Elizabeth Line / Crossrail Updates.

[St. Simon]

5 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

What are the Christmas/New Year possessions for Simon - any idea?

 

Hi Mike,

 

Don't know exactly, I only know generally the plans for electrification, I haven't quite tabs on the bits around London, although I think there is an S&C Renewal at Southall.

 

Simon

[jim.snowdon]

11 hours ago, St. Simon said:

 

Hi Mike,

 

Don't know exactly, I only know generally the plans for electrification, I haven't quite tabs on the bits around London, although I think there is an S&C Renewal at Southall.

 

Simon

It doesn't seem very long ago that they had a complete blockade to renew S&C at Southall.

 

Jim

[The Stationmaster]

3 hours ago, jim.snowdon said:

It doesn't seem very long ago that they had a complete blockade to renew S&C at Southall.

 

Jim

There's quite a lot of S&C in the vicinity of Southall (as you know of course) so it might be another area.  Important in my view to get down to replacing the remaining stretches of headspan ohle as originally promised.

[St. Simon]

7 hours ago, jim.snowdon said:

It doesn't seem very long ago that they had a complete blockade to renew S&C at Southall.

 

Jim

 

3 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

There's quite a lot of S&C in the vicinity of Southall (as you know of course) so it might be another area.  Important in my view to get down to replacing the remaining stretches of headspan ohle as originally promised.

 

Hi,

 

They did an S&C Renewal at Southall East Junction a couple of Christmas' back, but this Christmas it is time for Southall West Junction.

 

Simon

Edited August 28, 2019 by St. Simon

[Ron Ron Ron]

 

[ess1uk]

On 25/08/2019 at 20:01, Shed said:

When does this happen?

Once the GSMR is ready 

[St. Simon]

5 minutes ago, ess1uk said:

Once the GSMR is ready 

 

The GSMR has been in and working for a few years now.

 

Simon

[ess1uk]

1 minute ago, St. Simon said:

 

The GSMR has been in and working for a few years now.

 

Simon

But it’s not Ertms ready yet

[iands]

9 hours ago, ess1uk said:

But it’s not Ertms ready yet

Technically speaking, it's the "packet switching" element to support ETCS that is not ready yet. GSM-R as a system has been up and running for 10 years now but on its own cannot support ETCS to the required data speeds - GSM-R is only "circuit switching" capable, which is too slow data-wise for ETCS.

[ess1uk]

Swapping the 8000 series BTS to 9000 series to help with this

3 minutes ago, iands said:

Technically speaking, it's the "packet switching" element to support ETCS that is not ready yet. GSM-R as a system has been up and running for 10 years now but on its own cannot support ETCS to the required data speeds - GSM-R is only "circuit switching" capable, which is too slow data-wise for ETCS.

 

[ess1uk]

Acton dive under stinks!

pools of water and pond weed do not make for a safe cess .

just sayin

[The Stationmaster]

3 hours ago, ess1uk said:

Acton dive under stinks!

pools of water and pond weed do not make for a safe cess .

just sayin

Oh dear.  Sounds as if somebody overlooked how drains should work?

[lmsforever]

Wonder just when this project will open and when management will learn to build a railway.

[Platform 1]

Couple of interesting items on IanVisits last week:

 

https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/2019/09/17/take-a-look-at-the-crossrail-station-under-bond-street/

 

https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/2019/09/18/crossrail-on-target-but-warns-of-risks/

 

An interesting reply too to one of the comments: "No one would ever go from Shenfield to Reading on the Elizabeth line as there are considerably faster alternatives. The Lizzy line is a stopping commuter service, not an “intercity” style service.".  Makes me wonder why it goes out that far...

 

[The Stationmaster]

2 hours ago, lmsforever said:

Wonder just when this project will open and when management will learn to build a railway.

As we are to be lumbered with it between Paddington & Reading from December - hacking some local journey times to pieces in the process - I personally don't care if it never opens.  Regrettably I think it's a reasonable bet that to avoid embarrassment, if nothing else, the central section (or some of it) will probably open sometime in 2021 which will at least probably be to the relief of travellers on the central line 

[The Stationmaster]

3 minutes ago, Platform 1 said:

Couple of interesting items on IanVisits last week:

 

https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/2019/09/17/take-a-look-at-the-crossrail-station-under-bond-street/

 

https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/blog/2019/09/18/crossrail-on-target-but-warns-of-risks/

 

An interesting reply too to one of the comments: "No one would ever go from Shenfield to Reading on the Elizabeth line as there are considerably faster alternatives. The Lizzy line is a stopping commuter service, not an “intercity” style service.".  Makes me wonder why it goes out that far...

 

And if they did go on Crossrail they would have to change trains anyway as there will be no direct trains between Shenfield and Reading.  The extent if its running on the west side of London remains a puzzle to me.  although the original plan included Reading when you think about it nobody really benefits from it going beyond Slough (the normal terminating point for the all stations stopping service east thereof). But by extending to Maidenhead it does at least take in Burnham and Taplow.  But going beyond Maidenhead it in relilty delivers very little apart from seemingly having no interest in serving established local travel patterns and thus taking away existing travel options rather than adding anything.

