Ideas for potential Heathrow Southern link services, including Gatwick link.

[camflyer]

Mod note: split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/heathrow-southern-link.159625/

The main revenue is in Guildford / Basingstoke etc to Heathrow. This then opens up the possibility of Guildford / Basingstoke Vito London via Heathrow, which although a long way round in time terms may well still attract some through custom. That will be a direct take off SWR, and a very valuable revenue stream of SWR (indeed just about the most valuable).

I used to live in Guildford but used Gatwick most of the time as Heathrow was such a pain to get to. I imagine a direct service would be a money-spinner. It might even be useful for a Heathrow to Gatwick service.

 

[The Ham]

I used to live in Guildford but used Gatwick most of the time as Heathrow was such a pain to get to. I imagine a direct service would be a money-spinner. It might even be useful for a Heathrow to Gatwick service.

Having used trains in that area a fast amount I wouldn't be suprised if there was a lot of local travel on the services.

For instance Woking/Guildford has a very high contra peak (i.e. the opposite to London) flow, meaning that there'll be a fair amount of use for that.

Likewise in the evening peak there's just 2tph between Woking and Farnborough, meaning a doubling of that would be faily useful. As would the existence of fast services between Basingstoke/Farnborough in the peak directions during the peak hours (as they don't exist, although making then stopping services could be useful too as I've explained elsewhere).

The thing that they could also do is extend from Basingstoke to the new settlement at Manydown which is due to add something like 10,000 new people to the town. Based on other local areas that could see an extra 0.5 million to 1 million passengers added to the network for the cost of a new station and a few miles of electrification (if not provided as part of a larger scheme). However it could reduce the need to do works to the junction by having the services as a call point at Basingstoke rather than a turn around point, reducing the length of platform time needed and removing (on the flat) movements across the junction.

 

[edwin_m]

I used to live in Guildford but used Gatwick most of the time as Heathrow was such a pain to get to. I imagine a direct service would be a money-spinner. It might even be useful for a Heathrow to Gatwick service.

I don't get why so many people suggest a Heathrow-Gatwick service. If you've just landed at an airport why would you want to go to another airport? Interlining between flights at the two airports would involve re-clearing security and need a gap of about 3hr, which hardly anyone will do as there is almost certainly another hub where a similar flight connection can be made without leaving the airport.

 

[moley]

I don't get why so many people suggest a Heathrow-Gatwick service. If you've just landed at an airport why would you want to go to another airport? Interlining between flights at the two airports would involve re-clearing security and need a gap of about 3hr, which hardly anyone will do as there is almost certainly another hub where a similar flight connection can be made without leaving the airport.

There are enough people who do it to justify National Express running a regular coach service. That's without considering those who fly out from one London terminal and into another. Gatwick and Luton are good in that respect because of Thameslink.

 

[swt_passenger]

There are enough people who do it to justify National Express running a regular coach service. That's without considering those who fly out from one London terminal and into another. Gatwick and Luton are good in that respect because of Thameslink.

...and Gatwick to Heathrow will be almost as good with Thameslink and Crossrail. Heathrow apparently reckon another “round the side” link is unnecessary, as per the quote in post #123 earlier.

 

[kevin_roche]

The thing that they could also do is extend from Basingstoke to the new settlement at Manydown which is due to add something like 10,000 new people to the town. Based on other local areas that could see an extra 0.5 million to 1 million passengers added to the network for the cost of a new station and a few miles of electrification (if not provided as part of a larger scheme). However it could reduce the need to do works to the junction by having the services as a call point at Basingstoke rather than a turn around point, reducing the length of platform time needed and removing (on the flat) movements across the junction.

Nobody seems to want to talk about this. I wonder who should be pushing this idea forward.

 

[moley]

...and Gatwick to Heathrow will be almost as good with Thameslink and Crossrail. Heathrow apparently reckon another “round the side” link is unnecessary, as per the quote in post #123 earlier.

Personally, I agree that a LHR-LGW isn't necessary. However, people will still use the coach as it means interacting with their luggage once. The hassle of having to move your luggage from one train to another at Farringdon, even if the station is fully accessible, will put people off.

