The Automatic Splitting And Joining Of Trains
Hitachi And Automatic Splitting And Joining Of Trains
The Hitachi Class 395 train was the first train in the UK to be able to automatically split and join in service.
In The Impressive Coupling And Uncoupling Of Class 395 Trains, I linked to this video.
Impressive isn’t it?
In Do Class 800/801/802 Trains Use Batteries For Regenerative Braking?, I quoted this comment from a public on-line Hitachi document.
Because the coupling or uncoupling of cars in a trainset occurs during commercial service at an intermediate station, the automatic coupling device is able to perform this operation in less than 2 minutes.
This is definitely in line with Class 395 train performance.
This document from the Hitachi web site talks about the design of Hitachi’s Class 385 trains for Scotland. This is said.
The lead and rear railcars have an automatic coupler at the front and walk-through gangway hoods. When train sets are coupled together, the hoods fit together as part of the automatic coupling operation to provide access between train sets, meaning that passengers and staff are able to move freely from one train set to another.
Obviously, Hitachi have got automatic splitting and joining of trains spot on!
Current Split/Join Services
There are several places in the UK network, where splitting and joining of trains is used.
- Southeastern Highspeed do it at Ashford.
- Great Northern Kings Lynn do it at Cambridge.
- Southern do it at Haywards Heath.
- Virgin Trains do it at Crewe.
- South West Trains do it at Southampton.
But currently only the Class 395 trains can do it automatically.
The in-service entry of the Class 800 trains will change everything, as it will make a lot more new routes possible.
Virgin Trains East Coast
Currently, Virgin Trains East Coast (VTEC) run two trains per hour (tph) between Kings Cross and Leeds. In the Peak, some services are extended to Bradford Forster Square, Skipton and Harrogate, where the last route is not electrified.
Will some services to Leeds be run by two five-car Class 800/801 trains working together as a ten-car train?
- Class 800 trains are electro-diesel which could work to Harrogate under diesel power.
- Class 801 trains are all-electric, which could work all electrified routes from Leeds.
At Leeds the two trains could separate, with each train going to a different destination. Reading Hitachi’s published documents, the split would take under two minutes at Leeds and I don’t think there would be a restriction of a Class 800 and a Class 801 working together between Kings Cross and Leeds using the overhead electrification.
VTEC gets advantages by using this split and join approach.
- Frequencies and train length to the eventual destinations can be adjusted to what the market will sustain.
- Extra expensive train paths between the split/join station and London are not needed.
- Between the split/join station and London, the train can usually run using electrification.
- Costs are probably saved, if only a half-train is run to some destinations, as track access charges are based on weight.
- A five-car electro-diesel could probably access more routes than a nine-car train.
This is the fleet that VTEC have ordered.
- Class 800 – 10 x five-car
- Class 800 – 13 x nine-car
- Class 801 – 12 x five-car
- Class 801 – 30 x nine-car
These Class 800 and Class 801 trains give VTEC all sorts of of possibilities.
The backbone of the service which is a half-hourly service to Edinburgh probably needs about 35 nine-car trains, some of which would be electro-diesels to work North of the electrification to Aberdeen and Inverness.
But that still leaves quite a few five-car trains available for other services.
Great Western Railway
Great Western Railway (GWR) will probably use their Class 800/801802 trains in a similar manner.
This is the fleet that GWR have ordered.
- Class 800 – 36 x five-car
- Class 800 – 21 x nine-car
- Class 802 – 22 x five-car
- Class 802 – 14 x nine-car
Note that the electro-diesel Class 802 train is similar to the Class 800, but with the engines tuned for more power and larger fuel tanks, so it can handle Devon and Cornwall routes easier.
I think that given the number of five-car trains on order and the lack of promised electrification, I think that GWR will be using splitting and joining in some surprising places, to make sure that as many routes as possible get the new trains.
The Stadler Flirt
This article on Railway Technology describes the Stadler Flirts built for Swiss Federal Railways. This is said.
The train consists of articulated train sets, which contains light rail cars attached semi-permanently sharing a common bogie. The trains are available in two to six car combinations with two to six motorised axles. The automatic couplers, installed at both the ends of the trains, permit connection and disconnection of up to four train cars easily and quickly.
Does this mean that two trains can split and join like the Hitachi trains?
The Bombardier Aventra
The Aventra is a train that has been designed to have everything that customers might need. This is the description of the train in Wikipedia.
The train has been designed to be lighter and more efficient, with increased reliability. It will have lightweight all-welded bodies, wide gangways and doors to shorten boarding times in stations, and ERTMS. The design incorporates FlexxEco bogies which have been used in service on Voyagers and newer Turbostars. The gangway is designed to allow maximum use of the interior space and ease of movement throughout the train.
As Hitachi have published a lot of their thinking on Class 800/801 trains on the Internet, I would find it astounding that Bombardier and the other train building companies haven’t read it.
There have been four orders for the Aventras so far, which total over two thousand carriages.
Two of these orders are for mixed fleets of five-car and ten-car trains.
Are these trains and half-trains just like with the Hitachi trains?
If the answer is in the affirmative, I think it is very likely that Aventras will have the capability of splitting and joining automatically.
Greater Anglia
Greater Anglia has a complex route structure that fans out from a very busy electrified core into Liverpool Street on both their main lines.
They have ordered 89 x five-car and 22 x ten-car of Class 720 trains.
Many of their outer-suburban routes currently run twelve-car services and as their two main lines are only double-track, I can see a lot of five car trains working in pairs.
In Harlow Council Leader Jon Clempner Hopes Crossrail 2 Will Extend To Town, I suggested that Greater Anglia might use splitting and joining on the West Anglia Main Line to get four tph on the Hertford East Branch.
It may not be practical in that case, but Greater Anglia have several electrified branches.
