Greenford Branch line - services, rolling stock, cancellations and engineering works

[whole diary]

[JayMac]

This week, Chiltern services that start at Kidderminster, Stratford-on-Avon or Birmingham Moor Street are terminating at Leamington Spa, services that start at Birmingham Snow Hill are terminating at Didcot Parkway (running non-stop from Banbury).

Services from Aylesbury via Amersham will terminate at Harrow-on-the-Hill with onward connection via the Bakerloo to Baker Street.

There are trains starting at Bicester North running into Paddington (non stop from Gerrards Cross) and trains starting at Banbury running as far as West Ruislip.

Timetables here.

So to answer the OPs^▸ (Original Poster / topic starter) question it doesn't appear possible to do Greenford west curve on a Travelcard or Oyster^▸ (Smartcard system used by passengers on Transport for London services) as the services to Paddington originating at Bicester North make their final call prior to Paddington at Gerrards Cross. It is possible that the Chiltern services will not actually be travelling on the Greenford branch, instead going through Park Royal. The FGW^▸ (First Great Western) Greenford services merely being suspended to free up paths and platform space at Paddington.

[eightf48544]

Apparently FGW^▸ (First Great Western) have hired a Chiltern 165/0 2 car to work the Greenford branch. It comes complete with driver as FGW drivers aren't trained on 165/0. They have funy things like ATP^▸ (Automatic Train Protection) and tripcocks.

Saw set in Padd this pm.

[anthony215]

The use of the Chiltern class 165's is to allow 150002 to be transfered down to the Exeter area to provide more capacity during the summer period.

Though I have heard today that FGW^▸ (First Great Western) had two chiltern class 165's on hire working the Paddington - Greenford services

[Network SouthEast]

Apparently FGW^▸ (First Great Western) have hired a Chiltern 165/0 2 car to work the Greenford branch. It comes complete with driver as FGW drivers aren't trained on 165/0. They have funy things like ATP^▸ (Automatic Train Protection) and tripcocks.

Saw set in Padd this pm.

Not sure where you heard that, FGW drivers can drive them. And they have done so today. Just like when 165/0 units were hired in the past.

[a-driver]

165002 arrived from Aylesbury yesterday morning and was bought to Paddington by a Chiltern driver as they sign the route.  The plan is for it to be used on Greenford or Basingstoke services.
It is worked by us FGW^▸ (First Great Western) drivers though!  The ATP^▸ (Automatic Train Protection) system is isolated and the tripcock system can also be isolated although not necssary.

[bobm]

165002 arrived from Aylesbury yesterday morning and was bought to Paddington by a Chiltern driver as they sign the route.  The plan is for it to be used on Greenford or Basingstoke services.
It is worked by us FGW^▸ (First Great Western) drivers though!  The ATP^▸ (Automatic Train Protection) system is isolated and the tripcock system can also be isolated although not necssary.

Gather it was due to be used on the Basingstoke line this morning...but failed.

[Jason]

Gather it was due to be used on the Basingstoke line this morning...but failed.

Ah yes, I posted on the RDG^‡(resolve)-BAS channel, it ran as http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/C41960/2014/07/22/advanced
The return 07:37 service to BAS was cancelled due to technical problems

[a-driver]

165002 arrived from Aylesbury yesterday morning and was bought to Paddington by a Chiltern driver as they sign the route.  The plan is for it to be used on Greenford or Basingstoke services.
It is worked by us FGW^▸ (First Great Western) drivers though!  The ATP^▸ (Automatic Train Protection) system is isolated and the tripcock system can also be isolated although not necssary.

Gather it was due to be used on the Basingstoke line this morning...but failed.

They had problems with it again on the Greenford branch this morning.  Unable to release the brakes at Greenford.

[readytostart]

Just as an aside, BAS is Bere Alston, BSK^▸ (Brake Standard Corridor (carriage)) is Basingstoke!

[grahame]

Interested to see on the tube map for 2050 that the Greenford branch service runs to Gerrard's Cross ... and Crossrail to Ebbsfleet.  Alas, no tube / overground service to Ashford or Staines 

http://www.newsshopper.co.uk/resources/files/32832/
via
http://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/lewisham/11462033._/?

Is there logic (from flows and potential flows) in extending out from Greenford - either via tube or Network Rail lines?

[paul7575]

I think with the various interchanges available with the Central Line (between West Ruislip and Greenford) and with Crossrail at West Ealing, it is a way of increasing the overall journey options for the medium distance stations on the Chiltern route, without having to run extra or longer trains into Marylebone which is probably approaching capacity limits. 

