In message i
Tom Anderson wrote:

[snip]

Point taken, though, Twyford is a far more important station than i'd
realised.


It taps into a lot of traffic from the Wokingham area which would otherwise
have to take the slow service to Waterloo.

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

On Sun, 16 Dec 2007, Graeme Wall wrote:

In message i
Tom Anderson wrote:

Point taken, though, Twyford is a far more important station than i'd
realised.

It taps into a lot of traffic from the Wokingham area which would
otherwise have to take the slow service to Waterloo.

Ah, i see.

Hmm. It looks like a train from Wokingham to Waterloo takes 68 minutes; a
train from Twyford to Paddington which stops at Maidenhead only takes 32,
and one which stops at eight stations on the way takes 50 minutes.
Crossrail would presumably be more like 50 minutes. Would people use it
instead of the fast train? Would they even use it in place of the
Wokingham train? If not, the value of Crossrail at Twyford is maybe less
than the passenger numbers indicate. I suppose you have to factor in the
value of having a single-seat ride all the way into town against those
time differences.

tom

--
Well, I'm making a list too. But I'm also preparing appropriate
retribution. -- Graham

In message i
Tom Anderson wrote:

On Sun, 16 Dec 2007, Graeme Wall wrote:

In message i
Tom Anderson wrote:

Point taken, though, Twyford is a far more important station than i'd
realised.

It taps into a lot of traffic from the Wokingham area which would
otherwise have to take the slow service to Waterloo.

Ah, i see.

Hmm. It looks like a train from Wokingham to Waterloo takes 68 minutes; a
train from Twyford to Paddington which stops at Maidenhead only takes 32,
and one which stops at eight stations on the way takes 50 minutes.
Crossrail would presumably be more like 50 minutes.

I would hope an electrified service would do better than that.

Would people use it instead of the fast train? Would they even use it in
place of the Wokingham train?

It's still around 20 minutes quicker and Twyford station is easier to access
than Wokingham. IIRC the car park at the latter takes about a dozen cars.

If not, the value of Crossrail at Twyford is maybe less than the passenger
numbers indicate. I suppose you have to factor in the value of having a
single-seat ride all the way into town against those time differences.


Total journey time should be a lot less, especially for those working in the
City.



--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...
In message i
Tom Anderson wrote:
....
Would people use it instead of the fast train? Would they even use it in
place of the Wokingham train?

It's still around 20 minutes quicker and Twyford station is easier to
access
than Wokingham. IIRC the car park at the latter takes about a dozen cars.

268 according to http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/statio...ml#Interchange
--
David Biddulph

In message
"David Biddulph" groups [at] biddulph.org.uk wrote:

"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
...
In message i
Tom Anderson wrote:
...
Would people use it instead of the fast train? Would they even use it
in place of the Wokingham train?

It's still around 20 minutes quicker and Twyford station is easier to
access than Wokingham. IIRC the car park at the latter takes about a
dozen cars.

268 according to
http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/statio...ml#Interchange

Where on earth do they put them all? It's a fairly constricted site :-)
Mind you it's around 20 years since I last ventured to that part of town.

quick shufti on Google Earth Ah, I see, they've extended the carpark
northwards, that area was going to be light industrial units at one time.

Interesting to see they have 80 cycle spaces, I wonder how well they are
used.

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

On Mon, 17 Dec 2007, Graeme Wall wrote:

In message i
Tom Anderson wrote:

On Sun, 16 Dec 2007, Graeme Wall wrote:

In message i
Tom Anderson wrote:

Point taken, though, Twyford is a far more important station than i'd
realised.

It taps into a lot of traffic from the Wokingham area which would
otherwise have to take the slow service to Waterloo.

Ah, i see.

Hmm. It looks like a train from Wokingham to Waterloo takes 68 minutes; a
train from Twyford to Paddington which stops at Maidenhead only takes 32,
and one which stops at eight stations on the way takes 50 minutes.
Crossrail would presumably be more like 50 minutes.

I would hope an electrified service would do better than that.

How much difference does it make? And why? This is something that's always
puzzled me, actually - why are electric trains so much preferred to
diesels? Do they accelerate faster? I assume it's not a question of top
speed.

Would people use it instead of the fast train? Would they even use it in
place of the Wokingham train?

It's still around 20 minutes quicker and Twyford station is easier to
access than Wokingham.

Depends where you live - there seem to be a lot more houses near Wokingham
than Twyford, meaning most people in that area (if i've understood the
area you were referring to right) would be looking at a longer drive (or
even a drive rather than a walk) to get to Twyford. That offsets some of
the train's advantage.

tom

--
never mind your fingers, i've got blisters on my brain

In message i
Tom Anderson wrote:

On Mon, 17 Dec 2007, Graeme Wall wrote:

In message i
Tom Anderson wrote:

On Sun, 16 Dec 2007, Graeme Wall wrote:

In message i
Tom Anderson wrote:

Point taken, though, Twyford is a far more important station than
i'd realised.

It taps into a lot of traffic from the Wokingham area which would
otherwise have to take the slow service to Waterloo.

Ah, i see.

Hmm. It looks like a train from Wokingham to Waterloo takes 68 minutes;
a train from Twyford to Paddington which stops at Maidenhead only takes
32, and one which stops at eight stations on the way takes 50 minutes.
Crossrail would presumably be more like 50 minutes.

I would hope an electrified service would do better than that.

How much difference does it make? And why? This is something that's always
puzzled me, actually - why are electric trains so much preferred to
diesels? Do they accelerate faster?

Generally yes.

Would people use it instead of the fast train? Would they even use it
in place of the Wokingham train?

It's still around 20 minutes quicker and Twyford station is easier to
access than Wokingham.

Depends where you live - there seem to be a lot more houses near Wokingham
than Twyford, meaning most people in that area (if i've understood the
area you were referring to right) would be looking at a longer drive (or
even a drive rather than a walk) to get to Twyford. That offsets some of
the train's advantage.


As you say, depends where you live. I'm not just referring to Wokingham
itself, there's a large area know as Wokingham Without - 'ere, stop tittering
missus!

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

In article ,
(Tom Anderson) wrote:

I would hope an electrified service would do better than that.

How much difference does it make? And why? This is something that's
always puzzled me, actually - why are electric trains so much
preferred to diesels? Do they accelerate faster? I assume it's not
a question of top speed.

Quite a bit. Not having to carry diesel engines and their transmissions
around makes quite a difference to weight and therefore power required
for acceleration.

Also, they have a significantly longer life expectancy and maintenance
cost without diesel engines trying to shake them to bits all the time.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

How much difference does it make? And why? This is something that's always
puzzled me, actually - why are electric trains so much preferred to
diesels? Do they accelerate faster?

yes

In uk.railway Tom Anderson wrote:
How much difference does it make? And why? This is something that's always
puzzled me, actually - why are electric trains so much preferred to
diesels? Do they accelerate faster? I assume it's not a question of top
speed.

Firstly they can draw more peak power when accelerating as components can be
worked harder for shorter periods - with a diesel the power you've got is
the power you've got. Secondly you don't have to cart around a big heavy
engine and a tank of fuel all the time, so you can accelerate faster as your
train is (in theory) lighter. You can oversize the engine to get more
accelerating power (see Voyagers) but it'll be bigger and heavier (and more
expensive, and more track-damaging) so you don't win quite as much.

Theo