Double Decker Trains

[bringbackcrouc]

An idea often mooted to deal with the capacity problems on suburban lines is to introduce double decker lines like they have on the continent. However, the clearance for most British lines doesn't allow this.

Which line has the worst problem with congestion but would be the cheapest to adapt to allow double decker trains and how much do you reckon it would cost.

 

[SouthEastern-465]

I think we already have one of these threads somewhere?

 

[poshbakerloo]

I guess they would have to have a very low bottom floor and a curved tube train style roof. I think it would just be possible...

 

[jopsuk]

What he's asking is different. The thread in the Rolling Stock section was about fitting them within the restrictions that exist.

This is about overcrowded routes with no room for platform lengthening and no chance of getting higher frequencies (think London area 8, 10 and 12 car services).

The OP is interested in where it would be easiest to "improve" the loading gauge to, say UIC B+ or C. The most modest bit of this would be the platform works. Not sure if the "six foot" (gap between running lines) would need to be widened. The major works would be tunnels and bridges. So, which heavily congested lines have least or shortest tunnels and bridges? Anyone have realistic estimates for the work, taking into account the Network Rail multiplier?

 

[route:oxford]

Probably the GWML between Oxford/Reading to Paddington.

This is based on...

Most overbridges on the route appear to have a particularily high clearance (work has also been undertaken recently to improve clearance where appropriate for larger containers).

Class 166 units are said to have been built to a particularily generous width thus limiting their use to the GWML, thus a precedent has been set for using stock restricted to this route.

There are particularily heavy loadings between Reading and Paddington in the peak.

Each daytime hour "The Oxford Tube" and "Espress" send 9/10 coaches between them down the M40 (or around 750-800 seats). Increasing capacity of each single train could help reduce the high fares (a blunt tool to help cap usage of the rail services into London)

 

[bringbackcrouc]

That's interesting. I expected it to be one of the South London lines given that is the worse congestion and I would have thought 3rd rail might be more conducive to double decker trains.

JC

 

[jopsuk]

I'd have thought that Oxford could be improved by longer trains and increased frequency. As far as I can tell even off peak there's far less train capacity Oxford-London than just the Kings Cross route from Cambridge- a route of similar length serving a similar sized city.

 

[poshbakerloo]

I can never imagine what an English double deck trains would look like. I have seen that one done in the 1950s? as an experiment, but I don't think it was a goo enough try...

 

[route:oxford]

I'd have thought that Oxford could be improved by longer trains and increased frequency. As far as I can tell even off peak there's far less train capacity Oxford-London than just the Kings Cross route from Cambridge- a route of similar length serving a similar sized city.

Oxford does have the benefit of two XC services per hour terminating at Reading thus allowing passengers to change to a FGW service...

Running double-deckers to Oxford (as terminus) would primarily be for the benefit of Wales&West passengers... At present, many long-distance passengers from Paddington are forced to stand to Reading on busier services as wily season ticket holders run and grab seats on the HSTs rather than endure the turbos. High capacity, all standard, double-deckers with 2+2 seating throughout could provide a high level of comfort for short distance inter-city passengers and relieve the pressure on long-distance services.

TfL would then have to deal with the higher volumes arriving at Paddington...

 

[Mojo]

Of course there are the problems with doubledecker trains... higher dwell times, difficulty in checking tickets, limitation of luggage racks, etc.

 

[Broken Viking]

Probably the GWML between Oxford/Reading to Paddington.
Most overbridges on the route appear to have a particularily high clearance (work has also been undertaken recently to improve clearance where appropriate for larger containers).

That sounds about right going on my knowlege of the GWML. As far as I recall, Brunel originally built the line to 7ft (wide) gauge, which implicitly gave a much more generous loading gauge than what could be found on the SR lines around London.

I don't know if Brunels' wide gauge was nearly generous enough to accommodate an EU style double-deck train...But if it is, that might suggest it'd be possible to run double-deck services between London and Penzance, and possibly between Bristol and Swansea as well. 8)

Class 166 units are said to have been built to a particularily generous width thus limiting their use to the GWML, thus a precedent has been set for using stock restricted to this route.

I can verify that Class 166s are also used on the North Downs line running RDG > WKM > GLD > GTW as I used to commute daily between Blackwater and Guildford.
Although I'd guess (Thinking of many old structures on and near the route) that the line might've been built to standard gauge as opposed to Brunellian wide...But if the latter is the case, it might also allow double-deck Guildford/Gatwick flyers - Assuming that the Guildford tunnel was built as part of the North Downs route.