 

[swt_passenger]

Personally, I agree that a LHR-LGW isn't necessary. However, people will still use the coach as it means interacting with their luggage once. The hassle of having to move your luggage from one train to another at Farringdon, even if the station is fully accessible, will put people off.

I don’t think the demand has ever been publicly established although there’s the luggage issue as you say. How many seats are occupied on the regular coach? How many are actually airline passengers? How many coaches per hour would you need to justify a decent size train per hour?

 

[nlogax]

Presumably demand has been established at *some* point. Enough that even back in the 70s and 80s, BAA had laid on the Airlink helicopter shuttle with ten flights per day in each direction. Admittedly a single Sikorsky ran the entire service so it was somewhat limited in capacity.

 

[swt_passenger]

Presumably demand has been established at *some* point. Enough that even back in the 70s and 80s, BAA had laid on the Airlink helicopter shuttle with ten flights per day in each direction. Admittedly a single Sikorsky ran the entire service so it was somewhat limited in capacity.

I suppose what I should have said is there don’t seem to be up to date figures publicly available.

 

[matt_world2004]

I don’t think the demand has ever been publicly established although there’s the luggage issue as you say. How many seats are occupied on the regular coach? How many are actually airline passengers? How many coaches per hour would you need to justify a decent size train per hour?

TfL does have an additional interchange penalty for PRM passengers when modelling passenger flows. I believe its an additional 50% over nornal interchange time

 

[si404]

...and Gatwick to Heathrow will be almost as good with Thameslink and Crossrail. Heathrow apparently reckon another “round the side” link is unnecessary, as per the quote in post #123 earlier.

they don't want high quality links to their competitor, enabling said competition to benefit asymmetrically from the project: Gatwick gets access to Heathrow's larger number of flights, while abstracting some LHR transfer passengers for half their transfer onto cheaper flights at Gatwick.

Funny that!

 

[hotel_mode]

There are enough people who do it to justify National Express running a regular coach service. That's without considering those who fly out from one London terminal and into another. Gatwick and Luton are good in that respect because of Thameslink.

I used to get the coach quite regularly (work at Heathrow). Bear in mind that virtually the entire service is either Somewhere-Heathrow-Gatwick or Heathrow-Gatwick-Brighton.

The numbers that boarded at Heathrow and disembarked at Gatwick were rarely more than 10-15 per coach.

There are 44 coaches per day. Even optimistically that’s 600 passengers each way per day.

Transfers between Gatwick and Luton are vanishingly small. There just isn’t anywhere of note that Luton serves and Gatwick doesn’t.

 

[hotel_mode]

they don't want high quality links to their competitor, enabling said competition to benefit asymmetrically from the project: Gatwick gets access to Heathrow's larger number of flights, while abstracting some LHR transfer passengers for half their transfer onto cheaper flights at Gatwick.

Funny that!

The idea that there is some untapped market who will happily transfer between airports in London rather than flying via Amsterdam/Frankfurt/Dubai etc is fantasy.

Connecting flights are always cheaper than direct. The financial incentive to pay for the inconvenience doesn’t exist even before you add a £54 coach fare.

The only reason to do it is if your origin is served by one and your destination by the other.

 

[edwin_m]

...and Gatwick to Heathrow will be almost as good with Thameslink and Crossrail. Heathrow apparently reckon another “round the side” link is unnecessary, as per the quote in post #123 earlier.

With the southern link it would also be possible by changing at Clapham Junction.

 

[swt_passenger]

With the southern link it would also be possible by changing at Clapham Junction.

Yes of course, if all the Southern options are eventually built. Not sure on the relative speeds though.

 

[si404]

The idea that there is some untapped market who will happily transfer between airports in London rather than flying via Amsterdam/Frankfurt/Dubai etc is fantasy

true, but if the fantasy was reality, Gatwick would gain at Heathrow's expense from improved direct links, so its not like Heathrow would recommend it!

 

[camflyer]

I don't get why so many people suggest a Heathrow-Gatwick service. If you've just landed at an airport why would you want to go to another airport? Interlining between flights at the two airports would involve re-clearing security and need a gap of about 3hr, which hardly anyone will do as there is almost certainly another hub where a similar flight connection can be made without leaving the airport.

I'm not suggesting a dedicated high speed service, and certainly not an airside one, but while the number of passengers connecting LHR-GLW may not be large is going going to be a significant number. A rail route via Guildford may not be very direct but it is still an improvement on what is available today.

