look relatively clear from google maps, although they would certainly cause chaos on the main line if re-opened.

On the point of low usage, its not because there isn't demand, its just everyone drives to Farnborough, Brookwood and Woking stations or don't use the train. South of Camberley most trains miss connections with Alton-London trains at Ash Vale by a few minutes in both directions. They also spend 5 minutes at Camberley and then 15 minutes reversing at Aldershot both ways thus taking 50 mins to Guildford which is totally uncompetitive.

The connections at Ascot are Ok but that's a pretty slow route to London in comparison with the SWML even without changing. That's why current usage is low not lack of demand, the population of Camberley and Sandhurst being similar to Farnborough even before including Frimley and Bagshot.

A curve at Ash Vale would be a good idea (especially as Keogh Barracks which the curve would run through is closing) but there would still be an issue with 4 carriage platforms and lack of car parking (again a reflection of current low demand) at the stations.

At the moment the line is of little use to anyone due to poor connections and slow journey times. Surrey and SWT need to decide what the line is for and sort out the timetable so it works. I cant help feeling that connections with London trains at Ash Vale rather than Ascot would provide a more useful service and more passengers.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

As I have previously stated reinstating Sturt lane junction is completely impractical as it would require trains to be "double blocked", the only way to do it would be a fly over the single & mainlines and it would tortuously curved, steeply graded and very expensive, as it would impinge on a large office block & the fishing lakes.

Let's face it, it's a non starter. You'd have more chance building an avoiding curve at Redhill or reinstating the line to Cranleigh than this,as it would give you a better return for your money.

 

[hotelmode]

As I have previously stated reinstating Sturt lane junction is completely impractical as it would require trains to be "double blocked", the only way to do it would be a fly over the single & mainlines and it would tortuously curved, steeply graded and very expensive, as it would impinge on a large office block & the fishing lakes.

Let's face it, it's a non starter. You'd have more chance building an avoiding curve at Redhill or reinstating the line to Cranleigh than this,as it would give you a better return for your money.

I was replying to 455driver about the original curve formations being blocked by the A331. They aren't.

I understand that the original formation is an operational non starter hence the "although they would certainly cause chaos on the main line if re-opened." in the post.

I don't see there being any major works realistically. Just an extension to Staines (running into the Egham/Sunningdale crossing issues) or better connections/timings at Ash Vale would probably achieve nearly as much.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

That linkage was never constructed, just as the linkage between the NDL and the Cranleigh & Portsmouth direct at Peasmarsh junction (Guildford) because WW2 intervened.

And it would impinge on the A331. Have a look at the area using Bing Maps and select OS mapping.

 

[hotelmode]

That linkage was never constructed, just as the linkage between the NDL and the Cranleigh & Portsmouth direct at Peasmarsh junction (Guildford) because WW2 intervened.

And it would impinge on the A331. Have a look at the area using Bing Maps and select OS mapping.

I think there's some confusion.

The curve from the North Downs line to the SWML was never fully constructed and is obstructed by the A331.

The 2 curves from the Ascot-Camberley-Ash Vale line to the SWML were both opened in 1878 and both closed in 1964. They are both still more or less unobstructed as far as I can see, the one to the E/bnd SWML is especially obvious on satellite images. The West bound curve joins the main line well before the A331 bridge. A flyover would obviously increase the land take from these original flat junctions and the flat junctions are impractical so I'm sure neither is a viable option without huge expense.

Camberley had direct trains from Waterloo by this route. In the 1962 timetable I have in front of me there were several trains calling Woking, Brookwood, Frimley and Camberley taking around 50 mins. At the same time there was a through train from Waterloo to Camberley via Ascot every 30 mins throughout the day, which looks like it split from Reading trains at Ascot. There aren't many towns of 50K + in the South East that have seen their railway service deteriorate that badly in the last 60 years.

http://locodriver.co.uk/Railway_Encyclopedia/Part255/Part03/Part01/index.html For pictures showing both curves.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Ah, apologies. I think I know which you're on about.

Is it that curve you can see near Frimley Green on an OS map? If so that is the Sturt lane chord.

Whilst unobstructed that's the impractical one. That will cause serious issues with fast services from Weymouth/Southampton & Exeter, if reinstated, as the Camberley Society wants.

 

[hotelmode]

Ah, apologies. I think I know which you're on about.

Is it that curve you can see near Frimley Green on an OS map? If so that is the Sturt lane chord.

Whilst unobstructed that's the impractical one. That will cause serious issues with fast services from Weymouth/Southampton & Exeter, if reinstated, as the Camberley Society wants.