 

In the end i think it all comes back to money with DfT seeing the chance of shedding some franchise costs and TfL getting the whiff of some revenue.  Even with the upcoming revenue split based on ORCATS. TfL/Crossrail will inevitably pick up some revenue from Twyford and Maidenhead plus some short distance revenue from Reading eastwards.  However despite what they might think they won't get a sniff at the fairly lucrative Reading - London via Paddington revenue because it simply can't compete on journey times.  And the same goes for commuter traffic from Twyford to London and, to a not much lesser, extent peak period commuter traffic from Maidenhead where in both cases journey times - even including connection times at Paddington - will inevitably be shorter them taking a Crossrail train.  True some people who want to avoid the hassle of changing to Crossrail trains at Paddington will go for a through train but in my experience over the years most London commuters tend to prefer shorter journey times.

 

And once you compare the quality of the offer you will no doubt see what already happens at Hayes & Harlington where passengers, judging by their actions, prefer travelling on a Class 387 to travelling on a Class 345 - and that will be an even bigger decider for those travelling from further out but especially Maidenhead and beyond.  the situation at Slough will be influenced by the extent to which GWR will continue any services which offer non-stop running between there and Paddington but again I suspect the non-stop trains will win out except, probably, for passengers wishing to use Crossrail to/from stations east of Paddington. 

 

In the end we will see what happens but in view of the hostility to Class 345 trains which already seems to exist further out i do wonder to what extent they will be used where a choice exists.  little wonder there has been no tangible progress in discussions about the possible extension westwards of the area covered by Oyster cards and that Orcats will be used instead from December.

[Christopher125]

1 hour ago, Platform 1 said:

An interesting reply too to one of the comments: "No one would ever go from Shenfield to Reading on the Elizabeth line as there are considerably faster alternatives. The Lizzy line is a stopping commuter service, not an “intercity” style service.".  Makes me wonder why it goes out that far...

 

 

It goes out to Reading because most people see the obvious logic in having a stopping service that goes the whole way than have Crossrail terminate at Maidenhead, requiring a separate shuttle to fill the gap as was planned before electrification was confirmed.

 

Edited September 22, 2019 by Christopher125

[Mallard60022]

3 hours ago, lmsforever said:

Wonder just when this project will open and when management will learn to build a railway.

Funny that, my son was asking me yesterday what's happening with X Rail. He really enjoyed watching the TV programmes and was impressed by what he saw. He works in building /construction and has a good interest in railways too. Is there a 'pocket' size answer I could give him? Thanks.

Phil

[ess1uk]

4 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

Oh dear.  Sounds as if somebody overlooked how drains should work?

I wouldn’t want to go down there on a wet rainy day 

[Platform 1]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

most London commuters tend to prefer shorter journey times

 

Agreed Mike.  Back in the day, I commuted from Brentwood to central London.  In the peaks I'd aim to catch the semi-fast - even if packed - in preference to the all-stations services as it shaved some 10 minutes off the journey.  And the class 307/8s were more comfortable.

 

There is precedent of course - the Metropolitan went out to Aylesbury, but got cut back to Amersham in 1961; the Bakerloo was also effectively cut back operationally to Queens Park from Watford.  So Reading seems an odd choice based on TfL's own history.  Shenfield makes more sense (though Gidea Park might've been better) but I wouldn't want to commute from/to Brentwood today, stopping all stations, even with faster units.  Hearsay suggests many now travel from/to Shenfield instead.

 

1 hour ago, Christopher125 said:

most people see the obvious logic in having a stopping service that goes the whole way

 

No doubt that is a boon to some, especially with luggage, pushchairs, etc.  But personal observation shows most commuters go for time saving and comfy seats.

 

Like so many other recent things, it all feels like another race to the bottom.

 

[DY444]

On 22/09/2019 at 15:54, Christopher125 said:

 

It goes out to Reading because most people see the obvious logic in having a stopping service that goes the whole way than have Crossrail terminate at Maidenhead, requiring a separate shuttle to fill the gap as was planned before electrification was confirmed.

 

 

My view has always been that it should have gone no further than West Drayton or maybe Slough at a push.  Maidenhead never made any sense to me and Reading makes even less.

[The Stationmaster]

1 hour ago, DY444 said:

 

My view has always been that it should have gone no further than West Drayton or maybe Slough at a push.  Maidenhead never made any sense to me and Reading makes even less.

I suspect the only reasons it went to Maidenhead were as follows -

 

Reading was 'a bridge too far' for the construction budget as it originally stood plus lack of capacity to handle it at Reading (Reading had been the originally proposed western terminus back in the 1990s - using a single additional platform).

There was 'political'/Civil service imperative to reduce any franchise support costs that could be reduced out of Paddington.

There was a need to be seen to be taking notice of the MP for Maidenhead.

Somebody's (or lots of somebodies') eyes were a lot bigger than their brain capacity so Reading was seen as an attractive destination from a business./revenue viewpoint. (note how busy it is for inward commuting - a recent article in Modern Railways  puts Reading as the third busiest place for inward commuting outside London.  The problem with that in Crossrail terms is that the rail commuters come in to Reading on five different routes, Crossrail will only run on one of the five and it is probably not the busiest one.)