 

[moley]

With Guildford station redevelopment on the cards also, at worst it gives an opportunity to consider cross platform or even same platform connections between a LHR - Guildford and Reading - Gatwick service. Even this will be an improvement to changing at Farringdon and having to negotiate lifts etc.

 

[Class 170101]

My view would be that depending upon the number of services Crossrail operate would dictate the number of destinations.

I would say though it will depend to some extent upon Crossrail 2 so as to free up capacity into London Waterloo. But serving Staines and Virgina Water and onwards southwards would be in the hands of Crossrail services. Some services would also continue to Reading via the proposed western access.

The current 4tph Heathrow Express I would reserve for South Western destinations towards Southampton / Portsmouth and Bournemouth - a more long distance service destination compared to the London suburban services served by Crossrail.

 

[The Ham]

My view would be that depending upon the number of services Crossrail operate would dictate the number of destinations.

I would say though it will depend to some extent upon Crossrail 2 so as to free up capacity into London Waterloo. But serving Staines and Virgina Water and onwards southwards would be in the hands of Crossrail services. Some services would also continue to Reading via the proposed western access.

The current 4tph Heathrow Express I would reserve for South Western destinations towards Southampton / Portsmouth and Bournemouth - a more long distance service destination compared to the London suburban services served by Crossrail.

It would be better to keep the Southern Approach services limited to Basingstoke/Guildford to Paddington. Anyone from further away would change at Woking (where there would be 4tph rather than 1 or 2tph direct from their local station).

Not least because you don't really want a problem at Winchester, Southampton, etc. causing problems at Paddington.

 

[Class 170101]

It would be better to keep the Southern Approach services limited to Basingstoke/Guildford to Paddington. Anyone from further away would change at Woking (where there would be 4tph rather than 1 or 2tph direct from their local station).

Not least because you don't really want a problem at Winchester, Southampton, etc. causing problems at Paddington.

People won't change for Airports though. It won't be traffic generator if they aren't though trains.

 

[camflyer]

People won't change for Airports though. It won't be traffic generator if they aren't though trains.

Are present everyone has to change to get to Heathrow by train except those coming from central London.

 

[The Ham]

People won't change for Airports though. It won't be traffic generator if they aren't though trains.

The numbers of people who fly are relatively small compared to the numbers who use rail (compare the number of passengers at Heathrow, 80 million, with just those at Waterloo, 95-99 million, let alone the rest of the SWR network). This gap is widened when you consider that something like 30% of passengers at Heathrow are transferring between flights, so Waterloo carries something like 150% of your potential customers heading to Heathrow to fly.

Chances are most of the users of the Southern Approach services will be those who aren't going to the airport, or if they are it's not too fly. Even those that are going to fly most who use rail will be doing so for a short duration away, be that for work or weekend city breaks, and so will likely be using cabin luggage. As such the disadvantage of changing is fairly small.

You also have the issue of lack of paths South of Basingstoke and Guildford which will limit what could be run anyway.

As such the main market is unlikely to be those passengers wishing to fly somewhere and of those who do a significant number would be willing to make a change at Woking anyway, especially if it means a more frequent service to/from Heathrow.

 

[swt_passenger]

My view would be that depending upon the number of services Crossrail operate would dictate the number of destinations.

I would say though it will depend to some extent upon Crossrail 2 so as to free up capacity into London Waterloo. But serving Staines and Virgina Water and onwards southwards would be in the hands of Crossrail services. Some services would also continue to Reading via the proposed western access.

The current 4tph Heathrow Express I would reserve for South Western destinations towards Southampton / Portsmouth and Bournemouth - a more long distance service destination compared to the London suburban services served by Crossrail.

I don’t believe Crossrail 2 has much bearing at all on Southern Link. Yes it theoretically frees up 8 tph worth of platforms at Waterloo, but they are on the main suburban side. Any Southern Link services to Waterloo will be part of the Windsor side service group, which is almost maxed out already as there are only so many tracks through the Queenstown Road and Vauxhall area. It is effectively only a 2 track railway on that side. So the conclusion must be that Heathrow to Waterloo trains will have to replace existing services.

