| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Chiltern to Paddington
As most people here must know, Chiltern runs one service a day, M-F,
to Paddington. It's run mainly for maintaining driver route knowledge for the occasions when Chiltern services are diverted to Paddington. It's not quite a parly service, as it runs at a convenient time, five days a week, but it's also not promoted and little used other than by rail enthusiasts (the few passengers are all sole males with cameras). And, yes, I was one of those this week, and here's the evidence: https://www.flickr.com/photos/reclin...57654494380303 But it got me wondering if Chiltern could or should run more services into Paddington? Chiltern's services are growing steadily, with 2 tph Oxford services being added soon. The two-track route into Marylebone is congested, as are Marylebone's six platforms. Would it be possible to run, say, 2 tph into Paddington? There's obviously many constraints, including: - the single track sections on the neglected former main line from South Ruislip to Old Oak Common, which also sees occasional freight trains - the flat Old Oak Common West Junction to the GW relief lines - capacity on the relief lines into Paddington - Paddington platform availability. But might there still be room for a limited number of Chiltern services, maybe even at peak times? Once Crossrail starts, there will be more room in Paddington itself, but what about on the approach lines? |
Quote:
Not being a major rail enthusiast, I didn't know about this service. You describe it as "Chiltern to Paddington" but from where does it start? Surely further afield than West Ruislip? |
Chiltern to Paddington
In message , at 18:24:12 on Wed, 5
Aug 2015, Robin9 remarked: Not being a major rail enthusiast, I didn't know about this service. You describe it as "Chiltern to Paddington" but from where does it start? Surely further afield than West Ruislip? No. http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/sear...08/05/0000-235 9?stp=WVS&show=all&order=wtt&toc=CH -- Roland Perry |
Chiltern to Paddington
Robin9 wrote:
'Recliner[_3_ Wrote: ;149717']As most people here must know, Chiltern runs one service a day, M-F, to Paddington. It's run mainly for maintaining driver route knowledge for the occasions when Chiltern services are diverted to Paddington. It's not quite a parly service, as it runs at a convenient time, five days a week, but it's also not promoted and little used other than by rail enthusiasts (the few passengers are all sole males with cameras). And, yes, I was one of those this week, and here's the evidence: https://www.flickr.com/photos/reclin...57654494380303 But it got me wondering if Chiltern could or should run more services into Paddington? Chiltern's services are growing steadily, with 2 tph Oxford services being added soon. The two-track route into Marylebone is congested, as are Marylebone's six platforms. Would it be possible to run, say, 2 tph into Paddington? There's obviously many constraints, including: - the single track sections on the neglected former main line from South Ruislip to Old Oak Common, which also sees occasional freight trains - the flat Old Oak Common West Junction to the GW relief lines - capacity on the relief lines into Paddington - Paddington platform availability. But might there still be room for a limited number of Chiltern services, maybe even at peak times? Once Crossrail starts, there will be more room in Paddington itself, but what about on the approach lines? Good photos. Thank you. Not being a major rail enthusiast, I didn't know about this service. You describe it as "Chiltern to Paddington" but from where does it start? Surely further afield than West Ruislip? It arrives empty, presumably from Marylebone or Wembley, at the down platform 3 at South Ruislip. I assume the Chiltern drivers all take turns on this service after bringing in a peak train to Marylebone, so they have up-to-date route knowledge. After the return trip to Paddington, it terminates at West Ruislip, and then sits empty there for 20 mins or so, as fast up trains pass by on the centre road, before an ECS move back to Wembley or Marylebone. It's immediately followed by a stopper to Marylebone, which I took. |
Chiltern to Paddington
In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote: In message , at 18:24:12 on Wed, 5 Aug 2015, Robin9 remarked: Not being a major rail enthusiast, I didn't know about this service. You describe it as "Chiltern to Paddington" but from where does it start? Surely further afield than West Ruislip? No. http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/sear.../0000-2359?stp =WVS&show=all&order=wtt&toc=CH Looks pretty parliamentary to me. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
Chiltern to Paddington
wrote:
In article , (Roland Perry) wrote: In message , at 18:24:12 on Wed, 5 Aug 2015, Robin9 remarked: Not being a major rail enthusiast, I didn't know about this service. You describe it as "Chiltern to Paddington" but from where does it start? Surely further afield than West Ruislip? No. http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/sear.../0000-2359?stp =WVS&show=all&order=wtt&toc=CH Looks pretty parliamentary to me. It does, but runs five days a week, unlike most parlys. It's there to maintain driver route knowledge, for whenever Chiltern has to divert to Paddington if Marylebone can't be used. The current version is Oyster-friendly, so it's used more than when it started from outside the London zones. So, by running a shorter service, Chiltern probably collects a bit more revenue from the Oyster pot. |
Chiltern to Paddington
On 2015\08\06 02:36, Recliner wrote:
wrote: In article , (Roland Perry) wrote: In message , at 18:24:12 on Wed, 5 Aug 2015, Robin9 remarked: Not being a major rail enthusiast, I didn't know about this service. You describe it as "Chiltern to Paddington" but from where does it start? Surely further afield than West Ruislip? No. http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/sear.../0000-2359?stp =WVS&show=all&order=wtt&toc=CH Looks pretty parliamentary to me. It does, but runs five days a week, unlike most parlys. It's there to maintain driver route knowledge, for whenever Chiltern has to divert to Paddington if Marylebone can't be used. The current version is Oyster-friendly, so it's used more than when it started from outside the London zones. So, by running a shorter service, Chiltern probably collects a bit more revenue from the Oyster pot. I can't help thinking that giving the Greenford Branch over to Chiltern, extending all of the Greenford Trains to South or West Ruislip and half of them to Aylesbury via Princes Risborough to replace the current hourly service on that line, would achieve similar results in a better way. It would need a new platform to be built at Greenford though, and I'm not sure if the Greenford Branch still has chronic speed restrictions. |
Chiltern to Paddington
Basil Jet wrote:
On 2015\08\06 02:36, Recliner wrote: wrote: In article , (Roland Perry) wrote: In message , at 18:24:12 on Wed, 5 Aug 2015, Robin9 remarked: Not being a major rail enthusiast, I didn't know about this service. You describe it as "Chiltern to Paddington" but from where does it start? Surely further afield than West Ruislip? No. http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/sear.../0000-2359?stp =WVS&show=all&order=wtt&toc=CH Looks pretty parliamentary to me. It does, but runs five days a week, unlike most parlys. It's there to maintain driver route knowledge, for whenever Chiltern has to divert to Paddington if Marylebone can't be used. The current version is Oyster-friendly, so it's used more than when it started from outside the London zones. So, by running a shorter service, Chiltern probably collects a bit more revenue from the Oyster pot. I can't help thinking that giving the Greenford Branch over to Chiltern, extending all of the Greenford Trains to South or West Ruislip and half of them to Aylesbury via Princes Risborough to replace the current hourly service on that line, would achieve similar results in a better way. It would need a new platform to be built at Greenford though, and I'm not sure if the Greenford Branch still has chronic speed restrictions. The Greenford branch is certainly very slow, but that may just be because of the closely-spaced stops and relaxed timings. Of course, the service will soon start at West Ealing rather than Paddington, as Crossrail will be taking its Relief line paths into Paddington. It would be a pity to lose the convenient cross-platform interchange at Greenford, from which there are already frequent Central Line connections through to West Ruislip. So it's hard to see who would benefit from Chiltern running to West Ealing rather than Paddington. But as the GWR moves away from DMU services in the area, it could still make sense for Chiltern to take over the 2 tph West Ealing to Greenford shuttle, perhaps also running additional 1 tph West Ealing to Aylesbury services. |
Chiltern to Paddington
On 2015\08\06 03:39, Recliner wrote:
Basil Jet wrote: I can't help thinking that giving the Greenford Branch over to Chiltern, extending all of the Greenford Trains to South or West Ruislip and half of them to Aylesbury via Princes Risborough to replace the current hourly service on that line, would achieve similar results in a better way. It would need a new platform to be built at Greenford though, and I'm not sure if the Greenford Branch still has chronic speed restrictions. The Greenford branch is certainly very slow, but that may just be because of the closely-spaced stops and relaxed timings. Of course, the service will soon start at West Ealing rather than Paddington, as Crossrail will be taking its Relief line paths into Paddington. It would be a pity to lose the convenient cross-platform interchange at Greenford, from which there are already frequent Central Line connections through to West Ruislip. So it's hard to see who would benefit from Chiltern running to West Ealing rather than Paddington. But as the GWR moves away from DMU services in the area, it could still make sense for Chiltern to take over the 2 tph West Ealing to Greenford shuttle, perhaps also running additional 1 tph West Ealing to Aylesbury services. Ah! I'd forgotten that the Greenford shuttles were earmarked to be cut off at West Ealing. That stymies the proposal. |
