FGW HST Lengthening

[Captain Chaos]

At the SDO Stations on my line, Thatcham and Theale have the front AND rear power-cars off the platforms anyway. So that strategy is already implemented. It is announced for people to use STD class only to exit the train at these stations to help ease dwell times on the way to Paddington. Can't remember if it's the same on the Down direction. Sorry.

Increasing the number of coaches WILL increase dwell times as instead of just announcing to use STD only you will have to get people in the front two coaches of STD (Coaches E and D or there new equivalent under your plans) to move down.

Now bearing in mind we already have issues with larger numbers of people travelling in these coaches than any other part of the train do you honestly think it is either wise or going to be the same dwell time at the station moving these people down the train? I don't think so somehow.

 

[Nym]

Will they be that unreliable that they will have to make a scheduled stop at the servicing depot in every journey?

OOC is getting a station under HS2 remember...

You know, that big HS2 interchange that should include the WLL, NLL, and Willesden Junction Sta (Expanded) and the Central Line, but they've only planned for GW and XR platforms so far in addition to the six HS2 platforms...

 

[AlanFry1]

At the SDO Stations on my line, Thatcham and Theale have the front AND rear power-cars off the platforms anyway. So that strategy is already implemented. It is announced for people to use STD class only to exit the train at these stations to help ease dwell times on the way to Paddington. Can't remember if it's the same on the Down direction. Sorry.

Increasing the number of coaches WILL increase dwell times as instead of just announcing to use STD only you will have to get people in the front two coaches of STD (Coaches E and D or there new equivalent under your plans) to move down.

Now bearing in mind we already have issues with larger numbers of people travelling in these coaches than any other part of the train do you honestly think it is either wise or going to be the same dwell time at the station moving these people down the train? I don't think so somehow.

So this a good oppetunity to extend those platforms so that even 8 car HST sets do not need SDO. That might help passengers beyond Reding

 

[Captain Chaos]

So this a good oppetunity to extend those platforms so that even 8 car HST sets do not need SDO. That might help passengers beyond Reding

If only it was that simple.

Thatcham has the slight problem of:

In the up direction a level crossing in the rear and towards the front would require a re-design of the road and would eat into an industrial park (neither the council who recently re-designed the road layout nor the industrial park owners are probably going to be too thrilled at this.)

The same is true for the down direction.

Theale has a small issue of a bridge and a set of points as well as sidings for an oil depot. To lengthen platforms here probably require a bit more than laying out a new platform.

Also:

Kintbury (same line, opposite direction) has level crossing and signalling issues.

Hungerford also has level crossing and signalling issues.

Bedwyn also has bridge and signalling issues as well as road layout difficulties.

It's not as simple as going 'yeah we'll extend the platforms.' These would require significant planning and financial resources and I cannot see the financial justification for it.

As they say in business circles. It's just not cost-effective.

 

[AlanFry1]

If only it was that simple.

Thatcham has the slight problem of:

In the up direction a level crossing in the rear and towards the front would require a re-design of the road and would eat into an industrial park (neither the council who recently re-designed the road layout nor the industrial park owners are probably going to be too thrilled at this.)

The same is true for the down direction.

Theale has a small issue of a bridge and a set of points as well as sidings for an oil depot. To lengthen platforms here probably require a bit more than laying out a new platform.

Also:

Kintbury (same line, opposite direction) has level crossing and signalling issues.

Hungerford also has level crossing and signalling issues.

Bedwyn also has bridge and signalling issues as well as road layout difficulties.

It's not as simple as going 'yeah we'll extend the platforms.' These would require significant planning and financial resources and I cannot see the financial justification for it.

As they say in business circles. It's just not cost-effective.

I see, but as long as it is possible to solve thes problems then we should do them, if we do then FGW HST passengers beyond Reading can expect a slightly faster service

Like I said, we should treat the railways less as a business and more a public service

Why on earth did they not extend those platforms when they launched HST services on the the GWR

 

[dosxuk]

I see, but as long as it is possible to solve thes problems then we should do them, if we do then FGW HST passengers beyond Reading can expect a slightly faster service

Well, we could demolish every bit of railway infrastructure in the country and replace it all with 350mph maglevs running along new direct corridors with no concern as to anything that is currently in the way. That doesn't mean we should though.

