London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21   Report Post  
Old October 6th 20, 02:57 PM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Aug 2003
Posts: 10,125
Default Latest Crossrail Wild video

In message , at 14:45:21 on
Tue, 6 Oct 2020, Recliner remarked:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 12:14:46 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:

In message , at 11:49:29 on
Tue, 6 Oct 2020, Trolleybus remarked:

Personally, I don't think Crossrail should go as far as Reading. I
think Slough was far enough.

Windsor IMO, assuming crossing the mainline is at all possible.

It's single track from Slough and a single platform, so capacity and
the ability to recover during disruption are poor.


If Crossrail is supposed to be for shifting commuters deep into the
core, rather than them being dumped at Paddington on legacy services,
then Reading is a sensible terminus. And don't forget the people
commuting *to* Reading from smaller stations on the GWR corridor.


But conveying commuters from stations in Berkshire to Reading isn't
TfL's job. As Neil says, Crossrail should be focusing on travel in the
Greater London area.


Are there enough paths for both the Crossrail trains you'd be running
only as far as Slough, plus the legacy commuter services from Berkshire?

--
Roland Perry

  #22   Report Post  
Old October 6th 20, 03:40 PM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2019
Posts: 895
Default Latest Crossrail Wild video

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 14:45:21 on
Tue, 6 Oct 2020, Recliner remarked:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 12:14:46 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:

In message , at 11:49:29 on
Tue, 6 Oct 2020, Trolleybus remarked:

Personally, I don't think Crossrail should go as far as Reading. I
think Slough was far enough.

Windsor IMO, assuming crossing the mainline is at all possible.

It's single track from Slough and a single platform, so capacity and
the ability to recover during disruption are poor.

If Crossrail is supposed to be for shifting commuters deep into the
core, rather than them being dumped at Paddington on legacy services,
then Reading is a sensible terminus. And don't forget the people
commuting *to* Reading from smaller stations on the GWR corridor.


But conveying commuters from stations in Berkshire to Reading isn't
TfL's job. As Neil says, Crossrail should be focusing on travel in the
Greater London area.


Are there enough paths for both the Crossrail trains you'd be running
only as far as Slough, plus the legacy commuter services from Berkshire?


No, they'd need to change where the services meet.

  #23   Report Post  
Old October 6th 20, 04:11 PM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Aug 2003
Posts: 10,125
Default Latest Crossrail Wild video

In message , at 15:40:31 on Tue, 6 Oct 2020,
Recliner remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 14:45:21 on
Tue, 6 Oct 2020, Recliner remarked:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 12:14:46 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:

In message , at 11:49:29 on
Tue, 6 Oct 2020, Trolleybus remarked:

Personally, I don't think Crossrail should go as far as Reading. I
think Slough was far enough.

Windsor IMO, assuming crossing the mainline is at all possible.

It's single track from Slough and a single platform, so capacity and
the ability to recover during disruption are poor.

If Crossrail is supposed to be for shifting commuters deep into the
core, rather than them being dumped at Paddington on legacy services,
then Reading is a sensible terminus. And don't forget the people
commuting *to* Reading from smaller stations on the GWR corridor.

But conveying commuters from stations in Berkshire to Reading isn't
TfL's job. As Neil says, Crossrail should be focusing on travel in the
Greater London area.


Are there enough paths for both the Crossrail trains you'd be running
only as far as Slough, plus the legacy commuter services from Berkshire?


No, they'd need to change where the services meet.


And the local trains reverse and go back to Reading? Has Slough got
enough platforms for that, as well as reversing the Crossrails.
--
Roland Perry
  #24   Report Post  
Old October 6th 20, 08:12 PM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2019
Posts: 895
Default Latest Crossrail Wild video

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:40:31 on Tue, 6 Oct 2020,
Recliner remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 14:45:21 on
Tue, 6 Oct 2020, Recliner remarked:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 12:14:46 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:

In message , at 11:49:29 on
Tue, 6 Oct 2020, Trolleybus remarked:

Personally, I don't think Crossrail should go as far as Reading. I
think Slough was far enough.