Chiltern to Paddington
On Thu, 6 Aug 2015 04:46:19 -0700 (PDT), Northolt Park Gates
wrote: It is probably not worth starting a service which will be disrupted by the building of HS2. Yes, I suppose so, though at least HS2 will now be in tunnel in the Park Royal area, rather than taking over that old GWR Oxford line alignment to Northolt. But once Crossrail and the OOC station are built, I wonder if a possible route to Paddington with available capacity will remain? |
Chiltern to Paddington
On Thu, 06 Aug 2015 13:55:25 +0100
Recliner wrote: On Thu, 6 Aug 2015 04:46:19 -0700 (PDT), Northolt Park Gates wrote: It is probably not worth starting a service which will be disrupted by the building of HS2. Yes, I suppose so, though at least HS2 will now be in tunnel in the Park Royal area, rather than taking over that old GWR Oxford line alignment to Northolt. If you mean that line the runs parallel to the Central line, why on earth wouldn't they re-use that alignment instead of building a hugely expensive tunnel? -- Spud |
Chiltern to Paddington
On Thursday, 6 August 2015 13:55:28 UTC+1, Recliner wrote:
Yes, I suppose so, though at least HS2 will now be in tunnel in the Park Royal area, rather than taking over that old GWR Oxford line alignment to Northolt. But once Crossrail and the OOC station are built, I wonder if a possible route to Paddington with available capacity will remain? Think laterally - what'll be at OOC station? Yup, Crossrail & a connection to LHR. Won't that be enough to attract Chiltern?. Quite probably, with no requirement for Paddington. Also, someone up-thread suggested Risborough/Aylesbury - why not extend that northwards & eastwards when the new EastWest comes online & run to Milton Keynes or Bedford? That's my thinking. |
Chiltern to Paddington
Chris wrote:
On Thursday, 6 August 2015 13:55:28 UTC+1, Recliner wrote: Yes, I suppose so, though at least HS2 will now be in tunnel in the Park Royal area, rather than taking over that old GWR Oxford line alignment to Northolt. But once Crossrail and the OOC station are built, I wonder if a possible route to Paddington with available capacity will remain? Think laterally - what'll be at OOC station? Yup, Crossrail & a connection to LHR. Won't that be enough to attract Chiltern?. Quite probably, with no requirement for Paddington. Yes, I did suggest upthread that OOC itself might be a useful Chiltern destination, for both Crossrail and HS2, as well as probably the Overground. Also, someone up-thread suggested Risborough/Aylesbury - why not extend that northwards & eastwards when the new EastWest comes online & run to Milton Keynes or Bedford? That's my thinking. There's only a single track connection from the joint line to Aylesbury and the east-west line central section. In any case, there's a good chance that the Tring stoppers will be moved from Euston to Crossrail, which would be a very much better link to MK. |
Chiltern to Paddington
On 05/08/15 13:48, Recliner wrote:
As most people here must know, Chiltern runs one service a day, M-F, to Paddington. It's run mainly for maintaining driver route knowledge for the occasions when Chiltern services are diverted to Paddington. It's not quite a parly service, as it runs at a convenient time, five days a week, but it's also not promoted and little used other than by rail enthusiasts (the few passengers are all sole males with cameras). And, yes, I was one of those this week, and here's the evidence: https://www.flickr.com/photos/reclin...57654494380303 But it got me wondering if Chiltern could or should run more services into Paddington? Chiltern's services are growing steadily, with 2 tph Oxford services being added soon. The two-track route into Marylebone is congested, as are Marylebone's six platforms. Would it be possible to run, say, 2 tph into Paddington? There's obviously many constraints, including: I had thought the plan was to divert a couple of the existing services to Oxford. The xx48 from Marylebone would be an obvious choice: it terminates at Bicester, rather than the more natural Banbury, and doesn't connect with anything. However the matching xx18 service which would be the other one to send to Oxford does have a connection at Bicester North and is also sometimes extended to Banbury or Stratford (even though it would be better to extend the xx48). Having some trains going to Paddington and others to Marylebone would be particularly awkward when travelling out from London as you could go to one station only to find that the next train left from the other. Roger |