South Western Railway
South Western Railway have a similar route structure to Greater Anglia, with a very busy electrified core into Waterloo.
They have ordered 30 x five-car and 60 x ten-car of Aventra trains.
In Waterloo Upgrade August 2017 – Virginia Water Station, I talked about used splitting and joining to provide a better service on the Waterloo to Reading Line and the Chertsey Branch.
However, I think that most services will be run by ten-car trains given the make-up of the fleet.
The five-cars could generally run on routes where the capacity only needs five-car trains or the infrastructure wouldn’t allow anything longer.
They could then split and join to maximise the capacity and use only one path from the split/join station to Waterloo.
Exploring The Tamar Valley Line
The Tamar Valley Line runs up the Tamar Valley between Plymouth to Gunnislake stations, the latter of which is over the border in Cornwall.
These pictures show the journey.
The following sections are my thoughts on the journey.
The Scenery
Rarely, have I travelled on a railway with such spectacular views.
Calstock
This Google Map shows Calstock.
Note the Grade II* Listed Calstock Viaduct as the railway crosses the Tamar and the station on the Northern side of the river.
I suspect that if the railway ceased to run to Calstock and over the viaduct, there would be a revolution.
But having lived at the end of the then-erratic Felixstowe Branch line in the 1960s, I can see how if the service would be improved to hourly with a decent train, customers mysteriously appear. I suspect too, that road connections between Felixstowe and Ipswich are a lot better than between Calstock and Plymouth.
Bere Alston
This Google Map shows Bere Alston station.
Note the two lines leading from the station, with one going South to Plymouth and the other going North to Gunnislake.
The line that used to go to Tavistock can also be seen going East.
I have followed this in my helicopter and you can see much of track bed.
The Train Service
I just went up and came back on the same train, as a fellow passenger said there was nothing at Gunnislake. He was actually walking down from Bere Alston station.
So as I had other things to do rather than wait two hours on a Cornish hill for the next train, I may have taken the right decision. Or not as the case may be!
If you look at the way the train service is organised, currently one Class 150 train is dedicated to the route.
As it takes 45 minutes to go up from Plymouth to Gunnislake and then after a wait of typically six minutes, it comes down in a further 45 minutes, the train service is not the easiest to run efficiently.
Looking at the timings of the individual sections of the line we get the following going up.
- Plymouth to St. Budeaux Victoria Road – 10 minutes
- St. Budeaux Victoria Road to Bere Alston – 14 minutes
- Bere Alston to Gunnislake – 20 minutes
Coming down we get the following times.
- Gunnislake to Bere Alston – 18 minutes
- Bere Alston to St. Budeaux Victoria Road – 13 minutes
- St. Budeaux Victoria Road to Plymouth – 11 minutes
The following also complicate the train scheduler’s problem.
- The line is single-track with no passing loops.
- The driver has to change ends for the reverse at Bere Alston station.
On the other hand, a more powerful train could probably save time on the climb and if it had good brakes, it could save time of the descent.
At least St. Budeaux Victoria Road station is where the driver organises the signalling. Wikipedia says this.
Trains heading towards Bere Alston must collect the branch train staff from a secure cabinet on the platform before proceeding, as the line is operated on the One Train Working system with only a single unit allowed on the branch at a time. Conversely the staff has to be returned to the cabinet by the driver on the return journey before the unit can leave the branch and return to Plymouth.
If trains could climb up from St. Budeaux Victoria Road to Gunnislake and return within the hour and they could pass somewhere South of Bere Ferrers station, then an hourly service would be possible, with modern signalling!
But it would need two trains! And trains are something, that GWR doesn’t have in abundance.
The Two Stations At St. Budeaux
This Google Map shows the two stations at St. Budeaux.
According to this except from Wikipedia, the two stations; St. Budeaux Victoria Road and St. Budeaux Ferry Road were once connected.
A connection to the Great Western Railway was installed east of the station on 21 March 1941 to offer the two companies alternative routes between Plymouth and St Budeaux should either line be closed due to bombing during World War II. On 7 September 1964 the original line into Devonport was closed, and all trains use the former Great Western route and the wartime connection to reach St Budeaux, renamed St Budeaux Victoria Road to differentiate it from St Budeaux Ferry Road, opened by the Great Western Railway on 1 June 1904.
The line from St Budeaux to Bere Alston was singled on 7 September 1970, services having ceased beyond there (towards Tavistock North and Okehampton) in May 1968.
I would suspect that as there appears to be a fair amount of space in the area and with some innovative trackwork Network Rail could design something, that allowed an hourly service to Gunnislake from Plymouth and/or St. Budeaux Victoria Road.
Sort the two stations at St. Budeaux and it would surely allow extra stopping services from Plymouth along the Cornish Main Line. An hourly stopping train would give stations between Plymouth and Bt. Budeaux, a much friendlier two trains per hour (tph).
Onward To Tavistock And Okehampton
There is a Future Options section in the Wikipedia entry for Okehampton station. This is said.
Both Railfuture and the former MP for Totnes, Anthony Steen, have in the past proposed the reinstatement of the line between Okehampton and Bere Alston, thereby reconnecting the station with Plymouth. The reopening of the link would restore the continuous circuit of railway linking the towns around Dartmoor. On 18 March 2008 Devon County Council backed a separate proposal by developers Kilbride Community Rail to construct 750 houses in Tavistock that includes reopening part of this route from Bere Alston to a new railway station in Tavistock.
Whether this happens at any time in the future, will depend on various factors.
- The need for housing developments in the area.
- Tourism.
- Quarrying and the transport of stone.
- Commuting from Okehampton and Tavistock.
With the link to the Tarka Line, it would deliver an alternative route from Plymouth to Exeter and London, if the weather attacks Dawlish again.
A Dawlish Diversion
It sounds all well and good for a diversion for between London and Cornwall, should Dawlish be closed by the weather or for engineering work.
