Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hi folks,
Nobody appears to have picked up on this Press Release on the DfT site that was posted on Friday: -----8-----Start of quoted text-----8----- 056 01 May 2009 NEW CROSSRAIL ROUTE SAFEGUARDED The Government today safeguarded a potential Crossrail route from Maidenhead to Reading. Whilst there is no current commitment to extend Crossrail out to Reading, safeguarding provides additional protection against future developments on the route. Transport Minister Andrew Adonis said: “Our current priority is to get on with the delivery of the Crossrail Project as it is currently planned, but safeguarding would provide additional protection against developments impacting on future operational requirements. "Safeguarding will also allow the line to be electrified in the future and for Crossrail to be extended if a case can be made to do so.” Notes for editors 1.The Department for Transport (DfT) has issued Safeguarding Directions to protect a potential extension of Crossrail from Maidenhead Station to Reading West Junction. This follows a consultation on the draft Directions which closed on 25 July 2008. 2.The aim is to ensure that developments along this rail corridor do not impact on the ability to extend Crossrail in the future. Crossrail Ltd (CRL), a wholly owned subsidiary of TfL, has responsibility for delivering the Crossrail scheme and is responsible for safeguarding this corridor. 3.The Safeguarding Direction has been issued to Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) by the Secretary of State. The LPAs are required to consult CRL when determining planning applications for land within the limits shown on the safeguarding plans attached to the direction. 4.The Crossrail project currently terminates at Maidenhead. No decision or commitment to extend it further west to Reading has been made. However, DfT believes it sensible to safeguard this corridor for a potential extension of Crossrail to Reading. Safeguarding will also allow us to carry out alternative works, such as electrification, that could enable future operational requirements to be met. 5.Crossrail will run 118 km from Maidenhead and Heathrow in the west, through new twin-bore 21 km tunnels under central London to Shenfield and Abbey Wood in the east. It will bring an additional 1.5 million people within 60 minutes commuting distance of London's key business districts. When Crossrail opens in 2017 it will increase London's public transport network capacity by 10 per cent, supporting regeneration across the capital, helping to secure London's position as a world leading financial centre, and cutting journey times across the city. Preparatory works will continue throughout 2009 and main Crossrail construction starts in 2010. Public Enquiries: 020 7944 8300 Department for Transport Website: http://www.dft.gov.uk -----8-----End of quoted text-----8----- Original URL: http://nds.coi.gov.uk/environment/fullDetail.asp?ReleaseID=400344&NewsAreaID=2 Cheers, Barry |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() On May 5, 4:05*pm, Barry Salter wrote: Hi folks, Nobody appears to have picked up on this Press Release on the DfT site that was posted on Friday: -----8-----Start of quoted text-----8----- 056 * * 01 May 2009 NEW CROSSRAIL ROUTE SAFEGUARDED The Government today safeguarded a potential Crossrail route from Maidenhead to Reading. Whilst there is no current commitment to extend Crossrail out to Reading, safeguarding provides additional protection against future developments on the route. Transport Minister Andrew Adonis said: “Our current priority is to get on with the delivery of the Crossrail Project as it is currently planned, but safeguarding would provide additional protection against developments impacting on future operational requirements. "Safeguarding will also allow the line to be electrified in the future and for Crossrail to be extended if a case can be made to do so.” [Notes for editors snipped] -----8-----End of quoted text-----8----- Original URL: http://nds.coi.gov.uk/environment/fullDetail.asp?ReleaseID=400344&New.... It's only safeguarding of course, which doesn't mean it's actually going to happen, just that if it ever does it'll be a bit easier. There have been plenty of comments on these newsgroups in the past that getting Crossrail to Reading might not be all that it's cracked up to be in certain quarters, what with a Crossrail train from Reading into central London being slower that a fast non-stop service to Paddington (where interchange with Crossrail would of course be available). I don't hold any particularly strong opinions on this issue (not that my opinions on such things really matter!), but I'd be interested if anyone could explain why extending Crossrail to Reading is widely held to be so important. |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On May 5, 4:28*pm, Mizter T wrote:
On May 5, 4:05*pm, Barry Salter wrote: Hi folks, Nobody appears to have picked up on this Press Release on the DfT site that was posted on Friday: -----8-----Start of quoted text-----8----- 056 * * 01 May 2009 NEW CROSSRAIL ROUTE SAFEGUARDED The Government today safeguarded a potential Crossrail route from Maidenhead to Reading. Whilst there is no current commitment to extend Crossrail out to Reading, safeguarding provides additional protection against future developments on the route. Transport Minister Andrew Adonis said: “Our current priority is to get on with the delivery of the Crossrail Project as it is currently planned, but safeguarding would provide additional protection against developments impacting on future operational requirements. "Safeguarding will also allow the line to be electrified in the future and for Crossrail to be extended if a case can be made to do so.” [Notes for