Chiltern to Paddington
On Fri, 07 Aug 2015 22:03:13 +0100, Roger Lynn
wrote: On 05/08/15 13:48, Recliner wrote: snip Having some trains going to Paddington and others to Marylebone would be particularly awkward when travelling out from London as you could go to one station only to find that the next train left from the other. They've got things called timetables (printed or electronic form) to cure that. People travelling from various SR stations will be fairly used to trains leaving by more than one route. |
Chiltern to Paddington
On 07/08/2015 22:03, Roger Lynn wrote:
On 05/08/15 13:48, Recliner wrote: As most people here must know, Chiltern runs one service a day, M-F, to Paddington. It's run mainly for maintaining driver route knowledge for the occasions when Chiltern services are diverted to Paddington. It's not quite a parly service, as it runs at a convenient time, five days a week, but it's also not promoted and little used other than by rail enthusiasts (the few passengers are all sole males with cameras). And, yes, I was one of those this week, and here's the evidence: https://www.flickr.com/photos/reclin...57654494380303 But it got me wondering if Chiltern could or should run more services into Paddington? Chiltern's services are growing steadily, with 2 tph Oxford services being added soon. The two-track route into Marylebone is congested, as are Marylebone's six platforms. Would it be possible to run, say, 2 tph into Paddington? There's obviously many constraints, including: I had thought the plan was to divert a couple of the existing services to Oxford. The xx48 from Marylebone would be an obvious choice: it terminates at Bicester, rather than the more natural Banbury, and doesn't connect with anything. However the matching xx18 service which would be the other one to send to Oxford does have a connection at Bicester North and is also sometimes extended to Banbury or Stratford (even though it would be better to extend the xx48). Having some trains going to Paddington and others to Marylebone would be particularly awkward when travelling out from London as you could go to one station only to find that the next train left from the other. Roger Not a problem in Manchester, where trains to Liverpool depart from Victoria, or from (Piccadilly + Oxford Road) |
Chiltern to Paddington
BevanPrice wrote:
On 07/08/2015 22:03, Roger Lynn wrote: On 05/08/15 13:48, Recliner wrote: As most people here must know, Chiltern runs one service a day, M-F, to Paddington. It's run mainly for maintaining driver route knowledge for the occasions when Chiltern services are diverted to Paddington. It's not quite a parly service, as it runs at a convenient time, five days a week, but it's also not promoted and little used other than by rail enthusiasts (the few passengers are all sole males with cameras). And, yes, I was one of those this week, and here's the evidence: https://www.flickr.com/photos/reclin...57654494380303 But it got me wondering if Chiltern could or should run more services into Paddington? Chiltern's services are growing steadily, with 2 tph Oxford services being added soon. The two-track route into Marylebone is congested, as are Marylebone's six platforms. Would it be possible to run, say, 2 tph into Paddington? There's obviously many constraints, including: I had thought the plan was to divert a couple of the existing services to Oxford. The xx48 from Marylebone would be an obvious choice: it terminates at Bicester, rather than the more natural Banbury, and doesn't connect with anything. However the matching xx18 service which would be the other one to send to Oxford does have a connection at Bicester North and is also sometimes extended to Banbury or Stratford (even though it would be better to extend the xx48). Having some trains going to Paddington and others to Marylebone would be particularly awkward when travelling out from London as you could go to one station only to find that the next train left from the other. Roger Not a problem in Manchester, where trains to Liverpool depart from Victoria, or from (Piccadilly + Oxford Road) It's pretty standard in south London, as many stations are served by trains from more than one of Waterloo, Victoria, Blackfriars and London Bridge. |
Chiltern to Paddington
