Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Moderator note: Split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/crossrail-service-pattern-from-may-2023.242908/ Worth noting that the issue for Terminal 5 is that it's served by Heathrow Express. We're getting into crayonista territory, but I'd very much be in favour of abolishing HX and...
www.railforums.co.uk
If anyone wishes to discuss any other potential use of HEX paths or any other speculative topic, please create a new thread (if there isn't one already). Thanks
Yes. There would however be no practical way jf segregating Heathrow express touchins on contactless from Elizabeth line /GwR at that point. And the shortage of platforms at Maidenhead/Twyford would mean no dedicated hex gatelines
Touching in on Paddington platform 6 / 7 and out anywhere other than Heathrow didn't charge the HEx premium when I last did it in December 2020. Clearly that could have changed by now, but it is quite possible, with Oyster / Contactless to charge a higher fare to go to Heathrow and not charge that higher fare for touching out elsewhere.
Severe delays between Paddington and Reading / Heathrow Terminals due to an earlier signal failure at Southall. London Underground are accepting tickets via any reasonable route. MINOR DELAYS between Paddington and Abbey Wood / Shenfield while we fix a faulty train at Tottenham Court Road. GOOD SERVICE on the rest of the line.
This seems to happen a lot at the moment (somewhere on the cross-rail route)
Granted in this case it will also impact Heathrow Express, but we will see how well the extra running through the core works out. As we know from Thameslink, when it goes wrong it really goes wrong and HeX could remain the more reliable option as it is more self contained.
Yes, and maybe it works quite well in practice. My general impression of airport shuttles is rather poor, because most of the ones I'm familiar with (Luton DART, Edinburgh Tram from Edinburgh Gateway, Paris Orlyval, New York JFK Airtrain) are ridiculously expensive to go a mile or two before catching another train - not a great experience. But sensible integrated fares, charging the same for a comparable two-leg metro journey, and well-timed connections would alleviate a lot of my concerns there.
The Singapore Changi shuttle is really a branch from the Metro that ends at the airport. In fact I believe trains ran through from the city to the airport but this was stopped due to relatively low passenger numbers to the airport.
It left a lot to be desired living on the west side of the city and so a 25 minute taxi ride would take 1.5 hours on the metro. Add in to that changing terminals as there was only one metro stop for the airport.
No, because it’s not possible for fast trains to run on the relief lines and overtake the stoppers. It’s also not possible for trains to/from Heathrow to run on the main (fast) lines and transfer to/from the relief side nearer to Paddington. Also last of all, it’s definitely not practical to have fast trains between Paddington and Canary Wharf.
One thing to point out is that Heathrow is pretty close to the centre of London, which mean a metro/EL style service (more stops but connect to more places in London) might be more suitable
Look at cities with multiple airports
e.g. Tokyo
Haneda Airport, about 15 miles from Tokyo - Keikyu Airport Limited Express (non-stop between Haneda Airport and Shinagawa, which takes about 15 minutes) runs every 40 minutes with limited express service slotted in between. Most services continue into the centre of Tokyo as metro services, stopping at Shinbashi, Nihombashi, Asakusa, Skytree, etc. This service has no separation with other services and doesn't charge extra express fare.
Narita Airport, about 40-45 miles from Tokyo depending on the line - 2 operators (JR and Keisei) runs limited express trains from the airport with combined frequency of 5 tph, mostly non-stop between Airport and Tokyo and JR serves some more stations within Tokyo and suburb of Tokyo. Extra fares are required on both of them.
Similar scenario with Osaka Kansai Airport and Itami Airport
Taipei
Songshan Airport, mainly serves domestic destinations, basically located inside Taipei city. There is a MRT stop at the airport
Taoyuen Airport, mainly serves international destinations, about 20 miles away from Taipei. Connected by MRT with express and stopping services.
Seoul
Gimpo Airport, the closer airport, is connected by both Subway and mainline railway
Incheon Airport, the further airport, is connected by mainline railway only
If it require a significant time between the city centre and the airport, a non-stop premium service make sense. Otherwise, people would prefer direct services to more destinations to prevent the transfer hassle.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
No, because it’s not possible for fast trains to run on the relief lines and overtake the stoppers. It’s also not possible for trains to/from Heathrow to run on the main (fast) lines and transfer to/from the relief side nearer to Paddington. Also last of all, it’s definitely not practical to have fast trains between Paddington and Canary Wharf.
To be fair there isn't many more stops that can be skipped.
Ealing Broadway is the interchange station for other Tube lines, centre London stations are where people go so cannot be skipped.
Hayes & Harlington may not be an important station but for scheduling reason passing will be slow anyway.
I think by knocking off scheduling allowance Elizabeth Line could be 1-2 minutes faster between Paddington and Heathrow, in case they want to be even more competitive against HEX.
To be fair there isn't many more stops that can be skipped.
