How important is OOC to HS2?

[jfollows]

I suspect these will be significantly greater traffic generators than currently predicted.

The proportion of people accessing Heathrow from the Midlands and the North by public transport must be pretty slim. Likewise car journeys must be the dominant mode for journey from the Midlands and North to the Thames Valley. OOC will provide serious competition to the M40 and A34.

I agree.

I have had to make the train journey Manchester-Heathrow numerous times, because IBM had an office in Bedfont Lakes which I needed to visit. Whatever route I chose was a pain. My employer wouldn't allow flying because of outdated expense policies which made no sense (flights were "luxury" and therefore expensive whereas trains weren't, but I could buy an open return train ticket which wasn't cheaper even in Standard Class). I like trains so I didn't mind really, but I can't see a lot of people putting up with the train, and most of my colleagues drove instead. Old Oak Common would be great in comparison, for Heathrow or even Bedfont Lakes (which is a short walk from T4 through the Hilton).

 

[HSTEd]

I think we discussed this some time ago, and from anywhere west of about Swindon it would be quicker to head north via Birmingham instead. But I also think someone said all GW fast line trains would need to stop at OOC if any did, because of capacity issues.

This depends where you are going.

If you want to go from Birmingham the route via Swindon is faster, but from Manchester the faster HS2 journey overwhelms the change and its faster to route via OOC.

 

[Gareth]

Speaking personally, OOC will be hugely useful for the Crossrail connection. The less likely I need to faff about with those deep level tube lines*, the better.

*I do like the subsurface network though.

 

[coppercapped]

I suspect these will be significantly greater traffic generators than currently predicted.

The proportion of people accessing Heathrow from the Midlands and the North by public transport must be pretty slim. Likewise car journeys must be the dominant mode for journey from the Midlands and North to the Thames Valley. OOC will provide serious competition to the M40 and A34.

I agree with your conclusions. HS2 will connect at OOC to Crossrail — by definition this will also give good and frequent connections to Heathrow and the Crossrail services to other points along the Thames Valley out to its terminus at Reading (at a lower frequency) as well as the GW suburban service to Didcot and eventually to Oxford. This is part of the justification for the OOC station.

The question to my mind is whether the numbers of people changing between GW Main Line services to and from 'The West' (west Berkshire, Wiltshire, Somerset, Devon, Cornwall, Gloucestershire, Worcestershire, Herefordshire, Oxfordshire and South Wales, m'Lud...) at OOC will be sufficiently large to:

1. increase 'GBR's' net income over and above that which is generated by more direct routes to Birmingham and points North, even if 'route HS2' is slightly faster for some journeys
2. generate net additional traffic and income by making the connection to Heathrow at OOC rather than RailAir at Reading, and
3. whether the extra stop will in any way benefit the three or four hundred other people in the train who in fact have their business in central London and not in a shopping centre some way to the west. I rather suspect that the number of passengers from, say Taunton, who want to have a day out shopping or seeing the sights at OOC rather than the centre of London is vanishingly small.

For the avoidance of doubt - stopping trains servicing the suburban GW route at OOC for connections into and out of HS2 will be a commercial success. I am less convinced that stopping the longer distance, limited stop GW trains at OOC will have any significant commercial or financial advantages whatsoever for either the GW or HS2.

 

[irish_rail]

I agree with your conclusions. HS2 will connect at OOC to Crossrail — by definition this will also give good and frequent connections to Heathrow and the Crossrail services to other points along the Thames Valley out to its terminus at Reading (at a lower frequency) as well as the GW suburban service to Didcot and eventually to Oxford. This is part of the justification for the OOC station.