Windsor IMO, assuming crossing the mainline is at all possible.

It's single track from Slough and a single platform, so capacity and
the ability to recover during disruption are poor.

If Crossrail is supposed to be for shifting commuters deep into the
core, rather than them being dumped at Paddington on legacy services,
then Reading is a sensible terminus. And don't forget the people
commuting *to* Reading from smaller stations on the GWR corridor.

But conveying commuters from stations in Berkshire to Reading isn't
TfL's job. As Neil says, Crossrail should be focusing on travel in the
Greater London area.

Are there enough paths for both the Crossrail trains you'd be running
only as far as Slough, plus the legacy commuter services from Berkshire?


No, they'd need to change where the services meet.


And the local trains reverse and go back to Reading? Has Slough got
enough platforms for that, as well as reversing the Crossrails.


Remember that Reading was never the original target for Crossrail. What
would have happened at Maidenhead?

  #25   Report Post  
Old October 7th 20, 05:32 AM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Aug 2003
Posts: 10,125
Default Latest Crossrail Wild video

In message , at 20:12:31 on Tue, 6 Oct 2020,
Recliner remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:40:31 on Tue, 6 Oct 2020,
Recliner remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 14:45:21 on
Tue, 6 Oct 2020, Recliner remarked:
On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 12:14:46 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote:

In message , at 11:49:29 on
Tue, 6 Oct 2020, Trolleybus remarked:

Personally, I don't think Crossrail should go as far as Reading. I
think Slough was far enough.

Windsor IMO, assuming crossing the mainline is at all possible.

It's single track from Slough and a single platform, so capacity and
the ability to recover during disruption are poor.

If Crossrail is supposed to be for shifting commuters deep into the
core, rather than them being dumped at Paddington on legacy services,
then Reading is a sensible terminus. And don't forget the people
commuting *to* Reading from smaller stations on the GWR corridor.

But conveying commuters from stations in Berkshire to Reading isn't
TfL's job. As Neil says, Crossrail should be focusing on travel in the
Greater London area.

Are there enough paths for both the Crossrail trains you'd be running
only as far as Slough, plus the legacy commuter services from Berkshire?

No, they'd need to change where the services meet.


And the local trains reverse and go back to Reading? Has Slough got
enough platforms for that, as well as reversing the Crossrails.


Remember that Reading was never the original target for Crossrail.


It was, but they had to deny it in order to reduce the projected costs
(awaiting some tooth fairy to pay for 'extending' it to Reading).

What would have happened at Maidenhead?


Crossrail would have reversed, but the locals from Reading would have
run through to Paddington. Whether they in fact had sufficient
paths/platforms to do that is probably lost in the mists of time.
--
Roland Perry


  #26   Report Post  
Old October 9th 20, 03:00 PM posted to uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jun 2016
Posts: 117
Default Latest Crossrail Wild video

In article , Roland Perry
writes
Remember that Reading was never the original target for Crossrail.


It was, but they had to deny it in order to reduce the projected costs
(awaiting some tooth fairy to pay for 'extending' it to Reading).


No: they wanted to make sure that the Reading rebuild didn't get dumped
on the Crossrail budget. Once the rebuild was done and dusted and, more
to the point, paid for, suddenly Reading was the plan all along.

--
Clive D.W. Feather


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Latest Progress Or Lack Thereof Of Crossrail C[_2_] London Transport 6 May 9th 18 03:51 PM
Crossrail latest videos Basil Jet[_4_] London Transport 0 February 28th 18 08:59 AM
Video of Crossrail tunnels Basil Jet[_4_] London Transport 0 July 2nd 15 10:26 AM
Crossrail 2 latest eastender[_4_] London Transport 15 October 30th 14 03:27 PM
Latest official Crossrail Line Diagram John Rowland London Transport 0 August 4th 04 10:10 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:38 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 London Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about London Transport"

 

Copyright © 2017