Yes that's the one. A flat junction would certainly never work, maybe theres space for a flyover to the south, especially if you close the existing Ash vale line. Either way it wont happen in my lifetime!

 

[455driver]

I think that's the curve from the S/bnd North downs line to E/bnd SWML. The 2 curves from the Camberley line look relatively clear from google maps, although they would certainly cause chaos on the main line if re-opened.

I think you might be right, I knew the road prevented one group of nutters getting their direct service back and it looks like it was the wrong set of nutters!

Thanks for clearing it up for ne!

 

[3141]

Given that by using an "an permitted" for between Guildford and Farnborough allows you to change at Woking, then I would say yes.

(Even though there is a more expensive "Via Woking" ticket which only allows you to go that way and not use the North Downs Line, but that is the way of things.).

If I use the SWT website to search for a journey Overton to Gatwick starting at 0820, the route via Woking and Guildford is one of the options it offers me.

 

[The Ham]

Yes that's the one. A flat junction would certainly never work, maybe theres space for a flyover to the south, especially if you close the existing Ash vale line. Either way it wont happen in my lifetime!

Why not just go under the SWML, I don't know if it would work for going towards London, but could work going west, although would require it to be on supports over the lake.

Surrey County have put the cost for a full junction at £75m for the London bound option. I assume that either way would likely be a similar cost.

 

[Rational Plan]

Look up the Surrey County Council rail study. As it looks into this.

Basically it only sees a Camberley link as viable when more capacity is created on the SWML. So post Woking Grade separation at least and probably Crossrail 2.

Not much in the rest of the study, other than a couple of new stations and improve North Downs service (not by much though) and just keep campaigning to make sure trains are lengthened to 12 cars and put full weight behind Crossrail 2.

 

[The Ham]

Basically it only sees a Camberley link as viable when more capacity is created on the SWML. So post Woking Grade separation at least and probably Crossrail 2.

Quite, which is one of the reasons for my suggestion of the west facing junction to speed up travel times to London as it is not reliant on any other works.

It would then demonstrate the usefulness of the east facing junction as it would be easy to monitor passenger numbers changing at Farnborough for trains heading east.

Of course, post Crossrail 2 and grade separation of Woking junction Salisbury and Southampton (to name a few) would be looking for a more frequent service, many of which would be higher up the TOC's list of places to serve.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Of course the reason Camberley figures might be less is because people are driving to other stations. If they do that there is no way the figures will be counted as part of Camberley. Far better would be to add the numbers driving from Camberley to other stations to the Camberley to London figures.

True, however I still doubt that Camberley and Frimley would make it much past 1million mark and certainty not past the 2 million mark. Therefore fairly low down the list of places for a new/extra services to go to.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

The only busy trains on the Camberley route are the through London ones,outside of those you could quite easily fit the number of people travelling on it, not within a 4 car, not within a 2 car, but a single coach on many occasions.

A 2 car is more than adequate for the rest day, most of them over there travel free anyway because the guard can't get through and at night the kids make it a virtual no go zone and apart from them few travel. Even I'm scared I've seen needles and knives waved about over there so I don't travel by train, I use the car it's safer & more convenient.

So to call for through services, you need more & better stock.

Most of the locals have the common sense to use the buses, which stop outside the station and don't have the issues with the kids.

 

[FenMan]

Regarding the diminishing band of London-bound Camberley commuters - I lived in Camberley for probably too long and am old enough to remember travelling on services via Ascot that took 0h59m to get to Waterloo.

As Camberley is very much aligned East-West, commuters living in the east part mainly drive to Sunningdale with some going to Woking. In the west part, then Farnborough Main is used. Whichever way, SWT has still got their custom.

The cheap way to improve services from Camberley and Frimley to Waterloo would be to find a way to undo the impact of the SWML timetable recast that broke the previously good connections at Ash Vale. The old 5 minute connection is now 20 minutes. Despite this, the Ash Vale route still offers the fastest journey to Waterloo during the day - 1h12m - so a recast ought to reduce this to under an hour whilst maintaining a sensible margin for the connection.

Without speculating on the cause and effect, these days Camberley and Frimley are prime locations for people commuting to Heathrow by car.

 

[Rich McLean]

I dunno, but sounds like a lot more hassle to me, as that's alot of services coming up from Torbay on which people will be wanting to go up to EXC, and I doubt the connections will be there for it.Hope I'm wrong, as the extra capacity from the 158's will be very welcome. 153 Shuttle service ala Queen Street - Cardiff Bay perhaps?!

If paths are available, you could run the semi-fasts to Central but then you then would have 4tph between there and St Davids, coupled with the fact at turning services at St James Park or Exmouth Jn depending on pathing