The question to my mind is whether the numbers of people changing between GW Main Line services to and from 'The West' (west Berkshire, Wiltshire, Somerset, Devon, Cornwall, Gloucestershire, Worcestershire, Herefordshire, Oxfordshire and South Wales, m'Lud...) at OOC will be sufficiently large to:

1. increase 'GBR's' net income over and above that which is generated by more direct routes to Birmingham and points North, even if 'route HS2' is slightly faster for some journeys
2. generate net additional traffic and income by making the connection to Heathrow at OOC rather than RailAir at Reading, and
3. whether the extra stop will in any way benefit the three or four hundred other people in the train who in fact have their business in central London and not in a shopping centre some way to the west. I rather suspect that the number of passengers from, say Taunton, who want to have a day out shopping or seeing the sights at OOC rather than the centre of London is vanishingly small.

For the avoidance of doubt - stopping trains servicing the suburban GW route at OOC for connections into and out of HS2 will be a commercial success. I am less convinced that stopping the longer distance, limited stop GW trains at OOC will have any significant commercial or financial advantages whatsoever for either the GW or HS2.

Completely agree with this. Hopefully common sense will prevail before its too late!

 

[Irascible]

This depends where you are going.

If you want to go from Birmingham the route via Swindon is faster, but from Manchester the faster HS2 journey overwhelms the change and its faster to route via OOC.

Er, will there be no Manc-Bham service on HS2? got to admit not been paying much attention to it. For anyone the west side of Taunton I suspect the plane is still going to be the choice regardless. There's not all that many people in the borderline area across Wiltshire & Somerset & I'm not really on board with encouraging residents of the Bristol area to go to Manchester via London...

 

[HSTEd]

Er, will there be no Manc-Bham service on HS2? got to admit not been paying much attention to it. For anyone the west side of Taunton I suspect the plane is still going to be the choice regardless

Getting to Old Oak Common only takes ~23 minutes more than getting to Birmingham Curzon Street from Manchester Picadilly.

Add in the station change and I don't think changing at Birmingham looks particularly attractive. Bristol Parkway to Birmingham will be a handful of minutes slower than the journey to OOC.
And to the south west the route via the Berks and Hants should advantage OOC more.

There's not all that many people in the borderline area across Wiltshire & Somerset & I'm not really on board with encouraging residents of the Bristol area to go to Manchester via London...

Does it matter what route people really take?

Concentrating as much traffic as possible onto our highest capacity bulk transport routes has some important advantages to the industry.

 

[MarkyT]

...I'm not really on board with encouraging residents of the Bristol area to go to Manchester via London...

I expect that travelling via OOC & HS2 from Bristol is highly likely to be more expensive normally than a direct XC to Manchester, because the passenger will be taking up a London-bound seat nearly all the way to the capital on the GWR leg that could instead be sold to a premium London commuter or business traveller, especially at peak periods. There might be some edge case exceptions at very quiet times when GWR and the HS2 operator are trying to offload otherwise empty seats.

 

[Irascible]

Getting to Old Oak Common only takes ~23 minutes more than getting to Birmingham Curzon Street from Manchester Picadilly.

Add in the station change and I don't think changing at Birmingham looks particularly attractive. Bristol Parkway to Birmingham will be a handful of minutes slower than the journey to OOC.
And to the south west the route via the Berks and Hants should advantage OOC more.

Does it matter what route people really take?

Concentrating as much traffic as possible onto our highest capacity bulk transport routes has some important advantages to the industry.

Exeter to New St ( and so Plymouth, Taunton, Cornwall ) is about the same time as Exeter to Paddington, so you're hoping New St - Curzon St is considerably lengthier & more awkward a change than OOC. Bristol-New St is similarily about the same time as Paddington. Aside from that at a higher level, you're wasting energy sending people across the country & back again.

And, more importantly as MarkyT said, HS2 might be our highest capacity bulk transport but the GWR routes are already busy just with London traffic. XC up there is also rammed but that's another matter ( and also easier to fix just by running longer trains ).

 

[stuu]

And to the south west the route via the Berks and Hants should advantage OOC more.

