South Western division connection to Heathrow

[159]

Local MP's have urged Network Rail/SWT to build an extension in the FELTHAM/STAINES area to Heathrow.
Residents of the entire South West could hugely benefit from this if several trains were, say; diverted at Woking to follow the Addlestone/Chertsey line until the extension;and among other benefits:

-Compete w/ HEX (for Middlesex and South London dwellers)
-Provide a direct connection to a main airport for most of south west London- could run, as well as from Waterloo, Putney and Woking, from WIM/ Raynes Park/ Norbiton/ Teddington loop, an airport-wise badly connected area (currently requires you to take a half-hourly, traffic-prone bus, or the train to WIM-Earl's court-Piccadilly to Heathrow)

What does the general population think? A good idea? A HEX service from Waterloo? Connections to other places? Rolling stock? Fire away.

 

[swt_passenger]

Welcome.

I think the problem is it's been discussed so many times before I'm getting fed up with the repeats. Yes it's a good idea. Airtrack (via the new curve at Staines) was probably a good idea at the time, and that was to run into the existing T5 station.

I expect a different direct route from Feltham, if it required another Heathrow station, would be ruled out on those grounds.

To be fair you'll find existing southern access threads very difficult to search for. Airtrack is possibly the best search term.

One of the problems with just diverting trains off the mainline at Byfleet is that they must be new, in addition to the existing service patterns. I don't think people are going to want any existing services to be diverted away from Waterloo...

 

[gswindale]

Local MP's have urged Network Rail/SWT to build an extension in the FELTHAM/STAINES area to Heathrow.
Residents of the entire South West could hugely benefit from this if several trains were, say; diverted at Woking to follow the Addlestone/Chertsey line until the extension;and among other benefits:

-Compete w/ HEX (for Middlesex and South London dwellers)
-Provide a direct connection to a main airport for most of south west London- could run, as well as from Waterloo, Putney and Woking, from WIM/ Raynes Park/ Norbiton/ Teddington loop, an airport-wise badly connected area (currently requires you to take a half-hourly, traffic-prone bus, or the train to WIM-Earl's court-Piccadilly to Heathrow)

What does the general population think? A good idea? A HEX service from Waterloo? Connections to other places? Rolling stock? Fire away.

How does this differ from the abandoned Airtrack proposal?

What plans do they have for improving capacity along the Reading/Windsor lines without causing major road congestion due to the numerous level crossings in the area?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

[NSE]

As someone who regularly travels Raynes Park to Heathrow. I'd appreciate it haha

 

[edwin_m]

Local MP's have urged Network Rail/SWT to build an extension in the FELTHAM/STAINES area to Heathrow.
Residents of the entire South West could hugely benefit from this if several trains were, say; diverted at Woking to follow the Addlestone/Chertsey line until the extension;and among other benefits:

-Compete w/ HEX (for Middlesex and South London dwellers)
-Provide a direct connection to a main airport for most of south west London- could run, as well as from Waterloo, Putney and Woking, from WIM/ Raynes Park/ Norbiton/ Teddington loop, an airport-wise badly connected area (currently requires you to take a half-hourly, traffic-prone bus, or the train to WIM-Earl's court-Piccadilly to Heathrow)

What does the general population think? A good idea? A HEX service from Waterloo? Connections to other places? Rolling stock? Fire away.

If the service from Staines and beyond extended through Heathrow to Paddington, it would also provide a link from a wide area south west of London into HS2 at Old Oak. This is far more useful than the suggestion of through-running Paddington-Heathrow-Reading, which would be overtaken by trains on the existing GWML so would carry no through passengers.

 

[civ-eng-jim]

If the service from Staines and beyond extended through Heathrow to Paddington, it would also provide a link from a wide area south west of London into HS2 at Old Oak. This is far more useful than the suggestion of through-running Paddington-Heathrow-Reading, which would be overtaken by trains on the existing GWML so would carry no through passengers.

I.E, the Western Rail Link to Heathrow proposal?