 

[jopsuk]

Well, we could demolish every bit of railway infrastructure in the country and replace it all with 350mph maglevs running along new direct corridors with no concern as to anything that is currently in the way. That doesn't mean we should though.

Pfft, unambitious. 600 mph maglev, pressure sealed, running in low air pressure transparent tunnels, double decker, on every single line, with 500m trains and ultra-high frequency. As this is, just about, technically feasible, we should be doing it. Yesterday.

 

[AndyLandy]

Pfft, unambitious. 600 mph maglev, pressure sealed, running in low air pressure transparent tunnels, double decker, on every single line, with 500m trains and ultra-high frequency. As this is, just about, technically feasible, we should be doing it. Yesterday.

You guys put my quad-tracked 300km/h ECML proposal to shame! I can't believe I didn't suggest Maglev!

 

[LE Greys]

Pfft, unambitious. 600 mph maglev, pressure sealed, running in low air pressure transparent tunnels, double decker, on every single line, with 500m trains and ultra-high frequency. As this is, just about, technically feasible, we should be doing it. Yesterday.

I want it to go to New York with a stop in Halifax, N.S. (just so that I can visit my friends there whenever I want) via a submerged, floating tunnel.

 

[Nym]

Who needs trains anyway, Video Conferencing means no-one needs to travel any more...

And those who do will use the new teleporting systems that the railway companies are paying so much to keep quiet...

 

[starrymarkb]

Why on earth did they not extend those platforms when they launched HST services on the the GWR

Because HST's stopping there is a relatively recent thing (within the last 5 years) Prior to that 5 coach 180s were used on a new semi fast service to Exeter and before that they just had a turbo service Bedwyn to Reading/London)

 

[AlanFry1]

Because HST's stopping there is a relatively recent thing (within the last 5 years) Prior to that 5 coach 180s were used on a new semi fast service to Exeter and before that they just had a turbo service Bedwyn to Reading/London)

So hence it would be a good idea to extend those platforms

 

[Yew]

So hence it would be a good idea to extend those platforms

Can you come up with a plan for Lincoln?

 

[AndyLandy]

And those who do will use the new teleporting systems that the railway companies are paying so much to keep quiet...

Ahh, teleportation. I can't wait for that to become a reality. It'll make changing platforms at Clapham Junction so much easier!

 

[Captain Chaos]

So hence it would be a good idea to extend those platforms

Why?

The service will probably not exist when HST's stop as they will be replaced most likely with 5 car IEP's. So why bother?

There is no reason to extend these platforms for any reason whatsoever. 90 - 95% of all train that stop there are 3 car Turbo's.

Why should platforms everywhere be expected to be extended because a handful of people have to stand between Paddington and Reading? I mean seriously. There is no reason. It would cost millions upon millions of pounds to do so and would only be required for a couple of years. It would be a massive white elephant and an embarassing waste of money.

There are far, FAR better things to spend money on than extend platforms everywhere so as Joe Bloggs doesn't have to stand between Paddington and Reading.

To do this would be financially suicidal!

 

[AlanFry1]

Why?

The service will probably not exist when HST's stop as they will be replaced most likely with 5 car IEP's. So why bother?

There is no reason to extend these platforms for any reason whatsoever. 90 - 95% of all train that stop there are 3 car Turbo's.

Why should platforms everywhere be expected to be extended because a handful of people have to stand between Paddington and Reading? I mean seriously. There is no reason. It would cost millions upon millions of pounds to do so and would only be required for a couple of years. It would be a massive white elephant and an embarassing waste of money.

There are far, FAR better things to spend money on than extend platforms everywhere so as Joe Bloggs doesn't have to stand between Paddington and Reading.

To do this would be financially suicidal!