But after looking at what has been created at Dawlish and writing about it in Walking Between Dawlish And Dawlish Warren Stations, I teel that something has been created, that should be able to stand up to what happened in 2014.
But even if the line is never broken, as it was in 2014, there will always be a need to have a diversion for important engineering works, that might mean the line is closed for a couple of days.
So I think that Network Rail’s plan, which was reported about in the June 2016 Edition of Modern Railways, that I wrote about in Common Sense Between Exeter And Plymouth, could happen.
In the post I said this.
The Modern Railways article also says.
- The line’s function would be to provide a modest service serving local stations and to offer diversionary capability.
- Eight new stations would be provided.
- The line would be unlikely to be electrified.
- To help funding new housing would be built along the line.
A double-track railway with diesel trains would do the following.
- Improve the economy of Devon around the fringes of Dartmoor.
- Help in the development of much-needed housing in the area.
- Provide a much-needed freight route to and from the peninsular.
- Provide sufficient capacity in the event of problems at Dawlish.
But knowing Murphy’s Law, if the line were to reinstated, the sea at Dawlish would behave itself.
Could the line even be built as a single track, but big enough, so that it would allow five-car or perhaps even longer Class 800 trains to run between Plymouth and Exeter in an emergency or when the main line is closed for other reasons?
The timings for Class 150 trains on the line are as follows.
- Plymouth to Bere Alston – 24 minutes
- Okehampton to Exeter St. Davids – 44 minutes
I would estimate that Bere Alston to Okehampton could take about forty minutes, via Tavistock.
I think we can safely say that a modern train like a Class 172 train could do Exeter to Plymouth in under two hours.
As Exeter to Plymouth takes around an hour, I think it should be possible for something like a 100 mph Class 165 train to go round the complete circle in under three hours.
This would mean that to run a Devon Circular service with one tph in both directions would need.
- A rail link between Bere Alston and Okehampton via a new Tavistock station.
- Three trains in both directions or six trains in total.
- 100 mph diesel trains.
- One or more passing loops or lengths of double-track
- A solution that allows two different services at Bere Alston.
Additional services would also be provided in both directions..
- Between Exeter and Yeoford, there would be two tph instead of one tph.
- Between Plymouth and Bere Alston, there would be two tph instead of one tph.
- One extra tph between Exeter and Plymouth.
A lot of stakeholders should like it.
Conclusion
I’ve just posted what I have seen and what I have read from trusted sources.
It would appear there is a lot of potential to improve the railways in Devon.
It also strikes me that a lot of what Network Rail are proposing doing is only undoing what was done by British Rail engineers in the 1960s.
At least, BR engineers didn’t follow Beeching’s recommendation of closing the Tamar Valley Line.
What Train Is This?
I took these pictures of a train coming from Barnstaple to Exeter.
But what type if train is it?
The last picture shows it is Class 150 train built in the 1980s by British Rail.
It is certainly a high quality refurbishment of 150263.
I’d much rather travel in this train, than a new Class 700 train.
Consider.
- The seats were comfortable.
- There were several tables in each car.
- The toilet was one of the best I’ve seen.
- The information system, tip-up seats and grab handles were all excellent.
The train even had it’s own wheelchair ramp stowed away in a secure metal cupboard.
I can’t find anything on the web about who did the refurbishment of this train.
My only thought, is that it was an in-house job and came from Laira with love!
The Truth About The Refurbishment
The August 2017 Edition of Modern Railways has a long article entitled Great Western Improvement Imminent, where on page 75, this is said.
The Class 150/2s are going through a refurbishment and repaint at Wabtec’s Doncaster plant
If all the 137 trainsets end up like this no-one will complain.
The Tarka Line
The Tarka Line is a branch line in Devon that runs up from Exeter St. Davids station to Barnstable station.
I went to Barnstaple in the rush hour in a packed three car train, consisting of a Class 150 and a Class 153 train working together, asw a three-car unit.
The lady next to me, said she lived in Bideford, so she had a drive from Barnstaple.
Coming back down, the train was almost empty, so I took a pit stop at Yeoford station in a local pub called the Mare and Foal, before catching the next train back to Exeter. That train was a refurbished Class 150 train, that I wrote about in What Train Is This?
These pictures show Yeoford station to give a flavour of the line.
The Link To The Dartmoor Railway
This Google Map shows the section of the Tarka Line North from Yeoford station, which is in the South East corner.
At the village of Penstone, the Dartmoor Railway breaks off to the West to go to Okehampton station.
Under Future in the Wikipedia entry for Yeoford station, this is said.
The Dartmoor Railway plan to reopen the disused platform at the station in order to create an interchange with the Tarka Line (and thus the national network). Through running from Yeoford to Okehampton was intended to commence in 2009 but this was delayed pending the finalising of transfer arrangements with Network Rail. Accordingly, the “Sunday Rover” service run by Great Western Railway again operated on Sundays throughout the summer of 2009, although not calling here. Though the GWR summer trains have continued to operate since (running again each summer from 2013-16), agreement over the use of Yeoford as an interchange has still not been reached and it is unclear as to when (or if) this will be possible.
If this does happen, it could be the first step in opening up a second East-West route across Devon.
This page on the Dartmoor Railway web site is entitled GWR Sunday service to Okehampton and gives details of the GWR Summer Sunday service.
Reopening the old LSWR route across Devon will be driven by the following.
- New housing developments in the area.
- Tourism
- Creating employment.
- Bringing quarried materials to construction distribution depots and sites by rail.
- Creating a second route to Cornwall in case of disruption at Dawlish.
Murphy’s Law will of course apply and once the route is open, there will be no more disruption at Dawlish.
If the route is built, it will allow local trains to do a circular route from Exeter calling at the following stations in large towns.