 

[The Ham]

Try reading up to on the Southern Approach to Heathrow:

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/Southern-Rail-Access-to-Heathrow-Feasibility-Study.pdf

It is different to Airtrack.

The key (non London bound) services would be 2tph from Guildford and 2tph from Basingstoke.

Given that the latter would also likely have direct services via the Western Approach then it would make sense for them to act as an all stops service calling at Hook, Winchfield, Fleet, Farnborough, Brookwood and Woking before then running onto Heathrow (not sure about which stops it would make between).

If nothing else changed that would mean that Hook and Winchfield wood have 4 tph, which would probably be overkill as such I would think that one of the Basingstoke stoppers would potentially be diverted to serve Farnham.

That would mean that there would be a need to change trains to get to Waterloo, but that would likely be faster than the direct services due to being able to get a fast train from Farnborough or Woking.

I would suggest that (for example) Hook has trains at 20 minute spacing on a London, Heathrow, Heathrow type pattern. Then the Heathrow services from Guildford be tuned to run at brutally the same time through Woking as the London service and half way between the other two. That would give a service pattern at Woking to Heathrow as Gatos of 20,10,10 and 20 minutes (i.e. XX:01, XX:21, XX:31 and XX:41). Although not a true 15 minute frequency, close enough that it wouldn't cause too many problems but wouldn't result in over provision of services at relatively small stations (i.e.4 tph at Winchfield) not would it result in a 30 minute gap followed by two 15 minutes gaps when a service was diverted elsewhere.

Ideally both services would continue to Paddington via Old Oak Common connect with HS2.

 

[nlogax]

Try reading up to on the Southern Approach to Heathrow:

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/Southern-Rail-Access-to-Heathrow-Feasibility-Study.pdf

Link broken. Try this;
http://your.heathrow.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Southern-Rail-Access-to-Heathrow-Feasibility-Study.pdf

 

[The Ham]

Link broken. Try this;
http://your.heathrow.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Southern-Rail-Access-to-Heathrow-Feasibility-Study.pdf

Thanks.

 

[cle]

Is Crossrail to Staines (using the same curve) dead also?

 

[The Ham]

Is Crossrail to Staines (using the same curve) dead also?

Given the concerns about 18 tph terminating at Heathrow (6 from Crossrail, 4 from HEX, 4 from Waterloo, 2 from Guildford and 2 from Basingstoke from the south) it wouldn't be that surprising if we saw some through running of services.

If you paired:
- 2tph HEX to Guildford (also calls at Woking)
- 2tph HEX services to Reading (no other stops)
- 2tph Crossrail services to Waterloo
- 2tph Crossrail services to Basingstoke (Western)
- 2tph Crossrail services to Basingstoke (Southern)

That would only leave 2tph from Waterloo that needed to terminate at Heathrow, freeing up capacity at Heathrow for other services to run if there were capacity elsewhere for then.

The Crossrail services to Basingstoke, although wouldn't have toilets would mostly be used for shorter distances as the majority of people using them would join at Woking or stations West of Reading. However, even at an hour in length to get to Heathrow the lack of toilets wouldn't be a problem for most people.

If there were disruption then they could just turn back at Heathrow so as to restrict problems, as the risk of the being something that meant that no through trains could run without causing problems would be very low (unless it was something at Heathrow).

 

[D365]

Few problems with the above:

• Not sure if HEx Class 332s can be converted to dual voltage.
• Only 2tph Crossrail will be terminating at Terminal 5. Remaining 4tph will terminate at Terminal 4, which won't have an onwards connection.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

If the service from Staines and beyond extended through Heathrow to Paddington, it would also provide a link from a wide area south west of London into HS2 at Old Oak. This is far more useful than the suggestion of through-running Paddington-Heathrow-Reading, which would be overtaken by trains on the existing GWML so would carry no through passengers.