On Fri, 7 Aug 2015 23:14:07 +0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote: BevanPrice wrote: On 07/08/2015 22:03, Roger Lynn wrote: On 05/08/15 13:48, Recliner wrote: As most people here must know, Chiltern runs one service a day, M-F, to Paddington. It's run mainly for maintaining driver route knowledge for the occasions when Chiltern services are diverted to Paddington. It's not quite a parly service, as it runs at a convenient time, five days a week, but it's also not promoted and little used other than by rail enthusiasts (the few passengers are all sole males with cameras). And, yes, I was one of those this week, and here's the evidence: https://www.flickr.com/photos/reclin...57654494380303 But it got me wondering if Chiltern could or should run more services into Paddington? Chiltern's services are growing steadily, with 2 tph Oxford services being added soon. The two-track route into Marylebone is congested, as are Marylebone's six platforms. Would it be possible to run, say, 2 tph into Paddington? There's obviously many constraints, including: I had thought the plan was to divert a couple of the existing services to Oxford. The xx48 from Marylebone would be an obvious choice: it terminates at Bicester, rather than the more natural Banbury, and doesn't connect with anything. However the matching xx18 service which would be the other one to send to Oxford does have a connection at Bicester North and is also sometimes extended to Banbury or Stratford (even though it would be better to extend the xx48). Having some trains going to Paddington and others to Marylebone would be particularly awkward when travelling out from London as you could go to one station only to find that the next train left from the other. Roger Not a problem in Manchester, where trains to Liverpool depart from Victoria, or from (Piccadilly + Oxford Road) It's pretty standard in south London, as many stations are served by trains from more than one of Waterloo, Victoria, Blackfriars and London Bridge. Some of the stations are served in both directions as well (e.g. Lewisham, Clapham Junction) by trains on loop routes although the displayed destination tends to be changed during the journey thus preventing unwanted journeys by the pretty route. North of the Thames, trains leave Highbury and Islington (also Canonbury) for Clapham Junction in opposite directions; some are at identical departure times (so you can choose the wrong platform rather than the wrong station). |
Chiltern to Paddington
On 2015\08\08 00:49, Charles Ellson wrote:
North of the Thames, trains leave Highbury and Islington (also Canonbury) for Clapham Junction in opposite directions; some are at identical departure times (so you can choose the wrong platform rather than the wrong station). I was going to say it doesn't matter much, because journey times are similar, but the Shoreditch route cuts through zone 1 and the Willesden route stays in zone 2. They could fix the problem by usually terminating the via Peckham trains at Dalston Junction... they appear to run ever single one to or from Highbury, giving Croydon and New Cross the Dalston terminators. |
Chiltern to Paddington
|
Chiltern to Paddington
In message , at 05:21:40 on Sat, 8 Aug 2015,
Basil Jet remarked: On 2015\08\08 00:49, Charles Ellson wrote: North of the Thames, trains leave Highbury and Islington (also Canonbury) for Clapham Junction in opposite directions; some are at identical departure times (so you can choose the wrong platform rather than the wrong station). But most are 2 minutes apart. In any case with a turn-up-and-go service like that you won't normally be aiming for a particularly timed train. Also a rather big clue that the clockwise trains have a set of buffers just to the west of the platform (which means the platforms either service uses is completely predictable - in theory 7 for anticlockwaise and either 1 or 2 for clockwise, although looking at today's running they are always platform 2). And that the clockwise trains set off having berthed there about five minutes, whereas the anticlockwise ones arrive from the previous station, running through. And finally, only the anticlockwise ones use the OHL. I was going to say it doesn't matter much, because journey times are similar, but the Shoreditch route cuts through zone 1 and the Willesden route stays in zone 2. I was there yesterday, and the way they describe the trains doesn't lead to ambiguity - in other words they emphasive the "via's". They could fix the problem by usually terminating the via Peckham trains iirc they call them "via Canada Water" (And Willesden Junction the other way) at Dalston Junction... they appear to run ever single one to or from Highbury, giving Croydon and New Cross the Dalston terminators. And the Highbury terminators alternate between Clapham Junction and Crystal Palace. That leaves CJ with only one train via Canada Water every 15 minutes. -- Roland Perry |
Chiltern to Paddington
|
Chiltern to Paddington
Roland Perry wrote:
Also a rather big clue that the clockwise trains have a set of buffers just to the west of the platform You might think it's a big clue; my experience of the Great British Travelling Public begs to differ ;) Anna Noyd-Dryver |
Chiltern to Paddington
Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
Roland Perry wrote: Also a rather big clue that the clockwise trains have a set of buffers just to the west of the platform You might think it's a big clue; my experience of the Great British Travelling Public begs to differ ;) I agree. I'm amazed how often I've got on at a terminus and have people (usually women) asking in what direction the train would move. |
