Reading to Waterloo Line stopping pattern

[cle]

I do think that if 4tph west of Staines (plus 2tph to Aldershot) - then some of them needn't be all stations west of Staines.

Of course it's not for end-to-end travellers, but a fair few from Wokingham, Bracknell and Ascot to a lesser degree - could do with faster services. I'd chop Ascot (as it has the Aldershots) and run - Reading, Wokingham, Bracknell, Staines, Richmond then CJ/Vaux/Waterloo... 2tph. Twickenham could be used for passing if needed.


Ashford and Mortlake especially seem to get a rubbish deal - but I understand why. Could 2tph of the Windsors stop at Mortlake instead of Putney, following a fast? Unthinkable?

 

[HarleyDavidson]

I do think that if 4tph west of Staines (plus 2tph to Aldershot) - then some of them needn't be all stations west of Staines.

Of course it's not for end-to-end travellers, but a fair few from Wokingham, Bracknell and Ascot to a lesser degree - could do with faster services. I'd chop Ascot (as it has the Aldershots) and run - Reading, Wokingham, Bracknell, Staines, Richmond then CJ/Vaux/Waterloo... 2tph. Twickenham could be used for passing if needed.


Ashford and Mortlake especially seem to get a rubbish deal - but I understand why. Could 2tph of the Windsors stop at Mortlake instead of Putney, following a fast? Unthinkable?

You try chopping Ascot out of any faster services and see what happens! Too many rich & "influential" people live there. Take Vauxhall out of the equation as it will be a cross platform connection at Clapham.

 

[Greenback]

Yes - please see the 2001 suburban service diagram attached to my post yesterday.

Cheers, don't know how I kissed that but I did.

 

[Dr_Intoxicated]

I do think that if 4tph west of Staines (plus 2tph to Aldershot) - then some of them needn't be all stations west of Staines.

Of course it's not for end-to-end travellers, but a fair few from Wokingham, Bracknell and Ascot to a lesser degree - could do with faster services. I'd chop Ascot (as it has the Aldershots) and run - Reading, Wokingham, Bracknell, Staines, Richmond then CJ/Vaux/Waterloo... 2tph. Twickenham could be used for passing if needed.


Ashford and Mortlake especially seem to get a rubbish deal - but I understand why. Could 2tph of the Windsors stop at Mortlake instead of Putney, following a fast? Unthinkable?

There are quite a few people on the Windsors from intermediate stations that use Putney. I would not expect be as much usage of Mortlake.

Also Feltham is a recognised interchange for Heathrow.

 

[cle]

There are quite a few people on the Windsors from intermediate stations that use Putney. I would not expect be as much usage of Mortlake.

Also Feltham is a recognised interchange for Heathrow.

Putney would still have the current 2tph - I was talking about the additional 2.

And same for Ascot - they would have 4tph to London which is decent given the passenger numbers. Wokingham and Bracknell would have 4tph also - and are twice as busy.

 

[FenMan]

Putney would still have the current 2tph - I was talking about the additional 2.

And same for Ascot - they would have 4tph to London which is decent given the passenger numbers. Wokingham and Bracknell would have 4tph also - and are twice as busy.

Given that GWR have plans to increase traffic to 3tph on the North Downs Line, your suggestion would result in 7tph in each direction at Wokingham. This might cause a slight issue for motorists attempting to use the level crossing just south of the station.

 

[swt_passenger]

Given that GWR have plans to increase traffic to 3tph on the North Downs Line, your suggestion would result in 7tph in each direction at Wokingham. This might cause a slight issue for motorists attempting to use the level crossing just south of the station.

It isn't really the earlier poster's suggestion, it is the proposed service patterns in the latest Wessex (4 tph) and Western (3 tph) route studies.

The diagram in JamesRowden's post #19 earlier in the thread is repeated in the final version of the Wessex study as Fig 5.10. We can only hope the authors of the two studies have been in touch with one another regarding level crossings...

 

[cle]

It isn't really the earlier poster's suggestion, it is the proposed service patterns in the latest Wessex (4 tph) and Western (3 tph) route studies.

The diagram in JamesRowden's post #19 earlier in the thread is repeated in the final version of the Wessex study as Fig 5.10. We can only hope the authors of the two studies have been in touch with one another regarding level crossings...

Yep, indeed. I was more talking about stopping patterns - the overall services i'm referring to are those which were proposed.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

If you added 2tph to/from Waterloo to Aldershot via Ascot, you'd have 4tph between Ascot & Aldershot, which is a ridiculous level of service provision, considering that a 2 car is more than adequate during the day, a 4 car is carrying serious amounts of fresh air!

They'd have to extend them to Guildford or Farnham as there's nowhere for them to stay, that means training more crews up for the service, they won't do that it costs too much money. Also they'll have to upgrade the power supplies to the whole area (which I believe is a work in progress).

 

[infobleep]

Cheers, don't know how I kissed that but I did.

Was it a virtual kiss?

 

[LexyBoy]

IME most passengers are going between Reading and the likes of Bracknell and Ascot, and between London and stations to Ascot. So I suppose one could have services which are all stops Reading-Ascot then fast, and all stops Waterloo-Ascot then fast (for example) - but doing so would not benefit the majority of passengers, and inconvenience those making longer - but not end-to-end - journeys (such as me).

I think the route serves enough "centres", such as Staines, Bracknell, Richmond, Feltham etc that the all-stops approach is going to be hard to beat without inconveniencing quite a few people.

As others have said, the line is not (generally) there to serve the Reading - central London market - even if you are aiming at the south bank, it's usually faster to go via Paddington and the Bakerloo line.

