HS2 or Southwest improvements?

[The Planner]

In the context of the greatly reduced journey times to the West Midlands and points North made possible by HS2 an extra four minutes is probably acceptable. It is equally true however that stopping GWR trains at Old Oak Common will also extend their journey time by four minutes bringing the Reading to London time back to what it was before the IET trains were introduced - there being no equivalent line speed increase on the GWR. It's not just Reading passengers who will be affected but every long distance passenger on the Western going to and from London.

When the 802s were introduced in the west country in 2018 GWR made great play of the reduction in the London to Penzance times by 'up to 14 minutes' with the introduction of the new timetables with smaller gains for places further east. Stopping these trains at Old Oak Common will now lose 4 minutes of these gains - to what purpose? The only extra connections possible - apart from Crossrail which can also be made at Paddington - are to the Overground lines to and from Richmond and Clapham Junction to the south and to Willesden Junction round to Stratford (E) which can anyway be reached more quickly by Crossrail! In total these routes are probably not a large market for passengers from Neath or Newton Abbot.

But this would be the case of any new station dependent on where it is? OOC is meant to have massive regeneration off the back of HS2, so arguably it becomes a destination in itself, if you divorced HS2 from this and transposed any new town being built on a main line then the same could apply?

 

[The Planner]

If we are to expect 4 minute stops at OOC surely this is going to cause queues of trains heading in from the west , especially when there is disruption and trains are the slightest bit out of sequence. I imagine drivers will start seeing double yellows around Hayes and then experience a slow approach into OOC , further ruining the improved journey times that the IET fleet has provided us.

Depends on what the OOC layout is and how its timetabled. Any train now out of sequence on any main line will cause delay.

 

[irish_rail]

Depends on what the OOC layout is and how its timetabled. Any train now out of sequence on any main line will cause delay.

I think there is a very great risk that far longer than 4 minutes will have to be timetables in to every GWR service.
3 minutes to decelerate from 125mph to stop. At LEAST 2 minutes in the OOC platform, then a further minute to get up to 50mph for the final stretch into paddington.
So that's 5 to 6 minutes, and that's only if everything runs like clockwork. I'd say another couple of minutes would be necessary to be added to take into account the likelihood of drivers encountering double yellow signals on the approach to OOC and catching up the train in front (headways nowadays are 2 to 3 mins reading to padd).
So all in all I'd say 8 minutes would be needed as a minimum to be added to the reading to paddington journey time post hs2. That will make it slower than in HST days.

I dont buy the idea that OOC will be enough of a draw for people from the west to come to the area just to visit it. It will probably have lots of housing and some shops and restaurants, but the idea that people coming up to the capital from the likes of plymouth and swansea will be coming to visit old oak common is just not realistic. They will continue to want to go to Paddington for easy interchange to crossrail, buses and taxis.

 

[quantinghome]

@irish_rail As with Reading, OOC will have two platforms for each of the four lines on GWML. This minimizes the risk of delay.

I must say Coppercapped has presented the best argument I've heard for not stopping GW trains at OOC. Ultimately it will come down to balancing connectivity and speed within the constraints of the operational railway. However, I remain skeptical that a few minutes' extra due to an OOC stop is a major imposition on GW passengers.

I'd also like to know a little more about the assumptions underlying the 2012 estimated passenger numbers. They appear to be rather conservative - 1,100 passengers a day using HS2 to travel to Heathrow seems incredibly low, when it will be the most convenient way to connect to the Midlands and North. My hunch is that once people figure out HS2 is the best way to access Heathrow and the Thames Valley area from the Midlands and North then there will be significant flows of passenger interchanging between GW and HS2 at OOC. But who knows? Making predictions is difficult, especially about the future.