editors snipped] -----8-----End of quoted text-----8----- Original URL: http://nds.coi.gov.uk/environment/fullDetail.asp?ReleaseID=400344&New... It's only safeguarding of course, which doesn't mean it's actually going to happen, just that if it ever does it'll be a bit easier. There have been plenty of comments on these newsgroups in the past that getting Crossrail to Reading might not be all that it's cracked up to be in certain quarters, what with a Crossrail train from Reading into central London being slower that a fast non-stop service to Paddington (where interchange with Crossrail would of course be available). I don't hold any particularly strong opinions on this issue (not that my opinions on such things really matter!), but I'd be interested if anyone could explain why extending Crossrail to Reading is widely held to be so important. Given the ELLX experience, I wonder if there might yet be a tradeoff so that the service for people heading to Reading from intermediate stations is dramatically cut, and existing stopping serices merely replaced by Crossrail between Maidenhead and Paddington. |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Barry Salter wrote:
Hi folks, Nobody appears to have picked up on this Press Release on the DfT site that was posted on Friday: -----8-----Start of quoted text-----8----- 056 01 May 2009 NEW CROSSRAIL ROUTE SAFEGUARDED The Government today safeguarded a potential Crossrail route from Maidenhead to Reading. Someone had suggest that new stabling facilities at Reading were designed to cope with Crossrail stock. Have they 'safeguarded' the other end to Gravesend as well, or are they just 'consulting' on that. For that would you need dual voltage stock as for Thameslink? Jim Chisholm |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "J. Chisholm" wrote Have they 'safeguarded' the other end to Gravesend as well, or are they just 'consulting' on that. For that would you need dual voltage stock as for Thameslink? Yes, and yes (confirmed in the Knt draft RUS). Peter |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mizter T wrote:
On May 5, 4:05 pm, Barry Salter wrote: NEW CROSSRAIL ROUTE SAFEGUARDED It's only safeguarding of course, which doesn't mean it's actually going to happen, just that if it ever does it'll be a bit easier. There have been plenty of comments on these newsgroups in the past that getting Crossrail to Reading might not be all that it's cracked up to be in certain quarters, what with a Crossrail train from Reading into central London being slower that a fast non-stop service to Paddington (where interchange with Crossrail would of course be available). I don't hold any particularly strong opinions on this issue (not that my opinions on such things really matter!), but I'd be interested if anyone could explain why extending Crossrail to Reading is widely held to be so important. I'm one of those that doesn't think Reading will be that useful a Crossrail terminus IF all the proposed Crossrail services remain as all station stoppers. However, if there is a way of having a Crossrail fast service - perhaps as far as Ealing for instance it could be a useful way of freeing up capacity on longer distance services. However there is a similar debate about whether or not it should be Heathrow Express or Connect that runs through onto Crossrail - it seems to hinge on the lack of capacity and conflicting moves required on the crossovers from main to relief running lines? What I suspect is more significant [than the safeguarding] is that NR are to run Crossrail [their wider network changes] and Reading remodelling as a combined project under one manager... Paul S |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() On May 5, 4:32*pm, MIG wrote: On May 5, 4:28*pm, Mizter T wrote: [snip news of Crossrail to Reading safeguarding measures] It's only safeguarding of course, which doesn't mean it's actually going to happen, just that if it ever does it'll be a bit easier. There have been plenty of comments on these newsgroups in the past that getting Crossrail to Reading might not be all that it's cracked up to be in certain quarters, what with a Crossrail train from Reading into central London being slower that a fast non-stop service to Paddington (where interchange with Crossrail would of course be available). I don't hold any particularly strong opinions on this issue (not that my opinions on such things really matter!), but I'd be interested if anyone could explain why extending Crossrail to Reading is widely held to be so important. Given the ELLX experience, I wonder if there might yet be a tradeoff so that the service for people heading to Reading from intermediate stations is dramatically cut, and existing stopping services merely replaced by Crossrail between Maidenhead and Paddington. If Crossrail ever got to Reading, I'd fully expect it to take over most if not all of the existing stopping services - indeed that would only make sense, would it not? In fact surely a large part of the argument for Crossrail going as far as Reading is that of operational convenience - Crossrail would simply take over the existing FGW Reading to Paddington stoppers. Indeed if this weren't to happen then you'd have to deal with the issue of how Crossrail trains that terminate at Maidenhead mesh with stopping services from Paddington to Reading, when simply combining the two services would be logical (or at least appears to be so). This wouldn't leave passengers any worse off either. Readers paying any attention will see a volte face from my original comments, which is the unfortunate side-effect of using usenet for the purposes of thinking aloud! I'm afraid I've never paid that much attention to the Crossrail to Reading issue (and it shows!). |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 5 May, 17:01, Mizter T wrote:
On May 5, 4:32*pm, MIG wrote: On May 5, 4:28*pm, Mizter T wrote: [snip news of Crossrail to Reading safeguarding measures] It's only safeguarding of course, which doesn't mean it's actually going to happen, just that if it ever does it'll be a bit easier. There have been plenty of comments on these newsgroups in the past that getting Crossrail to Reading might not be all that it's cracked up to be in certain quarters, what with a Crossrail train from Reading into central London being slower that a fast non-stop service to Paddington (where interchange with Crossrail would of course be available). I don't hold any particularly strong opinions on this issue (not that my opinions on such things really matter!), but I'd be interested if anyone could explain why extending Crossrail to Reading is widely held to be so important. Given the ELLX experience, I wonder if there might yet be a tradeoff so that the service for people heading to Reading from intermediate stations is dramatically cut, and existing stopping services merely replaced by Crossrail between Maidenhead and Paddington. If Crossrail ever got to Reading, I'd fully expect it to take over most if not all of the existing stopping services - indeed that would only make sense, would it not? In fact surely a large part of the argument for Crossrail going as far as Reading is that of operational convenience - Crossrail would simply take over the existing FGW Reading to Paddington stoppers. Indeed if this weren't to happen then you'd have to deal with the issue of how Crossrail trains that terminate at Maidenhead mesh with stopping services from Paddington to Reading, when simply combining the two services would be logical (or at least appears to be so). This wouldn't leave passengers any worse off either. Readers paying any attention will see a volte face from my original comments, which is the unfortunate side-effect of using usenet for the purposes of thinking aloud! I'm afraid I've never paid that much attention to the Crossrail to Reading issue (and it shows!). Unfortunately even if they extend crossrail to Reading it still can't replace all the stopping services because there are 2 stopping services an hour from Oxford which call at many of the intermediate stations. So then you would either have to electrify the line to Oxford (ooh, look a flying pig) or more realistically terminate slow Oxford services at Reading and inconvenience passengers from intermediate stations between Reading and Oxford. Of course there is the option of running the Oxford slow services under the wires on the slows but this would take up valuable crossrail paths and of course result in more diesels under wires which is a waste of fuel. And no, I'm not even going to suggest that putting a loco on and off at reading is a viable idea, because it's not going to happen. Maybe in the short term they will continue to run under the wires until more of the Great Western Mainline and branches are electrified and then they can remove that anomaly. Talking of branches there would still be the outstanding issue of Henley trains which would almost certainly run under the wires in the peaks on the slows anyway, because that branch will * never* be electrified. |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Paul Scott wrote on 05 May 2009
16:56:45 ... I'm one of those that doesn't think Reading will be that useful a Crossrail terminus IF all the proposed Crossrail services remain as all station stoppers. However, if there is a way of having a Crossrail fast service - perhaps as far as Ealing for instance it could be a useful way of freeing up capacity on longer distance services. However there is a similar debate about whether or not it should be Heathrow Express or Connect that runs through onto Crossrail - it seems to hinge on the lack of capacity and conflicting moves required on the crossovers from main to relief running lines? Is there such a debate? Crossrail have been saying for years that Crossrail would replace Connect and that HEx would continue to run. They've planned the changes to Airport Junction to achieve this. However, it wouldn't surprise me if a debate had been re-opened. The Crossrail maps show every station on the line except at Heathrow, where it just shows "Heathrow Airport". If it replaces Connect, that will mean Crossrail running to T123 and T4, and not serving the main BA terminal at T5, which never looked like a plan that would survive unscathed. -- Richard J. (to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address) |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Richard J. wrote:
Paul Scott wrote on 05 May 2009 16:56:45 ... However there is a similar debate about whether or not it should be Heathrow Express or Connect that runs through onto Crossrail - it seems to hinge on the lack of capacity and conflicting moves required on the crossovers from main to relief running lines? Is there such a debate? Crossrail have been saying for years that Crossrail would replace Connect and that HEx would continue to run. They've planned the changes to Airport Junction to achieve this. However, it wouldn't surprise me if a debate had been re-opened. Not an official debate. But a remarkable number of contributors here are convinced that HEx cannot continue as is with Crossrail. However my own understanding is the same as yours, ie I've read the Crossrail rationale... Paul S |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Just begging for a graffitier with a sense of humour | London Transport | |||
Last unpainted D Stock (last "silver" Underground train) | London Transport | |||
Liverpool Street Blockade - What can be seen? | London Transport | |||
[OT] Mysteries seen from the air | London Transport | |||
Just Seen bendibus now on 73 | London Transport |