Greenford Branch

[17jwarman]

Looking at the situation of this line has made me wonder about whether it might be better as part of the Chiltern franchise rather than the Great Western franchise.

• It was never in the plans for GWML electrification (was something about too many bridges and tunnels wasn't it?)
• If other Thames Valley Branches now get wired along with Oxford and Reading-Basingstoke, there wont be any turbos allocated to Reading, especially if the 769's are successful
• The connection from the New North Main Line to the GWML has been severed as part of HS2 works
• Chiltern will then be the only TOC operating with only DMU's in London, surely meaning it would be easier operationally to just send a Chiltern DMU rather than keep like 2 turbos at Reading for the sole purpose of the branch
• As for London Overground, this is a prime candidate for them to take over, however looking at the palaver, stress and expense TfL and the DfT took electrifying and getting new trains for the GOBLIN, in the process getting rid of a perfect set of 2 car DMU's for the Greenford branch, one would think that TfL would not be very pleased having to have just a few expensive DMU's for operating an extremely separate service to the ones they are already operating

Just wondering about the whole situ

 

[pdeaves]

If other Thames Valley Branches now get wired along with Oxford and Reading-Basingstoke, there wont be any turbos allocated to Reading,

Until short enough (to deal with the Bourne End reversal problem) electrics arrive, there will be 165s remaining to serve Marlow.

 

[popeter45]

very much a pie in the sky idea but had a different idea potentially considering that part of the Chiltern line is central line could be extending the Ealing Broadway branch of the central line via Greenford to connect to the west Ruislip branch?
would need Ealing Broadway to be rebuilt but apart from that only need extra track from there to West Ealing

 

[SynthD]

That only is huge, it’s a idea-killer.

I don’t see this or Bourne End being solved in the medium term. Let it be and see what solutions come up from successful use elsewhere.

 

[swt_passenger]

Transferring it to Chiltern or LO was formally proposed and looked at by NR and then abandoned, within the last few years, as it was found there were no significant operational benefits. LO no longer operating any DMUs either, would have been a significant reason.

 

[Mag_seven]

very much a pie in the sky idea but had a different idea potentially considering that part of the Chiltern line is central line could be extending the Ealing Broadway branch of the central line via Greenford to connect to the west Ruislip branch?
would need Ealing Broadway to be rebuilt but apart from that only need extra track from there to West Ealing

I in one of my rare "extreme crayon" moments have often thought that but I suspect the infrastructure costs at the Ealing Broadway and Greenford ends would be immense.

 

[JonathanH]

• Chiltern will then be the only TOC operating with only DMU's in London, surely meaning it would be easier operationally to just send a Chiltern DMU rather than keep like 2 turbos at Reading for the sole purpose of the branch

Even if you only had the Cotswold line, Marlow and Greenford to provide Turbos for, it would not be any more difficult to provide units from Bristol to serve the route than it is to get units from Selhurst onto the line between Eastbourne and Ashford.

• If other Thames Valley Branches now get wired along with Oxford and Reading-Basingstoke, there wont be any turbos allocated to Reading, especially if the 769's are successful

Reading to Basingstoke is planned for 769 anyway. Wiring to Oxford still leaves Oxford to Banbury. Even at the end of March, GWR were still hoping for the eighth 769 to enter service this week.

 

[swt_passenger]

Found the DfT quote, it’s in the 2018 GW franchise stakeholder brief:

3.10 However, in respect of Greenford services, further examination suggests that providing rolling stock from Chiltern’s Wembley depot is unlikely to be operationally any easier than from GWR’s Reading depot, at least for as long as Reading depot retains a fleet of diesel trains.

Thus some of the intended benefits of the proposed transfer to Chiltern may be less than we had first anticipated. Many respondents’ replies focussed on how best to provide a reliable and suitably frequent service on the Greenford branch rather than a specific preference for one franchise or the other.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/736146/great-western-rail-franchise-stakeholder-briefing-document.pdf

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Think this has been done to the death. With London Overground it’s a complete island (especially as now they’ve gone ‘all electric’), with Chiltern it’s not a perfect fit, and with GWR it’s much the same.