- Crediton
- Okehampton
- Tavistock
- Plymouth
- Newton Abbott
The route would give connections to branches to Axminster, Barnstaple, Exmouth, Gunnislake, Paignton and Tiverton.
Onward To Bideford
The Wikipedia entry for Bideford station says this.
Recently, the station was included on the ATOC Connecting Communities report, that recommends closed lines and stations that should have a railway station. The report suggests the reopening of the Barnstaple – Bideford railway line.
This Google Map shows the centre of the town of Bideford.
The old station was located at the site of the Bideford Railway Heritage Centre at the Eastern end of the Old Bideford Bridge.
So could the railway line between Barnstaple and Bideford be reopened?
This Google Map shows the other end of the line at Barnstaple.
The old railway line is now used as the South West Coastal Path.
I think with traditional technology, it will be unlikely that the railway is rebuilt, as walkers and others will rightly object to noisy diesel trains or electrification of any kind, disturbing the countryside.
But as I wrote in No-Frills Mini Trains Offer Route To Reopening Lines That Beeching Shut, engineers won’t give up in providing solutions for difficult to serve places.
I believe that within ten years, a silent battery-powered train, will be ghosting its way along a single track railway between Barstaple and Bideford, that is shared with walkers and cyclists.
Remember engineering is the science of the possible, whereas politics is all impossible dreams.
Bedwyn Station
I had to go to a meeting in Marlborough, so I took a train to Bedyn station for the first time in my life.
I took these pictures.
This Google Map shows the layout of the station.
I have commuted from a couple of stations like this in Suffolk over the years and Bedwyn doesn’t impress me.
It is not a question of what the station has, but what it hasn’t.
- No local catchment area as Great Bedwyn only has a population of 1353 according to the 2011 Census.
- No car parking.
- No good road access.
- No step-free access.
- No welcoming facilities.
- No pub within walking distance.
- No mobile phone signal.
- No possibility of electrifying past Bedwyn, because of the need to demolish the bridge at the station.
I am surprised that GWR have kept it going so long!
Near where I lived in Suffolk was a station called Dullingham, which is just as welcoming as Bedwyn, but at least it had enough car parking for someone, who wanted to pop up to London and not drive.
There are only a few reasons, why GWR keep this station going.
- Historically, as they’ve always done it this way.
- Bedwyn is the best station to turn trains and has a convenient reversing siding.
- The guy, who decides the route lives in Bedwyn.
But I think they use Bedwyn to turn trains for one of the best reasons; to cut costs.
If you look at train timings from London, they are as follows.
Newbury – 52 minutes
Hungerford – 63 minutes
Bedwyn – 73 minutes
As they want to run an hourly service, turning the train at Bedwyn might mean that they can use a train less than doing it at say Pewsey, as timings work out well.
I think that as they need time to turn a train and give the driver a rest, that a journey time of 73 minutes means that a round trip to Bedwyn takes three hours with an allowance for a small delay.
After all it can’t be unprofitable as this article in the Marlborough News is entitled Back on track: Bedwyn to keep direct London trains after 2018.
This is said.
Great Western Railway announced today (February 24) that investment has been agreed with the Department for Transport that will, from 2018, bring brand new hybrid trains capable of switching between diesel and electric power to replace the diesel turbo fleet now serving Bedwyn travellers.
I think that the only reason they wouldn’t turn the trains at Bedwyn, is that there was a better alternative down the line., like perhaps at Westbury.
Incidentally, as the new trains could be faster, it might be that the turnback point could be further out
But both these scenarios would mean that Bedwyn will still get at least the same service it does now.
A Station For Marlborough
I wrote a post called A Station For Marlborough, a couple of weeks ago and this might be a possibility for a new terminus.
- It is a town of nearly 10,000 people.
- A lot of people in the town commute to Reading or London.
- The town has identified a place for a new station, which is on the old railway alignment from Bedwyn.
- If the train terminated at Marlborough, the timetable from Bedwyn could be the same.
- The train would need to be self-powered, as is Great Wstern Railway’s bi-mode trains.
It might even be better value-for-money to create the rail link to Marlborough, than rebuild Bedwyn station for electrification and with a car park and step-free access.
Through The Acton Dive-Under
As I left Ealing Broadway station to return to Paddington, it rather caught me by surprise and I only just got the camera out in time.
Hence the quality of the pictures.
Changing At West Ealing Station
This morning I changed at West Ealing station onto the Greenford Branch Line, after taking one of the new Class 387 trains from Paddington, which now run at a frequency of two trains per hour (tph).
It was not the best of experiences.
My train arrived and I assumed that they would be a few minutes to allow me to get across from Platform 3 to Platform 5.
But by the time I got there, the train had long since left, so I had a twenty-seven minute wait on a draughty and cold platform.
GWR could do one of three things.
- Arrange the schedules, so that transferring passengers have time to catch the shuttle train.
- Put up a temporary shelter, until the new station is built.
- Run four tph on the Greenford Branch.
I wasn’t the only passenger, who was a bit fed up.
Crowded Roads In West London
Today, I tried to get to West Drayton station to have a lunchtime drink with an old mate from Cambridge, who had called me up yesterday, as he might have needed a second person to help him with one of his robotic machines.
But it all went pear-shaped at Paddington, where trains to West Drayton were very much delayed and I was advised to take the Underground to Greenford station and then use a bus.
But at Greenford, there wasn’t a bus map or anybody to ask, so in the end I took a bus to Ealing Hospital, where I thought I knew I could get a bus to West Drayton. But there wasn’t! So I thought about giving up and instead, I got a bus to Ealing Broadway station, to get back to Paddington. But I arrived at Ealing Broadway station, just before a train to West Drayton arrived. I caught that, had a drink with my friend and then caught a train back to Paddington. He didn’t need me to help, as all he needed was a pair of eyes to tell him what was happening at the sharp end of his machine and the client had turned up with his glasses.
