On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 10:42:26 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote:

On 06/10/2020 10:06, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 16:17:07 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 12:09:41 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Robin9 wrote:

I watched this yesterday. Mr. Wild gave the impression that there
has been a slight set-back but nothing serious and consistent
progress was being made. No mention of the need for still more
money He now says that in early 2022 the line will be opened,
and possibly sooner. We'll see.



It's clear that he's shooting for public services (Abbey Wood to Padd low
level) in the core tunnels before the end of 2021. But through services
probably won't start till at least the second half of 2022.

Of course when they do start running the central core service timetable will
probably be completely buggered most days by problems on NR lines either end

just as happens on the ELL except much worse. It should have been kept as a
london only fast tube service on dedicated tracks.

To a large extent, it has separate tracks to GWR and GA services. The Abbey
Wood branch is XR-only, and most of the services on the Shenfield slow
lines will also be XR-only.

Still NR tracks though. Plus the longer a line is the greater the probability
of problems. Thats unavoidable for suburban and national services but for
something thats supposed to be a metro service taking some of the load off the
central and piccadilly lines its length IMO is going to be a problem.



Yes. Personally, I don't think Crossrail should go as far as Reading. I
think Slough was far enough.

Windsor IMO, assuming crossing the mainline is at all possible.

It's single track from Slough and a single platform, so capacity and
the ability to recover during disruption are poor.

In message , at 11:49:29 on
Tue, 6 Oct 2020, Trolleybus remarked:

Personally, I don't think Crossrail should go as far as Reading. I
think Slough was far enough.

Windsor IMO, assuming crossing the mainline is at all possible.

It's single track from Slough and a single platform, so capacity and
the ability to recover during disruption are poor.

If Crossrail is supposed to be for shifting commuters deep into the
core, rather than them being dumped at Paddington on legacy services,
then Reading is a sensible terminus. And don't forget the people
commuting *to* Reading from smaller stations on the GWR corridor.
--
Roland Perry

On 06/10/2020 11:49, Trolleybus wrote:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 10:42:26 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote:

On 06/10/2020 10:06, Recliner wrote:

Yes. Personally, I don't think Crossrail should go as far as Reading. I
think Slough was far enough.

Windsor IMO, assuming crossing the mainline is at all possible.

It's single track from Slough and a single platform, so capacity and
the ability to recover during disruption are poor.

I think the entire formation is double track. The station is massive and
used to have three platforms, although most of it is taken up with
restaurant seating areas at the moment which could be repurposed. I'm
surprised no-one mentioned that the line is not electrified and would
need to be. I don't think any of these are show stoppers, although
crossing the fast lines at Slough could be.

--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Miles Davis - 1967 - Miles Smiles

Basil Jet wrote:
On 06/10/2020 11:49, Trolleybus wrote:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 10:42:26 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote:

On 06/10/2020 10:06, Recliner wrote:

Yes. Personally, I don't think Crossrail should go as far as Reading. I
think Slough was far enough.

Windsor IMO, assuming crossing the mainline is at all possible.

It's single track from Slough and a single platform, so capacity and
the ability to recover during disruption are poor.

I think the entire formation is double track. The station is massive and
used to have three platforms, although most of it is taken up with
restaurant seating areas at the moment which could be repurposed. I'm
surprised no-one mentioned that the line is not electrified and would
need to be. I don't think any of these are show stoppers, although
crossing the fast lines at Slough could be.


It would need something like the Hitchin flyover in a built-up area to
cross the main lines: huge and expensive. There's no way that would have
been done, and for what reason? The cost of electrifying the Windsor
branch would be trivial by comparison.

On 06/10/2020 12:49, Recliner wrote:
Basil Jet wrote:
On 06/10/2020 11:49, Trolleybus wrote:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 10:42:26 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote:

On 06/10/2020 10:06, Recliner wrote:

Yes. Personally, I don't think Crossrail should go as far as Reading. I
think Slough was far enough.

Windsor IMO, assuming crossing the mainline is at all possible.

It's single track from Slough and a single platform, so capacity and
the ability to recover during disruption are poor.

