Great Western Coffee Shop

I thought I^d try to start a discussion about how the LTV part of the Greater Western Franchise might eventually end up during and after the several shake-ups that will settle down eventually at the end of the decade.  I think the best way to do this is to list the alterations that will be taking place and to give my opinions on what the best solutions to the various issues raised will be.  It is by no means an easy set of conclusions!


How it is now
The situation now is fairly simple.  The LTV service is operated by a fleet of 20 2-Car Turbos, 37 3-Car Turbos (21 of which are Class 166s), 5x Class 360s used on the Heathrow Connect services, and 2x Class 150s.  Those trains are backed up with a fleet of 5 Class 180s, and certain other services are operated by HSTs.

Turbos exclusively (or near exclusively) cover services from Reading to Guildford/Gatwick, London to Newbury/Bedwyn, Oxford to London stoppers, Oxford to Banbury, London to Greenford, Slough to Windsor, Maidenhead to Marlow, and Twyford to Henley services.  Turbos also cover many of the Oxford to London fasts as well as a few of the Cotswold Line services, backed up with Class 180s and HSTs (especially in the peak hours).

The Class 360s work the half-hourly Heathrow Connect service as well as the Terminal 4 shuttle service at the airport.


What is on the horizon
As I see it, the recent announcements of GWML electrification, further electrification announced in the HLOS, as well as the construction of Crossrail will radically alter the type of train and pattern of service that we will see over the coming years.

There appears to be four distinct stages due before the end of the decade;
1)   The electrification of the routes from London to Oxford/Newbury ^ Scheduled for Dec 2016.
2)   The electrification of the routes from Basingstoke to Reading, the Thames Valley branches, and north of Oxford to Nuneaton via Banbury ^ Scheduled for sometime between 2014-2019.
3)   The replacement of Heathrow Connect service with Crossrail services from Paddington (High Level) to Heathrow at 4tph frequency ^ Scheduled for May 2018.
4)   Full Crossrail implementation ^ Scheduled for Dec 2019.

All of this presents the new operator of the Greater Western Franchise with ever-moving goalposts ^ the number of electric units required between 2016 and 2019 is much more than will be required after 2019 when Crossrail takes over most of the Paddington suburban services.  That presents the franchisee with a problem if it is going to obtain new stock, as it will need somewhere to go to after that!


What kind of service will be operating from December 2016?
By then the London to Oxford/Newbury route should be using electric trains.  But what electric trains?  When Lord Adonis announced the original electrification plan for the GWML in July 2009, he said that Class 319s transferred from the ^Thameslink^ route and given a refresh including air-conditioning would operate over the route.  This is now in doubt, as with further electrification in the North West (where 319s were also going to go), as well as the extensions to the Greater Western franchise operated services, means that even with 86 4-car units ripe for a cascade, that probably won^t be enough to go round.

Will there be an order for new EMUs to work over the Greater Western route?  My guess is that there will be.  The 319s will go up north where they will be much better received by a less demanding public and all 86 will go into use working the newly electrified routes, possibly including some of those currently worked by Transpennine DMUs.

If a new order of EMUs is ordered for the Greater Western franchise, what form will it take?  4-car, 100mph units have been the norm for electric traction orders in recent decades, usually around 80 metres in length with carriages of 20m in length.  That makes them 11m longer than the current 3-Car Turbo fleet, which doesn^t sound like much, but is significant in terms of platform lengths.  I would imagine that they will be specified for 110mph working to make better use of the GWML^s ruling linespeeds (as Network Rail have stated is desirable).  The trouble with having a fleet of 4-car units is that it is much less flexible than the current Turbo fleet of 2 and 3-car lengths.  With the Turbos you can have any configuration from 2-6 carriages with a bit of mixing and matching (you could actually go up to 12 cars with the correct infrastructure).  With 4-car units you either have a 4-car train, or couple two together to go to 8-cars.  This leaves you with the conundrum that 4-car trains won^t be long enough to operate busy services, but 8-car trains would need expensive platform extensions, or a fleet fitted with Selective Door Operation (SDO) equipment ^ not to mention being too long outside of rush hour!  For those reasons, perhaps a 5-car length train would be more suitable to the kind of services most of them will operate on?

Even with 4-car trains, you have problems at some routes currently worked by Turbos.  For example, some or all platforms at places like Appleford, Culham, and Goring would need lengthening if SDO isn^t used.  This is also assuming that places like Southall and West Drayton on the Crossrail route will have been lengthened by 2016, so that 8-car trains will be able to stop there.  In some cases these platforms will only need a couple of metres added to them, but they will all need doing before electric trains take over.

The problem at Bourne End and Marlow is even more serious with the junction at Bourne End meaning a 2-car Turbo is the longest train that can be accommodated when going as far as Marlow.  The operational platforms length could just about be extended to cope with a 3-car 20m electric train though.

Perhaps the points raised in the previous paragraphs means that some EMUs will be ordered that will be of 3-car in length?  Unusual for an EMU, but certainly possible.

The service pattern will be similar to today I should imagine, but there will need to be alterations to the Turbo fleet, especially on the Paddington to Bedwyn service which will presumably become a Paddington to Newbury EMU operated service, with either a diesel Turbo shuttle service from Newbury to Bedwyn or an IEP operated service running though from Paddington via Reading and Newbury serving Kintbury, Hungerford and Bedwyn (and beyond). 

Also, the Paddington-Greenford service will become a West Ealing to Greenford shuttle service (presumably using two units with an increased 15 or 20-minute frequency).  I^m not sure, long term, that the Greenford service staying in the hands of the Greater Western franchise is a good idea, as it will have absolutely no direct link with other Greater Western services post-Crossrail, but whoever operates it, there will be much greater scope for coping with peak passenger growth to and from Paddington as the two paths per hour currently using these 2-car DMUs, could potentially be taken over by 8-car EMU^s until replaced by 10-car Crossrail EMUs in 2019.


List of possible December 2016 options
So, here is a list of the most likely solutions:
1)   Build a new build of a mix of 3 and 4-car EMUs based on the 110mph Class 350 EMU (or equivalent from another supplier).
2)   Use cascaded Class 319s and reduce a few of them in length to 3-cars, or seek other cascaded stock of 3-car length (Perhaps the aging Class 313s currently in use with First Capital Connect?).
3)   Use a 2-car Turbo all day on the Marlow Donkey and extend platforms at other stations to cope with 160m long electric trains (or in some cases 80m).
4)   Modify Bourne End (at significant expense) so that it can handle a 4-car, 80m train and just have a fleet of 80m units.
5)   Obtain a smallish fleet of new/cascaded EMUs, but continue to use a lot of Turbo units ^under the wires^ until 2019 when they will be replaced with Crossrail units.


What kind of service will be operating from December 2019?
At least things will have settled down by then with the only other (known) major change being the new western link into Heathrow Airport, due in the early 20s.  Though of course other major projects in later years, such as HS2 along with whatever else might be dreamt up in the intervening years might mean the situation is anything but settled!

Assuming that the current plan for Crossrail remains, i.e. its western terminus being Maidenhead, then a large number of the inner-LTV services will be taken over by Crossrail.  There will, however, continue to be a reasonable number of services, both diesel and electric, being operated over the LTV routes.

It is likely that the North Downs line from Reading to Gatwick, and the Kennet Line to Newbury and Bedwyn will remain largely unchanged from the service operating from 2016, though there may be a case to provide links further west from Reading to Oxford.  But other routes will all see alterations:

The DMU service from Reading to Basingstoke and Oxford to Banbury could be EMU operated ^ though again, without platform extensions it would have to be a 3-Car EMU.
There will need to be some sort of shuttle service operating from Reading to Slough ^ presumably using EMUs ^ unless somebody sees sense soon and extends Crossrail to Reading.  Sadly the HLOS refused to budge in this respect, saying the majority of respondents to the consolation preferred Maidenhead (mine certainly didn^t!), so we have to assume it won^t happen.

That will mean an EMU operated service from Reading to Slough.  The Oxford to London stopping service which currently runs twice and hour may continue to run (using the two relief line off-peak paths promised between Maidenhead and London), but would probably have some of its stops removed, by perhaps calling after Reading at Twyford, Maidenhead, Slough, Hayes & Harlington, Ealing Broadway and Paddington ^ much as they used to in the Thames Trains days.  The less stops, the harder to path though with all those Crossrail services.  I don^t envy the timetable planners.

You^ll also have a Greater Western operated EMU service operating from London/Reading to Newbury, Maidenhead to Marlow (presumably), Slough to Windsor, Twyford to Henley-On-Thames.  Perhaps the fleet of Heathrow Connect units would be suited to work the Thames Valley branches?  Added to that, the probability that some of the Oxford to London fast trains will also be operated by EMUs, rather than the whole lot going over to IEP operation. 

Peak hour through services to places like Henley and Bourne End are likely to continue, and it^s possible that new services could be provided, for example an hourly London to Swindon EMU service calling at Slough, Reading, Didcot, Wantage and Swindon would enable other IEPs to potentially have stops at Reading and/or Didcot removed.


What do I see happening until the end of the decade?
Very tricky one to answer, that.  There are so many variables.  We^ll all know a lot more when the winning of the franchise is announced and their plans revealed, but here are my hunches as to what service we will see.

Firstly, it doesn^t make business sense to acquire a large fleet of electric units only to see them not needed after just three years when Crossrail takes over.  A smallish fleet of about 25-30 4-car units would probably enable many of the Oxford-Paddington stopping services (and a few of the fast services) and the Newbury-Paddington service to go over to electric traction.  With Turbos continuing to work some of the Reading-Paddington services before being displaced in 2019 by Crossrail trains, that would mean a two phased cascade of Turbo units eventually leaving a core fleet of around 10-15 units for operating the remaining diesel services on the North Downs line as well as Bedwyn to Newbury and West Ealing to Greenford post-2019.  A few of the electric units above could then be reduced to 3-car length to work Oxford-Banbury and Reading-Basingstoke services as well as the Thames Valley branch lines.

I personally don^t think we^ll see any cascaded Class 319s.  The North West will swallow all of them up I think and a new fleet of EMUs will be ordered.  Perhaps a smallish order with a mixture of 5/4/3 cars to attempt to tick all the boxes, with some DMUs continuing under the wires during the period between 2016-2019?

Or, if there is somewhere for the surplus electric units to be cascaded to (such as the Bristol area, or the East-West Rail route), then perhaps a larger order of EMUs could be justified, with the extra units being cascaded there after Crossrail starts to take over in May 2018 and is then fully implemented in December 2019?

An awful lot rests on the huge amount of electrification and other infrastructure improvements coming to fruition on time.  If we look at recent projects, hardly anything is completed on time.  Look at the original estimates for Cotswold Line Redoubling when they were at the early stages of planning ^ it was a year late.  Evergreen 3 should have been up and running in less than a year from now, when in reality it hasn^t even been authorised yet.  Chiltern Mainline was a few months late on the revised delivery date at the start of last year.   Even certain elements of the Reading rebuild are running late when compared with the dates stated in the CP4 delivery plan statement of March 2009 ^ we should have seen the new platforms opening this November, not next Easter and the new maintenance depot by next February and not the end of next year.

Maybe those are fairly small slippages, but when a whole heap of unit cascades, timetable changes, staff training etc. rests on all of the jigsaw pieces of these big projects being put into place on time ^ then that worries me a little!

So, what do people on the forum think?  Am I right, am I wrong, have I missed potential problems and solutions completely?   We^ve touched on some of these issues already, but in looking at them as a whole wider picture is very important in my opinion.

Sadly, as a mere local customer on FGW services I probably don't have enough detailed knowledge to comment on your post II but I appreciate the time and effort you must have out in to create this and I look forward to following the discussion with interest.

One thing is for sure - we are going to see a lot of changes in our region over the next decade - it will be interesting to see what form the rail services will take when my son (currently 7 years old) is old enough to work. Who knows, maybe his dream of becoming a train driver will come true !

Thanks for the post, a very good summary IMO! ;D

One thing we can be sure of is that trains will be smaller than they should, not enough for expansion, Crossrail staying at Maidenhead resulting in a stupid service pattern, I bet the new EMUs will not be fit for 110.

Oxford services will be cut to 100mph EMU operation, ending the prospects for journey time decreases. A service that could be 45mins with frequent services and low fares (combined with Chiltern's service) could destroy the coach market. Cotswold services could be sped up.

Extra stops at Maidenhead and Tyford will occur on many services (inclduing all Oxford "fasts") to compensate for Crossrail. Of course, what we need is for stops to be CUT!

Well, the ITT document uses the following text to describe speeds of the units:

The composition of the fleet to operate the London suburban services from December 2016 and in subsequent years. Bidders shall explain the reasons for choosing:
between new and cascaded fleets;
the performance of the rolling stock including top speed capability (e.g. 90mph, 100, 110, 125 etc) and acceleration and braking rates;
the mix of diesel and electric sets;
which displaced vehicles will be redeployed within the franchise and which vehicles will be returned to their owning ROSCOs when Crossrail takes over services in May 2018 and December 2019; and
continued operation of DOO where it is in operation at the date of this ITT.

It should be noted that Network Rail believes that vehicles capable of 110mph running are necessary to maximise the benefits of the overall infrastructure investments on the route. Bidders should come to their own assessments of this view.

That's where you let yourself down sometimes, Btline, with statements like 'Oxford services will be cut to 100mph EMU operation' as nobody knows if that's the case or not yet - hence this debate, and even if they are that's better than the many 90mph services currently provided.  Presumably those services currently operated at 125mph will continue to do so with IEP operation.

I would hazard a guess that cascaded stock will be 100mph and if new stock it procured it will be 110mph as that seems to be the way we're going with recent EMU orders.  A 110mph service from Oxford to London would make a sub-50 minute journey time within reach if Slough was cut, and sub-55 minutes if it wasn't.  Either way, I doubt 45 minutes on a regular basis is likely.  I think stops at Maidenhead and Twyford could be allowed for in the two relief paths guaranteed, rather than on Oxford to London services, but of course that might not happen.

I'm just basing my hypothesis on my pessimistic view of things. :-\ Esp the view of Worcester as Cinderella. (semaphores won't be axed until the 2050s)

I read that Xrail would almost certainly get extended to RDG. Now it looks as if it won't. (and for goodness sake, get it onto the WCML slows) This shows that things get changed.

I was discussing the use of 319's on the TVL today with someone involved in the GWML electrification .......... there is a bit of an issue and that is the over promise of 319's to the extent that the promise use is about 50% more than there is train sets for  ;D

An option is some 395 type trains (without out shoe gear) to run the Oxford direct fasts and potentially a London - Swindon semi fast with potential new stations at Wantage Rd and one other location near Swindon (radical I know  :o )

When the Crossrail order is placed additional shorter Units ordered for the TVL services perhaps with different seat config, oh a don't forget there will be a order for the Cardiff Valley lines ......... or are they getting 313  ;D

Then there is cascaded stock coming off of the Liverpool Street services

Thanks II for a very good summary.

Definitely a case of "May you live in interesting times"

How about to solve the Marlow problem get some proper tram/trains a la Karlsrurh or Kassel dual voltage 600Dc 25Kv? Electrify the Marlow branch with lightweight tram caternery and put some loops in at Cookaham and elsewhere they can be relatively short and run a 10 or 15 minute shuttle with peak trains to and from Padd. 

Otherewise a small set of Stadler Narrow gauge EMUS, they seem to much the same size as our untis, the only trouble is most are now low floor so you add the problem of platform heights.

If I come up with any other mad ideas I'll post them.

 

I suppose that having a compatible fleet with Crossrail would be useful in terms of rescuing failed trains - perhaps a 5-car variant?  With regard to the Crossrail sets, I wonder what seating layout will be chosen?  Perhaps, in a 10-car train, a good compromise would be to have a 3-4-3 formation where the three coaches at either end have comfortable suburban seating, mostly 'airline' style (or 'bus' style as Broadgauge describes it) at 2+2, with the middle four coaches (likely to be the busiest within central London) fitted with longitudinal seating 'tube' style giving plenty of standing space?

I quite agree with your comments on Crossrail, though Worcester is set to lose its semaphores a long time before the 2050s according to the Invitation To Tender for the Greater Western franchise:

The Western Operating Strategy proposes the acceleration of three Re-signalling Projects in CP5 to deliver significant operational and OPEX benefits:
1) Plymouth ^ Penzance Re-signalling (2017);
2) Worcester Area (2018); and
3) Greenford Re-signalling (2018).

Hooray I assume resignally includes a new track layout at Worcester?

I expect we'll find out more when NR releases their CP5 Strategic Business Plan, which I think is due next January and I must say I'm bloody looking forward to reading it!  :P

No mention in this discussion about the talked about Oxford/Gatwick service using the refurbished underpass at Reading. Mark Hopwood has spoken optimisticly about this possibility. Would that mean using one of the existing 2 slow TPH Oxford/London trains to make an hourly O/G service? How about power souces for such a service - 5 car Bi-mode?

I did mention it in the post-Dec 2019 section (but it probably should have been mentioned in the post-Dec 2016 section).  I'm in two minds about it to be honest, and I think the electrification plan actually decreases the likelihood of it happening, even though it becomes slightly easier using the underpass at Reading.  I don't think there are the paths, unless you utilise one of the Oxford to Reading stopping paths which then means slow journeys, as the minimum time for an Oxford-Reading stopper is 40 minutes with trains currently taking much longer thanks to long layovers at Didcot.  Traction wise, you really are looking at a Turbo unless there is some infill 3rd Rail enabling 319s to be a possibility - I can't see that though to be honest.  I certainly can't personally see how a 5-Car bi-mode operated train would make any money.  Then again, Mr Hopwood might have other ideas!

Perhaps, as used to happen until about seven years ago, a couple of early morning/late evening Gatwick services could be extended from/to Oxford?

In some ways, I think a better solution would be for a 2-hourly XC service using the current Newcastle to Reading trains which could then go forward to Guildford, Gatwick and (possibly) on to Brighton, that would give useful direct (and fast) links from Birmingham, Leamington, Banbury and Oxford (and Coventry in the longer term) but then again it's already been tried in a manner of speaking back around 10 years ago, requires an extra unit, and long signalling headways on the North Downs line after Wokingham make pathing difficult!

The North Downs line needs an upgrade - now.
Then fast & frequent trains can run from Reading (or Oxford) to both Tonbridge/Ashford (how about Canterbury/ Margate in the Summer?) and Gatwick/Brighton.
Supplemented by local services following 3 mins behind.

Of course, this would require re-signalling, electrification and flyovers at Redhill, and possibly another platform at Gatwick.

East Surrey and Kent are really blocked off from the rest of the UK by London, this would help by getting local and long distance traffic off the Southern M25.

Is there really a demand for through services of that distance, especally as you good do Reading - Stratford on Crossrail and change onto HS1 Or even a change at Faringdon and St Pancras


Gatwick is having another platform built.  North Downs electrification now there is a quandary, to take up the option of passive provision of an AC / DC interface at Reading or wire the Reading's and Windsor's to Staines or further East and the wire the North Downs or conrail the North Downs (unlikely), either way the North Downs electrification is not even on the radar for CP6 in other words the very long grass

Isn't it interesting how things come round again.

BR were castigated for building the Bletchley flyover yet it's coming back to life.

I am sure that as part of the same scheme (round London Frieght)  there are dusty plans in the archive for a flyover at Redhill.

However one thing that never seems to be mentionrd is the two track bottle neck through the tunnels  South of Guildford to Shalford Junction or even a flyover at the latter. 



Edit note: Typos corrected, for clarity. CfN.

With regard to the Oxford-London stoppers, it should be noted that East-West Rail have pushed the case for their half-hourly Bedford/Milton Keynes services to continue beyond Oxford as stopping trains to Reading.  On that front I think they are wrong for several reasons, and that now electrification has been announced an ideal scenario would be to extend one of them to Bristol, to provide a real east to west link, with the other calling at Didcot before (possibly) continuing on to Reading.

Benefits of doing that include:

• Reinstatement of the direct Bristol to Oxford service.
• Better chance of reopening Wooton Basset, Corsham and Wantage stations which could be served by these trains.
• Better range of destinations served by direct trains; Bristol to Oxford; Bath to Bicester; Swindon to Bedford are a few of the examples.
• Removal of two trains per hour laying over at Reading, which when rebuilt with all those through platforms is better suited to through trains.
• Reading to Bedford will become much easier after Crossrail and having a stopping service from Reading to Oxford extending to Bedford would not be very attractive journey time wise.

I agree totally with II. Travelling from Reading to Milton Keynes and eastwards would mean going around a semi-circle. Whilst some would use it to/from Reading, I think the greatest potential is from the west, a more or less southwest/northeast diagonal journey to and from the stations mentioned by II but also to the north-east avoiding that horror spot - Birmingham New Street.

Yes, the XC option is an interesting one as it would cut quite a lot of time out of the through journey time on certain flows, though Birmingham does produce a lot of the loadings on those trains.  The GRIP 4 East-West Rail study does some calculations on various routes which is well worth a read for those that are interested.  I could certainly see that rising passenger numbers could justify one train per hour heading to/from the North-East via Oxford/Bedford/Leicester, that could also be a service starting from somewhere like Bristol to give the flows I mentioned in my previous post.

The GRIP 4 report (made well before electrification was on the agenda) can be viewed at:  http://www.eastwestrail.org.uk/the_project/reports/ (http://www.eastwestrail.org.uk/the_project/reports/)

I would urge anyone who agrees with the opinion that services running as stopping trains to/from Reading is not a very good way of maximising the benefits of the direct link, to put them to EastWest rail via their website, as I have already done.  The direct link to do so is at:  http://www.eastwestrail.org.uk/your-views/ (http://www.eastwestrail.org.uk/your-views/)

I've certainly had to travel to Oxford, Milton Keynes, Bow Brickhill, Cambridge, Ely and Norwich over recent years, many several times, and a direct train would have been rather nice ... which doesn't in itself justify a service. But -  "blue sky" - how about a true connectional service ... linking up with radial routes from London (and others) as follows:
* London to Weymouth at Dorchester
* London to Exeter at Yeovil Joint
* London to Taunton  and beyond at Westbury
* London to Bristol and Weston-super-Mare at Chippenham
* London to South Wales and to Gloucester at Swindon
* Birmingham to Southampton at Oxford
* London (Marylebone) to Stratford-upon-Avon and Birmingham at Bicester Joint
* London (Marylebone) to Aylesbury and beyond at Claydon
* London to Coventry, Liverpool, Manchester etc (West Coast) at Bletchley
* London to Leicester, Derby and Nottingham at Bedford
* London to Peterborough, Doncaster, York and Newcastle etc (East Coast) at Sandy
* London to King's Lynn at Cambridge
* Ipswich to Peterborough etc at Ely
* London to Great Yarmouth at Norwich

Small piece in October Modern Railways about changing entrance to Redhill and the possibily of buiding an extra platform for the Gatwicks/ Readings to reverse. No mention of electrification though.

The extra platform at Redhill has been on the cards for a few years, but it is now explicitly stated in the DfT's CP5 HLOS proposals:

"44. The Secretary of State wishes to augment rail access to Gatwick Airport through capacity enhancement at Redhill..." with the solution listed in the acompanying 'Illustrative Options' being an additional platform;  so it seems a bit more than a possibility...

Paul

Hello! I've just come across this forum. We're wondering how the Marlow branch would be operated post-electrification. One possibility would be a stored energy solution between Bourne End and Marlow along with an all-day half-hourly service to Maidenhead. Some EMUs will of course be displaced from Liverpool Street services by Crossrail and it wouldn't be difficult to convert some 315s to 3 cars, but they will be pretty well life expired by that time.

Conversion to a tramway and extension to High Wycombe had been mooted, and that would have atractions for the local community. Also it might be easier to circumvent the places where the trackbed has been built over, in particular at Wooburn. Loudwater is not so easy because of the M40 but light industrial premeses would be easier to relocate. However reinstating the line for heavy rail would provide a diversionary route for the Chiltern line and open up the possibility of a HW to Heathrow service once Heathrow western access is complete. Also commuters on the line value their through services to/from London in the peaks.

The Greenford service from West Ealing could be extended over the GW line to South Ruislip and West Ruislip, where reversal would be easier, and transferred to the Chiltern franchise. This would require reinstatement of platforms at Greenford and Northolt. This would provide a useful connection between the Chiltern main line and Crossrail without requiring a short hop on the Central line. Should the HS2 interchange at Old Oak Common be built then a full service could be restored from the Chiltern line to OOC. Currently there's just the Parliamentary into Paddington once a day and one wonders what will happen to that when Crossrail starts operating.

Welcome to the forum, Western Explorer. I'm sure some of our knowledgeable bunch will be along shortly to debate the points you raise.

Oh, and nice choice of forum name. I'm a big fan of the 'Western' diesel-hydraulics.  :D

As others have stated welcome to the forum Western Explorer.

Now to answer one of your questions about the Marlow branch the main problem being the Marlow platform at Bourne End  although you could perhaps extend the platform towards the main road outside the station although you have to ask what would have if a train overan the platform.

I personally think a tram-train proposal would be good for the branch although that would me the lack of through trains to London which could still end however. using tram-trains I hope would offer much better frequencies and the extensions to other destinations perhaps involving on street operation.

A lot of the class 315's have been mooted for use on the Cardiff Valley lines network along wit the the class 313's which are presently with Southern and as for reducing them to 3 carriage units, perhaops you could but you would have to remove all the equipment which is under the 4th carriages (Which inccidently was a reason given why the class 319's couldnt be reduced to 3 carriage units).

The only other option could be to order some new 2 carriage emu's but this is likely to be expensive as no such emu exists at the moment unless you coulnt the class 456's which are DC only.

Quite apart from being DC-only, the 456s are also slated to join the SWT fleet as part of the "ten-car railway" plans on the suburban/Windsor services out of Waterloo.

You've also got the 2-car 466s on Southeastern, but they're also DC only.

I don't think there are any 2-car 25kV electric units, but as you say it would just about be possible to squeeze a 3-car unit into the down platform at Bourne End. One driver did make an attempt at extending the line a few years ago, and the result made the front of the local papers :-( I think it was after that that they installed the friction buffer stops.

There's no chance of any more third rail electrification outside existing areas, and NR would like to convert the SE to overhead. However if the Southampton-Basingstoke section is converted to AC then some of the redundant equipment could be used for infill on less heavily used lines such as North Downs, Uckfield or Marsh Link. That would require dual voltage stock on the Soton/Weymouth services.

There used to be the turbo charged 309 2 cars with the same horsepower as the 4 car sets.

10 car train went like a rocket.

Fastest start stop times over short distances in the world, 66 mph average over around 15 miles.

Plus they used to be 4 car sets with a Griddle car with real  steak (cooked to order) in a bap!