 

[CW2]

I think there is a very great risk that far longer than 4 minutes will have to be timetables in to every GWR service.
3 minutes to decelerate from 125mph to stop. At LEAST 2 minutes in the OOC platform, then a further minute to get up to 50mph for the final stretch into paddington.
So that's 5 to 6 minutes, and that's only if everything runs like clockwork. I'd say another couple of minutes would be necessary to be added to take into account the likelihood of drivers encountering double yellow signals on the approach to OOC and catching up the train in front (headways nowadays are 2 to 3 mins reading to padd).
So all in all I'd say 8 minutes would be needed as a minimum to be added to the reading to paddington journey time post hs2. That will make it slower than in HST days.

I dont buy the idea that OOC will be enough of a draw for people from the west to come to the area just to visit it. It will probably have lots of housing and some shops and restaurants, but the idea that people coming up to the capital from the likes of plymouth and swansea will be coming to visit old oak common is just not realistic. They will continue to want to go to Paddington for easy interchange to crossrail, buses and taxis.

You seem to be really determined to paint OOC in as bad a light as possible, by exaggerating the downside and ignoring the benefits.
The fast line planning headway from Reading is 2 minutes. By having two platform faces (i.e. an island platform) for each direction, the platforms can be used alternately, so with 6 tracks available onward into Paddington trains should be able to approach OOC freely, without undue signal checks.

As for the time penalty in stopping, I'd suggest you take a look at Milton Keynes in the Down direction. The WCML fast lines are notoriously full. The linespeed here is 125 mph. The penalty for a train stopping, making a 2 minute stop, and accelerating up to line speed again totals 4.5 minutes. So with trains not having to accelerate up to 125 mph from OOC towards Paddington, 4 minutes seems to me to be an accurate estimation / calculation.

Also, when considering the "who benefits" question, it is important to ensure you measure the end-to-end journey time, instead of measuring to the bufferstops at Paddington. The greater connectivity offered at OOC means that many people heading towards north and east London will do better to change at OOC than going via Paddington, via the North London Line, and West London Line.

As for Crossrail, I suspect the regular passengers may cotton on to the benefits of asymmetric travel patterns. If commuting from (say) Reading to Central London (via Crossrail) and return, I would change at OOC in the morning to get a seat on the Crossrail trains starting from there, and change at Paddington in the evening to get a seat on the GWR train on the way home.

 

[irish_rail]

You seem to be really determined to paint OOC in as bad a light as possible, by exaggerating the downside and ignoring the benefits.
The fast line planning headway from Reading is 2 minutes. By having two platform faces (i.e. an island platform) for each direction, the platforms can be used alternately, so with 6 tracks available onward into Paddington trains should be able to approach OOC freely, without undue signal checks.

As for the time penalty in stopping, I'd suggest you take a look at Milton Keynes in the Down direction. The WCML fast lines are notoriously full. The linespeed here is 125 mph. The penalty for a train stopping, making a 2 minute stop, and accelerating up to line speed again totals 4.5 minutes. So with trains not having to accelerate up to 125 mph from OOC towards Paddington, 4 minutes seems to me to be an accurate estimation / calculation.

Also, when considering the "who benefits" question, it is important to ensure you measure the end-to-end journey time, instead of measuring to the bufferstops at Paddington. The greater connectivity offered at OOC means that many people heading towards north and east London will do better to change at OOC than going via Paddington, via the North London Line, and West London Line.

As for Crossrail, I suspect the regular passengers may cotton on to the benefits of asymmetric travel patterns. If commuting from (say) Reading to Central London (via Crossrail) and return, I would change at OOC in the morning to get a seat on the Crossrail trains starting from there, and change at Paddington in the evening to get a seat on the GWR train on the way home.

Milton Keynes isn't a fair comparison. Not everything stops there , you dont have fast line wcml trains stopping there every 2 minutes. It also is mainly commuters , whereas, OOC is apparently going to be full if people with large luggage Heathrow bound.
I can't help but feel OOC will become an East Mids Parkway style white elephant, whatever the overall benefits of hs2 may or may not be.

