Hi folks,

Nobody appears to have picked up on this Press Release on the DfT site
that was posted on Friday:

-----8-----Start of quoted text-----8-----

056 01 May 2009

NEW CROSSRAIL ROUTE SAFEGUARDED

The Government today safeguarded a potential Crossrail route from
Maidenhead to Reading.

Whilst there is no current commitment to extend Crossrail out to
Reading, safeguarding provides additional protection against future
developments on the route.

Transport Minister Andrew Adonis said:

“Our current priority is to get on with the delivery of the Crossrail
Project as it is currently planned, but safeguarding would provide
additional protection against developments impacting on future
operational requirements.

"Safeguarding will also allow the line to be electrified in the future
and for Crossrail to be extended if a case can be made to do so.”


Notes for editors

1.The Department for Transport (DfT) has issued Safeguarding Directions
to protect a potential extension of Crossrail from Maidenhead Station to
Reading West Junction. This follows a consultation on the draft
Directions which closed on 25 July 2008.

2.The aim is to ensure that developments along this rail corridor do not
impact on the ability to extend Crossrail in the future. Crossrail Ltd
(CRL), a wholly owned subsidiary of TfL, has responsibility for
delivering the Crossrail scheme and is responsible for safeguarding this
corridor.

3.The Safeguarding Direction has been issued to Local Planning
Authorities (LPAs) by the Secretary of State. The LPAs are required to
consult CRL when determining planning applications for land within the
limits shown on the safeguarding plans attached to the direction.

4.The Crossrail project currently terminates at Maidenhead. No decision
or commitment to extend it further west to Reading has been made.
However, DfT believes it sensible to safeguard this corridor for a
potential extension of Crossrail to Reading. Safeguarding will also
allow us to carry out alternative works, such as electrification, that
could enable future operational requirements to be met.

5.Crossrail will run 118 km from Maidenhead and Heathrow in the west,
through new twin-bore 21 km tunnels under central London to Shenfield
and Abbey Wood in the east. It will bring an additional 1.5 million
people within 60 minutes commuting distance of London's key business
districts. When Crossrail opens in 2017 it will increase London's public
transport network capacity by 10 per cent, supporting regeneration
across the capital, helping to secure London's position as a world
leading financial centre, and cutting journey times across the city.
Preparatory works will continue throughout 2009 and main Crossrail
construction starts in 2010.


Public Enquiries: 020 7944 8300
Department for Transport Website: http://www.dft.gov.uk

-----8-----End of quoted text-----8-----

Original URL:
http://nds.coi.gov.uk/environment/fullDetail.asp?ReleaseID=400344&NewsAreaID=2

Cheers,

Barry

On May 5, 4:05*pm, Barry Salter wrote:
Hi folks,

Nobody appears to have picked up on this Press Release on the DfT site
that was posted on Friday:

-----8-----Start of quoted text-----8-----

056 * * 01 May 2009

NEW CROSSRAIL ROUTE SAFEGUARDED

The Government today safeguarded a potential Crossrail route from
Maidenhead to Reading.

Whilst there is no current commitment to extend Crossrail out to
Reading, safeguarding provides additional protection against future
developments on the route.

Transport Minister Andrew Adonis said:

“Our current priority is to get on with the delivery of the Crossrail
Project as it is currently planned, but safeguarding would provide
additional protection against developments impacting on future
operational requirements.

"Safeguarding will also allow the line to be electrified in the future
and for Crossrail to be extended if a case can be made to do so.”

[Notes for editors snipped]

-----8-----End of quoted text-----8-----

Original URL:
http://nds.coi.gov.uk/environment/fullDetail.asp?ReleaseID=400344&New....


It's only safeguarding of course, which doesn't mean it's actually
going to happen, just that if it ever does it'll be a bit easier.

There have been plenty of comments on these newsgroups in the past
that getting Crossrail to Reading might not be all that it's cracked
up to be in certain quarters, what with a Crossrail train from Reading
into central London being slower that a fast non-stop service to
Paddington (where interchange with Crossrail would of course be
available).

