Reading Station improvements

[whole diary]

[eightf48544]

Sorry to disagree with you electric train but stopping Crossrail short at Maidenhead completely disrupts large passenger flows from Reading to intermeadiate stations.

There is a very counterflow from East of Maidenhead into Reading and equally there is a heavy flow from Reading (and West thereof) and Twyford (plus Henley) to stations East of Maidenhead in particualr Slough Hayes and Ealing Broadway. All these passengers who currently enjoy athrough train will have to change.

For instance currently with one change at Reading you can to an aweful lot of places from Taplow. To add a change one stop down the line doesn't make rail tavel attractive especialy as many will be leisure journies with luggage.

[willc]

If anyone wants to get a feel for the areas being talked about at Reading station, there are quite a few pictures in this forum thread on pages three and four.

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=501601

[IndustryInsider]

A very good map - the most detailed I've seen is on page 4, too.  I'm intending to do a series of pictures showing the transformation at Reading over the coming years (at roughly 6 monthly intervals) , in a similar style to ones I have done at Bicester North.  I will share them on here of course.

[ChrisB]

Where are the Bicester North ones?....

[IndustryInsider]

You can find them here, Chris.

http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=7250.30

I'll add a third picture in a couple of months when all is finished at Bicester North.  For Reading I plan to visit the same ten or so spots every six months to record the changes over the next five years or so until the scheme is complete and slowly produce a mosaic and slideshow of the changes.  Some of the locations (such as the overbridge) will become inaccessible after a couple of years, but others, such as the multi-storey car park and the current platform 4 should be available throughout.

[paul7575]

A very good map - the most detailed I've seen is on page 4, too. 

I have an earlier small combined version of that 'phase 1 and phase 2 diagram', unfortunately I printed it (without ever saving) straight from a masssive online report that I've never been able to find since - it was labelled up as a 'Corus Rail' drawing! 

Thanks to 'Skyscraper city' then, as that version is now safely stored on my PC, it's possibly the most detailed source I've seen anywhere.  Will still keep a lookout for a geographically correct drawing, one will probably surface eventually...

Paul

[Fish]

Although perhaps not given a much publicity as the new mainline platforms and flyovers the third "Southern" Platform will be a big improvement for pasengers on the Waterloo and North Downs services. Giving as it does a 3rd platform and more importantly eliminating the single track bottleneck over Vastern Road bridge.

My information from our Network Rail Liaison Manager some 4-5 weeks ago is that the 3rd Platform is likely to be shelved due to the cuts.  However, all the preparation work is to go ahead so it can be installed if there is a change of heart subsequently.  Pretty much all the rest of the station development is secure.  However, there are likely to be cuts to the development of the new depot.

[IndustryInsider]

To be honest, the third southern platform is a bit of a luxury, so if anything was to be cut from the scheme then I would agree it should be that.  Provided that the single feed into the platforms is doubled, the platforms are extended to 12-car, and the fly-under is reopened allowing grade separated access to the new high numbered platforms, there should be plenty of capacity.

[paul7575]

Also, if the oft-rumoured joining of some Gatwick and 'west of Reading' services via the new relief platforms ever happened, two platforms for SWT^▸ (South West Trains) would remain perfectly adequate.  As long as the Vastern Rd overbridge is made wide enough for the 3rd paltform and track the rest of the job will presumably be straightforward - although it has been repeatedly said that access to teh site is pretty constrained so it makes practical sense to do the whole job at once.  Maybe the half way house is to do the civils only, and leave the platform structure til later?

Of course in the future they might even be able to shift the responsibility and get BAA to pay for it from their Airtrack budget...

(BTW^▸ (by the way), and to save a new thread, the extra platform at Gatwick was given the go ahead today (on NR^» (Network Rail - home page)'s London and SE press release page). The relevance to FGW^▸ (First Great Western) is that it potentially makes paths available for the Reading Gatwick service at the other end...)

Paul

[ChrisB]

Oxford - Gatwick trains are very much part of the equation for after the upgrade.

[paul7575]

Interestingly, the Sussex RUS^▸ (Route Utilisation Strategy) analysis is that a second Reading - Gatwick service per hour doesn't currently have an adequate BCR^▸ (Benefit Cost Ratio). 

It may be that an extended service would be expected to bring in just enough additional through passengers from Oxford to tip the analysis positive - of course the extra Redhill - Gatwick leg would also tie up another Turbo all day - where would they get it?

Paul

[mjones]

Also, if the oft-rumoured joining of some Gatwick and 'west of Reading' services via the new relief platforms ever happened, two platforms for SWT^▸ (South West Trains) would remain perfectly adequate.  As long as the Vastern Rd overbridge is made wide enough for the 3rd paltform and track the rest of the job will presumably be straightforward - although it has been repeatedly said that access to teh site is pretty constrained so it makes practical sense to do the whole job at once.  Maybe the half way house is to do the civils only, and leave the platform structure til later?

....

Yes, I wondered about that. Given all the expensive and disruptive work needed to install the additional bridge over Vastern Rd, how much money is really saved by not adding the new platform, and how much more expensive and disruptive will it be to come back and add it in the future?

[paul7575]

There is NO reduction in the planned Crossrail stations, the significant change is on the Abbey Wood branch where third rail is going to be used on the surface and the Connaught tunnel (form North Woolwich line).

NR^» (Network Rail - home page) have announced a design contract award today for the Abbey Wood area surface works:

Network Rail has awarded a major design contract for Crossrail works to Balfour Beatty Rail. The contract covers the design phase for works on the two-mile stretch from Plumstead to Abbey Wood in south east London, including the design for the new Abbey Wood station, which is the terminus station on the south east section of the Crossrail route.

The station work will provide two new Crossrail platforms and improved access. In addition, a four-track railway will be created requiring Network Rail to improve five bridges and build two new overhead electrified railway lines between Plumstead portal (where the central tunnel section emerges) and Abbey Wood.

But that might just mean the press office aren't completely up to speed, which wouldn't be unusual...

Paul

[paul7575]

Network Rail (London and SE) press release confirming that Reading BC have cleared the station plans...

http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/Press-Releases/ACTION-STATIONS-FOR-READING-AS-COUNCIL-GIVES-GREEN-LIGHT-TO-REDEVELOPMENT-PLANS-15ab/SearchCategoryID-8.aspx

^The fact that consent has been granted so quickly is thanks to the hard work that has gone on behind the scenes so that our plans are right for Reading, and we appreciate the strong support we^ve had from the council in developing this scheme.

Paul

[willc]

But that might just mean the press office aren't completely up to speed, which wouldn't be unusual...

Or that they are intending to go ahead with overhead wiring to Abbey Wood. And since the press office is the official mouthpiece of the company they are conveying the official position.

Given that the Gravesend extension is still only an aspiration, it would seem something of an absurdity to fit third-rail gear to the trains, which would only be used for a short section of a short branch. And the cost of fitting the trains with DC^▸ (Direct Current) gear would probably wipe out any saving achieved by not improving clearances in the Docklands tunnel.