On 26/11/2018 11:59, NY wrote:
"Recliner" wrote in message
news
Getting to Heathrow from anywhere to the west is a pain.

Yes. Various rail links to the west and southwest have been under
discussion for decades, and still are. The station under T5 awaits the
line
west, but construction still hasn't begun.

Crossrail will help a little, but it's not enough.

I'm not sure why a north-to-west facing curve was never built between
the Heathrow spur and the GWML, to allow trains from Reading, Oxford,
Bristol and south Wales to reach Heathrow - even if it involved a change
to a Reading-Heathrow shuttle.

There were proposals at one time to build a spur from the
Reading-Ascot-Waterloo line near Feltham to serve Heathrow from that
direction, but I don't know whether that is still on the cards.

It was never really on the cards, along with the extension of the
Slough-Windsor service to Heathrow and several other variants.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On Mon, 26 Nov 2018 10:30:16 +0000, Robin9
wrote:


'Basil Jet[_4_ Wrote:

No, it would require a short curve in the vicinity of Acton Wells
Junction. (Admittedly levels might be an issue.) The curve from Acton
Wells Junction to the southbound WLL is already there, crossing the
canal twice, and not currently used by any passenger trains.

--
Basil Jet .

In fact, all it requires is Old Oak to be bypassed altogether, and
Chiltern trains to be given paths on the GW main line between
West Ealing and Acton Yard.

Those paths don't exist post-Crossrail. It's why the Greenford shuttle
was cut back to the new bay platform at West Ealing.

Chiltern wants to use its existing direct, fast, otherwise unused
route to dedicated platform(s) at OOC, not take a slow, congested
route, with flat junctions, shared with other GWR Relief line and WLL
services to CLJ.

This would provide a way of not only connecting to Crossrail, HS2, the
GWR and the WLL, but increasing Chiltern services without overloading
Marylebone.

The route from Acton Yard to
Clapham Junction already exists and is a regular freight route.
No new loop would be needed.

In message , at
11:59:03 on Mon, 26 Nov 2018, NY remarked:
Yes. Various rail links to the west and southwest have been under
discussion for decades, and still are. The station under T5 awaits
the line
west, but construction still hasn't begun.

Crossrail will help a little, but it's not enough.

I'm not sure why a north-to-west facing curve was never built between
the Heathrow spur and the GWML, to allow trains from Reading, Oxford,
Bristol and south Wales to reach Heathrow - even if it involved a
change to a Reading-Heathrow shuttle.

There were proposals at one time to build a spur from the
Reading-Ascot-Waterloo line near Feltham to serve Heathrow from that
direction, but I don't know whether that is still on the cards.

Both such routes were hailed in BAA's annual report 1998, as well as HEx
to St Pancras in addition to PAD.

Is it any wonder I'm a bit of a caller-out of rail industry vapourware?
--
Roland Perry

Basil Jet wrote:
On 26/11/2018 02:09, Recliner wrote:
Basil Jet wrote:
On 25/11/2018 23:11, Recliner wrote:
Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sun, 25 Nov 2018 22:54:58 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

Basil Jet wrote:
On 25/11/2018 20:21, Roger Lynn wrote:
On 25/11/18 01:40, Basil Jet wrote:
On 25/11/2018 00:55, Recliner wrote:
However, I hope that Chiltern's request for a reopened line into the new
OOC Crossrail/HS2/GWR station comes to fruition, so it can run an hourly
service to it from Milton Keynes via Aylesbury.

It seems like a stupid place to terminate - I can't see many people
getting trains in from High Wycombe to change onto HS2 for Birmingham.
Crossrail is just a glorified tube line - although I suppose the other
Chiltern trains terminate at a station with only one tube line.

Connections to Heathrow and the GWML would be useful. At the moment
getting to Heathrow from Chiltern stations is a pain and it's easier and
faster to drive or get a coach.

I wasn't suggesting it shouldn't go to OOC - just that it should go on
to Clapham Junction afterwards, giving Chiltern stations a one change
journey to Gatwick and half the country.

I don't think there would be any route beyond OOC to the West London line.
The Crossrail depot is in the way.

Round the north side meeting the WLL on the south side of Willesden
Junction IIRC.

That would miss the OOC station altogether. It would have to cross the
canal and join the WLL on the north side.

No, it would require a short curve in the vicinity of Acton Wells
Junction. (Admittedly levels might be an issue.) The curve from Acton
Wells Junction to the southbound WLL is already there, crossing the
canal twice, and not currently used by any passenger trains.


The Richmond line crosses the former GWR line to Birmingham at right
angles, so there's no easy connection. And if you cut through the Boden
building and Waitrose to get a connection, you'd miss the more important
OOC station.