Taunton-OOC is going to be around 90 minutes, then 20 minutes at least for the change (possibly a bit less or more depending on timetables), then 70 minutes to Manchester = 180 minutes, vs about 200 on the direct train (if they ever run again). A max 20 minute saving and the faff of changing trains doesn't sound a winning proposition to me

 

[JohnRegular]

I think the importance of OOC as a long distance interchange is somewhat overstated- the way it is often presented in these threads is that passengers will happily make two or three changes in order to save a few minutes. Sure, maybe some will, but I can't see (for example) Southampton passengers getting off a train to Birmingham at Reading, getting another train to OOC, and then changing again to get to Birmingham a bit quicker. I'm not sure honestly of the actual expected time saving in this case, but I suspect it would have to be fairly substantial in order to attract a lot of passengers from a direct XC.

 

[irish_rail]

I think the importance of OOC as a long distance interchange is somewhat overstated- the way it is often presented in these threads is that passengers will happily make two or three changes in order to save a few minutes. Sure, maybe some will, but I can't see (for example) Southampton passengers getting off a train to Birmingham at Reading, getting another train to OOC, and then changing again to get to Birmingham a bit quicker. I'm not sure honestly of the actual expected time saving in this case, but I suspect it would have to be fairly substantial in order to attract a lot of passengers from a direct XC.

Agreed. Alot on here don't seem to appreciate the value to alot of none regular rail users of direct trains. The idea of taking a train from the south west all the way to London to a mega busy interchange, to change for the north of the UK will put some off.

And as another poster pointed out , I'm not convinced there is the spare capacity on GWR London trains to take all of the XC passengers from the south west who will travel via OOC instead (despite the fact it will not be quicker or more convenient, and probably more expensive, but that seems to be the assertion of some on here).

 

[quantinghome]

I think the importance of OOC as a long distance interchange is somewhat overstated- the way it is often presented in these threads is that passengers will happily make two or three changes in order to save a few minutes. Sure, maybe some will, but I can't see (for example) Southampton passengers getting off a train to Birmingham at Reading, getting another train to OOC, and then changing again to get to Birmingham a bit quicker. I'm not sure honestly of the actual expected time saving in this case, but I suspect it would have to be fairly substantial in order to attract a lot of passengers from a direct XC.

There's nothing to stop a direct service running Southampton-Reading-OOC-Paddington. And while the improvement OOC brings to your particular example is not so clear cut, OOC would certainly be a vast improvement for passengers travelling between pretty much any city north of Birmingham and the Thames Valley or South Coast.

 

[Bald Rick]

There's nothing to stop a direct service running Southampton-Reading-OOC-Paddington.

there is - which existing trains between London and Reading, and Basingstoke and Southampton, are you going to cancel to run it?

 

[Nottingham59]

I think the importance of OOC as a long distance interchange is somewhat overstated

I agree with that. It would be much more useful as a local and regional interchange, like Straford has become for East London. But for that to work, OOC would need better interchanges from the WCML and hopefully as an alternative terminus for increased Chiltern traffic via the North London Line. These don't seem to be in the pipeline.

Personally I think the scope for long-distance interchange at OOC is limited. Don't get me wrong, OOC will be well-used, now it is built. But if HS2 had gone directly to Euston it would have saved around 8 minutes, five miles of tunnel (£0.5bn at £30m/km), and around £2bn to build the OOC station.

The same argument applies even more to the HS2 station at Manchester Airport. How many people catching a Manchester train at Euston are heading for Manchester Airport? 2%? There's a giant kink in the line to get there, and makes the tunnel under Manchester is twice as long as necessary. Adding another 6-8 minutes to everyone's journey and another £2.5bn to the cost.

 

[coppercapped]

There's nothing to stop a direct service running Southampton-Reading-OOC-Paddington.

From the infrastructure point of view, no there isn't.

Operationally there might be, due to potential congestion at the flat junctions at Basingstoke, Southcote and Oxford Road and track capacity towards London and and platform capacity at Paddington. To which of the current destinations served from Paddington would you reduce the service?