 

As I mentioned previously the former logical split for GW route stopping/semi-fast trains was Slough and it would have been the logical terminus for Crossrail if it were to run beyond the boundary of 'London' at West Drayton.  It would probably mean two GWR off-peak semi-fasts per hour running east of Slough if Crossrail terminated there - well that is going to happen anyway.  In order to bolster the local service between Slough and Reading it would perhaps mean a Reading - Slough 'shuttle' calling at all stations - that would be no problem at all using a 4 car class 387 formation as a platform to handle it could easily be recreated at Slough where there is ample space for it (an 8 car Class 387 platform would not be practical in my view but with major demolitions of business premises on non-railway owned land it could be done.

 

A more 'local' operator, instead of one focused on London and 'thinking London', would be far more likely to serve local travel needs westwards between Slough, but more particularly Maidenhead and west thereof, towards Reading.  That certainly seems to be the case thus far where loss of GWR services and introduction of Crossrail trains will have an adverse effect on some local journey times and on connections with long distance trains at Reading.

[DY444]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

I suspect the only reasons it went to Maidenhead were as follows -

 

Reading was 'a bridge too far' for the construction budget as it originally stood plus lack of capacity to handle it at Reading (Reading had been the originally proposed western terminus back in the 1990s - using a single additional platform).

There was 'political'/Civil service imperative to reduce any franchise support costs that could be reduced out of Paddington.

There was a need to be seen to be taking notice of the MP for Maidenhead.

Somebody's (or lots of somebodies') eyes were a lot bigger than their brain capacity so Reading was seen as an attractive destination from a business./revenue viewpoint. (note how busy it is for inward commuting - a recent article in Modern Railways  puts Reading as the third busiest place for inward commuting outside London.  The problem with that in Crossrail terms is that the rail commuters come in to Reading on five different routes, Crossrail will only run on one of the five and it is probably not the busiest one.)

 

As I mentioned previously the former logical split for GW route stopping/semi-fast trains was Slough and it would have been the logical terminus for Crossrail if it were to run beyond the boundary of 'London' at West Drayton.  It would probably mean two GWR off-peak semi-fasts per hour running east of Slough if Crossrail terminated there - well that is going to happen anyway.  In order to bolster the local service between Slough and Reading it would perhaps mean a Reading - Slough 'shuttle' calling at all stations - that would be no problem at all using a 4 car class 387 formation as a platform to handle it could easily be recreated at Slough where there is ample space for it (an 8 car Class 387 platform would not be practical in my view but with major demolitions of business premises on non-railway owned land it could be done.

 

A more 'local' operator, instead of one focused on London and 'thinking London', would be far more likely to serve local travel needs westwards between Slough, but more particularly Maidenhead and west thereof, towards Reading.  That certainly seems to be the case thus far where loss of GWR services and introduction of Crossrail trains will have an adverse effect on some local journey times and on connections with long distance trains at Reading.

 

A friend of mine lives in Maidenhead and commutes to Canary Wharf daily.  Ideal candidate for Crossrail you'd think but not a bit of it.  She tried out a 345 down to Hayes and said there was no way she was going all the way to London and back every day "sitting sideways on a big tube train".  She intends to continue to change at Paddington or possibly Ealing Broadway if the times suit.  There are already a number of reports of passengers at Hayes and stations inwards letting 345s go and waiting for 387s instead.

 

If this is in anyway indicative and passenger resistance to travelling outer suburban distances on 345s does become a big issue then I think there is a possibility it will end up being rethought.  

[caradoc]

For me the major failing of Crossrail (apart from the cost and time overruns !) is the decision to hand it to TfL and therefore operate it as a 'Tube' line. It should instead form part of the national network, as with Thameslink, which provides long distance through services from places such as Bedford, Peterborough, Cambridge and Brighton. Crossrail could have performed a similar function with trains from, for example Oxford (assuming it is ever electrified), Swindon and Newbury to Ipswich, Southend and Ramsgate; Imagine the connectional possibilities between Thameslink and Crossrail at Farringdon ! Instead Crossrail will never be more than an over-extended Tube line, and then with trains not suitable for even its limited direct journeys. What an opportunity wasted.

 

[Mark Saunders]

14 minutes ago, caradoc said:

For me the major failing of Crossrail (apart from the cost and time overruns !) is the decision to hand it to TfL and therefore operate it as a 'Tube' line. It should instead form part of the national network, as with Thameslink, which provides long distance through services from places such as Bedford, Peterborough, Cambridge and Brighton. Crossrail could have performed a similar function with trains from, for example Oxford (assuming it is ever electrified), Swindon and Newbury to Ipswich, Southend and Ramsgate; Imagine the connectional possibilities between Thameslink and Crossrail at Farringdon ! Instead Crossrail will never be more than an over-extended Tube line, and then with trains not suitable for even its limited direct journeys. What an opportunity wasted.

 

 

Reading the first line awakens the cynic in me this sums it up, part of TfL which it means it is on their books as debt, rather than Network Rail which now shows as Government!

 

Mark Saunders