The only way it would work ‘beautifully’, is if they had a platform on the main line at Greenford and could therefore run to/from South Ruislip, which to be fair they could go into and out of the down platform there without major issues thanks to the new track layout and signalling. Certainly, on a 20-minutely frequency, that wouldn’t quite be achievable as the two units wouldn’t make their turnarounds. It would therefore need to be half-hourly, but it’s unattractive.

The fact it takes 11 minutes end to end means you could somehow just manage a quarter-hourly service with two units, but only between Greenford and West Ealing. That’s pretty pointless, too.

I would suggest what’s probably needed is a D Train-type job, based at West Ealing or similar, using fast-charge battery technology and maybe just skimming enough journey time off to make it a reliable quarter-hourly 2 Unit proposition. Whoever runs it, doesn’t matter as it’s a bespoke service. Could use Stourbridge shuttle unit-things too.

 

[Gloster]

I would suggest what’s probably needed is a D Train-type job, based at West Ealing or similar, using fast-charge battery technology and maybe just skimming enough journey time off to make it a reliable quarter-hourly 2 Unit proposition. Whoever runs it, doesn’t matter as it’s a bespoke service. Could use Stourbridge shuttle unit-things too.

Are the Stourbridge shuttle units allowed out on the main line in passenger service?

Could a D-train be modified to charge off the OHL, or would that involve too much structural alteration and safety issues? And of course, every time the unit got to Ealing Broadway it would be wanting to head across to the District.

 

[swt_passenger]

Are the Stourbridge shuttle units allowed out on the main line in passenger service?

Could a D-train be modified to charge off the OHL, or would that involve too much structural alteration and safety issues? And of course, every time the unit got to Ealing Broadway it would be wanting to head across to the District.

The hypothetical D train wouldn’t get anywhere near Ealing Broadway though, just West Ealing. There are no paths east of there, which is why they spent so much reopening the terminating bay platform.

 

[JamesRowden]

An almost certainly 'too expensive/disruptive to be worth it' option would be to covert the Central line West of Greenford and the Greenford branch into a branch of the Elizabeth line.

 

[MatthewRead]

Until short enough (to deal with the Bourne End reversal problem) electrics arrive, there will be 165s remaining to serve Marlow.

Also the Windsor branch isn't that also staying Turbo operated?

 

[cle]

Could Greenford platforms not be built as part of this? It seems a small price to pay for some quite good connectivity in future.

 

[Gloster]

Could Greenford platforms not be built as part of this? It seems a small price to pay for some quite good connectivity in future.

Putting a platform or platforms on the Network Rail lines should not be too difficult, although it would probably be expensive as all such projects now seem to be. Connecting the new platform(s) to the existing station might be more of a problem, involving either a high bridge over the inbound Central Line or a tunnel through the embankment and part of the station. If the Network Rail line went back to double track and a second platform was needed, then a high bridge would be needed over the lines. Otherwise passengers would be forced out on to Oldfield Lane North to pass between the two parts of the station, and the the pavement doesn’t look very wide.

I don’t know Greenford, having only visited once and that was several decades ago. Somebody with local knowledge may be able to give a better assessment.

 

[BrianW]

Putting a platform or platforms on the Network Rail lines should not be too difficult, although it would probably be expensive as all such projects now seem to be. Connecting the new platform(s) to the existing station might be more of a problem, involving either a high bridge over the inbound Central Line or a tunnel through the embankment and part of the station. If the Network Rail line went back to double track and a second platform was needed, then a high bridge would be needed over the lines. Otherwise passengers would be forced out on to Oldfield Lane North to pass between the two parts of the station, and the the pavement doesn’t look very wide.

I don’t know Greenford, having only visited once and that was several decades ago. Somebody with local knowledge may be able to give a better assessment.

very much a pie in the sky idea but had a different idea potentially considering that part of the Chiltern line is central line could be extending the Ealing Broadway branch of the central line via Greenford to connect to the west Ruislip branch?
would need Ealing Broadway to be rebuilt but apart from that only need extra track from there to West Ealing

Looking like another solution looking for a problem. A lot of expenditure for how much benefit? How many tickets sold to/from the intermediate stations?
Im lived in Northolt for many years- used this line maybe once, just in order to. Otherwise headed only ever on the Central Line into Central London or 140 bus and WR from Hayes and Harlington if heading west. Always bus to Greenford or West Ealing or Ealing Broadway.