 

[CW2]

Milton Keynes isn't a fair comparison. Not everything stops there , you dont have fast line wcml trains stopping there every 2 minutes. It also is mainly commuters , whereas, OOC is apparently going to be full if people with large luggage Heathrow bound.
I can't help but feel OOC will become an East Mids Parkway style white elephant, whatever the overall benefits of hs2 may or may not be.

You wanted to measure how much additional time would be taken by inserting a stop at OOC.
To do that, you need to compare a non-stop service with a stopping one, to measure the time loss.
Milton Keynes is the perfect comparison for this purpose.
Why do you claim that OOC will be full of passengers + luggage en route to Heathrow? The figures suggest they will be a relatively small part of the passenger flow.

 

[py_megapixel]

Have people on here stopped to consider that the reason it takes ages to get to Cornwall on the train from either London or Birmingham might be because they are physically separated by a distance which is far from trivial?
There's a reason this route has a sleeper train, you realise.

Complaining that travelling from Plymouth to London takes a long time strikes me as an awful lot like choosing to live in an isolated farmhouse and then being frustrated that you can't just pop across the road to a supermarket whenever you feel like it.

Yes I know it's not the fastest it could be, but it's far from ridiculous.

 

[Ianno87]

Milton Keynes isn't a fair comparison. Not everything stops there , you dont have fast line wcml trains stopping there every 2 minutes. It also is mainly commuters , whereas, OOC is apparently going to be full if people with large luggage Heathrow bound.
I can't help but feel OOC will become an East Mids Parkway style white elephant, whatever the overall benefits of hs2 may or may not be.

You wanted to measure how much additional time would be taken by inserting a stop at OOC.
To do that, you need to compare a non-stop service with a stopping one, to measure the time loss.
Milton Keynes is the perfect comparison for this purpose.
Why do you claim that OOC will be full of passengers + luggage en route to Heathrow? The figures suggest they will be a relatively small part of the passenger flow.

If OOC is to be "full of passengers heading to Heathrow", sounds like a good case for stopping trains to benefit these passengers.

 

[py_megapixel]

If OOC is to be "full of passengers heading to Heathrow", sounds like a good case for stopping trains to benefit these passengers.

What through service will there be to Heathrow from OOC? Will Crossrail stop there?

 

[CW2]

What through service will there be to Heathrow from OOC? Will Crossrail stop there?

EVERYTHING will stop there, in all directions, all day and night!

 

[py_megapixel]

EVERYTHING will stop there, in all directions, all day and night!

I'm going to assume that doesn't include HEx.

Right. So if Crossrail will stop there, I reckon a good percentage of passengers are going to be connecting to journeys which are sensible to do either starting on Crossrail, or entirely on Crossrail. And they are going to prefer what I assume will be a quick walk over a footbridge to the traipse at Paddington through the barriers, across the concourse and to the various underground (note the small U) platforms.

That, in my opinion, is good enough reason to stop long distance services at OOC.

 

[Ianno87]

I'm going to assume that doesn't include HEx.

Right. So if Crossrail will stop there, I reckon a good percentage of passengers are going to be connecting to journeys which are sensible to do either starting on Crossrail, or entirely on Crossrail. And they are going to prefer what I assume will be a quick walk over a footbridge to the traipse at Paddington through the barriers, across the concourse and to the various underground (note the small U) platforms.

That, in my opinion, is good enough reason to stop long distance services at OOC.

Remembering today the regularity with which Paddington tube station gets closed (with passengers held outside for minutes at a time) to manage crowding.

 

[BayPaul]

I'm going to assume that doesn't include HEx.