I don't hold any particularly strong opinions on this issue (not that
my opinions on such things really matter!), but I'd be interested if
anyone could explain why extending Crossrail to Reading is widely held
to be so important.

On May 5, 4:28*pm, Mizter T wrote:
On May 5, 4:05*pm, Barry Salter wrote:





Hi folks,

Nobody appears to have picked up on this Press Release on the DfT site
that was posted on Friday:

-----8-----Start of quoted text-----8-----

056 * * 01 May 2009

NEW CROSSRAIL ROUTE SAFEGUARDED

The Government today safeguarded a potential Crossrail route from
Maidenhead to Reading.

Whilst there is no current commitment to extend Crossrail out to
Reading, safeguarding provides additional protection against future
developments on the route.

Transport Minister Andrew Adonis said:

“Our current priority is to get on with the delivery of the Crossrail
Project as it is currently planned, but safeguarding would provide
additional protection against developments impacting on future
operational requirements.

"Safeguarding will also allow the line to be electrified in the future
and for Crossrail to be extended if a case can be made to do so.”

[Notes for editors snipped]

-----8-----End of quoted text-----8-----

Original URL:
http://nds.coi.gov.uk/environment/fullDetail.asp?ReleaseID=400344&New...

It's only safeguarding of course, which doesn't mean it's actually
going to happen, just that if it ever does it'll be a bit easier.

There have been plenty of comments on these newsgroups in the past
that getting Crossrail to Reading might not be all that it's cracked
up to be in certain quarters, what with a Crossrail train from Reading
into central London being slower that a fast non-stop service to
Paddington (where interchange with Crossrail would of course be
available).

I don't hold any particularly strong opinions on this issue (not that
my opinions on such things really matter!), but I'd be interested if
anyone could explain why extending Crossrail to Reading is widely held
to be so important.

Given the ELLX experience, I wonder if there might yet be a tradeoff
so that the service for people heading to Reading from intermediate
stations is dramatically cut, and existing stopping serices merely
replaced by Crossrail between Maidenhead and Paddington.

On May 5, 4:32*pm, MIG wrote:

On May 5, 4:28*pm, Mizter T wrote:

[snip news of Crossrail to Reading safeguarding measures]

It's only safeguarding of course, which doesn't mean it's actually
going to happen, just that if it ever does it'll be a bit easier.

There have been plenty of comments on these newsgroups in the past
that getting Crossrail to Reading might not be all that it's cracked
up to be in certain quarters, what with a Crossrail train from Reading
into central London being slower that a fast non-stop service to
Paddington (where interchange with Crossrail would of course be
available).

I don't hold any particularly strong opinions on this issue (not that
my opinions on such things really matter!), but I'd be interested if
anyone could explain why extending Crossrail to Reading is widely held
to be so important.

Given the ELLX experience, I wonder if there might yet be a tradeoff
so that the service for people heading to Reading from intermediate
stations is dramatically cut, and existing stopping services merely
replaced by Crossrail between Maidenhead and Paddington.

If Crossrail ever got to Reading, I'd fully expect it to take over
most if not all of the existing stopping services - indeed that would
only make sense, would it not?

In fact surely a large part of the argument for Crossrail going as far
as Reading is that of operational convenience - Crossrail would simply
take over the existing FGW Reading to Paddington stoppers. Indeed if
this weren't to happen then you'd have to deal with the issue of how
Crossrail trains that terminate at Maidenhead mesh with stopping
services from Paddington to Reading, when simply combining the two
services would be logical (or at least appears to be so). This
wouldn't leave passengers any worse off either.

Readers paying any attention will see a volte face from my original
comments, which is the unfortunate side-effect of using usenet for the
purposes of thinking aloud! I'm afraid I've never paid that much
attention to the Crossrail to Reading issue (and it shows!).

On 5 May, 17:01, Mizter T wrote:
On May 5, 4:32*pm, MIG wrote:



On May 5, 4:28*pm, Mizter T wrote:

[snip news of Crossrail to Reading safeguarding measures]

It's only safeguarding of course, which doesn't mean it's actually
going to happen, just that if it ever does it'll be a bit easier.