So I achieved my objective and also had a wander round the Boroughs of Ealing and Hillingdon on buses and trains.
I trundle round North and East London most of the time and sometimes I even cross the River and go to the Deep South.
But I do find West London the most crowded, with buses slowed by all the traffic on the roads and infrequent very busy trains.
The West of London needs improvement in public transport.
I sometimes think, the traffic has got worse over the forty-six years, I had a driving licence.
Rail And Underground Lines
There are several lines going West from Central London, which include.
- The Chiltern Line from Marylebone to West Ruislip
- The Central Line to West Ruislip
- The Metroplitan Line to Uxbridge
- The Piccadilly Line to Uxbridge
- The Great Western Main Line tfrom Paddington to Reading and Heathrow
- The Piccadilly Line to Heathrow
Going further round, there are several lines from Waterloo going to the South West.
Only one line; the West London Line goes North South, although there used to be others.
The network is probably more sparse than some other directions from London.
Reliance on Cars And Buses
I think this rather thin coverage, puts a heavy radiance on cars and buses, which might explain the crowded roads.
Crossrail
Crossrail will bring improvement with the following Off Peak services in trains per hour (tph), along the slow lines of the Great Western Main Line.
- 4 tph to Heathrow Terminal 4
- 2 tph to Reading
- 2 tph to Maidenhead
Note.
- The central core tunnel probably has a limit of 24 tph.
- The service has a good balance between the various destinations.
- There will also be Great Western Railway services.
- Looking at the Crossrail schedule, there is scope to adjust the schedule on each branch.
I think that as Crossrail develops and the line and its passengers learn more about each other, the service pattern of Crossrail will change.
If I have a worry about Crossrail, it is that few of the stations towards Central London have many parking spaces, so will walking, cycling and the buses be adequate for Crossrail to tap its full potential?
The West London Tram
The West London Tram was proposed by Ken Livingstone in 2002.
These paragraphs from Wikipedia describes the tram and its route.
The West London Tram was a proposed on-street light rail line that was to run along the Uxbridge Road (A4020) corridor in West London, England. The scheme is promoted by Transport for London (TfL) but opposed by the councils of all three London Boroughs through which it would run. It was postponed indefinitely on 2 August 2007
The tram route was planned to run between Uxbridge and Shepherd’s Bush, serving Hillingdon, Southall, Hanwell, West Ealing, Ealing and Acton en route and would have completely replaced a number of equivalent London Bus routes.
If it had been built it would have had good connectivity to Crossrail and the Central Line. But the view of those against the project prevailed.
In my trip today, you could see why probably every car driver in the area, would be against a scheme like the tram. Only at places on the route, where there was a wide island of grass dividing the carriageways, would the tram not have increased congestion.
It looks like the thirty million pounds spent was wasted.
Crossrail And/Or West London Tram?
This Google Map shows the area around the three stations of Hanwell, West Ealing And Ealing Broadway.
Great Western Main Line And The A4020 Through Ealing
Note.
- The Great Western Main Line across the middle.
- The A 4020 runs South of and parallel to the railway.
- Ealing Hospital is marked by the red arrow in the bottom left of the map.
I asked in the Header to this section if it should be And/Or between the projects.
Undoubtedly, it should be Or! Taxpayers can’t afford both!
In comparing the two, I believe the following points are valid.
- Trams stop about three or four more times than trains.
- The train is faster.
- The tram doesn’t serve Old Oak Common station or Heathrow.
- Trams annoy drivers in the same way that bendy buses do.
- Crossrail has a rich connection pattern compared to the tram.
- Pedestrians probably prefer trams, whilst drivers prefer trains.
The politicians decided and chose the trains.
Making More Of The Railways
If the streets are crowded can we use the existing railways to inject greater capacity into the existing railways in West London?
The key to this, as it sits in the middle of so many lines is the creation of a new station at Old Oak Common.
I will now summarise the possible rail projects that can be developed in West London
Chiltern Railways To Old Oak Common
Chiltern Railways have a capacity problem at Marylebone and one way to alleviate it would be for Chiltern to create a second terminal at Old Oak Common station, which could be accessed using an improved New North Main Line.
There is a real possibility of this project going forward and it could have many worthwhile features.
It would add another East-West route across West London, but with the comprehensive connectivity of Old Oak Common.
Chiltern Metro Creation
Wikipedia says this about a Chiltern Metro.
New Chiltern Metro Service that would operate 4+tph for Wembley Stadium, Sudbury & Harrow Road, Sudbury Hill Harrow, Northolt Park, South Ruislip and West Ruislip. This would require a reversing facility at West Ruislip, passing loops at Sudbury Hill Harrow, and a passing loop at Wembley Stadium (part of the old down fast line is in use as a central reversing siding, for stock movements and additionally for 8-car football shuttles to convey passengers to the stadium for events).[73] This ‘Chiltern Metro’ service was not programmed into the last round of franchising agreements.
When I wrote Could A Chiltern Metro Be Created? and came to the conclusion, that it might be possible, I got several positive responses.
Greenford Branch Improvements
The Greenford Branch Line connects the Great Western Main Line and the New North Line.
This map from carto.metro.free.fr shows the Northern end of the branch, where it joins the New North Line.
Northern End Of The Greenford Branch
Whilst this map from carto.metro.free.fr shows the Southern end of the branch, where it joins the Great Western Main Line.
Southern End Of The Greenford Branch
What service the line will get after Crossrail opens has still to be decided,
- 4 tph between West Ealing and Greenford stations is certainly possible.
- There are those, including Ealing Council, who don’t like Greenford losing its direct connection to Paddington.
- A rebuilt Greenford station could incorporate Chiltern services.
As the connections at both ends of the branch allow trains to go in either an East or West direction, could this be useful in creating services between the two main lines?