You massively overestimate the land needed for the curve. You only need
the car park of the Boden building for a curve the same radius as the
one in Bicester.


I rather think you *underestimate* the land required.

Comparing your proposed curve, the other curves in the Old Oak/Willesden
area, and the Bicester curve, I really don’t think it’ll fit where you want
it to.


Anna Noyd-Dryver

On 26/11/2018 15:25, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
Basil Jet wrote:
On 26/11/2018 02:09, Recliner wrote:

The Richmond line crosses the former GWR line to Birmingham at right
angles, so there's no easy connection. And if you cut through the Boden
building and Waitrose to get a connection, you'd miss the more important
OOC station.

You massively overestimate the land needed for the curve. You only need
the car park of the Boden building for a curve the same radius as the
one in Bicester.

I rather think you *underestimate* the land required.

Comparing your proposed curve, the other curves in the Old Oak/Willesden
area, and the Bicester curve, I really don’t think it’ll fit where you want
it to.

Have you measured it on the screen with a circular object? I have,
twice, at two different scales using two different circular objects.

Incidentally, GWR use the Paddington - Park Royal - Ealing - Paddington
for turning trains that have ended up the wrong way round. How will they
turn trains after the line is severed, or will the line be too busy to
even think about it?

--
Basil Jet - listening... St. Vincent. Star Park. Stealing Sheep. Stephen
Mallinder. Stereolab. Steve Harley & Cockney Rebel. Steve Mackay. Steve
Mason. Steve Reich. Steve Wynn. Stiff Little Fingers. Stonephace. Stump.
Sub Sub. Subway Sect. Suede. Sufjan Stevens. Sugar. Suicidal Tendencies.
Suicide. Sun City Girls & David Oliphant. Sun Ra. Sunday Painters.
Swans. Sweet Baboo. Swell Maps. Swing Out Sister. Swollen Monkeys. Syd
Barrett. Sylvan Esso.

Presumably, they'll simply change locomotives in Acton Yard.

Robin9 wrote:

'Basil Jet[_4_ Wrote:
Incidentally, GWR use the Paddington
- Park Royal - Ealing - Paddington for turning trains that have
ended up the wrong way round. How will they turn trains
after the line is severed, or will the line be too busy to
even think about it?

Basil Jet .

Presumably, they'll simply change locomotives in Acton Yard.

It's HSTs that sometimes need turning, and that won't be a problem given
that there are triangles at both ends of the Greenford branch.

On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 11:09:16 +0000
Robin9 wrote:
'Basil Jet[_4_ Wrote:
Incidentally, GWR use the Paddington
- Park Royal - Ealing - Paddington for turning trains that have
ended up the wrong way round. How will they turn trains
after the line is severed, or will the line be too busy to
even think about it?

Basil Jet .

Presumably, they'll simply change locomotives in Acton Yard.

On a related topic, I've often wondered why almost all US locomotives are
single ended. I realise the routes are long and the trains are usually topped
and tailed, but you'd think from a simple operational POV it would be simpler
to have a cab at both ends so you don't have to turn them or can only have them
leading in 1 direction.

In article ,
NY wrote:
I'm not sure why a north-to-west facing curve was never built between the
Heathrow spur and the GWML, to allow trains from Reading, Oxford, Bristol
and south Wales to reach Heathrow - even if it involved a change to a
Reading-Heathrow shuttle.

Because the line is at capacity from Newbury to Paddington.

So which services through Reading are you going to divert to
Heathrow? They have to be fast trains, otherwise it'll be quicker
to go to non-stop Paddington and change there.

What is the number of now inconvienced passengers (that wanted
Paddington and now have to change at Reading and stand if they can
squeeze on in the peak) v the number of passengers who have a better
journey?

Note that the service pattern from Reading - Heathrow needs to be
at least every 20 minutes to ensure that there are no passengers
who get a faster journey by travelling Reading - Paddington -
HEX, so you're going to have to divert a pretty large proportion
of the Reading to Paddington fasts; I'm not sure how many there
are, but losing 3tph would be very noticable.

--
Mike Bristow

On 28/11/2018 12:33, Mike Bristow wrote:
In article ,
NY wrote:
I'm not sure why a north-to-west facing curve was never built between the
Heathrow spur and the GWML, to allow trains from Reading, Oxford, Bristol
and south Wales to reach Heathrow - even if it involved a change to a
Reading-Heathrow shuttle.

Because the line is at capacity from Newbury to Paddington.

So which services through Reading are you going to divert to
Heathrow? They have to be fast trains, otherwise it'll be quicker
to go to non-stop Paddington and change there.


You missed the bit about a Reading - Heathrow shuttle.

One solution, given a west facing curve would be to run a limited stop
service Paddington - Heathrow - Reading and return on the current HE
frequencies.


--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.