That's actually an incredibly good idea. You could have services from a wide area of Hampshire/Surrey/Dorset to Old Oak Common, giving connections to HS2, thereby providing a fast way to get to much of the Midlands and North (much quicker than Cross-Country services) without having to negotiate the London underground. (CrossRail2 would do something similar, but only for the metro area in SW London).

I could imagine that kind of link could not only open up many new journey opportunities, but would tempt quite a few cross-country travellers out of cars, as well as removing a small number of passengers from the overcrowded London zone 1.

 

[edwin_m]

That's actually an incredibly good idea. You could have services from a wide area of Hampshire/Surrey/Dorset to Old Oak Common, giving connections to HS2, thereby providing a fast way to get to much of the Midlands and North (much quicker than Cross-Country services) without having to negotiate the London underground. (CrossRail2 would do something similar, but only for the metro area in SW London).

I could imagine that kind of link could not only open up many new journey opportunities, but would tempt quite a few cross-country travellers out of cars, as well as removing a small number of passengers from the overcrowded London zone 1.

I can't claim any credit for it - it was mentioned in the Modern Railways article on Heathrow Southern Railway late last year, which proposes a new alignment alongside the M25 continuing through Staines to avoid the level crossings.

I don't think anyone would want Crossrail trains to run beyond Staines - although they are capable of being equipped for third rail it would introduce a lot of operational risks to mix them with the South Western network. Personally I'd sent all four of what are now HEX paths on via Staines and terminate the western rail link at T123 with a reversing siding between the eastern end of the Heathrow tunnels and the junction with GWML. By the time any of this happens the 332s will be life-expired anyway so dual voltage isn't really an issue.

 

[DerekC]

I can't claim any credit for it - it was mentioned in the Modern Railways article on Heathrow Southern Railway late last year, which proposes a new alignment alongside the M25 continuing through Staines to avoid the level crossings. .

This has been an obvious idea for a long time - if we had a Department for Transport which actually did cross-modal infrastructure planning it would have happened when the M25 widening and Heathrow T5 was going in.

 

[MarkyT]

A new route alongside the M25, together with a new Egham station, could also allow Reading - Waterloo trains to be diverted away from the existing route and enable closure of the old route with its three level crossings. The old route might be reused as a light rail corridor, with extra stations added, or could become a cycle and pedestrian path.

My illustration attached shows new track used by both Heathrow and Waterloo - Reading / Weybridge trains in yellow, and new track only used by Heathrow trains in blue.

 

[randompixel]

This is mentioned in getsurrey today. A new proposal (I don't know -how- new) that proposes branching off onto a new raised line at Chertsey following the M25 and also re-instating the Staines curve.

https://heathrowrail.com/proposed-route/

For £1.2b you'd get Heathrow -> Staines -> CJ -> Waterloo AND Basingstoke/Guildford –> Woking –> Heathrow –> Paddington , 4 trains an hour on each route.

 

[InOban]

I think those routes were described in Modern Railways a few months ago.

 

[GW43125]

A new route alongside the M25, together with a new Egham station, could also allow Reading - Waterloo trains to be diverted away from the existing route and enable closure of the old route with its three level crossings. The old route might be reused as a light rail corridor, with extra stations added, or could become a cycle and pedestrian path.

My illustration attached shows new track used by both Heathrow and Waterloo - Reading / Weybridge trains in yellow, and new track only used by Heathrow trains in blue.

(I realise how old this thread is but as it's been reactivated I'll still quote this post)

I struggle to see just how you'd get it through Egham on that alignment. Also, by moving the station further away from the town centre that's going to be met with opposition. The level crossings round Egham weren't too much of an issue until Pooley Green got upgraded to full barriers because some pillock parked a bus on it...

 

[swt_passenger]

I think those routes were described in Modern Railways a few months ago.

Isn't ti just a variant on one of the routes in the NR report linked earlier in this thread? Doesn't seem there's much new in this story.

 

[Clip]

(I realise how old this thread is but as it's been reactivated I'll still quote this post)

I struggle to see just how you'd get it through Egham on that alignment. Also, by moving the station further away from the town centre that's going to be met with opposition. The level crossings round Egham weren't too much of an issue until Pooley Green got upgraded to full barriers because some pillock parked a bus on it...