As the line has a lot of short platforms (BAW only just accommodates a three-car 165!) it could prove very useful during morning peak services in both directions. We all know that Reading is a constant bottleneck, but the 07:58 and 08:21s from BAW to GLD are always crammed to the rafters with pupils commuting to the two popular prep schools along the route as well! hock:

Of course there are the problems with doubledecker trains... higher dwell times, difficulty in checking tickets, limitation of luggage racks, etc.

My experience of double-deck trains is limited to a handful of runs on German DBAG and Finnish VR services...But from what I remember, dwell time on these services hasn't been any greater than what an 8-car 450 often requires. Indeed, the German DD services that I've used between Hamburg and Bremen get a minute per call...But often manage to load/offload completely within 30-45 seconds! 8)

 

[Capybara]

Perhaps German passengers don't do their best to prevent alighting passengers getting off.

 

[Greenback]

The double deck trains I've used a few times in the Netherlands don't take long to unload/load, but the people are used to them, know they will proably easily get a seat, and they also have wide doors!

In this country, knowing that so many trains are rammed everyone wants to be the first on to bag any spare seats that are going!

 

[gordonthemoron]

That's interesting. I I would have thought 3rd rail might be more conducive to double decker trains.

I can't think of any double deck trains that use third rail, all the ones I have used have either been OHLE or diesel

 

[Oliver]

Oxford does have the benefit of two XC services per hour terminating at Reading thus allowing passengers to change to a FGW service...

Running double-deckers to Oxford (as terminus) would primarily be for the benefit of Wales&West passengers... At present, many long-distance passengers from Paddington are forced to stand to Reading on busier services as wily season ticket holders run and grab seats on the HSTs rather than endure the turbos. High capacity, all standard, double-deckers with 2+2 seating throughout could provide a high level of comfort for short distance inter-city passengers and relieve the pressure on long-distance services.

TfL would then have to deal with the higher volumes arriving at Paddington...

Oxford is actually a much bigger city than Cambridge, however Paddington is much worse situated for the City than KX or Liverpool Street, so Cambridge is a more convenient home for commuters. Also the Cambridge Cruisers (if they are still called that) provide a frequent non-stop service. Oxford has been relatively badly served by rail for a generation, hence the attraction of the Chiltern alternative.

 

[Oswyntail]

....But often manage to load/offload completely within 30-45 seconds! 8)

In the Continental loading gauge there is much more space for passenger movement from the upper (or lower) deck. The chief problem with the earlier British experiments was that passengers for the upper deck were effectively climbing over those on the lower deck - and it felt like it. Dwell times were the main operational reason fro abandoning the experiment

I can't think of any double deck trains that use third rail, all the ones I have used have either been OHLE or diesel

The British experiments were in the SR on 3rd rail.

 

[jopsuk]

Cambridge is a more convenient home for commuters. Also the Cambridge Cruisers (if they are still called that) provide a frequent non-stop service.

It's "The Cambridge Express", at least northbound on the Kings Cross departure screens. Doesn't get a name on the screens at Cambridge. Even off peak it mainly seems to mainly be a double 365, running twice an hour. Then there's the hourly semi-fast, which I think is often a double unit (mainly 365) and the stopper, more usually a single 317 as far as I'm aware. Plus two off peak Liverpool Street services, which as far as i can tell from my window at work are mainly double 317. So, around 2500 seats per hour off peak. More during peak, when standing is rife. Cambridge-London is astoundingly well served by rail- it really does make the service to Oxford look poor given how comparable they are as destinations (so similar, last time I checked the off peak day return was the same price)

But both lines have tunnels, especially the GN route, making gauge expansion rather a lot of work though. More 12 car trains is more realistic, and is a plan for the West Anglia (that already has some random 12 car stations- Whittlesford Parkway, for example, in a bit of spectacular forward thinking when it was lengthened a long time back)

There's only a single coach per hour down the M11 to Victoria, with it taking nearly an hour more than even the slowest rail services. oxford only has a lot oc coaches due to a comparitively poor rail service.

 

[poshbakerloo]

When they tried making this British double decker train, wasn't the bottom deck at normal height, not at a lower level?

 

[jopsuk]

How's about you go take a look in the rolling stock thread that you posted in on the similar subject?

 

[bringbackcrouc]

What bridges and tunnels would have to be modified to allow double decker trains between Oxford and Paddington.

Also on the question of access to the City, when Crossrail is complete do you think there will ever be a point when trains not on the suburban crossrail routes (say Oxford to Paddington) join at Paddington and go on to the City.

Something I have found is that I don't mind how far I have to travel but one really hates is changing especially with bags... something that never occured to Beaching who just assumed we'd drive to stations and continue to take the train for most of our journeys.

JC