Slough and Windsor Eton Central Line

[aspierail]

As you know the Slough and Windsor Eton Central Line is operated by class 165 even though its used for only 1 stop and the journey takes about 6mins or so do you think class 165 is right for this route or a different DMU unit should serve this route instead.

 

[Aictos]

As you know the Slough and Windsor Eton Central Line is operated by class 165 even though its used for only 1 stop and the journey takes about 6mins or so do you think class 165 is right for this route or a different DMU unit should serve this route instead.

A 3 car Pacer would be perfectly acceptable to operate what is basically a shuttle service between the two but I fail to see the locals accepting that!

 

[transmanche]

As you know the Slough and Windsor Eton Central Line is operated by class 165 even though its used for only 1 stop and the journey takes about 6mins or so do you think class 165 is right for this route or a different DMU unit should serve this route instead.

Yes, I'd say it's the perfect DMU for the job - being as it's the type of DMU available.

Using anything else would just add extra costs (driver training) and bring additional complications (reducing flexibility in unit deployment).

 

[swt_passenger]

They should use a bi-mode IEP eventually. It will be able to make use of a few yards of OHLE at Slough, and they'll be able to switch off all the engines during the turnround...

:roll:

 

[LE Greys]

Parry People Mover, just a very long one.

 

[142]

Parry People Mover, just a very long one.

Just send some PM 150/2S to the thames branches. Vile things they are! Then send turbos to bristol

 

[route:oxford]

Fine as they are, it allows them to be swapped about as and when necessary.

I suppose, for such a short journey,a travellator instead? Or maybe a pair those whizzy units that are used to transfer passengers at Heathrow Terminal 5.

Isn't the eventual plan though to have a merged station at Windsor & Eton? I suppose the 3rd rail will be extended through to Sloff at that stage.

 

[4SRKT]

What's the problem? The journey may only take six minutes, but it runs every 20 minutes, and at peak times is well enough loaded to justify that type of set. As already pointed out there isn't anything else available in the area, and drafting in something else would require more sets as a spare would also be needed, but at the moment a spare can be drawn from the wider pool. The only other option would ba a complete recast of the timetable to run the services to and from Paddington, but as there are no off-peak Paddington > Slough terminators any more there's nothing to link it up with, and you'd have to cross the fasts at Slough to get to the slows so that's a total non-starter anyway.

The service and traction are fine as they are.

 

[Greenback]

Yes, it's the right unit. It provides consistency of service delivery across the area. As others have said, it would be unnecessarily complicated and expensive to introduce a different type.

 

[FGW_Lad]

Whenever I've used the service it always is 70-80% full, weekends I even see 3-car 165's on the line

 

[Mojo]

I've only ever done the line once. It was in the summer and it was very busy both ways, with people standing and this was off-peak. Most of the passengers were tourists (largely American) and I was surprised that everyone was going this way rather than the direct train from Waterloo.

It wasn't until I got home and looked it up that I discovered that going from Paddington was not only cheaper (the CDR from London Terminals to Central vs Riverside is £1 cheaper), but also much quicker according to the National Rail journey planner. Similarly there are 3tph all with good connections vs 2tph with 50+ Min journeys from Waterloo.

As to whether it's a good unit to run on the line. I can't think what else you'd run. The line is DOO so you'd need some sort of DMU compatible with running in DOO mode, which the 165 hits the bill. If you were to run some other kind of vehicle then you'd need to find somewhere to store and maintain it, adding complexity to FGW's relatively simple London/Thames Valley fleet. You'd also have the problem of coping with demand at busy times, and the line DOES get busy.

 

[tbtc]

As far as I knew it the branch isn't going to be electrified? Seems a strange omission (if true), given the short bit of wiring needed.

Hadn't heard about extending it "through" onto the SWT line - any plans about?

 

[4SRKT]

I lived in Windsor for two years and almost always went this way into London, except occasionally for a bit of variety. It's quicker and the 165 is a more comfortable unit than a 455. The ability to plug into the Central Line at Ealing Broadway is also a strong draw. Central station is also more, well, central, although not by much. From a tourist's POV the entrance to Windsor over the long low viaduct with excellent views of the Castle, the River and Eton Colleage is much better than the approach to Riverside, and the station entrance is right opposite the Castle. Job's a good 'un. The only exception where I might have used Riverside was going to visit my parents with more than one piece of luggage, where not having to change en route to London made the journey to the Cross a bit less arduous.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Hadn't heard about extending it "through" onto the SWT line - any plans about?

I doubt it. The two lines enter the town at quite different levels, giving a similar engineering problem to linking up Bradford Interchange and Forster Square. The big difference being that the real estate value of the centre of Windsor is probably more than the entire city of Bradford, so it's even less likely than the Bradford link up!

 

[317 forever]

As far as I knew it the branch isn't going to be electrified? Seems a strange omission (if true), given the short bit of wiring needed.

Hadn't heard about extending it "through" onto the SWT line - any plans about?

Indeed, the Windsor Eton line ought to be electrified. Then some trains terminating at Slough could be extended to Windsor.

 

[jopsuk]

I doubt it. The two lines enter the town at quite different levels, giving a similar engineering problem to linking up Bradford Interchange and Forster Square. The big difference being that the real estate value of the centre of Windsor is probably more than the entire city of Bradford, so it's even less likely than the Bradford link up!

