"Dan G" wrote

I live in Reading and I don't want Crossrail to come here. Why?
Because Crossrail will be a stopper service. I want to catch an HST to
Paddington, overtaking the slow Crossrail trains past Maidenhead, and
then change for the ride into central London (or beyond). Taking it
all the way to Reading would increase the already sky-high cost and
take away capacity for other, more useful, trains for Reading.

If Crossrail is extended to Reading the Main (Fast) Lines will still be
available for 125 mph trains running non-stop (or possibly calling at
Slough) between Paddington and Reading. But if it terminates at Maidenhead
how are London to Twyford/Henley passengers to be catered for, or passengers
travelling to Reading from intermediate stations? Will there be a
Paddington - Reading stopping service sandwiched between Crossrail trains
(using capacity which really ought to be kept for freight)? Or will
passengers have to use Crossrail, and change at Slough or Maidenhead for a
shuttle service? Or will Main Line capacity be used up with 90 mph trains
calling at Slough, Maidenhead and Twyford (perhaps crossing to the Relief
Lines at Dolphin, Maidenhead East or Ruscombe once the Crossrail service has
thinned out - and the crossing move eats capacity)?

While Crossrail can be justified as a stopping service within Greater
London, as Acton Main Line and Hanwell would undoubtedly get much more use
if they had a decent service) stopping all Maidenhead trains at Iver and
Taplow is daft, as in population terms these two stations at least are in
the middle of nowhere.

The argument that saddling Crossrail with the cost of rebuilding and
resignalling Reading would make Crossrail unaffordable is sound, but the
argument that even if these necessary improvements are funded separately, as
they will be, Crossrail still can't go there is weak. However, it has to be
realised that although Reading is only two stations further than Maidenhead
it is actually half as far again as Paddington to Maidenhead.

Peter

On 14 Dec, 18:33, Rupert Candy wrote:
On Dec 14, 5:51 pm, lonelytraveller

wrote:
I don't see why they should be allowed to pull down things like the
buildings on Cowcross Street and replace them with some huge office
block or glassy steel windowed box; they should be forced to rebuild
it all, like at the forecourt of St. Pancras, or at least to rebuild
it according to the new design if its too expensive to reuse the same
bricks etc.

Why? Should all new trains be built to look like the Rocket?

That would be nice.

In message
,
lonelytraveller writes
On 14 Dec, 18:33, Rupert Candy wrote:
On Dec 14, 5:51 pm, lonelytraveller

wrote:
I don't see why they should be allowed to pull down things like the
buildings on Cowcross Street and replace them with some huge office
block or glassy steel windowed box; they should be forced to rebuild
it all, like at the forecourt of St. Pancras, or at least to rebuild
it according to the new design if its too expensive to reuse the same
bricks etc.

Why? Should all new trains be built to look like the Rocket?

That would be nice.

No it wouldn't. The Rocket was a locomotive, so it couldn't carry many
passengers if any, and it could be very unpleasant travelling on it at
this time of year.

As far as I am concerned it would be nice if all new trains were built
with more seat width (there are an awful lot of fatties commuting into
London these days) and more leg room.
--
Jane
British OO, American and Australian HO, and DCC in the garden
http://www.yddraiggoch.demon.co.uk/railway/railway.html

On Fri, 14 Dec 2007, Peter Masson wrote:

"Dan G" wrote

I live in Reading and I don't want Crossrail to come here. Why? Because
Crossrail will be a stopper service. I want to catch an HST to
Paddington, overtaking the slow Crossrail trains past Maidenhead, and
then change for the ride into central London (or beyond). Taking it all
the way to Reading would increase the already sky-high cost and take
away capacity for other, more useful, trains for Reading.

If Crossrail is extended to Reading the Main (Fast) Lines will still be
available for 125 mph trains running non-stop (or possibly calling at
Slough) between Paddington and Reading. But if it terminates at
Maidenhead how are London to Twyford/Henley passengers

Hey, don't forget Marlow!

to be catered for, or passengers travelling to Reading from intermediate
stations? Will there be a Paddington - Reading stopping service
sandwiched between Crossrail trains (using capacity which really ought
to be kept for freight)? Or will passengers have to use Crossrail, and
change at Slough or Maidenhead for a shuttle service? Or will Main Line
capacity be used up with 90 mph trains calling at Slough, Maidenhead and
Twyford (perhaps crossing to the Relief Lines at Dolphin, Maidenhead
East or Ruscombe once the Crossrail service has thinned out - and the
crossing move eats capacity)?

Yes.