Similar comments would apply to ideas about interchange at Hanger Lane/Park Royal or West Ruislip/ Ickenham.

 

[Non Multi]

Putting a platform or platforms on the Network Rail lines should not be too difficult, although it would probably be expensive as all such projects now seem to be. Connecting the new platform(s) to the existing station might be more of a problem, involving either a high bridge over the inbound Central Line or a tunnel through the embankment and part of the station. If the Network Rail line went back to double track and a second platform was needed, then a high bridge would be needed over the lines. Otherwise passengers would be forced out on to Oldfield Lane North to pass between the two parts of the station, and the the pavement doesn’t look very wide.

I don’t know Greenford, having only visited once and that was several decades ago. Somebody with local knowledge may be able to give a better assessment.

Apparently there's a closed off subway between the Tube station and the disused/derelict platforms. The platforms don't meet up with the present single track, so either the line would need to be slewed or a platform widened to meet (as has happened with Chiltern stations).

 

[D365]

An almost certainly 'too expensive/disruptive to be worth it' option would be to covert the Central line West of Greenford and the Greenford branch into a branch of the Elizabeth line.

Very speculative. Crossrail to Aylesbury would be more likely, and that's saying something!

 

[Ianno87]

Putting a platform or platforms on the Network Rail lines should not be too difficult, although it would probably be expensive as all such projects now seem to be. Connecting the new platform(s) to the existing station might be more of a problem, involving either a high bridge over the inbound Central Line or a tunnel through the embankment and part of the station. If the Network Rail line went back to double track and a second platform was needed, then a high bridge would be needed over the lines. Otherwise passengers would be forced out on to Oldfield Lane North to pass between the two parts of the station, and the the pavement doesn’t look very wide.

I don’t know Greenford, having only visited once and that was several decades ago. Somebody with local knowledge may be able to give a better assessment.

Though arguably there'd be relatively little point in combining a station at Greenford, as who would actually need to interchange there if a service ran through to South/West Ruislip? Penny numbers at most.

If anything the current operation with 1 unit is pretty "cheap and cheerful" and suits the level of demand well. The only other thing you might do would be to go to 4tph with 2 units and draw the line on the tube map as a "branch" of Crossrail - possibly combined with some accessibility improvements at each station.

 

[JamesRowden]

Very speculative. Crossrail to Aylesbury would be more likely, and that's saying something!

I think your joke recognition systems failed to pick something up in my post

 

[D365]

I think your joke recognition systems failed to pick something up in my post

I didn't see a wink

 

[HST43257]

In my opinion there are 2 ways the Greenford branch could go. Pre covid, the 3 intermediate stations on the branch were the least used in London. This was due to the lack of the direct London service. Greenford has the Central Line and there aren’t many further connections so I could easily see the branch closing. I think this can only NOT happen if a battery/electric direct London service is regained. Unless my calculations are wrong, there’s 8tph on the slow lines - surely this could be increased to 10tph from West Ealing (not all stopping) to Paddington. When Crossrail clears out of Paddington high level I imagine that platforms 11 and 12 will become quite empty, so space at Paddington shouldn’t be a problem.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

In my opinion there are 2 ways the Greenford branch could go. Pre covid, the 3 intermediate stations on the branch were the least used in London. This was due to the lack of the direct London service. Greenford has the Central Line and there aren’t many further connections so I could easily see the branch closing. I think this can only NOT happen if a battery/electric direct London service is regained. Unless my calculations are wrong, there’s 8tph on the slow lines - surely this could be increased to 10tph from West Ealing (not all stopping) to Paddington. When Crossrail clears out of Paddington high level I imagine that platforms 11 and 12 will become quite empty, so space at Paddington shouldn’t be a problem.

Patronage wasn’t any higher when it worked as a through to Paddington until 4 years ago. With the expense of creating the new dedicated bay platform at West Ealing and further change is unlikely.

 

[Ianno87]

In my opinion there are 2 ways the Greenford branch could go. Pre covid, the 3 intermediate stations on the branch were the least used in London. This was due to the lack of the direct London service. Greenford has the Central Line and there aren’t many further connections so I could easily see the branch closing. I think this can only NOT happen if a battery/electric direct London service is regained. Unless my calculations are wrong, there’s 8tph on the slow lines - surely this could be increased to 10tph from West Ealing (not all stopping) to Paddington. When Crossrail clears out of Paddington high level I imagine that platforms 11 and 12 will become quite empty, so space at Paddington shouldn’t be a problem.