Brentford Branch Reopening
I wrote about this in Could The Golden Mile In Houslow Get A Station?
The Brentford Branch could be a useful branch, worked by a shuttle train!
Hounslow Loop Line Improvements
The Hounslow Loop Line, which has a strong presence on both sides of the river and takes passengers to and from Waterloo, is being improved to increase capacity.
Could we see the Overground opening new services along the North London Line to perhaps Brentford, Hounslow and Feltham stations?
The route is used by freight trains, and Transport have suggested using the route to create an orbital Overground route.
Conclusions
The railways will take the strain in West London, after the abandonment of the West London Tram.
The Definitive Branch Line For An Electric Train With On Board Energy Storage
In Curious Rail Construction At Ipswich Station, I described how the current five-car Platform 1 has been electrified and given an electrified route of a few hundred metres to the Felixstowe Branch Line.
I then outlined how an ow an electric train with on-board energy storage, could work the Ipswich-Felixstowe service.
- I’ll assume that a fully-charged train starts from the new depot at Manningtree or some other suitable overnight stabling.
- The train positions early in the morning for the first service from Felixstowe, using overhead power to Ipswich and on-board power on the branch.
- Passengers load at Felixstowe and the train proceeds to Ipswich under on-board power to the current Platform 1 at Ipswich.
- The train would sneak into the platform on the North side of Ipswich Freight Yard, well out of the way of the Great Eastern Main Line and any freight movements.
- If the platform was busy and the train had to wait at a signal, it could even up pantograph to start the recharging of the on-board energy storage.
- Once in Platform 1, the train would either start or continue the charging process.
- The pantograph would be lowered, when the charging was complete or at any time before the train left for Felixstowe.
The process would continue all day.
But things don’t always go to plan, so what happens at Ipswich, if Platform 1 is blocked by a failed train?
As the train will be approaching Ipswich on a dedicated line, it would stop at a signal and wait. As the overhead wire to the station will be continuous, it would immediately up pantograph to start the charging process, to make certain, it wasn’t stuck with a flat battery.
There has been a lot of thought, in how trains with on board storage should be operated.
Similar layouts seem to be being installed at other places.
Maidenhead and the Marlow Branch Line
Maidenhead station is where the Marlow Branch Line connects to the Great Western Main Line.
Platform assignments after Crossrail will probably be.
- Down Fast
- Up Fast
- Down Slow – Crossrail
- Up Show – Crossrail
- Marlow Branch
Note that Platform 5 has recently been extended to the full Crossrail length of 200 metres, so could this platform be shared between the Marlow Branch trains and the Class 387 trains that will start to shuttle between Maidenhead and Paddington in mid-2017.
These are pictures taken at Maidenhead station.
Note the platform 5 for the Marlow Branch and the first couple of hundred metres of the branch are being electrified.
Trains with on-board energy storage between Maidenhead and Bourne End stations could certainly use the same procedure as the one I outlined for trains between Ipswich and Felixstowe. They would probably come into Platform 5 at Maidenhead, as the Marlow Branch trains currently do.
But they also have the advantage at Maidenhead of a very long two hundred metre Platform 5.
Note that four-car Class 387 trains couldn’t go past Bourne End station, so the remainder of the branch to Marlow would probably be served by a diesel shuttle.
On November 25th, 2016, I took this picture from a passing train.
Note.
- I was looking directly down the Marlow Branch.
- The two lines join around the position of the last gantry and the nearest one goes into Platform 4, with the farthest one going into Platform 5.
- You can’t really see it too well in the picture, but the overhead wire appears to be only above the line into Platform 5.
This Google Map shows a close-up of the Western \end of Platforms 4 and 5 and the start of the Marlow Branch.
Hopefully, it will be clearer than mud now!
Note the two-car train in Platform 5.
So why is there no connecting electrification between Platform 4 and the Marlow Branch Line?
It could be that it hasn’t been erected yet, but on the other hand, it could be that it isn’t needed.
- All trains arriving at Maidenhead from Bourne End would use Platform 5.
- These trains would only use the wiring to the West of Platform 5, if say the platform was blocked, by say a failed train.
- Trains between Bourne End and Paddington, after arriving at Platform 5 would up pantograph and after leaving the platform, they would use an existing crossover to access the Up Slow line for Paddington.
- Trains between Paddington and Bourne End would probably use the existing crossovers to stop in Platform 5 after arriving on the Up Slow. Once in Platform 5, they would down pantograph and continue to Bourne End under on-board power.
So a second electrified line not being needed, could be the explanation of only one being created.
Note that when Crossrail starts, Crossrail trains will use Platforms 3 and 4 and will reverse using a reversing siding to the West of the station..
So the Marlow Branch and Crossrail will effectively be two separate systems with their own tracks, trains and arrangements.
Slough And The Slough to Windsor & Eton Line
Slough station is where the Slough to Windsor & Eton Line connects to the Great Western Main Line.
As I passed through Slough station, I noticed that the gantries are such, that just as at Maidenhead, the bay Platform 1 could have a short length of overhead wiring installed, so that the shuttle to Windsor and Eton Central station could be run using an electric train with on-board energy storage.
This small add-on to the electrification, would create a branch line independent of the main line.
- It would be worked as a single train shuttle.
- The train would be electric with on-board energy storage.
- The train would charge at Slough station.
- It would have dedicated platforms in the two terminal stations; Slough and Windsor and Eton Central.
- The train could be worked using the principle of only one train on the line at a time or One Train Working.
- Trains would enter and leave the dedicated branch tracks for servicing and other tasks, as they do now, through a connection to the Fast lines at Slough station.
Unlike the Marlow Branch, it would not need protection for failed trains, as there is only one train.
I would suspect that capacity at the Windsor end of the branch would limit any expansion unless a scheme like the Windsor Link Railway was brought forward and that a four-car electric shuttle train would be sufficient to work the line for many years.
