"asdf" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 17:08:11 +0000 (UTC), "Peter Masson"
wrote:

These could all be accommodated by a Paddington-Reading DMU...

which would duplicate Crossrail between Paddington and Maidenhead,
taking up
track capacity on the Relief Lines

Only as much track capacity as they'd take up if they were Crossrail
trains instead...


that would only apply between Reading and Maidenhead....

Put it this way, with crossrail running only from Maidenhead, you'd
have, say, 2 trains running "stoppers" Reading to London. If Crossrail
were extended to London, those 2 extra "stoppers" would be covered by
extending some or all of the Maidenhead trains and no need for an
extra two trains between Maidenhead and London, thus 2 (or more) paths
saved.

On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Peter Masson wrote:

which would duplicate Crossrail between Paddington and Maidenhead,
taking up track capacity on the Relief Lines (or running fast between
Paddington and Maidenhead on the Mains, and taking up track capacity
there

Why does the GWML have Main and Relief lines, rather than Fast and Slow?
Are there any other railways with odd terminology like that? The only one
that springs to mind is the WCML, which (at the London end) has Fast, Slow
and DC (which should really be Slower!).

Oh, and why are the Atlantic lines called that?

Is there some Dictionary of Rail Placenames that would answer all these
questions?

tom

--
Do more with less -- R. Buckminster Fuller

"Peter Masson" wrote in message
...

You may be thinking of Westbourne Park, which at one
time had platforms on the Main and Relief Lines, and
was used as a ticket stop for trains approaching Paddington.

What's a "ticket stop"? TIA.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

"Tom Anderson" wrote

Why does the GWML have Main and Relief lines, rather than Fast and Slow?
Are there any other railways with odd terminology like that?

Oh, and why are the Atlantic lines called that?

The GWR used the terminology Main and Relief Lines. The SR used Through and
Local Lines. The Great Eastern also seemed to have used Through and Local -
and on the 6-track Bethnal Green bank the northern pair were the Suburban
Lines. With the Shenfield electrification, the Through and Local Lines were
transposed as far as Ilford flyover, and renamed as the Main and Electric
Lines.

The Atlantic Lines cross Atlantic Road by a bridge just before they go over
the top of Brixton station.

Peter

"John Rowland" wrote

What's a "ticket stop"? TIA.

In the 19th century it was quite common for a train approaching its terminus
to stop at a platform outside the station while ticket collectors checked
and collected the tickets of all the passengers. Sometimes this was done at
a suburban station (Westbourne Park on the approach to Paddington,
Schoolhill for Great North of Scotland trains approaching Aberdeen, and
Clachnaharry (1) for trains from the north approaching Inverness) and
sometimes at a special 'ticket' platform.

(1) William Kennoway was the Highland Railway's senior ticket collector in
the 1870s. If the train was late it would only stop for him to climb on
board. He would then make his way along the outside of the train, while it
was crossing the Ness Viaduct on its way into Inverness, collecting tickets
through the windows.

Peter

On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 09:58:49 +0000, asdf
wrote:

On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 22:52:50 +0000, Terry Harper
wrote:

It does not make sense to terminate the stopping service at
Maidenhead, which then requires a second stopping service between
Reading and Maidenhead.

Surely it would be easier to just run the stopping Reading services
with DMUs (Reading-Slough or Reading-Paddington), than to electrify
all the way from Maidenhead to Reading?

Even easier not to electrify beyond Heathrow. Why have two services
doing the same thing?

Heathrow is a terminus - ITIYM Hayes & Harlington. It's beneficial to
electrify as far as Maidenhead (or Twyford, really) as this allows a
through service through the Crossrail tunnel, rather than having to
change at Paddington. But such a service from Reading would be
little-used, as it would be much slower than the frequent non-stop
service to London.

Would it be slower than the all-stations stopping service from
Paddington? That's the comparison. If it terminates at Maidenhead,
then passengers for stations beyond will have to transfer to an
all-stations shuttle between Maidenhead and Reading. It's analogous
with terminating the Cambridge electrification at Royston.

Very short-sighted.
--
Terry Harper
Website Coordinator, The Omnibus Society
http://www.omnibussoc.org