Discussion on electrification and the Marlow branch

[Mikey C]

Nothing special at all about Marlow punters but there is a general presumption in NSE land that you don't replace good stock with stuff that is 15 years older and not of the same quality.

The interiors of the Coastway 313s are very nice, I'd prefer an electric Coastway 313 to a diesel 165 on such a short journey

 

[AM9]

The interiors of the Coastway 313s are very nice, I'd prefer an electric Coastway 313 to a diesel 165 on such a short journey

Passengers in the southeast are entitled to the same as any others so where is this 'presumption' that they should be pandered to?

 

[Buttsy]

FGW got both prototype 150s for the Basingstoke shuttle and colleagues who were commuting on it were not upset about getting 'old' trains as the refurb was reasonable.

 

[AM9]

I did say that it would be until stock was available. As far as ticket prices go, those who have to use older stock in the southeast all have to pay the same so what's so special about the Marlowe lot?

Apologies to Mikey C, this comment was in reply to Clarence Yard's post #150. In my defence, I wrote it whilst bouncing along in a 350 just south of Rugby.
Maybe Clarence Yard could tell us more about this 'presumption'. It sounds interesting and I suspect, would explain a few things to me and some other regulars on this forum.

 

[Mikey C]

Apologies to Mikey C, this comment was in reply to Clarence Yard's post #150. In my defence, I wrote it whilst bouncing along in a 350 just south of Rugby.
Maybe Clarence Yard could tell us more about this 'presumption'. It sounds interesting and I suspect, would explain a few things to me and some other regulars on this forum.

I had wondered

Aren't London and South East fares a lot higher than in the rest of the country?
As I said in my original reply, on such a short journey 313s and their ilk would be perfectly acceptable, and from using that line, it feels like a rural branch line rather than a major commuter route anyway as it chugs slowly along behind allotments before crossing that lovely plain next to the Thames

 

[AM9]

I had wondered

Aren't London and South East fares a lot higher than in the rest of the country?
As I said in my original reply, on such a short journey 313s and their ilk would be perfectly acceptable, and from using that line, it feels like a rural branch line rather than a major commuter route anyway as it chugs slowly along behind allotments before crossing that lovely plain next to the Thames

London & SE fares tend to be higher than other areas:
a) because the majority of the passengers have higher overall costs and incomes
and
b) because the services tend to be more frequent and faster (as a consequence of a much higher volume of travellers)
Because of this much higher-level of service need, the rolling stock and lineside systems need to have more resilience and greater reliability than can be tolerated elsewhere in the UK. Failure to provide such resilience produces a breakdown in services wherever it happens. In the southeast, when trains carrying over 1000 passengers, running on less than 5 minute headways breakdown on infrastructure that doesn't have bypass routes, disruption can affect 10s of thousands of passengers with very little chance of recovery within the peak period.
Now if we focus on the few minor branch lines that feed into the main routes into London, problems on most of them can at least be contained and not cripple the lines that they feed. The Marlow branch is just one of those, i.e. if a train fails anywhere on the branch, including Maidenhead platform 5, it will not bring down either Crossrail or GWML services. As a consequence, any reasonably serviceable stock can run the branch timetable, certainly as an interim measure.

 

[dviner]

it feels like a rural branch line rather than a major commuter route anyway as it chugs slowly along behind allotments before crossing that lovely plain next to the Thames

I used to like watching out for rabbits in the fields by the river when the mornings/evenings were bright enough. Also, looking at the benches that were totally surrounded by water when the river was high...

 

[Clarence Yard]

The presumption isn't mine, it comes from the punters and their politicians and so you tune into it. If you take their through trains away and replace their 1990's train with something from the 1970's, then there will be guarenteed aggro.

And even if you could persuade them that this was a brilliant idea, the ROSCO concerned won't take RV on the 313 refurb. mods (they didn't for the TSGN bidders) so you will paying through the nose for making old stock fit for the job.

Much better to wait for someone else to get a bulk order of suitable new stock in and tag on the back as an add on order.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Send a couple of Pacers down to operate the Marlow branch

 

[Buttsy]

Send a couple of Pacers down to operate the Marlow branch

Nah, let's get a bubble car back where it belongs...

 

[AM9]

The presumption isn't mine, it comes from the punters and their politicians and so you tune into it. If you take their through trains away and replace their 1990's train with something from the 1970's, then there will be guarenteed aggro.

So it's just commuter whinges and local MPs, some of whose votes come from them. Of course they like to trumpet their 'hard done by' status, but this oddball line with its infrastructure problems is a drop in the ocean of London rail transport issues so that will take its place much nearer the end of the queue that they think.

And even if you could persuade them that this was a brilliant idea, the ROSCO concerned won't take RV on the 313 refurb. mods (they didn't for the TSGN bidders) so you will paying through the nose for making old stock fit for the job.

Much better to wait for someone else to get a bulk order of suitable new stock in and tag on the back as an add on order.

They can continue with their 2-car DMU then but forget any daft ideas of wasting paths into Paddington. There will be plenty of trains to change onto at Maidenhead.

 

[NSEFAN]

They can continue with their 2-car DMU then but forget any daft ideas of wasting paths into Paddington. There will be plenty of trains to change onto at Maidenhead.