Hmm. You wouldn't want to do it in such a way that both stations would be retained- you'd want to just keep one, and link it through to Slough perhaps (becoming the terminus of the service from Waterloo).

Not sure this would help with the engineering, of course

 

[RPI]

Just send some PM 150/2S to the thames branches. Vile things they are! Then send turbos to bristol

whats wrong with our 150/2's? they're about the best 150's on the network having 2+2 seating!

 

[Aictos]

whats wrong with our 150/2's? they're about the best 150's on the network having 2+2 seating!

Agreed, on a recent RailUK meet I was at Bolton heading home via a rather convoluted route anyway my train turn up consisting of a Pacer and a 150 on the rear - needless to say I made sure I got on the 150!

 

[4SRKT]

Agreed, on a recent RailUK meet I was at Bolton heading home via a rather convoluted route anyway my train turn up consisting of a Pacer and a 150 on the rear - needless to say I made sure I got on the 150!

On a recent meet in Leeds a 150 + 144 combo turned up and we all made sure we got in the 144. So there!

 

[RPI]

thankfully 142's from our area will be going back to where they belong at some point this year, Manchester is welcome to the flippin things lol.

 

[Tubeman]

Indeed, the Windsor Eton line ought to be electrified. Then some trains terminating at Slough could be extended to Windsor.

Nice idea in principle, but the layout at Slough makes this problematic... The Windsor branch approaches from the south and so the bay platform is alongside the 'fast' platforms. To be a realistic extension of trains terminating at Slough on the relief lines, trains would have to cross the 'fast' roads on the level to access the Windsor branch which would cause too many conflicts.

The only answer is a flyover / diveunder to take the Windsor branch over / under the 'fast' roads west of Slough station, which would be prohibitively expensive. It wouldn't be operationally robust either, as only one train can be on the branch at any one time as it's single and there's only one platform at Windsor & Eton Central... so any delays to a 'down' service and the following train wouldn't be able to proceed any further than Slough until the train ahead has been to Windsor and back (admittedly there's a short section of double track at the north end of the branch)... Ultimately this would diminish the frequency on the branch.

 

[WestCoast]

thankfully 142's from our area will be going back to where they belong at some point this year, Manchester is welcome to the flippin things lol.

142s removing Northern's 180s - but at least they have pink doors and fancy seat cushions:roll:

Regarding the Windsor brach - I suppose having one-class of train just for that route wouldn't be operationally efficient.

I do wonder what the merits of running a through service to Paddington are - I presume paths and stock would go against this?

 

[142]

whats wrong with our 150/2's? they're about the best 150's on the network having 2+2 seating!

They are always cold and always stink, FGW have not got a clue what a cleaner is evidently! give me a 142/143 over a 150 any day!

 

[Ivo]

Down with 165s!

Seriously, at present I feel that they are the right stock for the job. But as a long-term objective, could the line not be wired and developed as part of Crossrail? I realise it would involve building a flyover, but they managed it at Airport Junction...

Could always stick a 180 on it

 

[Aictos]

On a recent meet in Leeds a 150 + 144 combo turned up and we all made sure we got in the 144. So there!

I wonder when you were going to pop up, Least we can agree to disagree on what we feel is the superior unit!

 

[tbtc]

142s removing Northern's 180s

So the biggest franchise in the UK goes back to having no "post privatisation" DMUs (and only sixteen post privatisation EMUs)...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Indeed, the Windsor Eton line ought to be electrified. Then some trains terminating at Slough could be extended to Windsor.

Electrification works best on "self contained" routes (to maximise the number of DMUs "saved" per mile of track). To electrify the main line, yet leave a short branch with a twenty minute frequency unelectrified seems crazy (you'd have to mile a lot further elsewhere to "save" one DMU)

 

[robvulpes]

As far as I knew it the branch isn't going to be electrified? Seems a strange omission (if true), given the short bit of wiring needed.

Hadn't heard about extending it "through" onto the SWT line - any plans about?

<http://windsorlink.net/>

 

[LE Greys]

Electrification works best on "self contained" routes (to maximise the number of DMUs "saved" per mile of track). To electrify the main line, yet leave a short branch with a twenty minute frequency unelectrified seems crazy (you'd have to mile a lot further elsewhere to "save" one DMU)

Agreed. The St Alban's Abbey branch, North Berwick branch and so on bear this out. Repeating the mistake of not doing various lines in Yorkshire when the ECML was done, and leaving non-electric islands such as the Uckfield line would not be a good idea. It means you have to maintain an extra class of unit, thus pushing up costs for no good reason. 171s really do not need to exist when a 377 could do the job just as well for a minimal extra investment.

 

[WestCoast]

Could always stick a 180 on it

Well they've been pretty much everywhere else now.

So the biggest franchise in the UK goes back to having no "post privatisation" DMUs (and only sixteen post privatisation EMUs)...

great.

 

[TEW]

They are always cold and always stink, FGW have not got a clue what a cleaner is evidently! give me a 142/143 over a 150 any day!

FGW units are usually clean, much better than XC trains. The stinky trains are the 150/1s, they have a foul stench. Even the refurbishment didn't remove it either.

 

[142]

FGW units are usually clean, much better than XC trains. The stinky trains are the 150/1s, they have a foul stench. Even the refurbishment didn't remove it either.

at least 150/1s have windows that stay shut and dont rattle as much, admitedly they do stink though