Chiltern to Paddington
"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
... On Fri, 07 Aug 2015 22:03:13 +0100, Roger Lynn wrote: On 05/08/15 13:48, Recliner wrote: snip Having some trains going to Paddington and others to Marylebone would be particularly awkward when travelling out from London as you could go to one station only to find that the next train left from the other. They've got things called timetables (printed or electronic form) to cure that. People travelling from various SR stations will be fairly used to trains leaving by more than one route. Timetables are fine but if you want to catch the next service to HW and are travelling from (for example) Trafalgar Square it is difficult to judge how long it will take you by each route on the Underground and therefore which mainline station you should had for. Suppose you aim for the next train out of Paddington but are slightly delayed and miss the train. Now you've got to get from Paddington to Marylebone before *that* train departs, when if you'd known you were going to be delayed you'd have gone directly to Marylebone and been certain to catch that train. At least Paddington and Marylebone are close enough that it doesn't take long on the Bakerloo line between one and the other, so you can probably do it before the next train leaves *if they are equally spaced*. |
Chiltern to Paddington
In uk.railway NY wrote:
Timetables are fine but if you want to catch the next service to HW and are travelling from (for example) Trafalgar Square it is difficult to judge how long it will take you by each route on the Underground and therefore which mainline station you should had for. As already discussed, this happens for KX/Liverpool St to Cambridge. The journey time difference is such that it isn't real competition: if you're in about a 15 min tube radius of Liverpool St or further east then that route can swing it, otherwise it's almost always faster to go to KX, except in case of disruption. The arithmetic varies a little bit during the day (in the peaks KX/LST are about evens, off-peak KX wins, late evening both are slower but KX still wins) but not enough to sway it. It can also vary if you want to do Tottenham Hale (all LST trains) or Finsbury Park (KX semi-fasts) rather than the terminus, which can work out depending on your start point. The frequency, spacing and journey time to get between the two is such that if you miss a train, it's still quickest to stay put and wait for the next one. Theo |
Chiltern to Paddington
Somewhere on Youtube, I think it was in one of the 'Secrets of the Overground' videos, it was claimed that because they couldn't tell which way round you had gone the cheaper fare was charged, excluding zone 1, and that this was an exception to the normal rule that Shoreditch High Street was in zone 1. Does anybody know if this is correct?
|
Chiltern to Paddington
|
Chiltern to Paddington
On 07/08/15 22:23, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Fri, 07 Aug 2015 22:03:13 +0100, Roger Lynn wrote: Having some trains going to Paddington and others to Marylebone would be particularly awkward when travelling out from London as you could go to one station only to find that the next train left from the other. They've got things called timetables (printed or electronic form) to cure that. That's fine if they're actually kept to, but previously it wasn't necessary to study a timetable, you could just turn up and be sure of catching the next train, whenever it happened to be. People travelling from various SR stations will be fairly used to trains leaving by more than one route. That doesn't stop it being a new and unnecessary inconvenience on this route. Roger |
Chiltern to Paddington
On 06/08/2015 00:44, Recliner wrote:
It arrives empty, presumably from Marylebone or Wembley, at the down platform 3 at South Ruislip. I assume the Chiltern drivers all take turns on this service after bringing in a peak train to Marylebone, so they have up-to-date route knowledge. Runs empty from Wembley LMD to South Ruislip as 5V35, forms 2V35 to Paddington, 2M30 back to West Ruislip, then 5H43 back to Marylebone, though that's only part of the unit's diagram for the day. The trains in question are only worked by Aylesbury drivers, and I believe they need a Guard as well. Cheers, Barry -- Barry Salter, usenet (at) southie (dot) me (dot) uk Disclaimer: The above do not necessarily represent the views of my employer. |
Chiltern to Paddington
Barry Salter wrote:
On 06/08/2015 00:44, Recliner wrote: It arrives empty, presumably from Marylebone or Wembley, at the down platform 3 at South Ruislip. I assume the Chiltern drivers all take turns on this service after bringing in a peak train to Marylebone, so they have up-to-date route knowledge. Runs empty from Wembley LMD to South Ruislip as 5V35, forms 2V35 to Paddington, 2M30 back to West Ruislip, then 5H43 back to Marylebone, though that's only part of the unit's diagram for the day. The trains in question are only worked by Aylesbury drivers, and I believe they need a Guard as well. Yes, there was a guard. All he did was to walk through the train just before departure on each leg to check that we all knew where it was going. Everyone did -- that's why we were on it. |