From the business point of view, what net increase in receipts would such a service, taking up a Main Line path between Reading and Paddington, bring? Any Southampton passengers for London would continue to use Waterloo as it would be quicker due to the slowish bit between Basingstoke and Reading and — as is the considered opinion of many on this Forum — Paddington is too far out in the sticks to be of interest as a London terminus.

And while the improvement OOC brings to your particular example is not so clear cut, OOC would certainly be a vast improvement for passengers travelling between pretty much any city north of Birmingham and the Thames Valley or South Coast.

What do you mean by 'vast improvement' and why will it be a vast improvement?

What is to prevent an acceleration of services to Birmingham from the south? Grade separation at Didcot East will come at some point as will the increase of capacity between Didcot and Oxford and the additional platforms at Oxford. These alone will ease many timetabling and speed constraints so enabling services to be accelerated. Examples are permitting the XC services to be always scheduled to use the 125mph Mains rather than being timed to allow the use of the 100mph Reliefs between Reading and Didcot; pathing allowances at Didcot East and platform occupation at Oxford.

Even 5 minutes faster will make 'route HS2' less attractive as the time savings due to it are only marginal in the great scheme of things (door-to-door is the important time) and will require at least one change and possibly two if the onward journey to, say, Shrewsbury or Lichfield requires yet another change from Curzon Street to New Street.

 

[quantinghome]

What do you mean by 'vast improvement' and why will it be a vast improvement?

Manchester - Southampton is about 4h15 by direct train, possibly a little less if you pick a particular connection through London. HS2 + change at OOC would reduce this to around 2h30 or less if you can fit direct OOC-Southampton services into the timetable. Crucially this means a significantly faster train journey than car journey. Any northern city not currently on a direct route to Reading or Southampton (Liverpool, Nottingham, anything north of Crewe on the WCML) would likely benefit even more.

What is to prevent an acceleration of services to Birmingham from the south? Grade separation at Didcot East will come at some point as will the increase of capacity between Didcot and Oxford and the additional platforms at Oxford. These alone will ease many timetabling and speed constraints so enabling services to be accelerated. Examples are permitting the XC services to be always scheduled to use the 125mph Mains rather than being timed to allow the use of the 100mph Reliefs between Reading and Didcot; pathing allowances at Didcot East and platform occupation at Oxford.

Even 5 minutes faster will make 'route HS2' less attractive as the time savings due to it are only marginal in the great scheme of things (door-to-door is the important time) and will require at least one change and possibly two if the onward journey to, say, Shrewsbury or Lichfield requires yet another change from Curzon Street to New Street.

Certainly you could make some interventions on the existing XC route and shave a few minutes off. But that's all you'd achieve, and you'd be running into the old problem of faster services destroying capacity on a mixed use railway. OOC cuts many journey times by over an hour.

 

[The Planner]

From the infrastructure point of view, no there isn't.

Operationally there might be, due to potential congestion at the flat junctions at Basingstoke, Southcote and Oxford Road and track capacity towards London and and platform capacity at Paddington. To which of the current destinations served from Paddington would you reduce the service?

From the business point of view, what net increase in receipts would such a service, taking up a Main Line path between Reading and Paddington, bring? Any Southampton passengers for London would continue to use Waterloo as it would be quicker due to the slowish bit between Basingstoke and Reading and — as is the considered opinion of many on this Forum — Paddington is too far out in the sticks to be of interest as a London terminus.

What do you mean by 'vast improvement' and why will it be a vast improvement?

What is to prevent an acceleration of services to Birmingham from the south? Grade separation at Didcot East will come at some point as will the increase of capacity between Didcot and Oxford and the additional platforms at Oxford. These alone will ease many timetabling and speed constraints so enabling services to be accelerated. Examples are permitting the XC services to be always scheduled to use the 125mph Mains rather than being timed to allow the use of the 100mph Reliefs between Reading and Didcot; pathing allowances at Didcot East and platform occupation at Oxford.