According to the document that says all GWR services stop, all HEX also stop - It's all or nothing

 

[py_megapixel]

According to the document that says all GWR services stop, all HEX also stop - It's all or nothing

Is stopping at HEX likely to be a condition of their track access rights being extended then? Because I can't see any other way you could force them to stop

 

[BayPaul]

Is stopping at HEX likely to be a condition of their track access rights being extended then? Because I can't see any other way you could force them to stop

As I understand it, this document is a base case assumption, not necessarily what is actually going to happen. However in multiple other threads people who know all about these things have confirmed that it is all or nothing, so if HEX can't stop, then GWR can't stop either.
I would imagine that Heathrow wouldn't object too much to them stopping, as it would give a turn up and go frequency from OOC to Heathrow, so making HS2 a much better way to access Heathrow.
It seems that there is a long-term ambition to extend HEX services into SWR land in the event of Southern Access being built. If that was the case, then it is probably a no-brainer to stop HEX anyway, as this would add a lot of connectivity

 

[Ianno87]

Is stopping at HEX likely to be a condition of their track access rights being extended then? Because I can't see any other way you could force them to stop

If it, ultimately, did come down to a track access conflict/dispute (many years hence), HEx would essentially have to demonstrate to ORR it was significantly economically or operationally disadvantageous for them to be forced to stop if they didn't want to, and for GWR to demonstrate that, on balance, the benefits of stopping (including use of a major public investment) outweigh the disbenefits, assuming that they bid to stop (either commercially, or are required to as part of their franchise agreement)

 

[HSTEd]

Well if GWR decided to stop, and HEx didn't - HEx could just get hit with endless signal checks to a stop in the platform.

 

[irish_rail]

As I understand it, this document is a base case assumption, not necessarily what is actually going to happen. However in multiple other threads people who know all about these things have confirmed that it is all or nothing, so if HEX can't stop, then GWR can't stop either.
I would imagine that Heathrow wouldn't object too much to them stopping, as it would give a turn up and go frequency from OOC to Heathrow, so making HS2 a much better way to access Heathrow.
It seems that there is a long-term ambition to extend HEX services into SWR land in the event of Southern Access being built. If that was the case, then it is probably a no-brainer to stop HEX anyway, as this would add a lot of connectivity

Well I'm not sure the owners of HEX will be so happy that they can no longer proclaim direct none stop services to central London

 

[CW2]

Well I'm not sure the owners of HEX will be so happy that they can no longer proclaim direct none stop services to central London

Since when was Paddington in Central London? It's a western suburb.
I'm confident that HEX will realise the size of the potential market by linking directly into HS2 at OOC is worth it - not that they will have a lot of choice.

 

[coppercapped]

But this would be the case of any new station dependent on where it is? OOC is meant to have massive regeneration off the back of HS2, so arguably it becomes a destination in itself, if you divorced HS2 from this and transposed any new town being built on a main line then the same could apply?

Any new station will mean that some or all of the trains passing through it will call there. However any new station on the GW, as long as it is west of Reading where the trunk route starts to branch, will mean that not every single train going to London will have time added to its journey. A new station elsewhere will only be served by a sub-set of the full London service so most won't be affected.

OOC is planned to be a massive regeneration site - some 25,500 new homes and 65,000 new jobs are planned to be built or created over the next 20 to 30 years. But it is in London - in principle it will be no different to any other built up and identifiable suburban area such as, say, Wembley or Hackney. It will be better connected than some - it will have several Tube stations in it or near it, it will have Crossrail and the Paddington outer-suburban services. But no long distance trains call at Wembley, Cricklewood or Finsbury Park, all about the same distance from their ultimate terminals, for connectional reasons or because they are destinations in their own right. If the argument about stopping the GW long distance trains at OOC is valid then it is equally valid for trains on other routes.

I see no evidence that this is being considered for any of the other rail routes radiating from London.

Citizens of Ealing go to Paddington to start their train journeys to the west - I see no reason why the future inhabitants of OOC can't do the same - it's closer than Ealing after all, only one stop on Crossrail.

 

[coppercapped]

Since when was Paddington in Central London? It's a western suburb.
I'm confident that HEX will realise the size of the potential market by linking directly into HS2 at OOC is worth it - not that they will have a lot of choice.