Twyford And The Henley Branch Line
Twyford station is where the Henley Branch Line connects to the Great Western Main Line.
I wrote about using trains with on-board energy storage on the Henley Branch in Twyford Station And The Henley Branch and came to the conclusion, that electric trains of this type could serve this short branch of just four miles in length, with very little change to the infrastructure
Installing a short length of electrification in the bay platform 5 at Twyford station and for a short distance on the branch could be used to charge the trains.
As on the Marlow Branch and the Slough to Windsor and Eton Line, this would create a branch line independent of the main line.
I doubt that this line will ever be fully-electrified.
Certainly, as I passed the line today, there was no sign of any electrification.
West Ealing And Greenford Branch Line
West Ealing station is where the Greenford Branch Line connects to the Great Western Main Line.
But seeing as the last direct train from Greenford to Paddington seems to be on the 23rd of December 2016, the Greenford Branch Line will become an independent branch line with its own bay Platform 5 at West Ealing station, where passengers will have to change to and from Paddington.
In West Ealing Station – 12th October 2016, I showed the progress a couple of months ago and as at Slough gantries are in place, that could be used to electrify the new bay platform.
Once the wires were in place at the platform, all it would need to provide a quality service to Greenford, would be suitable electric train with on-board energy storage.
- The journey would take around ten minutes.
- Trains would charge their storage at West Ealing.
- Two trains per hour would be possible with one train.
- Four trains per hour would be possible with two trains, as the branch has a lot of double-track to allow passing.
The only infrastructure needed, other than the electrification might be some platform lengthening for the new trains.
As I passed the line today, there was some evidence of wires going up, but they probably can’t be completed until the new station is finished at West Ealing station.
Surely, if the branch was going to be run in perpetuity by diesel trains, there would be no evidence of electrification in the bay platform 5 and at the start of the Greenford Branch.
The Emerging Design
If you look at all these examples, most of which are ongoing projects, they have a series of common features.
- The branch line is fairly simple, often just a shuttle between two dedicated terminal platforms.
- The branch line is within the range of an electric train with on-board energy storage, to go out and return.
- Some branches are worked using the principle of only one train on the line at a time or One Train Working.
- At least one terminal platform will be electrified, so that the on board energy storage can be charged.
- The branch line is within the range of an electric train with on-board energy storage.
The only feature not common to all the detailed examples, is where the electrified platform could be shared as at Ipswich and Maidenhead,
In these cases, provision must be made for another train failing in the station.
If Network Rail can get this philosophy right, it has the following advantages.
- New or refurbished environmentally-friendly electric trains can replace elderly diesel trains on suitable routes.
- As the electric trains will typically be four-cars or more, there will be large capacity increases.
- There will be very little infrastructure work, except for platform lengthening and possibly electrifying an extra platform in a station on an already electrified line.
- Network Rail will gain a bit of credibility.
As an example, Ipswich Felixstowe could go from an hourly single -car Class 153 train to an hourly five-car modern Aventra with Wi-fi and lots of space.
Bourne End Station And Improving The Marlow Branch Line
Bourne End station is an intermediate station on the Marlow Branch Line, where trains reverse on their way between Maidenhead and Marlow stations.
It also is a terminus of trains to and from Paddington station in the Peak.
This Google Map shows the station and its location.
Note.
- The Bourne End Railway Bridge takes the railway over the Thames to and from Maidenhead.
- The two-car Class 165 train on its way to or from Marlow.
- The station has a short Northern platform, where trains reverse and a longer Southern one, that can only be used by trains going to Maidenhead.
- There is a step-free interchange between platforms
- All lines are single-track.
These pictures show the station and the surrounding area.
These are some thoughts on various ideas and issues on Bourne End station and the Marlow Branch Line.
Longer Trains To Marlow
Currently, because of the layout of the junction, where trains take the left-hand fork to Maidenhead and the right hand route to Marlow., all trains to Marlow must be only two cars.
I don’t know if modern trains can take sharper curves than the 1990s-built Class 165 trains on the route, but if it was the case, it might be possible to configure the junction to allow the Northern platform to be lengthened to take a longer train.
There are also other features of modern trains like a Class 387 train, that might help.
- Selective door opening.
- Walk-through design.
- 20 metre as opposed to a near-23 metre car-length of the older diesel train.
It would be a tight fit, but I suspect that fitting a three or even four-car train in Bourne End station might be possible, if the passenger traffic needed that capacity.
Passing Loops On The Line
There used to be a passing loop at Cookham station, but this was removed in the 1960s.
This Google Map shows Cookham station.
Cookham Station
It is probably one of those things that is possible, but would actually be a difficult project to implement.
- The users of the line wouldn’t accept a long closure.
- The level crossing would add a large degree of complication and opposition.
I suspect that unless there were really pressing reasons, that a passing loop will never be rebuilt at Cookham.
Increased Frequency
In the Peak, the service between Marlow and Maidenhead is effectively two trains per hour (tph). The method is described in Train Services under the Wikipedia entry for the Marlow Branch Line. This is said.
The off-peak service is one train per hour in each direction between Maidenhead and Marlow. During morning and evening peak times a two trains per hour service is achieved by using two trains: one shuttling between Marlow and Bourne End, and another between Bourne End and Maidenhead/London Paddington. This is possible because Bourne End station has two platforms that may be used simultaneously.
I suspect, that some devious train scheduler has a method for improving on this in the Peak and perhaps providing 2 tph in the Off Peak all day.
Certain facts might help.
- It only takes seven minutes to travel between Bourne End and Marlow stations.
- It only takes eleven minutes to travel between Bourne End and Maidenhead stations.
- Track improvements and modern faster trains might improve these times.
- Modern trains probably mean that the driver can change ends in a shorter time.
- Modern trains have various driver assistance systems to help timekeeping.