Even 5 minutes faster will make 'route HS2' less attractive as the time savings due to it are only marginal in the great scheme of things (door-to-door is the important time) and will require at least one change and possibly two if the onward journey to, say, Shrewsbury or Lichfield requires yet another change from Curzon Street to New Street.

Not sure it will. Even looking today at 1M46, thats a pretty clean path. I don't see where 5 minutes is coming from.

 

[Bletchleyite]

People keep comparing OOC to Stratford, but I think it's more like Clapham Junction. OK, not quite everything stops there, but that's more due to pathing issues and short platforms. So yes, I do think everything should stop. It would remove quite a lot of "cross London" interchanges. Not everyone values direct over fast, though many do. Those who value direct will still use XC's execrable service, whereas those who value speed will want to connect onto HS2.

I also think there will be considerable interchange to Heathrow, particularly if "code sharing" with rail becomes a thing so connections are protected.

If only the WCML classic line services could be better connected to it, too, by adding a full WCML station at Willesden. They do pass nearby. It would also reduce if not eliminate the path-clogging need for the Southern service via Kensington Olympia because you could connect onto the LO West London Line from all WCML services instead. One stop on the WLL from Willesden would connect the two far more easily than faffing via London.

 

[Meerkat]

How many people catching a Manchester train at Euston are heading for Manchester Airport? 2%? There's a giant kink in the line to get there, and makes the tunnel under Manchester is twice as long as necessary. Adding another 6-8 minutes to everyone's journey and another £2.5bn to the cost.

Manchester Airport is effectively Manchester Parkway isnt it? Lots of the people who drive to Stockport will go to the airport instead.

If only the WCML classic line services could be better connected to it, too, by adding a full WCML station at Willesden.

Full WCML station plus West Hampstead Interchange, Clapham improvements so all fasts stop, and a people mover link from Willesden Junction to OOC would be a wonderful connection system that would be useful to loads of people, local and longer distance.
Though I would prefer the Heathrow South Link to get the SWML people into Heathrow and OOC.

 

[camflyer]

I like the plans for OOC and look forward to see the redevelopment of the whole area. It really does have the potential to be the "Stratford of the West". It's just a shame that the geography didn't allow a seamless connection with the Tube.

 

[jfollows]

Manchester Airport is effectively Manchester Parkway isnt it? Lots of the people who drive to Stockport will go to the airport instead.

And those who drive to Wilmslow currently also (eg from Hale/Altrincham - I know my former colleague from Sale tended to drive to Stockport).
My choice will be between a 10 minute walk to Wilmslow station which I now have anyway, or a ten minute drive plus allowance for parking time to the HS2 station. I can see that if I were able to get off at Old Oak Common in about an hour that it would be attractive.

 

[HSTEd]

People keep comparing OOC to Stratford, but I think it's more like Clapham Junction. OK, not quite everything stops there, but that's more due to pathing issues and short platforms. So yes, I do think everything should stop. It would remove quite a lot of "cross London" interchanges. Not everyone values direct over fast, though many do. Those who value direct will still use XC's execrable service, whereas those who value speed will want to connect onto HS2.

I also think there will be considerable interchange to Heathrow, particularly if "code sharing" with rail becomes a thing so connections are protected.

If only the WCML classic line services could be better connected to it, too, by adding a full WCML station at Willesden. They do pass nearby. It would also reduce if not eliminate the path-clogging need for the Southern service via Kensington Olympia because you could connect onto the LO West London Line from all WCML services instead. One stop on the WLL from Willesden would connect the two far more easily than faffing via London.

If it could be done I think it would turn the WLL into the preferred route for "Cross London" journeys such as they exist.

WLL from Old Oak Common or Willesden Junction to Clapham Junction.