You also need to consider the freight that operates on the Slow Lines, plus the fact that Crossrail also increases the passenger service frequency too.

 

[JonathanH]

When Crossrail clears out of Paddington high level I imagine that platforms 11 and 12 will become quite empty, so space at Paddington shouldn’t be a problem.

GWR need one of platform 11 and 12 to allow Heathrow Express to resume longer turnarounds in platforms 6 and 7. Running Greenford services into Paddington causes a conflict at the flat junctions for access to the Crossrail platforms and at West Ealing. The eventual Crossrail timetable is planned for 12tph.

I think the hope is that with a much more frequent service at West Ealing and easier interchange, the number of users on the Greenford branch will increase.

 

[swt_passenger]

In my opinion there are 2 ways the Greenford branch could go. Pre covid, the 3 intermediate stations on the branch were the least used in London. This was due to the lack of the direct London service. Greenford has the Central Line and there aren’t many further connections so I could easily see the branch closing. I think this can only NOT happen if a battery/electric direct London service is regained. Unless my calculations are wrong, there’s 8tph on the slow lines - surely this could be increased to 10tph from West Ealing (not all stopping) to Paddington. When Crossrail clears out of Paddington high level I imagine that platforms 11 and 12 will become quite empty, so space at Paddington shouldn’t be a problem.

The full Crossrail service does not allow for a through service from the Greenford branch, the flat crossing of down branch trains over the up relief causes too many conflicts. That is why the bay platform was reinstated and the GWR service cut back. So yes, your calculations must be wrong.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

The full Crossrail service does not allow for a through service from the Greenford branch, the flat crossing of down branch trains over the up relief causes too many conflicts. That is why the bay platform was reinstated and the GWR service cut back. So yes, your calculations must be wrong.

Crossrail 1 made allowance for the bay platfrom at West Ealing and also what are now the EMU stabling sidings , making passive provision saved a considerable amount of money at a later date.

The Greenford extension into Paddington came around as "brain storm" on a management training excercise , at a time when there was a considerable less amount of traffic into Paddington terminus. Some years later ,it was estimated it was the least worth branch passenger service out of Paddington. Certainly the least valuable path into a London terminus. l

Just before lockdown 2 I went on it (relieving old projects) - mid morning. There were 5 passengers. Not a bad loading from previous observations.

 

[swt_passenger]

Crossrail 1 made allowance for the bay platfrom at West Ealing and also what are now the EMU stabling sidings , making passive provision saved a considerable amount of money at a later date.

The Greenford extension into Paddington came around as "brain storm" on a management training excercise , at a time when there was a considerable less amount of traffic into Paddington terminus. Some years later ,it was estimated it was the least worth branch passenger service out of Paddington. Certainly the least valuable path into a London terminus. l

Just before lockdown 2 I went on it (relieving old projects) - mid morning. There were 5 passengers. Not a bad loading from previous observations.

Yes, this is what I find odd, the planned curtailment of the through service was always clear from the Crossrail (1) Act onwards, and is documented in all the relevant route studies, route strategies, franchise consultations etc.

And yet here we are again with various proposals to run through trains to Paddington, whether GWR or Chiltern, but it’s just not allowed for...

 

[BrianW]

Can someone remind us why this line survives? There are bus services (probably more frequent than the train) that connect Greenford with West Ealing and Ealing Broadway, and Greenford with Greenford Station, let alone to two Sudbury stations, two Wembley stations, two Ruislip stations, Southall and Hayes&Harlington and Heathrow...

 

[popeter45]

Can someone remind us why this line survives? There are bus services (probably more frequent than the train) that connect Greenford with West Ealing and Ealing Broadway, and Greenford with Greenford Station, let alone to two Sudbury stations, two Wembley stations, two Ruislip stations, Southall and Hayes&Harlington and Heathrow...

its basicly a parliamentary service, the effort to cease passenger services wouldn't be worth it so easier to just run a basic service to meet obligations