- . Running two tph as a shuttle shouldn’t be a problem, as it is currently in the Peak.
- Currently, four tph run to both Paddington and Reading from Maidenhead, with extra trains in the Peak.
- Crossrail will add four tph to Paddington and two tph to Reading.
- If all trains are modern, with floor heights compatible with Crossrail’s Class 345 trains and GWR’s Class 387 trains, then all train entry and exit, will just be a step or wheel across.
It probably all adds up to having at least two tph on the branch all day.
One problem that will limit frequency to two tph, is the lack of a passing loop on the line.
Two tph is only attainable, by using Bourne End station as a virtual passing loop, where the trains don’t actually pass. but the passengers do.
I suspect that train arrivals and departures at Bourne End station, are timed, to minimise conflicting passenger movements between platforms.
This is the current times of some movements at Bourne End station in the morning Peak.
- 7:21 – Train arrives from Maidenhead
- 7:24 – Train arrives from Marlow
- 7:27 – Train leaves to Maidenhead
- 7:28 – Train leaves to Marlow
These times give seven minutes for Maidenhead to Marlow passengers to change trains and three minutes for passengers going the other way.
They obviously give plenty of time for the driver to change ends of the train.
If we take the current timings of Maidenhead to Bourne End and Bourne End to Marlow, we get timings for a complete shuttle of two journeys.
- Maidenhead and Bourne End – 6+2*11 +4 = 32 minutes
- Marlow and Bourne End – 4 + 2*7 + 4 = 22 minutes
The extra four minutes has been added as that is how long it takes to reverse the train at Marlow.
So if a minute or two could be shaved on the Maidenhead shuttle, two tph is possible.
Three tph are probably possible between Bourne End and Marlow, but using one train to run three tph between Maidenhead and Bourne End is certainly not possible unless, one or more of the following are done.
- A passing loop is built between Maidenhead and Bourne End.
- A better sequence of trains is used at Bourne End.
- Trains run faster and call in minimum times at intermediate stations.
- Some trains don’t terminate at Maidenhead, but go on to Paddington or another station.
I am left with the conclusion, that with modern trains two tph is possible all day, but with minor adjustments three tph may be possible, especially in the Peaks.
Restoring The Line To High Wycombe
From the images in this post, I think it would be unlikely that the line to High Wycombe would ever be restored.
It would probably need a level crossing and I doubt Network Rail or the locals would like that idea.
I think that the increased frequency of trains between Bourne End and Maidenhead would need a passing loop.
Electrification
It has been planned to electrify Bourne End station and the Marlow Branch Line.
As I said in Is It Bi-Modes And Battery Trains To The Rescue?, nothing has been said by the Rail Minister about any plans for the electrification of the Marlow Branch.
But I did take these pictures at Maidenhead station today.
Why would the platform for the Marlow Branch and the first couple of hundred metres of the branch be electrified?
Especially, as there appeared to be no sign of work on the rest of the line between Maindenhead and Bourne End!
Given what I saw and wrote about increased frequencies, I think there are four possibilities.
- The Marlow Branch continues to be run as now..
- It receives traditional electrification later.
- The line is electrified just enough to charge trains with an IPEMU-capability or batteries.
- It has something to do with reversing Crossrail trains.
Option 1 and 2 are possibilities, but Crossrail are reversing trains to the West of the station.
It would also appear that sufficient work is being done for option 3.
Consider.
- There appears to be no work going on to lower the track in the numerous bridges.
- The clearances, are enough for a battery-powered train or IPEMU, which would be those needed for a Class 165 train.
- The line is only just over seven miles long, which would be within battery range.
- The line has at least two level crossings, which can be difficult to electrify.
- Putting overhead wiring on Bourne End Railway Bridge could rightly meet with objections.
Perhaps the best way to run the branch would be to run it almost as two separate services, as it is currently done in the Peak.
- A newer two-car diesel, like say a Class 172 train, runs the shuttle between Marlow and Bourne End.
- A four-car electric multiple unit with an IPEMU-capability, runs the Bourne End to Maidenhead service, under battery power charging at Maidenhead station, using the 200 metres or so of overhead wires.
- The trains are timed to meet at Bourne End, where passengers change between the trains.
- Certain Bourne End to Maidenhead trains could be extended to Paddington, as they are now in the Peak. I think they would take two hours for the round trip.
- In some ways the biggest advantage is that the only new infrastructure, would be the electrification at Maidenhead station, that is currently in progress.
I feel it is all feasible.
Conclusions
On current timings, two tph is very feasible and three tph may be a possibility and a certainty in the Peak.
What benefits would passengers get from this level of service?
- They get a turn-up-and-go service of at least two tph.
- They get newer trains with more capacity.
- Some of the trains would be electric-powered.
And the train operator?
- They get newer trains with more capacity.
- They would only need to allocate a small number of trains to provide the service.
- They get an easy-to-deliver service.
Hopefully, the quality service would attract more passengers and generate profits.
Surely though, Network Rail are the biggest winner, as they would only need to get the infrastructure into tip-top condition, add a small amount of electrification and give it a thorough testing.
Will it happen?
I have no idea, but it certainly looks like something innovative is being assembled.
If whatever Network Rail and GWR are planning, should involve the use of IPEMUs or battery-powered trains and it proved to be a success, then it would open up the possibility of several branch and other lines receiving the same electrification by stealth.
- Barking Riverside Extension
- Didcot Parkway to Oxford
- Felixstowe Branch
- Greenford Branch
- Henley Branch
- Marshlink Line
- Sudbury to Marks Tey and Colchester
- Uckfield Branch
- Windsor Branch
It is certainly easier to electrify a line using modified electric trains with batteries, built in a new clean and warm factory in Derby, rather than by traditional methods, which seem to be Network Rail’s money pit.
The Anonymous Widower 