I suspect that demand for trips between Twyford and London, and between
Reading and stations on the way to London, is very small compared to the
demand further in along the line. Even if Crossrail could run to Reading,
i really doubt that the demand would justify more than a few tph. Doing
all the electrification work etc just for that seems daft. Might as well
interleave a few non-Crossrail Reading stoppers. Or couple a diesel loco
onto a few Crossrail trains at Maidenhead!

Actually, i'm skeptical about the value of extending beyond Slough,
really. Maidenhead has lots of demand, but would be better served by
stopping some fast trains, allowing Crossrail to focus on London.

Here are some passenger numbers (from Wikipedia, 2004/5 figures, millions
of entries and exits per year) for public amusement:

Reading 13.297
Twyford 1.083
Maidenhead 3.272
Taplow 0.149
Burnham 0.822
Slough 4.448
Langley 0.482
Iver 0.111
West Drayton 0.742
Hayes & H'ton 1.229
Southall 0.865
Hanwell 0.154
West Ealing 0.384
Ealing Broadway 6.307
Acton Main Line 0.115

I'm surprised how low some of the London ones are. I imagine this is due
to competition from the tube, which will change post-Crossrail. Will be
interesting to see.

While Crossrail can be justified as a stopping service within Greater
London, as Acton Main Line and Hanwell would undoubtedly get much more
use if they had a decent service) stopping all Maidenhead trains at Iver
and Taplow is daft, as in population terms these two stations at least
are in the middle of nowhere.

Where does Iver stand with respect to the Green Belt? Seems like somewhere
that's ideal for plonking down some of these hundreds of thousands of
houses we need. Ditto Taplow, i suppose.

tom

--
The most successful people are those who are good at plan B. --
James Yorke

On 15 Dec, 13:24, Jane Sullivan wrote:

(snip)

As far as I am concerned it would be nice if all new trains were built
with more seat width (there are an awful lot of fatties commuting into
London these days) and more leg room.
--
Jane


Why not approach that problem from the other end?

"Tom Anderson" wrote

Reading 13.297
Twyford 1.083
Maidenhead 3.272
Taplow 0.149
Burnham 0.822
Slough 4.448
Langley 0.482
Iver 0.111
West Drayton 0.742
Hayes & H'ton 1.229
Southall 0.865
Hanwell 0.154
West Ealing 0.384
Ealing Broadway 6.307
Acton Main Line 0.115

i.e. Twyford is busier than all intermediate stations except Maidenhead,
Slough, Hayes & H, and Ealing Bdy. That seems to be before counting
passengers transferring from the Henley branch.

While Crossrail's current position is that it will run an entirely stopping
service, I think there is a case for a mixture of semi-fast and stopping
trains, at least west of West Drayton and possibly east of Stratford.

Peter

On 15 Dec, 14:49, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"Tom Anderson" wrote



Reading 13.297
Twyford 1.083
Maidenhead 3.272
Taplow 0.149
Burnham 0.822
Slough 4.448
Langley 0.482
Iver 0.111
West Drayton 0.742
Hayes & H'ton 1.229
Southall 0.865
Hanwell 0.154
West Ealing 0.384
Ealing Broadway 6.307
Acton Main Line 0.115

i.e. Twyford is busier than all intermediate stations except Maidenhead,
Slough, Hayes & H, and Ealing Bdy. That seems to be before counting
passengers transferring from the Henley branch.

While Crossrail's current position is that it will run an entirely stopping
service, I think there is a case for a mixture of semi-fast and stopping
trains, at least west of West Drayton and possibly east of Stratford.

Peter

A-la Thameslink's current patterns?

On 15 Dec, 13:24, Jane Sullivan wrote:
In message
,
lonelytraveller writes

On 14 Dec, 18:33, Rupert Candy wrote:
On Dec 14, 5:51 pm, lonelytraveller

wrote:
I don't see why they should be allowed to pull down things like the
buildings on Cowcross Street and replace them with some huge office
block or glassy steel windowed box; they should be forced to rebuild
it all, like at the forecourt of St. Pancras, or at least to rebuild
it according to the new design if its too expensive to reuse the same
bricks etc.

Why? Should all new trains be built to look like the Rocket?

That would be nice.

No it wouldn't. The Rocket was a locomotive, so it couldn't carry many
passengers if any, and it could be very unpleasant travelling on it at
this time of year.
You wrote "built to look like" not "built to function like". It could
easily look like the Rocket but function like a modern locomotive. And
it would therefore be nice.

Tom Anderson wrote:

Where does Iver stand with respect to the Green Belt?

Therein.

On Sat, 15 Dec 2007, John Rowland wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:

Where does Iver stand with respect to the Green Belt?

Therein.

Curses.

tom

--
The major advances in civilization are processes that all but wreck the
societies in which they occur. -- Alfred North Whitehead