 

[Bald Rick]

HS2 + change at OOC would reduce this to around 2h30 or less if you can fit direct OOC-Southampton services into the timetable.

HS2 + change at Euston & Waterloo will be sub 3hrs. Granted not 2h30, but still beats the car.

 

[Bletchleyite]

HS2 + change at Euston & Waterloo will be sub 3hrs. Granted not 2h30, but still beats the car.

But has the awkward change via London, which a good many people simply won't do, and which is inaccessible from a wheelchair user point of view too.

I can't see much of a case against this at all - having a "London Hbf" as an interchange (even if not in London itself so not as useful for going to London) is a massive potential benefit. If all it costs is 5 minutes on GWR and legacy WCML services plus the cost of a 4 platform station at Willesden (and some tidying up of the existing station which is an abject tip), that seems a price worth paying. If it's that much of an issue on "fast" GWR services, lop Reading out of those instead, leaving that in the "semifasts" only.

 

[MarkyT]

If it's that much of an issue on "fast" GWR services, lop Reading out of those instead, leaving that in the "semifasts" only.

That would inconvenience an awful lot of well-established traffic. It should definitely not be one or the other. Redeveloped Reading is a good template for what Old Oak Common (or West London Junction as I like to call it) could become.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That would inconvenience an awful lot of well-established traffic.

Some of which would change at OOC instead, to be fair.

It should definitely not be one or the other. Redeveloped Reading is a good template for what Old Oak Common (or West London Junction as I like to call it) could become.

I'd rather they just added OOC to all existing services that pass it on all lines. The interchange benefit is potentially far greater than 5 minutes on an InterCity journey which for most people is neither here nor there. As I said it isn't a local interchange like Stratford, it's more like a super-Clapham Junction.

 

[Bald Rick]

But has the awkward change via London, which a good many people simply won't do, and which is inaccessible from a wheelchair user point of view too.

But many will, as they do now.

My point is not that OOC is a bad thing, far from it, it is definitely the right thing to do.

However I see the prospect of through trains from the SWML to Paddington extremely unlikely, and therefore Basingstoke and South / West of there to Birmingham / Manchester will have the choice of direct train (XC), or changing at least twice (Reading / OOC, or Waterloo / Euston).

 

[Bletchleyite]

But many will, as they do now.

They will. But we're not just building for current users, we're building so people who don't currently use rail start doing so.

If HS2 and associated things like OOC don't grow the market for rail (and reduce that for domestic air and car), it's an abject failure. But I'm sure it will - and this would be a great addition.

 

[Horizon22]

I have to disagree. If I'm going to Central London and getting a taxi somewhere Paddington is far far better. Also the tube network at Paddington connects the useful termini of other stations such as Euston, Kings Cross etc. I can walk to many attractions of Central London within half an hour, and not to mention the tourist side of Paddington Station (the grandest of all London termini arguably) which in itself is an attraction. All OOC is going to do is add minutes to my already long journey. I also think the planners need to observe passengers empty off an IET at Paddington with all luggage in tow and they will soon realise that we are looking at probably a 4 or 5 minute stop at OOC if it is indeed going to be well used, unless of course you replace all IETs with trains with doors all down the carriage like a commuter train. Either way, I think users in the south west and south Wales lose.

People have very different habits when they know it is a terminus as opposed to a through station. People dawdle off terminals, because people know there is no rush. It would be treated more like Reading is.

Also depending on where you are going and given you may not have to walk so far to connect with Crossrail, it may well be more convenient. Taxi usage is relatively uncommon - most people are connecting to the tube or a bus.

It will be interesting to see what sort of state Heathrow Express is in by the time it opens, as its business case gradually declines after Crossrail opens. Those paths could be better used.

My impression of GWML at OOC is that it's an "all or nothing" for stops. In this case it becomes like Stratford or London Bridge (albeit faster) and has a very high benefit as interchange between 3 key sectors and one of the world's biggest airports.