It's faster to get the train to Paddington and walk to Waterloo. I speak from experience.

 

[infobleep]

IME most passengers are going between Reading and the likes of Bracknell and Ascot, and between London and stations to Ascot. So I suppose one could have services which are all stops Reading-Ascot then fast, and all stops Waterloo-Ascot then fast (for example) - but doing so would not benefit the majority of passengers, and inconvenience those making longer - but not end-to-end - journeys (such as me).

I think the route serves enough "centres", such as Staines, Bracknell, Richmond, Feltham etc that the all-stops approach is going to be hard to beat without inconveniencing quite a few people.



It's faster to get the train to Paddington and walk to Waterloo. I speak from experience.

Is Waterloo within a 20 minute walking distance of Paddington?

 

[JamesRowden]

If you added 2tph to/from Waterloo to Aldershot via Ascot, you'd have 4tph between Ascot & Aldershot, which is a ridiculous level of service provision, considering that a 2 car is more than adequate during the day, a 4 car is carrying serious amounts of fresh air!

They'd have to extend them to Guildford or Farnham as there's nowhere for them to stay, that means training more crews up for the service, they won't do that it costs too much money. Also they'll have to upgrade the power supplies to the whole area (which I believe is a work in progress).

What about scrapping the Ascot-Guildford service and running an Alton/Farnham-Guildford service instead which would connect with the Aldershot-Ascot-Waterloo service?

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Pointless because unless you shift the current Guildford - Ascot service to depart Guildford at xx:45 & xx:15 (the former you can't as the 1Oxx Gatwick - Reading departs at xx:44), which would give Aldershot - Farnham an approximate 15' service, but there's no need for it.

 

[JamesRowden]

Pointless because unless you shift the current Guildford - Ascot service to depart Guildford at xx:45 & xx:15 (the former you can't as the 1Oxx Gatwick - Reading departs at xx:44), which would give Aldershot - Farnham an approximate 15' service, but there's no need for it.

Your post doesn't make sense. It doesn't state a downside to my suggestion.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Your post doesn't make sense. It doesn't state a downside to my suggestion.

Yes it does. Because there's no demand for it.

You have to run a service from Guildford to Aldershot, well at present it arrives just 3' in front of the down Alton. So if you carried the idea forward of sending to Farnham instead of Ascot, you're going to have 2 trains to Farnham, within 3' of each other and it does it in the reverse direction.

You simply cannot leave a train in the platform at Aldershot for 20-30' during the day, it's operationally restrictive and besides, there's no demand for it, with any passengers wanting to go to Staines, going to Ascot and waiting about 6' for the train there or for Richmond & Twickenham, using the up Alton and changing at Clapham and returning as it's so much quicker.

 

[JamesRowden]

Yes it does. Because there's no demand for it.

You have to run a service from Guildford to Aldershot, well at present it arrives just 3' in front of the down Alton. So if you carried the idea forward of sending to Farnham instead of Ascot, you're going to have 2 trains to Farnham, within 3' of each other and it does it in the reverse direction.

You simply cannot leave a train in the platform at Aldershot for 20-30' during the day, it's operationally restrictive and besides, there's no demand for it, with any passengers wanting to go to Staines, going to Ascot and waiting about 6' for the train there or for Richmond & Twickenham, using the up Alton and changing at Clapham and returning as it's so much quicker.

Then run the Guildford train though to Alton at a different part of the 30 minute cycle?

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Nope, most off peak trains from London only carry probably a dozen down there, if that. You could get away with pruning that London service to hourly, the demand is so light.

You get a few more around lunchtime, because there's an hours gap, otherwise, you pick up most from Farnham.

Again it's all peaks & troughs. I the evening when I've been down at Farnham shed, I've seen 5 & 8 car trains go past with just one or two on.

 

[JamesRowden]

Nope, most off peak trains from London only carry probably a dozen down there, if that. You could get away with pruning that London service to hourly, the demand is so light.

You get a few more around lunchtime, because there's an hours gap, otherwise, you pick up most from Farnham.

Again it's all peaks & troughs. I the evening when I've been down at Farnham shed, I've seen 5 & 8 car trains go past with just one or two on.

So maybe the Alton to Waterloo services could be cut back to Farnham?

 

[infobleep]

I'd like a direct train to Farnham for selfish purposes of course. I do wish the 3 minutes at Aldershot could be longer or the official connection time between trains at Aldershot reduced.

Interestingly on the 31st Jan there is engineering works between Guildford and Aldershot.

The timetable works in such a way that you have a 34 minute wait at Aldershot for the train to Alton when coming off the bus from Guildford. The journey time is 1hour 37 minutes. Going via Woking it is just 56 minutes but that isn't allowed on a single ticket.,

The return journey in the afternoon however is just 50 minutes vers 55 via Woking. Surely they could improve the timings.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

I don't think you'd have any problems going via Woking on an Alton ticket if there's engineering works involved. We send people that way if things are screwed up between Guildford & Aldershot all the time.

In fact if you had a bike or pram/pushchair you'd almost certainly be directed that way as they're not allowed on RRB's.

And btw, you're asking too much from our TPU, common sense & minimal inconvenience isn't in it as far as they're concerned.

 

[LexyBoy]

Is Waterloo within a 20 minute walking distance of Paddington?

(Still) faster than getting the Reading-Waterloo train I meant, not faster than using the Tube.

It's about 40 minutes from memory.

 

[evergreenadam]

Well there is an opportunity to put forward your views on train frequencies and service patterns in the current consultation:

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/south-western-rail-franchise