We also know from the NR route study that with CR2 the plan is to transfer 7 specific semi-fast services (that currently run on the mains between Surbiton and Waterloo) into those 8 main slow paths. The 7 services in question will still run on the slow lines at Byfleet Junction as they do now, exactly where via Woking trains from Heathrow will join/leave the main route. The space on the main fasts inbound from Surbiton will then be usable by more Waterloo long distance fast services, from origins such as Portsmouth, Southampton or Salisbury.

So Crossrail 2 effectively adds 7 or maybe 8 tph through the Woking area on existing plans, without even considering Heathrow services.

All in all I think the main key to unlock Southern Link capacity will be the Woking flyover project.

 

[Class 170101]

Are present everyone has to change to get to Heathrow by train except those coming from central London.

Correct, but I understand as part of the new runway construction Heathrow needs to increase modal shift and surely these links could do that?

I don’t believe Crossrail 2 has much bearing at all on Southern Link. Yes it theoretically frees up 8 tph worth of platforms at Waterloo, but they are on the main suburban side. Any Southern Link services to Waterloo will be part of the Windsor side service group, which is almost maxed out already as there are only so many tracks through the Queenstown Road and Vauxhall area. It is effectively only a 2 track railway on that side. So the conclusion must be that Heathrow to Waterloo trains will have to replace existing services.

We also know from the NR route study that with CR2 the plan is to transfer 7 specific semi-fast services (that currently run on the mains between Surbiton and Waterloo) into those 8 main slow paths. The 7 services in question will still run on the slow lines at Byfleet Junction as they do now, exactly where via Woking trains from Heathrow will join/leave the main route. The space on the main fasts inbound from Surbiton will then be usable by more Waterloo long distance fast services, from origins such as Portsmouth, Southampton or Salisbury.

So Crossrail 2 effectively adds 7 or maybe 8 tph through the Woking area on existing plans, without even considering Heathrow services.

All in all I think the main key to unlock Southern Link capacity will be the Woking flyover project.

A lot of infrastructure will be needed.

 

[camflyer]

Correct, but I understand as part of the new runway construction Heathrow needs to increase modal shift and surely these links could do that?

Indeed. And that's why I am in favour of them. If Heathrow is going to be allowed to expand then they have to take a lot of cars off the roads. The Southern Link is a more complicated (and more expensive) issue but The Western Link is a no brainer as it is relatively cheap but opens up direct (or one change) links to Reading, Oxford, Swindon, Bristol, Cardiff and all points west all without the extra time/cost/hassle of going via central London. It would also be a boost to tourism and business in the west country.

 

[si404]

The really expensive one would be the Northern rail link. And the airport wants it to be HSR from Birmingham and beyond, rather than a similar-to-the-others regional thing from Wycombe, etc (and with more money, Watford, with far better benefits).

Southern rail link service is arguably more about SWT relief into London, rather than airport access. Obviously airport access (especially local from Staines for workers) is important, but Surrey to OOC and Paddington is where both the demand, and the fares income would be. I think the plan for Elizabeth line to Staines and HEx to Woking (with 2 to Guildford and 2 to Farnborough and Basingstoke) is good for the SRA. Virginia Water would be better than Staines to do Bracknell-Heathrow, but as Staines is surely a given, it's something that would need analysis.

 

[edwin_m]

The really expensive one would be the Northern rail link. And the airport wants it to be HSR from Birmingham and beyond, rather than a similar-to-the-others regional thing from Wycombe, etc (and with more money, Watford, with far better benefits).

That's effectively been ruled out. One of the HS2 reports said that the passenger numbers into Heathrow would be about 8% of those going into central London, so would only justify re-routeing one or two of the 18 trains per hour. It would be difficult to justify a very expensive tunneled link and station based on those sort of passenger numbers, and since the Heathrow trains could only serve a few HS2 detinations many of the Heathrow passengers would end up changing at Old Oak anyway. Even having to make that connection, HS2 makes Heathrow far quicker and easier to access from the Midlands and North, without the schlep across London from Euston or Kings Cross.

 

[si404]

That's effectively been ruled out.

I bang the drum you bang loads, but Heathrow and crayonistas take a while to bang lots. I mostly mentioned as a Northern rail link to more useful destinations along the inner M40 and M25 corridors.