Indeed. It's the London commuter belt. It's not like the removal of through trains to Paddington is going to affect passenger numbers in the long-term, especially if there is a good connection at Maidenhead.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Aren't London and South East fares a lot higher than in the rest of the country?

Maidenhead-Marlow SDR £4.90 (7.25 miles).
Chester-Helsby SDR £5.90 (7.5 miles).
So the answer is no
This one in the north (not in a PTE area) is 20% dearer for a similar distance.

 

[TheKnightWho]

They're cheaper on the whole though, aren't they?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

They're cheaper on the whole though, aren't they?

Within a PTE area, yes (extra subsidy).
Longer distance fares are much the same over the country, but with a premium on London services.
Glasgow-Edinburgh SDR is £23.90 for 45 miles.
Slough-Oxford SDR for the same distance is £21.50
But going the other way Goring-Paddington is £44.30.

Outside the SE, peak restrictions are usually less onerous (but they are catching up).
And there is no equivalent to the Network Card for off-peak travel.

 

[AM9]

Outside the SE, peak restrictions are usually less onerous (but they are catching up).
And there is no equivalent to the Network Card for off-peak travel.

The network card brings the prices nerer to each other although the £13 minimum M-F means that there's little or no saving on most journeys below 20-30 miles.

 

[leomartin125]

Mod Note: Posts #167 - #197 originally from this thread.

Hi all,

I was recently down at Maidenhead station and noticed that over the May bank holiday, workers have implemeted gantries and catenary over the Marlow line at the Maidenhead end, signifiying electrification. I thought the Hendy Review stated that the Marlow line was to be kept diesel due to the project running over budget? So why the obvious electrification? This would have explained why the cut the trees back recently on the line...

 

[GazK]

Hi all,

I was recently down at Maidenhead station and noticed that over the May bank holiday, workers have implemeted gantries and catenary over the Marlow line at the Maidenhead end, signifiying electrification. I thought the Hendy Review stated that the Marlow line was to be kept diesel due to the project running over budget? So why the obvious electrification? This would have explained why the cut the trees back recently on the line...

Probably overrun protection. Additional OLE to protect accidental routing of electric train into branch. Also allows future build without needing isolation of main lines.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

 

[swt_passenger]

...I thought the Hendy Review stated that the Marlow line was to be kept diesel due to the project running over budget?

That wording is definitely not used in anything produced by Hendy.

I'd stick with "postponed indefinitely due to the lack of short AC EMUs".

 

[edwin_m]

That wording is definitely not used in anything produced by Hendy.

I'd stick with "postponed indefinitely due to the lack of short AC EMUs".

Ah, but is it because the trains are short or the money is short?

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Ah, but is it because the trains are short or the money is short?

Money - no ROSCO wants to buy two car EMUs. They (not entirely irrationally) want NR/DfT to stump up the cash to make the railway support a minimum of 4 x 20m formation units.

The problem is that to have a two car EMU, it needs to be a largely bespoke design, everything that's on the PTSO vehicle in a 3/4/5 car Electrostar or 4/5 car Desiro would need to be accommodated on the two driving vehicles, which is difficult today with CET toilet tanks and air conditioning modules.

 

[trac]

yay! - four car EMU to Marlow

 

[leomartin125]

yay! - four car EMU to Marlow

Or you can get 3 car EMU's too! Look at the Class 323, that could suit the Marlow line quite well!

 

[swt_passenger]

Or you can get 3 car EMU's too! Look at the Class 323, that could suit the Marlow line quite well!

It is still (at 3 x 23m) far too long for reversing at Bourne End unless the points are moved and the radius of the curve towards Maidenhead is altered.

 

[Harbornite]

Or you can get 3 car EMU's too! Look at the Class 323, that could suit the Marlow line quite well!

We want to keep those here in Birmingham, thank you very much!

 

[hwl]

Or you can get 3 car EMU's too! Look at the Class 323, that could suit the Marlow line quite well!

313 is 9m shorter than a 323 so far easier for NR!

 

[Class 170101]

How about a Class 320?

In any event I think it would be better to isolate the line altogether and build some more Parry People movers?

 

[SpacePhoenix]

What's the traffic figures like for between Marlow and Bourne End?

 

[FenMan]

What's the traffic figures like for between Marlow and Bourne End?

289,204 entrances and exits at Marlow in 2014/15.

So, assuming all are return journeys (a big assumption I know), 144,602 passengers per year, or, assuming the line is open 360 days a year, an average of 400 passengers a day.

To continue my dodgy maths, let's say the weekday number of passengers leaving Marlow is 450. There are 23 departures on weekdays, so the average loading would be 19 passengers.

Would it be cheaper to order taxis?

 

[leomartin125]

289,204 entrances and exits at Marlow in 2014/15.

So, assuming all are return journeys (a big assumption I know), 144,602 passengers per year, or, assuming the line is open 360 days a year, an average of 400 passengers a day.

To continue my dodgy maths, let's say the weekday number of passengers leaving Marlow is 450. There are 23 departures on weekdays, so the average loading would be 19 passengers.

Would it be cheaper to order taxis?

I was thinking a tram line would be the most suitable thing. But that would honestly be so expensive it wouldn't ever be dreamt of.