Ealing Broadway is the interchange station for other Tube lines, centre London stations are where people go so cannot be skipped.
Hayes & Harlington may not be an important station but for scheduling reason passing will be slow anyway.
I think by knocking off scheduling allowance Elizabeth Line could be 1-2 minutes faster between Paddington and Heathrow, in case they want to be even more competitive against HEX.
The Hayes and Harlington stop does allow Reading to be reached in 50 minutes. Not sure if that is impressive or not, as a slick connection you could do the same on Hex via Paddington. However the 5 minute connection, I would not consider change there for reading, where in the past I occasionally used Hex.
The Singapore Changi shuttle is really a branch from the Metro that ends at the airport. In fact I believe trains ran through from the city to the airport but this was stopped due to relatively low passenger numbers to the airport.
They only drive the 387 hex fleet, they only sign the hex route and West Ealing sidings, GWR Reading and Pad drivers are the ones that take them to and from Reading depot, They are on a separate contract from GWR drivers
Looking on the website I see you are correct about a luggage size limit. Surprised though as I was completely unaware and have broken it at least once - usually Singapore is very good at telling you what you can and can’t do…
Touching in on Paddington platform 6 / 7 and out anywhere other than Heathrow didn't charge the HEx premium when I last did it in December 2020. Clearly that could have changed by now, but it is quite possible, with Oyster / Contactless to charge a higher fare to go to Heathrow and not charge that higher fare for touching out elseswere
Presumably though hex would want to charge a premium for journeys west of Langley on the western rail access. Given there is no way of identifying whether they took the Elizabeth line (changing at hayes) or the Heathrow express direct then this would be difficult to do. Furthermore, it would be difficult to identify what route someone took if they went Old Oak common - Heathrow -Langley on the Heathrow express or the Elizabeth line
Furthermore, it would be difficult to identify what route someone took if they went Old Oak common - Heathrow -Langley on the Heathrow express or the Elizabeth line
Presumably though hex would want to charge a premium for journeys west of Langley on the western rail access. Given there is no way of identifying whether they took the Elizabeth line (changing at hayes) or the Heathrow express direct then this would be difficult to do.
Presumably though hex would want to charge a premium for journeys west of Langley on the western rail access. Given there is no way of identifying whether they took the Elizabeth line (changing at hayes) or the Heathrow express direct then this would be difficult to do. Furthermore, it would be difficult to identify what route someone took if they went Old Oak common - Heathrow -Langley on the Heathrow express or the Elizabeth line
As there would normally be revenue staff on all HEx services, it should be possible to check tickets on all services. So HEx could negotiate with TfL to have a special reader that's configured to cause a higher HEx charge to be applied when an inspection takes place. A mobile pink reader that charges a higher fare, if you will.
There's only -four- eight platforms and the station layout seems to suggest only one gateline. Iirc it is one gateline with steps down to each platform
So there would be significant fare increase for those workers in slough and Langley who travel to the airport. And why should tfl change their fare system to accommodate an open access operator
Presumably if Heathrow Express isn’t gone by the time HS2 opens, it will push even more passengers towards Crossrail thanks to the easy interchange at Old Oak Common
Incidentally I asked about whether all trains will call at OOC on opening in the thread on the station's construction, and wondered if HEx would be around by this point, on the basis that them calling at OOC would slow them down, plus the easy interchange making the service effectively redundant.
Yes but what I meant was the Didcot services running semi-fast has nothing to do with Heathrow Express at a core level (sure you still have to plan the service approriately for margins, recoccupancy, headways etc.) as that isn't something on the cards yet.
GWR would definitely find a use for an additional 4 fast paths out of Paddington every hour
Considering their rolling stock situation I doubt they could utilise the paths if they wanted to, unless they do get more in before a hypothetical HEx abolition.
There's quite an interesting piece on London Reconnections that I've linked below titled "Slow Death of Heathrow Express" which argues that 2028 looks like when a decision will need to be made about its future, as it seems the article is saying both track access and train leases are up for renewal around that point.
Article also suggests there may be 4 tph Lizzie Line to T5 by then, making 8 tph in total to LHR
It's older than the Times article in post #1 though, so only has anecdotal evidence that usage had fallen.
When discussing Crossrail, commenters have often speculated on the ultimate demise of Heathrow Express – the private train operating company that runs a non-stop express service between Paddington and Heathrow. This speculation is generally predicated on the belief that once the Elizabeth line...
After a long haul flight I can honestly think of nothing worse than sitting on the 73 stock for an hour.
Crossrail will finish off HEX though. I’d pay a small premium to use HEX but the big issue is that the HEX fare stands alone, rather than a bolt-on to the usual zonal fares.
73 stock is due to be replaced in the next few years anyway, although Crossrail will probably remain more convenient for those not bothered about price vs Underground.