I think the entire formation is double track. The station is massive and
used to have three platforms, although most of it is taken up with
restaurant seating areas at the moment which could be repurposed. I'm
surprised no-one mentioned that the line is not electrified and would
need to be. I don't think any of these are show stoppers, although
crossing the fast lines at Slough could be.


It would need something like the Hitchin flyover in a built-up area to
cross the main lines: huge and expensive. There's no way that would have
been done, and for what reason? The cost of electrifying the Windsor
branch would be trivial by comparison.

I believe there is cash value in having trains running through the
tourist parts of London with "Windsor" on the front.

--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Miles Davis - 1967 - Miles Smiles

In message , at 12:29:56 on Tue, 6 Oct 2020,
Basil Jet remarked:

Yes. Personally, I don't think Crossrail should go as far as Reading. I
think Slough was far enough.

Windsor IMO, assuming crossing the mainline is at all possible.

It's single track from Slough and a single platform, so capacity and
the ability to recover during disruption are poor.

I think the entire formation is double track.

erm: https://www.opentraintimes.com/maps/...ough#T_WINDSEC
--
Roland Perry

On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 12:29:56 +0100
Basil Jet wrote:
On 06/10/2020 11:49, Trolleybus wrote:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 10:42:26 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote:

On 06/10/2020 10:06, Recliner wrote:

Yes. Personally, I don't think Crossrail should go as far as Reading. I
think Slough was far enough.

Windsor IMO, assuming crossing the mainline is at all possible.

It's single track from Slough and a single platform, so capacity and
the ability to recover during disruption are poor.

I think the entire formation is double track. The station is massive and
used to have three platforms, although most of it is taken up with
restaurant seating areas at the moment which could be repurposed. I'm

I doubt Windsor town council will give up their major shopping centre
without a fight frankly. It probably should have been kept as a station but
its took late now. The current station is just a miserable single track halt.

Windsor low level station would make more sense wrt size but unfortunately its
3rd rail and linked to the wrong part of the network.

On 06/10/2020 14:29, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 12:29:56 on Tue, 6 Oct 2020,
Basil Jet remarked:

Yes. Personally, I don't think Crossrail should go as far as
Reading. I
think Slough was far enough.

Windsor IMO, assuming crossing the mainline is at all possible.

Â*It's single track from Slough and a single platform, so capacity and
the ability to recover during disruption are poor.

I think the entire formation is double track.

erm: https://www.opentraintimes.com/maps/...ough#T_WINDSEC

Obviously the track is single, but the formation is double,
because the disused land and wide bridges are still there.

--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Miles Davis - 1967 - Miles Smiles

On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 12:14:46 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:

In message , at 11:49:29 on
Tue, 6 Oct 2020, Trolleybus remarked:

Personally, I don't think Crossrail should go as far as Reading. I
think Slough was far enough.

Windsor IMO, assuming crossing the mainline is at all possible.

It's single track from Slough and a single platform, so capacity and
the ability to recover during disruption are poor.

If Crossrail is supposed to be for shifting commuters deep into the
core, rather than them being dumped at Paddington on legacy services,
then Reading is a sensible terminus. And don't forget the people
commuting *to* Reading from smaller stations on the GWR corridor.

But conveying commuters from stations in Berkshire to Reading isn't TfL's job. As Neil says, Crossrail should be
focusing on travel in the Greater London area.

On 06/10/2020 14:45, Recliner wrote:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 12:14:46 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:

In message , at 11:49:29 on
Tue, 6 Oct 2020, Trolleybus remarked:

Personally, I don't think Crossrail should go as far as Reading. I
think Slough was far enough.

Windsor IMO, assuming crossing the mainline is at all possible.

It's single track from Slough and a single platform, so capacity and
the ability to recover during disruption are poor.

If Crossrail is supposed to be for shifting commuters deep into the
core, rather than them being dumped at Paddington on legacy services,
then Reading is a sensible terminus. And don't forget the people
commuting *to* Reading from smaller stations on the GWR corridor.

But conveying commuters from stations in Berkshire to Reading isn't TfL's job. As Neil says, Crossrail should be
focusing on travel in the Greater London area.


That's just a useful bonus.

Problem is that with Crossrail taking up the paths from Slough inwards,
what about people travelling from stations between Reading and Slough?
Is there any logic in having two services operating back to back and
making people change when one train could work through?

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.