Chiltern to Paddington
On 07/08/2015 22:03, Roger Lynn wrote:
I had thought the plan was to divert a couple of the existing services to Oxford. The xx48 from Marylebone would be an obvious choice: it terminates at Bicester, rather than the more natural Banbury, and doesn't connect with anything. However the matching xx18 service which would be the other one to send to Oxford does have a connection at Bicester North and is also sometimes extended to Banbury or Stratford (even though it would be better to extend the xx48). The latest iteration of the October timetable has been uploaded into ITPS, so is now available in journey planners, and it's a fairly major recast in the off-peak! Northbound from Marylebone: xx.05 - Oxford Parkway (fast to Haddenham & Thame Parkway) xx.10 - Birmingham Moor Street (High Wycombe, then fast to Banbury) xx.13 - Aylesbury via High Wycombe (fast to Gerrards Cross) xx.16 - High Wycombe (Wembley Stadium, South Ruislip, Gerrards Cross, Beaconsfield) xx.27 - Aylesbury via Amersham xx.35 - Oxford Parkway (fast to High Wycombe, then Bicester Village) xx.40 - Birmingham Snow Hill (Bicester North, Banbury...) xx.43 - Banbury (fast to Gerrards Cross) xx.46 - Gerrards Cross (stopper) xx.57 - Aylesbury Vale Parkway via Amersham The xx.10 Birminghams are the current xx.15s, but with an additional call at High Wycombe; xx.13 is the current xx.21; xx.16 the current xx.25(ish); Mets return to xx.27 and xx.57; xx.40 is the current xx.45 minus the High Wycombe call; xx.43 is the current xx.48 and xx.46 is the current xx.52. Cheers, Barry -- Barry Salter, usenet (at) southie (dot) me (dot) uk Disclaimer: The above do not necessarily represent the views of my employer. |
Chiltern to Paddington
On 2015\08\10 21:12, Barry Salter wrote:
On 06/08/2015 00:44, Recliner wrote: It arrives empty, presumably from Marylebone or Wembley, at the down platform 3 at South Ruislip. I assume the Chiltern drivers all take turns on this service after bringing in a peak train to Marylebone, so they have up-to-date route knowledge. Runs empty from Wembley LMD to South Ruislip as 5V35, forms 2V35 to Paddington, 2M30 back to West Ruislip, then 5H43 back to Marylebone, though that's only part of the unit's diagram for the day. The trains in question are only worked by Aylesbury drivers, and I believe they need a Guard as well. What use is a diversionary route that only a fraction of the drivers have the route knowledge for? |
Chiltern to Paddington
On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 15:33:08 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote: On 2015\08\10 21:12, Barry Salter wrote: On 06/08/2015 00:44, Recliner wrote: It arrives empty, presumably from Marylebone or Wembley, at the down platform 3 at South Ruislip. I assume the Chiltern drivers all take turns on this service after bringing in a peak train to Marylebone, so they have up-to-date route knowledge. Runs empty from Wembley LMD to South Ruislip as 5V35, forms 2V35 to Paddington, 2M30 back to West Ruislip, then 5H43 back to Marylebone, though that's only part of the unit's diagram for the day. The trains in question are only worked by Aylesbury drivers, and I believe they need a Guard as well. What use is a diversionary route that only a fraction of the drivers have the route knowledge for? More use than one that nobody has knowledge for. How big in numerical figures is the "fraction" ? Are there also e.g. freight drivers from somewhere else who could act as pilots if necessary ? |
Chiltern to Paddington
Basil Jet wrote:
On 2015\08\10 21:12, Barry Salter wrote: On 06/08/2015 00:44, Recliner wrote: It arrives empty, presumably from Marylebone or Wembley, at the down platform 3 at South Ruislip. I assume the Chiltern drivers all take turns on this service after bringing in a peak train to Marylebone, so they have up-to-date route knowledge. Runs empty from Wembley LMD to South Ruislip as 5V35, forms 2V35 to Paddington, 2M30 back to West Ruislip, then 5H43 back to Marylebone, though that's only part of the unit's diagram for the day. The trains in question are only worked by Aylesbury drivers, and I believe they need a Guard as well. What use is a diversionary route that only a fraction of the drivers have the route knowledge for? When you schedule the diversions, you roster drivers who know the route... fGW examples include only Exeter drivers sign via Honiton, only Swansea sign via Barry, Swansea *don't* sign via Newbury, etc. Anna Noyd-Dryver |
Chiltern to Paddington
On 10/08/15 21:54, Barry Salter wrote:
The latest iteration of the October timetable has been uploaded into ITPS, so is now available in journey planners, and it's a fairly major recast in the off-peak! Northbound from Marylebone: xx.05 - Oxford Parkway (fast to Haddenham & Thame Parkway) xx.10 - Birmingham Moor Street (High Wycombe, then fast to Banbury) xx.13 - Aylesbury via High Wycombe (fast to Gerrards Cross) xx.16 - High Wycombe (Wembley Stadium, South Ruislip, Gerrards Cross, Beaconsfield) xx.27 - Aylesbury via Amersham xx.35 - Oxford Parkway (fast to High Wycombe, then Bicester Village) xx.40 - Birmingham Snow Hill (Bicester North, Banbury...) xx.43 - Banbury (fast to Gerrards Cross) xx.46 - Gerrards Cross (stopper) xx.57 - Aylesbury Vale Parkway via Amersham The xx.10 Birminghams are the current xx.15s, but with an additional call at High Wycombe; xx.13 is the current xx.21; xx.16 the current xx.25(ish); Mets return to xx.27 and xx.57; xx.40 is the current xx.45 minus the High Wycombe call; xx.43 is the current xx.48 and xx.46 is the current xx.52. Thanks, that's interesting. That leaves the xx.05 as being the current xx.18 and the xx.35 is new. Hopefully the xx.43 will connect with the xx.10 at Banbury, although presumably it will sometimes be extended to Stratford and I don't know how the timetabling would fit for that. The xx.40 appears to lose the Bicester North connection that the xx.45 has, but it's not a very good connection and Banbury is a better place to change anyway. If the above timetable is repeated through the day it means Aylesbury has gained a regular London via HW service which it hasn't had for many years but Stratford continues to lose its regular London service (I think it used to be every 2 hours). Travelling between Oxford and Aylesbury or between Aylesbury and anywhere North of Banbury will be awkward unless doubling back is allowed between Princes Risborough and HW. Roger |
Chiltern to Paddington
Roger Lynn wrote:
On 10/08/15 21:54, Barry Salter wrote: The latest iteration of the October timetable has been uploaded into ITPS, so is now available in journey planners, and it's a fairly major recast in the off-peak! Northbound from Marylebone: xx.05 - Oxford Parkway (fast to Haddenham & Thame Parkway) xx.10 - Birmingham Moor Street (High Wycombe, then fast to Banbury) xx.13 - Aylesbury via High Wycombe (fast to Gerrards Cross) xx.16 - High Wycombe (Wembley Stadium, South Ruislip, Gerrards Cross, Beaconsfield) xx.27 - Aylesbury via Amersham xx.35 - Oxford Parkway (fast to High Wycombe, then Bicester Village) xx.40 - Birmingham Snow Hill (Bicester North, Banbury...) xx.43 - Banbury (fast to Gerrards Cross) xx.46 - Gerrards Cross (stopper) xx.57 - Aylesbury Vale Parkway via Amersham The xx.10 Birminghams are the current xx.15s, but with an additional call at High Wycombe; xx.13 is the current xx.21; xx.16 the current xx.25(ish); Mets return to xx.27 and xx.57; xx.40 is the current xx.45 minus the High Wycombe call; xx.43 is the current xx.48 and xx.46 is the current xx.52. Thanks, that's interesting. That leaves the xx.05 as being the current xx.18 and the xx.35 is new. Hopefully the xx.43 will connect with the xx.10 at Banbury, although presumably it will sometimes be extended to Stratford and I don't know how the timetabling would fit for that. The xx.40 appears to lose the Bicester North connection that the xx.45 has, but it's not a very good connection and Banbury is a better place to change anyway. Yes, eg the 1143 arrives Banbury 1302, the 1210 calls at Banbury 1307. The only through trains to Stratford are 0618, 1824, 2043. No through off-peak services. There will be a connection at Leamington every 2 hours from the xx10. This will actually be a bit quicker than the current 3-hourly through train. Peter Smyth |
Chiltern to Paddington
On 2015\08\10 21:54, Barry Salter wrote:
The latest iteration of the October timetable has been uploaded into ITPS, so is now available in journey planners, and it's a fairly major recast in the off-peak! October of which year? The Chiltern website says the current timetable is valid until this December. |
Chiltern to Paddington
On 11/08/2015 15:33, Basil Jet wrote:
What use is a diversionary route that only a fraction of the drivers have the route knowledge for? Bearing in mind that, to keep the route on their card, a driver needs to drive over it at *least* every six months, and Chiltern run over it approximately 260 days a year, that gives a theoretical maximum of 130 drivers who can sign it...assuming you have a different driver every day. Chiltern has approximately 300 drivers, so short of running two or three trains a day to/from Paddington (which there isn't the stock for, let alone paths), it's impossible for the entire complement to sign the route. With the route being limited to two trains per hour each way due to the single line, it's just as easy to change drivers at West Ruislip and implement stepping back. Cheers, Barry -- Barry Salter, usenet (at) southie (dot) me (dot) uk Disclaimer: The above do not necessarily represent the views of my employer. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 10:08 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk