Henley-on-Thames every 15 minutes

[ess]

As it's Henley Regatta week with the Henley special service, I was thinking. What would it take to upgrade the Henley branch to allow 2 trains per hour / service every 15 mins? What would that likely cost?

 

[JonathanH]

As it's Henley Regatta week with the Henley special service, I was thinking. What would it take to upgrade the Henley branch to allow 2 trains per hour / service every 15 mins? What would that likely cost?

It is somewhat unfortunate that the point at which the passing loop would need to be is on the bridge between Wargrave and Shiplake, which is roughly half way.

At one time the line was double track with two bridge spans, but it would be difficult to see how a train every fifteen minutes would ever be needed.

As it is the Regatta is served with longer trains, with the Reading to Basingstoke line running 3tp2h to release a unit on Saturday.

 

[Bald Rick]

As it's Henley Regatta week with the Henley special service, I was thinking. What would it take to upgrade the Henley branch to allow 2 trains per hour / service every 15 mins? What would that likely cost?

Either:

1) a passing loop in the Shiplake area, including the station, meaning new platform, accessible route, and upgrading the level crossing etc. Somewhere around the £20m-£30m mark at a guess.

2) raising the linespeed to 75mph, which will involve extensive trackwork upgrading a bridge or two (including over the Thames) plus upgrading the level crossing. Maybe cheaper, maybe not. This would also need Shiplake and Wargrave station calls to be skipped, and some tight turnrounds.

 

[BerkshireRails]

As it's Henley Regatta week with the Henley special service, I was thinking. What would it take to upgrade the Henley branch to allow 2 trains per hour / service every 15 mins? What would that likely cost?

They used to operate an every 20 minutes service by skipping either Shiplake or Wargrave stations depending on the direction and operating a replacement bus service to them. To get an an every 15 minutes service will require the restoration of a passing loop. The best place to put the loop will be at Wargrave, due to lack of development on the former Down Line unlike at Shiplake. You would probally want the Loop to start just after Shiplake Viadcut at around 33 miles and 00 Chains and run to around 31 miles 30 chains to allow for dynamic passing of the Henley services. However could the added capacity from 4tph be created in other ways such as running longer trains, as you might be able to get 4tph however it might mean you can no longer spare enough units for 7 car trains so you stuck with a 4 and 3 car train which in some respects puts you in no better place.
A photo I took last year of the strengthened Henley service at Twyford during the Regatta which was a 7 car formed of 165117, 165123 & 165126 and was operating on a half hourly frequency due to operating into Platform 4 the Up Relief due to being to long for the Bay.

 

[JonathanH]

2) raising the linespeed to 75mph, which will involve extensive trackwork upgrading a bridge or two (including over the Thames) plus upgrading the level crossing. Maybe cheaper, maybe not. This would also need Shiplake and Wargrave station calls to be skipped, and some tight turnrounds.

It is about 4½ miles from Henley to Twyford, so every 15 minutes is a nine mile round trip in each quarter hour with two reversals and four stops. A minute for each stop and automatic operation means the distance needs to be covered in 9 minutes, average speed of 60mph.

Could very rapid acceleration, a lightweight vehicle and the kind of automation seen on shuttle trains within airports deliver a fifteen minute frequency?

 

[BerkshireRails]

It is about 4½ miles from Henley to Twyford, so every 15 minutes is a nine mile round trip in each quarter hour with two reversals and four stops. A minute for each stop and automatic operation means the distance needs to be covered in 9 minutes, average speed of 60mph.

Could very rapid acceleration, a lightweight vehicle and the kind of automation seen on shuttle trains within airports deliver a fifteen minute frequency?

Before you automate you would need to deal with the three level crossings on the route, the first one at Twyford from the Carpark on to P4&5 and the second one at Shiplake which is an ACOL+B and the third one is between Shiplake and Henley at Bolney Farm and is an UWC. Considering the 387s & 345s can cover the 5 miles between Twyford and Maidenhead in 7 minutes it might just about possible with electrification, with a 90mph limit and double crewing if automation doesn't work.

 

[JonathanH]

Considering the 387s & 345s can cover the 5 miles between Twyford and Maidenhead in 7 minutes it might just about possible with electrification, with a 90mph limit and double crewing if automation doesn't work.

There isnt a tight bend between Twyford and Maidenhead though.

 

[BerkshireRails]

There isnt a tight bend between Twyford and Maidenhead though.

That is true; however, there is still a line speed reduction in the Maidenhead area to 40 or 75mph, depending on routing. Another comparison would be Redhill to Gatwick Airport which is 6 miles and 22 chains at takes 10 minutes for a turbo with limits of 15 mph in the Redhill area which is a similar length to the 25mph in Twyford, then 75mph to Earlswood at which point it goes up to 90mph as far as Horley where it drops to 70mph and on approach to Gatwick it drops to 40mph for the P1&2 Island.

 

[Bald Rick]

It is about 4½ miles from Henley to Twyford, so every 15 minutes is a nine mile round trip in each quarter hour with two reversals and four stops. A minute for each stop and automatic operation means the distance needs to be covered in 9 minutes, average speed of 60mph.

Could very rapid acceleration, a lightweight vehicle and the kind of automation seen on shuttle trains within airports deliver a fifteen minute frequency?

possibly.

 

[Zomboid]

A lot of work for a one day a year service

 

[Mcr Warrior]

A lot of work for a one day a year service

The Henley Regatta is longer than a one day annual event, it's more like six consecutive days, but where else on the GB railway network has actually had significant infrastructure improvements, of recent, that then only ever get used for relatively short periods?

 

[Bald Rick]

The Henley Regatta is longer than a one day annual event, it's more like six consecutive days, but where else on the GB railway network has actually had significant infrastructure improvements, of recent, that then only ever get used for relatively short periods?

Arguably station upgrades for The Commonwealth games in Birmingham, and the Olympics in London, but they all drove a legacy. Eg all the work at Stratford to improve station capacity for the Olympics was then followed by significant development in the local area as a result. I don’t suppose the good folk of Henley would be overly happy to see large scale housing and commercial development to follow a doubling of their train service.

 

[Zomboid]

The Henley Regatta is longer than a one day annual event, it's more like six consecutive days, but where else on the GB railway network has actually had significant infrastructure improvements, of recent, that then only ever get used for relatively short periods?

But they only run the 7 car trains on one day a year.

The work would need to be useful at least 6 days a week all year to be worth doing.

Electrification would be a better use of money so 8 car EMUs could provide a peak time service to Paddington (subject to pathing!) all year

 

[BerkshireRails]

But they only run the 7 car trains on one day a year.

The work would need to be useful at least 6 days a week all year to be worth doing.

Electrification would be a better use of money so 8 car EMUs could provide a peak time service to Paddington (subject to pathing!) all year

Electrification would allow for increased capacity by having fewer cabs in the train during the Regatta, as, rather than six cabs with a turbo, you would only have four cabs by using the 387s. The peak-time Henley to London services were withdrawn due to Capacity issues, and a 4-car 387 will be able to fit into the Bay at Twyford quite nicely, as a 4-car Turbo fits in the Bay during the weekday Regatta. It might be possible to restore the every 20 minutes Regatta timetable with the 387s and skipping Shiplake in Up Direction & Wargrave in both directions with rail replacement buses running to those two stations, or you could run an every 30 minutes service all stops like normal in the Regatta due to the improved acceleration rate. Shiplake can only really be skipped in the Up Direction due to the level crossing at the Down end of the station, which requires all trains to stop.
A photo of Shiplake station looking towards the Level Crossing, with the 165 running on the former Up Line, Shiplake was an Island Platform with the Down Line running through what is now Houses on the other side of the Road.

 

[WAO]

Railway economics favour longer trains rather than more frequent trains. It would also make sense to use the stock based at the Cardiff Road Depot, 387's at the moment; a single unit providing enhancement. Simple electrification of the 7.25km branch might cost c£15M but the short distance might also allow a small but adequate battery raft to fit - only perhaps 50kWhr would be needed, with charging at Twyford. The Greenford experimental train might be preferred, (if strengthened) being off the peg, if a 387 conversion would prove too complicated.

WAO

 

[BerkshireRails]

Railway economics favour longer trains rather than more frequent trains. It would also make sense to use the stock based at the Cardiff Road Depot, 387's at the moment; a single unit providing enhancement. Simple electrification of the 7.25km branch might cost c£15M but the short distance might also allow a small but adequate battery raft to fit - only perhaps 50kWhr would be needed, with charging at Twyford. The Greenford experimental train might be preferred, (if strengthened) being off the peg, if a 387 conversion would prove too complicated.

WAO

Electrification was planned for the Twyford Branch, but it got delayed at the same time as Oxford electrification.

GWR have found it is better for the charging to take place at Twyford due to the power supply from the Grid. It would require two fast chargers to allow for Regatta services, rather than the single fast charger found at West Ealing.

 

[Mark J]

Build the planned (but never built) Henley to Marlow railway, then we can have the Oxfordshire/Buckinghamshire/Berkshire Orbital Railway.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Jul 2025 ==

---
Seriously though.

It is madness that the Henley Branch does not even have a passing loop. Same with the Maidenhead to Marlow line, although there is the double track section at Bourne End.

The residents of Wargrave and Shiplake have to once again make do with a reduced service during Regatta week, to cater for that traffic.

 

[Class15]

I think electrification and the introduction of Class 387s is the most sensible option for this branch (and the other Thames Valley branches).

I can understand the logic of battery trains but I wouldn’t have them in otherwise electrified areas. Easier for maintenance to wire all the Thames Valley branches. Just like BR electrifying Wickford to Southminster and Romford to Upminster.

 

[Bald Rick]

Easier for maintenance to wire all the Thames Valley branches.

How is it easier for maintenance? More electrification kit is more maintenance, certainly not easier.

A battery train doesnt need any meaningful additional maintenance compared to an EMU.

 

[Zomboid]

I think Henley definitely warrants wires. Marlow is a difficult case since it needs a really small train for the reversal. I wonder if a 40m long 25kV/ Battery high floor tram train style thing would be the answer for the whole area. Wire the various bay platforms from the main line and use those for charging and run them in pairs for the other branches. They could additionally be fitted with Greenford style charging for use in Devon & Cornwall if necessary.

Not sure if they'd be ideal for Basingstoke, but that line should really get electrified all the way for XC and freight operation anyway.

 

[JonathanH]

It is madness that the Henley Branch does not even have a passing loop. Same with the Maidenhead to Marlow line, although there is the double track section at Bourne End.

It really isn't madness that it doesn't have a loop. The train service manages a near half hourly without a loop, and only uses a two or three coach train. I appreciate that there is no room for special services, but otherwise what is the need for two trains to pass on any of the dead end Thames branches?

 

[BerkshireRails]

It really isn't madness that it doesn't have a loop. The train service manages a near half hourly without a loop, and only uses a two or three coach train. I appreciate that there is no room for special services, but otherwise what is the need for two trains to pass on any of the dead end Thames branches?

The only branch needing to pass on it is the Marlow Branch, which operates hourly apart from in the peak, where it is split at Bourne End.

How is it easier for maintenance? More electrification kit is more maintenance, certainly not easier.

A battery train doesnt need any meaningful additional maintenance compared to an EMU.

Because you have less training, you can have a larger uniform fleet rather than having smaller fleets dedicated to each branch.

I think Henley definitely warrants wires. Marlow is a difficult case since it needs a really small train for the reversal. I wonder if a 40m long 25kV/ Battery high floor tram train style thing would be the answer for the whole area. Wire the various bay platforms from the main line and use those for charging and run them in pairs for the other branches. They could additionally be fitted with Greenford style charging for use in Devon & Cornwall if necessary.

Not sure if they'd be ideal for Basingstoke, but that line should really get electrified all the way for XC and freight operation anyway.

Marlow can fit trains up to just around 60m with some signage being moved. GWR released a report into the 230s, which is worth a read, and it suggests Falmouth, Looe, Newquay, and Gunnislake Branch are workable for battery traction.

 

[zwk500]

Because you have less training, you can have a larger uniform fleet rather than having smaller fleets dedicated to each branch.

Have a uniform fleet of BEMUs and then you have the flexibility to respond to incidents that cause a loss of power on the electrified as well. The additional training for a Battery unit against a normal EMU for the driver will be fairly light depending on how many procedures there are to learn, and the maintenance point has already been covered.

 

[Bald Rick]

Because you have less training, you can have a larger uniform fleet rather than having smaller fleets dedicated to each branch.

Training for what, exactly?

 

[BerkshireRails]

Training for what, exactly?

Training for the multiple small separate fleets.

Have a uniform fleet of BEMUs and then you have the flexibility to respond to incidents that cause a loss of power on the electrified as well. The additional training for a Battery unit against a normal EMU for the driver will be fairly light depending on how many procedures there are to learn, and the maintenance point has already been covered.

BEMUs aren't suitable for all of the routes in the GWR LTV (London Thames Valley) area. Some of them are due to the length, and others are down-to-line speed, with some extra routes having power supply challenges like the North Downs Line. The electrified sections of the North Downs Line have very limited power spare for any conversion of the North Downs Line to electric operations. This limited power could be insufficient to charge the batteries, which would require a fast charger; however, the existing third rail will lead to a very complex train, which is more likely to be unreliable, like the class 769s.

 

[JohnRegular]

Aren't the Henley and Marlow branches pretty much exactly the use case for BEMUs like the 230s?
Would wiring the branches and operation with EMUs allow for increases over the current frequencies that batteries couldn't (e.g. due to charging time)?

 

[BerkshireRails]

Aren't the Henley and Marlow branches pretty much exactly the use case for BEMUs like the 230s?
Would wiring the branches and operation with EMUs allow for increases over the current frequencies that batteries couldn't (e.g. due to charging time)?

Electrification couldn't provide an increase in frequency. The Henley branch would have the fast chargers at Henley-on-Thames, and the Marlow branch would have them at Bourne End. The charging time is the driver's charging time.

 

[HSTEd]

Marlow is going to need a specialised fleet of short units whatever happens, because of the junction geometry at Bourne End.

Unless you convert the Bourne End-Marlow section to a Doppelmayr cableliner or something..... (Other brands are available)

 

[Bald Rick]

Training for the multiple small separate fleets.

why would there be ‘multiple’ seperate fleets? You might want to ask Merseyrail how expensive the extra training for their battery fleet was.

The electrified sections of the North Downs Line have very limited power spare for any conversion of the North Downs Line to electric operations.

This limited power could be insufficient to charge the batteries, which would require a fast charger; however, the existing third rail will lead to a very complex train, which is more likely to be unreliable, like the class 769s.

What evidence are you basing that on?

 

[BerkshireRails]

Marlow is going to need a specialised fleet of short units, whatever happens, because of the junction geometry at Bourne End.

Unless you convert the Bourne End-Marlow section to a Doppelmayr cableliner or something..... (Other brands are available)

Bourne End station can fit a 3-car 230 in with some modifications.