Well you wouldn't have to close the line nor the station in Egham that's already there

 

[DerekC]

There have been lots of threads and comments in threads about this kind of proposal before, but I think this one really deserves to succeed:

https://heathrowrail.com/

It's the logical route which has been staring us in the face for years, it includes a link to Old Oak for HS2 and Crossrail as well as to Heathrow. What's not to like?

 

[387star]

Thought southern were going to take over Heathrow express lol

 

[swt_passenger]

There have been lots of threads and comments in threads about this kind of proposal before, but I think this one really deserves to succeed:

https://heathrowrail.com/

It's the logical route which has been staring us in the face for years, it includes a link to Old Oak for HS2 and Crossrail as well as to Heathrow. What's not to like?

A link through T5 towards Paddington has been a long standing aim of every option going back to the original Airtrack, adding Old Oak Common is also a logical addition for any Southern access scheme now that HS2's station is in the works. So I don't think this scheme is proposing anything new or novel in terms of connections the other side of Heathrow.

 

[MarkyT]

(I realise how old this thread is but as it's been reactivated I'll still quote this post)

I struggle to see just how you'd get it through Egham on that alignment. Also, by moving the station further away from the town centre that's going to be met with opposition. The level crossings round Egham weren't too much of an issue until Pooley Green got upgraded to full barriers because some pillock parked a bus on it...

In the Egham area, my route is little different to that proposed by Heathrow Southern Railway, the main difference being the new station. I'd provide access to the new Egham station from Vicarage Road, very near Pooley Green level crossing which is in fact not much further from one end of the High Street than the existing Egham station is from the other end. Some users would gain, some would lose clearly. The new station would be about 500m from the old along the route of the existing railway which could be converted into a wide high quality cycle and pedestrian path from Virginia Water to central Staines. 5 minutes extra walk at most, and imagine no more level crossing holdups AT ALL on Egham's roads. With no junction constraints nearby, Staines station could be rebuilt slightly closer to the town centre, with access near the High Street bridge.

A problem I see with the Heathrow Southern proposal is crossing all the complex slip roads of the M3/M25 intersection, which might result in an expensive bored tunnel right under the whole junction. My proposal avoids this entirely while also rerouting all Reading line trains away from Egham's level crossings as well as the Heathrows. It also avoids the difficult north-west curve connection at Staines that Heathrow Southern propose for access towards Reading. My journey time to Woking and beyond would be slightly longer than theirs, taking into account the extra station stop for Heathrow trains at Egham (a sweetener to help counter local opposition to moving the station) and the slightly longer route via Virginia Water. Speed for Chertsey line trains not stopping at Virginia Water might be improved by easing the curve of the divergence from the Reading line which would also help with stepping distances on the curved platforms for trains that do stop there. There is land available to do this and the new footbridge looks like it could accommodate a wider curve. See attached image.

 

[DerekC]

A link through T5 towards Paddington has been a long standing aim of every option going back to the original Airtrack, adding Old Oak Common is also a logical addition for any Southern access scheme now that HS2's station is in the works. So I don't think this scheme is proposing anything new or novel in terms of connections the other side of Heathrow.

I agree with that, but the route makes sense (in fact it's been staring DfT in the face for the last 15 years and they should have done it at the same time as T5 and widening the M25). And the proposal which is now on the table has got some sensible railway-savvy backers. So we should all start lobbying instead of worrying about whether it's really a new idea or not.

 

[GW43125]

In the Egham area, my route is little different to that proposed by Heathrow Southern Railway, the main difference being the new station. I'd provide access to the new Egham station from Vicarage Road, very near Pooley Green level crossing which is in fact not much further from one end of the High Street than the existing Egham station is from the other end. Some users would gain, some would lose clearly. The new station would be about 500m from the old along the route of the existing railway which could be converted into a wide high quality cycle and pedestrian path from Virginia Water to central Staines. 5 minutes extra walk at most, and imagine no more level crossing holdups AT ALL on Egham's roads. With no junction constraints nearby, Staines station could be rebuilt slightly closer to the town centre, with access near the High Street bridge.

