Maidenhead station - services, facilities, car parking and incidents (merged posts)

[whole diary]

[IndustryInsider]

Sanfrandragon if you could perhaps also try 11 and 12 next time you catch it?  I’m not suggesting everyone will get a seat by any means but the better spread out everyone is the better.

Many times I’ve seen trains packed at one end with plenty of seats at the other - hardly anyone moves down even when announcements are made on the train!  I guess for 20 minutes some don’t think it’s worth it?

[sanfrandragon]

Thanks for that BBM - presumably coach 12 on the 07:02 was the same as coach 11?  That’s the place to head for the best chance of a seat then?  It would be good if Nick and others can try that part of the train to see whether it is usually like that.

I was at the back this am, probably coach 11 or 10, I wasnt counting.  It was full and standing.  Didn't get a seat.

It was probably coach 10. I wish now I'd taken a photo of coach 11 as proof! At MAI^▸ (Maidenhead station) i'd say that more people walked past me into coach 12 than sat down in coach 11 but I'd guess it was just as quiet - presumably if it'd been busy then those people would have returned to coach 11 to grab the empty seats.

Good intel thanks, I'll try right at the back tomorrow.

[NickB]

I’ll give it a bash tomorrow. I reckon I was in coach 8 or 9 (standing where I used to pick up Coach G of the old IET^▸ (Intercity Express Train))

[IndustryInsider]

Any why did they only extend the platforms to take 10 carriages, when they obviously knew they would be increasing to 12?! The front 7 already suffer extra loading due to mainly being the ones most accessable at the prior stations, and then at one of the busiest loading points, they can still not get into all carriages from the platform.

I should imagine that will be down to who was paying for the extensions.  At Maidenhead Crossrail will have paid as they need to get their 9-car 345s to fit.  They’re roughly the same length as ten coaches worth of 387.  The number of longer formations of 387s or IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train) operated by GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) is small - i.e. not an all day operation like at Slough, so I expect nobody wanted to cough up any more money.

That being said, the down relief platform at Maidenhead (and Twyford) are both good for 12-car 387s, so at least all doors open on the way home!

[stuving]

Any why did they only extend the platforms to take 10 carriages, when they obviously knew they would be increasing to 12?! The front 7 already suffer extra loading due to mainly being the ones most accessable at the prior stations, and then at one of the busiest loading points, they can still not get into all carriages from the platform.

I should imagine that will be down to who was paying for the extensions.  At Maidenhead Crossrail will have paid as they need to get their 9-car 345s to fit.  They’re roughly the same length as ten coaches worth of 387.  The number of longer formations of 387s or IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train) operated by GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) is small - i.e. not an all day operation like at Slough, so I expect nobody wanted to cough up any more money.

That being said, the down relief platform at Maidenhead (and Twyford) are both good for 12-car 387s, so at least all doors open on the way home!

Network Rail's project W004 "Thames Valley Electric Multiple Unit Capability Works" included platform lengthenings to take 387s throughout their operating routes, though the work at Slough and Maidenhead was noted as jointly funded with Crossrail. The list of 13 platforms required to reach 12-car length was:
  Slough – Platforms 2, 3, 4 and 5.
  Maidenhead – Platforms 1, 2 ,3, 4 and 5.
  Twyford – Platforms 1, 2 and 3.
  Didcot - Platform 3 – funded by IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) but still delivers 12 car EMU^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit) capability

In September 2018 this work was described in the plan as:
"Milestone:    EIS^▸ (Enters Into Service) Infrastructure authorised (Paddington to Didcot)
Description:   Infrastructure authorised for passenger use
Date:      December 2017
Status:   Complete"

[IndustryInsider]

Well, that’s not happened at Maidenhead (except for Platform 3), or Twyford (also P3).

[Sixty3Closure]

I did wonder if I was reading that correctly as Twyford P3 was completed far later than December 2017. 

I think P1 already is 12 coaches or certainly very close so I wasn't expecting any work on that side of the station.

[stuving]

I did wonder if I was reading that correctly as Twyford P3 was completed far later than December 2017. 

I think P1 already is 12 coaches or certainly very close so I wasn't expecting any work on that side of the station.

Wrong way round - P3 was 244 m from a long time ago, while P1 and P2 were extended to 250 m in 2017/8.

[IndustryInsider]

P3 was extended at Twyford a very short distance, no more than 5 metres.  Correcting what I said earlier though, P1/2 are also 12-car 387 length.  P4, for obvious reasons, will remain 8-car only.

[stuving]

For the record, the following platform lengths (in m) are longer in the latest Western Sectional Appendix (November 2019) than they were in September 2018.

Slough
P2    208>254
P3    192>253
P4    161>253
P5    161>253

Maidenhead
P1    177>210
P2    199>211
P3    198>254
P4    205>204*
p5    205>209*

Twyford    (between June 2017 and June 2018)
P1    172>250
P2    182>250
p3    244>250
[p4    180 no change]

*These look more like remeasurings than extensions

As to why NR^» (Network Rail - home page) claimed to have finished this before they actually did, or in the case of P1 and P2 at Maidenhead didn't fully, that's baffling.

[NickB]

Why would platform 2 at Maidenhead be shorter than 3, given that they are the same block?

[stuving]

Why would platform 2 at Maidenhead be shorter than 3, given that they are the same block?

I wondered that - and the best guess I can come up with is OLE^▸ (Overhead Line Equipment, more often "OHLE") in the way near the platform edge. But from satellite pictures (which predate the extensions) that seems to be just a true on the existing length. But just a minute - haven't you noticed that?

[IndustryInsider]

Why would platform 2 at Maidenhead be shorter than 3, given that they are the same block?

If you look at platform 3 at the London end it now extends a little further.

[NickB]

So the good news is that carriages 10-12 on the 7.02 provided plenty of seats today. Judging by the tube school holidays have kicked in today as well which will help. I think I’ve found my new regular spot on the platform though... bye bye to my travellers from coach 8 after all these years 😁

The bad news is that the 7.07 was badly delayed and lots of cancellations followed that one (only maidenhead cancelled!), so I return to my earlier point about the timetable being wound too tightly. It looks like the linkup at Oxford did for the 7.07 today.

[IndustryInsider]

That’s good to hear.  As you say, numbers will now drop, especially from tomorrow so please report back in the New Year when everyone returns as to how it’s coping.

The actual coupling of the 07:07 went very smoothly this morning, the empty set from the sidings caused the problem as despite having the signal it took several minutes to move - don’t know why.  At least it retained the Maidenhead stop, and it was the following 07:15 that had a Maidenhead stop removed (along with Twyford), but kept its stop at Slough.  The 07:35 also skipped Maidenhead (a short train), but the 12-car 07:32 stopped and left 3 minutes late, arriving Paddington 8 minutes late, so there were 43 carriages worth provided from Maidenhead at 06:48, 07:02, 07:17 and 07:35.

I would say that’s probably the optimal outcome for Maidenhead if infrastructure problems are leading to delays as they were again today.  Perhaps somebody listened after the 07:07’s stop was culled earlier in the week? 

Let’s hope NR^» (Network Rail - home page)’s kit behaves itself properly in the New Year so we can determine just how resilient the new timetable is.