What will happen to the IEP is anyone guess and these plaform extensions are not just for London-Reading passengers, but faster journey times overall becuase of less use of SDO

 

[Captain Chaos]

What will happen to the IEP is anyone guess and these plaform extensions are not just for London-Reading passengers, but faster journey times overall becuase of less use of SDO

But it won't be any faster will it?

Padd - Bristol doesn't use SDO.

Padd - Cardiff/Swansea doesn't either.

Some Padd - Plymouths don't either.

Neither does Padd - Oxford HST's.

Are you telling me that longer platforms are going to make these any faster?

It won't. All you are going to do is make a rather heavy train even heavier. Your proposals are simply not required.

The issue with Padd - Reading is not capacity. It's frequency. IEP's will solve the problem. Longer HST's won't.

 

[AlanFry1]

But it won't be any faster will it?

Padd - Bristol doesn't use SDO.

Padd - Cardiff/Swansea doesn't either.

Some Padd - Plymouths don't either.

Neither does Padd - Oxford HST's.

Are you telling me that longer platforms are going to make these any faster?

It won't. All you are going to do is make a rather heavy train even heavier. Your proposals are simply not required.

The issue with Padd - Reading is not capacity. It's frequency. IEP's will solve the problem. Longer HST's won't.

It is not easy to add frequency andf it will be some time before hat happens, as for IEP, it will be quite a while (if ever) before that comes

When the plaforms are extended the services using SDO will have slightly reduced journey times and there will be 25% more capacity

 

[Flamingo]

It is not easy to add frequency andf it will be some time before hat happens, as for IEP, it will be quite a while (if ever) before that comes

When the plaforms are extended the services using SDO will have slightly reduced journey times and there will be 25% more capacity

Right, lets end the flights of fantasy here, they are getting tedious now.

Point one - Every platform we call it is not going to be extended. Period. You can wave your magic wand all you want, it's not going to happen.

Point two - FGW is not going to make it's trains into 10 carriage trains for all the reasons that I have already listed.

Point three - don't believe everything you read in the Daily Mail about trains too and from Reading resembling Indian railways at their worst. It is a 25 minute journey on an INTERCITY train, and the majority of people standing are either not prepared to walk along the platform, or choose to squeeze themselves into a train they can already see has not got a seat, regardless of the fact they will have to wait a maximum of 6 minutes for the next train.

If the government cancelled their programme of building Aircraft carriers that don't have planes, or reduced the basic dole to £10 a week, or shut every hospital in the country then they could afford to put 16 lines each way from Reading to London, and every commuter from Reading would have their own carriage. That's as likely as your ideas.

 

[Captain Chaos]

That's pretty much what I was trying to say Flamingo. But you have put it miles better. Hats off to you sir!

 

[AndyLandy]

Even if there are genuine capacity issues on RDG-PAD, increasing the length of the Intercity services on that route is hardly the optimal fix! I'd be looking at the commuter and stopping services that run between the two and seeing if there's a way of making the capacity improvements there. Can we make those services longer, or make them faster/better acceleration/fewer stops so we can squeeze another path or two on the route.

 

[Flamingo]

Even if there are genuine capacity issues on RDG-PAD, increasing the length of the Intercity services on that route is hardly the optimal fix! I'd be looking at the commuter and stopping services that run between the two and seeing if there's a way of making the capacity improvements there. Can we make those services longer, or make them faster/better acceleration/fewer stops so we can squeeze another path or two on the route.

Probably the way to go. However, it'll be getting the Reading passengers to catch the slower services that will then be the challenge.

 

[AndyLandy]

Probably the way to go. However, it'll be getting the Reading passengers to catch the slower services that will then be the challenge.