A problem I see with the Heathrow Southern proposal is crossing all the complex slip roads of the M3/M25 intersection, which might result in an expensive bored tunnel right under the whole junction. My proposal avoids this entirely while also rerouting all Reading line trains away from Egham's level crossings as well as the Heathrows. It also avoids the difficult north-west curve connection at Staines that Heathrow Southern propose for access towards Reading. My journey time to Woking and beyond would be slightly longer than theirs, taking into account the extra station stop for Heathrow trains at Egham (a sweetener to help counter local opposition to moving the station) and the slightly longer route via Virginia Water. Speed for Chertsey line trains not stopping at Virginia Water might be improved by easing the curve of the divergence from the Reading line which would also help with stepping distances on the curved platforms for trains that do stop there. There is land available to do this and the new footbridge looks like it could accommodate a wider curve. See attached image.

The first part of my post there raised a bit of an issue: At the moment there's no space around Pooley Green to fit in everything you say!

It'd be good though if such a proposal could cut out the tedious 15mph 90 degree curve round to Chertsey-but access to the Reading line and Virginia Water could be problematic.

 

[DerekC]

Option 3 of the Network Rail December 2015 study looks very like the HSR one. There is a good section on the problems of the alignment and they do look significant. I will quote a couple of sections (it's worth reading the whole thing - see link below):

In practical terms the choice of surface level alignment is limited to one that follows the east side of the M25 motorway as closely as possible.

Construction of three major new structures (in addition to numerous single span bridges and culverts) will be required to carry the proposed route across: the River Thames at Runnymede, the southbound M25 off slip road at Junction 13 (and) the M3 motorway at Junction 12.

The M25 motorway is carried on an embankment south of the River Thames and passes over the A308 on a two span bridge. At this point an off slip road diverges from the southbound (anti-clockwise) carriageway to join the A308 immediately to the west of the Runnymede roundabout. There is an extremely limited amount of land available at this point in which to divert the proposed alignment of the new railway further from the M25 motorway to create headroom over the existing slip road. The result of this is that the railway must be carried on a high viaduct well above surrounding ground level, causing potentially severe visual intrusion and significant environmental impacts.

Junction 12 of the M25 is where it crosses the M3 motorway and is therefore an important node on the national motorway network. Slip roads are provided at the junction to facilitate the flow of traffic in all directions to and from the M3 motorway and as a result the junction comprises a complex arrangement of slip roads on multiple levels. Care will be required in the design of the new railway viaduct crossing the junction to ensure that neither its construction nor future maintenance interfere with the free flow of traffic on the motorways beneath.

It should be noted that this alignment would result in the most visual intrusion due to the extent of the surface level infrastructure and its height in some locations.

http://your.heathrow.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Southern-Rail-Access-to-Heathrow-Feasibility-Study.pdf

When you think how easy this could have been (railway down the central reservation of the M25, or just provisioning for the railway in designing the motorway slip roads) if we had an integrated approach to transport provision, as is the case in Belgium, Holland and lots of other places it makes you pretty angry.

 

[swt_passenger]

I agree with that, but the route makes sense (in fact it's been staring DfT in the face for the last 15 years and they should have done it at the same time as T5 and widening the M25). And the proposal which is now on the table has got some sensible railway-savvy backers. So we should all start lobbying instead of worrying about whether it's really a new idea or not.

It already 'made sense' when you replied in this thread 29th July though, it didn't actually need yet another new thread starting.

You'll have no doubt noticed that the mods have moved your post into the right place.

 

[DerekC]

It already 'made sense' when you replied in this thread 29th July though, it didn't actually need yet another new thread starting.

You'll have no doubt noticed that the mods have moved your post into the right place.

No problem now it has been retitled so that it reflects the issue more accurately.