Oh no - not this tired old knee jerk...

Paddington is east of High Street Kensington - a well known retail area m'lud - and 1 mile due north of the Albert Hall.

I've not heard of these areas being described as 'western suburbs'. But each to his taste.

 

[py_megapixel]

Well I'm not sure the owners of HEX will be so happy that they can no longer proclaim direct none stop services to central London

Since when was Paddington in Central London? It's a western suburb.
I'm confident that HEX will realise the size of the potential market by linking directly into HS2 at OOC is worth it - not that they will have a lot of choice.

Well if they don't, and we're assuming that GW won't stop if HEx don't, people connecting from HS2 will have the following options:

1) HS2 to Euston, walk to Euston Square or Kings Cross, underground to Paddington tube station, walk to Paddington mainline, HEx to Heathrow

2) HS2 to OOC, Crossrail to Paddington low level, walk to Paddington mainline, HEx to Heathrow

3) HS2 to OOC, Crossrail to Heathrow

I don't know about anyone else but I would certainly choose option 3.

 

[CW2]

The story goes back to when HS2 was first being designed. The issues are two-fold:

Firstly the footfall at Euston would overload all the local transport links if HS2 ran non-stop to Euston, so a second station in a location enabling widespread connections with rail and underground services would be needed. After some investigation and sifting, OOC was chosen.

Secondly there was a lengthy debate as to whether or not HS2 should serve Heathrow, either directly or by means of a loop off the main HS2 route. The conclusion (after considerable to-ing and fro-ing) was that there would be an interchange at OOC, and no direct HS2 link to Heathrow.

So the agreement for HEX to call at OOC to facilitate connections was taken at a very high level. The current HEX contract has been modified and extended to "at least" 2028, to coincide with OOC opening. You can expect a suitably modified contract in due course.

There was initial resistance from GWR route at the prospect of stopping all main line services at OOC, but once their planners realised the scale of the project, they came fully onside.
The modelling which has been done demonstrates the benefits for travellers to significant areas of London, because of the much wider range of connections available at OOC compared with Paddington.

Note also that the assumptions used were that local journeys on HS2 Euston to OOC and vice versa would not be permitted, so the platforms at OOC would be one-way passenger flows, in order to promote swift boarding and alighting.

 

[py_megapixel]

The story goes back to when HS2 was first being designed. The issues are two-fold:

Firstly the footfall at Euston would overload all the local transport links if HS2 ran non-stop to Euston, so a second station in a location enabling widespread connections with rail and underground services would be needed. After some investigation and sifting, OOC was chosen.

Secondly there was a lengthy debate as to whether or not HS2 should serve Heathrow, either directly or by means of a loop off the main HS2 route. The conclusion (after considerable to-ing and fro-ing) was that there would be an interchange at OOC, and no direct HS2 link to Heathrow.

So the agreement for HEX to call at OOC to facilitate connections was taken at a very high level. The current HEX contract has been modified and extended to "at least" 2028, to coincide with OOC opening. You can expect a suitably modified contract in due course.

There was initial resistance from GWR route at the prospect of stopping all main line services at OOC, but once their planners realised the scale of the project, they came fully onside.
The modelling which has been done demonstrates the benefits for travellers to significant areas of London, because of the much wider range of connections available at OOC compared with Paddington.

Note also that the assumptions used were that local journeys on HS2 Euston to OOC and vice versa would not be permitted, so the platforms at OOC would be one-way passenger flows, in order to promote swift boarding and alighting.

That makes a lot of sense. And one would hope that a professional model would be more accurate than our speculations!

 

[quantinghome]

OOC is planned to be a massive regeneration site - some 25,500 new homes and 65,000 new jobs are planned to be built or created over the next 20 to 30 years. But it is in London - in principle it will be no different to any other built up and identifiable suburban area such as, say, Wembley or Hackney. It will be better connected than some - it will have several Tube stations in it or near it, it will have Crossrail and the Paddington outer-suburban services. But no long distance trains call at Wembley, Cricklewood or Finsbury Park, all about the same distance from their ultimate terminals, for connectional reasons or because they are destinations in their own right. If the argument about stopping the GW long distance trains at OOC is valid then it is equally valid for trains on other routes.