There are a couple of open questions with the 'separate gateline' model:
Several posters have suggested that some/all passengers on GW Main Line trains will prefer to change at OOC to Elizabeth Line trains rather than Paddington for their continued journey to or through central London because the change will be easier than at Paddington. One of the reasons separate gatelines exist at Paddington is because the main line and TfL have different ticketing and charging regimes so at either station passengers will have to shew a ticket when changing trains. As a result one of the two claimed advantages[1] of making a change at OOC will disappear.
Separate gatelines at OOC will make this station unique between Paddington and Reading as all the other stations where passengers will be able to change between the Elizabeth Line and GW services (Slough, Maidenhead, Twyford and Reading) have common gatelines. Confusing or what?
If HeX remains as a non-stop service to Paddington the problem of ticketing goes away.
[1] The other is that the walk is shorter. That depends on where one sits in the train compared to the position of the lifts or escalators at OOC and at which platform the train arrives or departs at Paddington. It is not clear cut.
There's only -four- eight platforms and the station layout seems to suggest only one gateline. Iirc it is one gateline with steps down to each platform
So there would be significant fare increase for those workers in slough and Langley who travel to the airport. And why should tfl change their fare system to accommodate an open access operator
Do check your facts. HEx is not an Open Access Operator in the sense of the Railways Act 1993. HEx was planned as a joint venture between BAA and BR: it owns its own infrastructure and has running rights on the main line railway between Airport Junction and Paddington. Construction began in 1993 and the first services operated in 1998.
I fail to see why HEx has to modify its charging and fares system to accommodate the perceived needs of a johnny-come-lately some 25 years later. If anything TfL has to adapt.
Nobody has seemed to realise that as a result of the higher fares the income per passenger using HEx services is higher than those on other services. I did a calculation some years ago — I think I posted it here but it's too late for me to search for it — which showed that HEx's yield was considerably higher than for other services even though it had to pay for all its own train maintenance including the capex and opex of its depot.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
In the early days there was no gateline and the concept of a premium did not exist as there was no other service to Heathrow, apart from the Piccadilly line. The price was competitive with HEx's main competitor, a taxi ride to the West End. Only the arrival of the Heathrow Connect services a few years later, also operated by BAA/HAL and the immediate precursor of the Crossrail services to Heathrow, gave rise to the discussion of the size of the charge for the tunnel section.
The way that HEx was run was very customer friendly - one could buy the tickets on the train and there were no gates to impede somebody with luggage.
'main line' = GW main line trains, that is express trains as well as the outer suburban services to Newbury and Didcot (for Oxford). 'suburban' now equals 'Elizabeth Line'. Simples.
In the early days there was no gateline even though HEx charged a premium. It was very customer friendly - one could buy the tickets on the train. The present arrangement is anything but.
'main line' = GW main line trains, that is express trains as well as the outer suburban services to Newbury and Didcot (for Oxford). 'suburban' now equals 'Elizabeth Line'
Do check your facts. HEx is not an Open Access Operator in the sense of the Railways Act 1993. HEx was planned as a joint venture between BAA and BR: it owns its own infrastructure and has running rights on the main line railway between Airport Junction and Paddington. Construction began in 1993 and the first services operated in 1998.
I fail to see why HEx has to modify its charging and fares system to accommodate the perceived needs of a johnny-come-lately some 25 years later. If anything TfL has to adapt.
Nobody has seemed to realise that as a result of the higher fares the income per passenger using HEx services is higher than those on other services. I did a calculation some years ago — I think I posted it here but it's too late for me to search for it — which showed that HEx's yield was considerably higher than for other services even though it had to pay for all its own train maintenance including the capex and opex of its depot.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
In the early days there was no gateline and the concept of a premium did not exist as there was no other service to Heathrow, apart from the Piccadilly line. The price was competitive with HEx's main competitor, a taxi ride to the West End. Only the arrival of the Heathrow Connect services a few years later, also operated by BAA/HAL and the immediate precursor of the Crossrail services to Heathrow, gave rise to the discussion of the size of the charge for the tunnel section.
The way that HEx was run was very customer friendly - one could buy the tickets on the train and there were no gates to impede somebody with luggage.
'main line' = GW main line trains, that is express trains as well as the outer suburban services to Newbury and Didcot (for Oxford). 'suburban' now equals 'Elizabeth Line'. Simples.
Hex is an open access operator it wasn't subject to franchising the first service between london Paddington and langley provided by london transport or its predecessor organisations was in 1883 tell me how many services ran to the airport then?
Nobody has seemed to realise that as a result of the higher fares the income per passenger using HEx services is higher than those on other services. I did a calculation some years ago — I think I posted it here but it's too late for me to search for it — which showed that HEx's yield was considerably higher than for other services even though it had to pay for all its own train maintenance including the capex and opex of its depot.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
www.railforums.co.uk