The convention the author uses on the map is to just name a generic station on the route outside the zones, it wouldn't necessarily be Gerrards Cross - although that has the infrastructure for reversals - the actual proposal in the source TfL^» (Transport for London - about) document is to run from High Wycombe to either West Ealing or Old Oak Common, by CP6^▸ (Control Period 6 - The five year period between 2019 and 2024)/2024.  Of course there are also well rehearsed reasons why Crossrail actually requires the 'Greenford' route to terminate at West Ealing.

It comes from a table on page 147 of this 22 Mb TfL document, and is definitely concerning Chiltern rather than tube: https://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/transport_supporting_paper.pdf

Note that the map is a third party attempt to clarify some of the various proposals in the London 2050 report, it isn't a TfL map as such, (although it has just been distributed wildly all around the internet), a chap who posts on the London Reconnections website did it himself...

Paul

[Red Squirrel]

That's a very interesting report - thanks for highlighting it. I particularly like what, to me, is a new word: densification. In this context it refers to the desirability of knocking down thirties semis in outer suburbia and replacing them with higher density new homes, thus giving sufficient population density to support public transport. Bring it on, I say!

[eightf48544]

I've always thought it very odd that Crossrail didn't take over OOC^▸ (Old Oak Common (depot)) to West Ruslip and maybe Wycombe. With a big interchange at North Acton a station on the mainline at Greenford.

Crossrail could also have served the branch to West Ealing (terminate) from Greenford East (?) Jn. The bay at Greenford Central line would then close. This would have given say 6 tph less trains terminating at Padd. Electrifying the Greenford loop also gives an opportunity to turn units and prevent uneven tyre wear caused by the sharp left hand curve on the Heathrow branch.

It wasn't even in the early plans for Crossrail which envisage linking with the Aylesbury line somewhere around Neasden. I was never quite sure how that junction was going to be made.   

[stuving]

I've always thought it very odd that Crossrail didn't take over OOC^▸ (Old Oak Common (depot)) to West Ruslip and maybe Wycombe. With a big interchange at North Acton a station on the mainline at Greenford.

Crossrail could also have served the branch to West Ealing (terminate) from Greenford East (?) Jn. The bay at Greenford Central line would then close. This would have given say 6 tph less trains terminating at Padd. Electrifying the Greenford loop also gives an opportunity to turn units and prevent uneven tyre wear caused by the sharp left hand curve on the Heathrow branch.

It wasn't even in the early plans for Crossrail which envisage linking with the Aylesbury line somewhere around Neasden. I was never quite sure how that junction was going to be made.   

Option C was:

Run from Paddington, via the predominantly freight-only line, through Greenford to South Ruislip. North of South Ruislip, the route would serve all stations to High Wycombe. An alternative sub-option provided two routes to High Wycombe ^ the one described above plus a route via Sudbury and Harrow Road.

This was appraised thus:

5.5 The High Wycombe corridor (corridor C) performed poorly against the GOMMMS sub-objective of transport economic efficiency. This reflected the low level of passenger demand and crowding relief provided by this option relative to other western corridors. In addition, the operation of a high frequency Crossrail service from High Wycombe raised significant concerns about the levels of service reliability that could be achieved for both Crossrail and the Chiltern Trains services that currently operate in the corridor. As a result of these factors, this corridor was not selected for inclusion in the preferred scheme.

(From Crossrail Information Paper A1 - Development of the Crossrail Route)

[grahame]

Cancellations this morning (27/12/2014)

expand 07:45 London Paddington to Greenford due 08:09
expand 08:15 London Paddington to Greenford due 08:39
expand 08:16 Greenford to London Paddington due 08:42
expand 08:45 London Paddington to Greenford due 09:09
expand 08:46 Greenford to London Paddington due 09:12
expand 09:15 London Paddington to Greenford due 09:39
expand 09:16 Greenford to London Paddington due 09:42
expand 09:45 London Paddington to Greenford due 10:09
expand 09:46 Greenford to London Paddington due 10:12

This train will be cancelled.
This is due to over-running engineering works.
Additional Information:
First Great Western tickets will be valid on:
London Underground services to/from Greenford and Central London.
London Underground services to/from Acton Central Line stations to/from Central London and Ealing Broadway
London Buses between Ealing Broadway and Greenford

Is it my imagination, or does the Greenford service get cancelled / cut back an awful lot more than the other Thames Valley branches - Windsor, Marlow and Henley?