I see no evidence that this is being considered for any of the other rail routes radiating from London.

Citizens of Ealing go to Paddington to start their train journeys to the west - I see no reason why the future inhabitants of OOC can't do the same - it's closer than Ealing after all, only one stop on Crossrail.

But there are stations similar to that planned for OOC where long distance trains stop. The question is, will OOC be like Wembley, Cricklewood and Finsbury Park, or like Stratford and Clapham?

 

[CW2]

Oh no - not this tired old knee jerk...

Paddington is east of High Street Kensington - a well known retail area m'lud - and 1 mile due north of the Albert Hall.

I've not heard of these areas being described as 'western suburbs'. But each to his taste.

Trafalgar Square is the accepted centre of London - from which all road distances are measured. With the growth in the financial districts, the centre of gravity of London is certainly further east nowadays. Nevertheless I've done a bit of research, using walking distances on Bing maps. Guess which of the traditional termini is furthest from the centre of London?

Charing X 0.2 miles

Waterloo 0.9 miles

Victoria 1.3 miles

Euston 1.7 miles

Kings Cross 1.9 miles (assume St Pancras much the same)

Marylebone 2.3 miles

Liverpool St 2.4 miles

Fenchurch St 2.4 miles

Paddington 2.7 miles

Paddington is great if you are trying to get back home late night after a concert in the Albert Hall. In pretty much all other circumstances you have to reach it by bike / bus / tube. It is the least central of all the central London termini.

 

[irish_rail]

Trafalgar Square is the accepted centre of London - from which all road distances are measured. With the growth in the financial districts, the centre of gravity of London is certainly further east nowadays. Nevertheless I've done a bit of research, using walking distances on Bing maps. Guess which of the traditional termini is furthest from the centre of London?

Charing X 0.2 miles

Waterloo 0.9 miles

Victoria 1.3 miles

Euston 1.7 miles

Kings Cross 1.9 miles (assume St Pancras much the same)

Marylebone 2.3 miles

Liverpool St 2.4 miles

Fenchurch St 2.4 miles

Paddington 2.7 miles

Paddington is great if you are trying to get back home late night after a concert in the Albert Hall. In pretty much all other circumstances you have to reach it by bike / bus / tube. It is the least central of all the central London termini.

Twaddle. You can walk to oxford st within 15 minutes from paddington. It is very much central London.

 

[irish_rail]

Well if they don't, and we're assuming that GW won't stop if HEx don't, people connecting from HS2 will have the following options:

1) HS2 to Euston, walk to Euston Square or Kings Cross, underground to Paddington tube station, walk to Paddington mainline, HEx to Heathrow

2) HS2 to OOC, Crossrail to Paddington low level, walk to Paddington mainline, HEx to Heathrow

3) HS2 to OOC, Crossrail to Heathrow

I don't know about anyone else but I would certainly choose option 3.

And i guess this is the problem. The west must take a hit so that northerners can have easier access to Heathrow.

 

[quantinghome]

I'd also like to know a little more about the assumptions underlying the 2012 estimated passenger numbers. They appear to be rather conservative - 1,100 passengers a day using HS2 to travel to Heathrow seems incredibly low, when it will be the most convenient way to connect to the Midlands and North. My hunch is that once people figure out HS2 is the best way to access Heathrow and the Thames Valley area from the Midlands and North then there will be significant flows of passenger interchanging between GW and HS2 at OOC. But who knows? Making predictions is difficult, especially about the future.

Answering my own question on this - I've had a look at some stats from the CAA which show very low numbers of Heathrow passengers coming from the Midlands and North. Really quite surprised by that.