I wonder whether something as crude as tiered pricing would solve that. Simply offer a slightly cheaper "Not HSTs" option for tickets and seasons. (Well, more likely offer "Not HSTs" at the current fare and increase the price of the "Any" option)

 

[Flamingo]

I wonder whether something as crude as tiered pricing would solve that. Simply offer a slightly cheaper "Not HSTs" option for tickets and seasons. (Well, more likely offer "Not HSTs" at the current fare and increase the price of the "Any" option)

It wouldn't. At present, off-peak tickets are not valid between 16.00 - 19.30 on HST's that are first-stop Reading (unless going to Swindon or west). On average, I'll charge up 5-10 people in one or two carriages, as that's all I'll get into before Reading (extrapolating out, that's up to 40-50 people per train). 90% of them say "I've never had a problem with it before".

When they get to Reading, there is no way of knowing what train they are coming off, so barriers don't stop them, and at Paddington, again, the ticket gates don't know what train is on the platform.

 

[AndyLandy]

It wouldn't. At present, off-peak tickets are not valid between 16.00 - 19.30 on HST's that are first-stop Reading (unless going to Swindon or west). On average, I'll charge up 5-10 people in one or two carriages, as that's all I'll get into before Reading (extrapolating out, that's up to 40-50 people per train). 90% of them say "I've never had a problem with it before".

When they get to Reading, there is no way of knowing what train they are coming off, so barriers don't stop them, and at Paddington, again, the ticket gates don't know what train is on the platform.

Pah! People, eh? The job would be so much easier without 'em!

About the only other solution I can think of is to have the Eastbound Intercity services do set down only at Reading and the Westbound ones do pick up only. That seems to be SWT's strategy for expresses that call at CLJ. For sure, some people will figure it out and manage to board anyway, but if you take away the already-packed HSTs from the departure boards and don't announce platforms, you might manage to push commuters on to the less-crowded local/regional services.

 

[Zoe]

It wouldn't. At present, off-peak tickets are not valid between 16.00 - 19.30

Peak lasts until 1930 on FGW? I thought the DfT had the maximum period when Off Peak tickets could be banned as 1500 - 1900 when leaving London.

 

[Flamingo]

Peak lasts until 1930 on FGW? I thought the DfT had the maximum period when Off Peak tickets could be banned as 1500 - 1900 when leaving London.

Sorry, the 19.22 is the first one to Reading they are valid on after 19.00. The 19.30 is the first one I'd usually work they are valid on.

 

[Zoe]

Sorry was getting confused with the Super Off Peak which would be the regulated fare. For Reading it would be an Off Peak Day return and so subject to different restricitons?

 

[Flamingo]

It appears to be so.

 

[AlanFry1]

Right, lets end the flights of fantasy here, they are getting tedious now.

Point one - Every platform we call it is not going to be extended. Period. You can wave your magic wand all you want, it's not going to happen.

Point two - FGW is not going to make it's trains into 10 carriage trains for all the reasons that I have already listed.

Point three - don't believe everything you read in the Daily Mail about trains too and from Reading resembling Indian railways at their worst. It is a 25 minute journey on an INTERCITY train, and the majority of people standing are either not prepared to walk along the platform, or choose to squeeze themselves into a train they can already see has not got a seat, regardless of the fact they will have to wait a maximum of 6 minutes for the next train.

If the government cancelled their programme of building Aircraft carriers that don't have planes, or reduced the basic dole to £10 a week, or shut every hospital in the country then they could afford to put 16 lines each way from Reading to London, and every commuter from Reading would have their own carriage. That's as likely as your ideas.

if FGW serve 8-car trains on platforms too short, then they need to get a move on then, to cope with 10-car trains, also I do not read the daily mail, but no doubt there is overcrowding on the FGW

Like I have said the government could afford it, if they cracked down on tax evasion and avoidance both past and present

Also, all I am saying is make the most of the current stock we have


--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Probably the way to go. However, it'll be getting the Reading passengers to catch the slower services that will then be the challenge.

or you can make HST sets longer


--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Even if there are genuine capacity issues on RDG-PAD, increasing the length of the Intercity services on that route is hardly the optimal fix! I'd be looking at the commuter and stopping services that run between the two and seeing if there's a way of making the capacity improvements there. Can we make those services longer, or make them faster/better acceleration/fewer stops so we can squeeze another path or two on the route.

so then we would need to order more EMUs then