There have been plenty of comments on these newsgroups in the past
that getting Crossrail to Reading might not be all that it's cracked
up to be in certain quarters, what with a Crossrail train from Reading
into central London being slower that a fast non-stop service to
Paddington (where interchange with Crossrail would of course be
available).

I don't hold any particularly strong opinions on this issue (not that
my opinions on such things really matter!), but I'd be interested if
anyone could explain why extending Crossrail to Reading is widely held
to be so important.

Given the ELLX experience, I wonder if there might yet be a tradeoff
so that the service for people heading to Reading from intermediate
stations is dramatically cut, and existing stopping services merely
replaced by Crossrail between Maidenhead and Paddington.

If Crossrail ever got to Reading, I'd fully expect it to take over
most if not all of the existing stopping services - indeed that would
only make sense, would it not?

In fact surely a large part of the argument for Crossrail going as far
as Reading is that of operational convenience - Crossrail would simply
take over the existing FGW Reading to Paddington stoppers. Indeed if
this weren't to happen then you'd have to deal with the issue of how
Crossrail trains that terminate at Maidenhead mesh with stopping
services from Paddington to Reading, when simply combining the two
services would be logical (or at least appears to be so). This
wouldn't leave passengers any worse off either.

Readers paying any attention will see a volte face from my original
comments, which is the unfortunate side-effect of using usenet for the
purposes of thinking aloud! I'm afraid I've never paid that much
attention to the Crossrail to Reading issue (and it shows!).

Unfortunately even if they extend crossrail to Reading it still can't
replace all the stopping services because there are 2 stopping
services an hour from Oxford which call at many of the intermediate
stations. So then you would either have to electrify the line to
Oxford (ooh, look a flying pig) or more realistically terminate slow
Oxford services at Reading and inconvenience passengers from
intermediate stations between Reading and Oxford. Of course there is
the option of running the Oxford slow services under the wires on the
slows but this would take up valuable crossrail paths and of course
result in more diesels under wires which is a waste of fuel. And no,
I'm not even going to suggest that putting a loco on and off at
reading is a viable idea, because it's not going to happen.

Maybe in the short term they will continue to run under the wires
until more of the Great Western Mainline and branches are electrified
and then they can remove that anomaly. Talking of branches there would
still be the outstanding issue of Henley trains which would almost
certainly run under the wires in the peaks on the slows anyway,
because that branch will * never* be electrified.

In article cbdb0206-4847-455b-af10-3e344d0db8d5
@o30g2000vbc.googlegroups.com, says...

Unfortunately even if they extend crossrail to Reading it still can't
replace all the stopping services because there are 2 stopping
services an hour from Oxford which call at many of the intermediate
stations. So then you would either have to electrify the line to
Oxford (ooh, look a flying pig) or more realistically terminate slow
Oxford services at Reading and inconvenience passengers from
intermediate stations between Reading and Oxford. Of course there is
the option of running the Oxford slow services under the wires on the
slows but this would take up valuable crossrail paths and of course
result in more diesels under wires which is a waste of fuel.

Or they could do as the Bedwyn services do and stop until Reading and
then run fast into Paddington. This assumes that capacity can be found
on the main lines for 90mph services between the 125mph service.

Duncan

In article
,
(D DB 90001) wrote:

Unfortunately even if they extend crossrail to Reading it still can't
replace all the stopping services because there are 2 stopping
services an hour from Oxford which call at many of the intermediate
stations. So then you would either have to electrify the line to
Oxford (ooh, look a flying pig) or more realistically terminate slow
Oxford services at Reading and inconvenience passengers from
intermediate stations between Reading and Oxford. Of course there is
the option of running the Oxford slow services under the wires on the
slows but this would take up valuable crossrail paths and of course
result in more diesels under wires which is a waste of fuel. And no,
I'm not even going to suggest that putting a loco on and off at
reading is a viable idea, because it's not going to happen.

Maybe in the short term they will continue to run under the wires
until more of the Great Western Mainline and branches are electrified
and then they can remove that anomaly. Talking of branches there would
still be the outstanding issue of Henley trains which would almost
certainly run under the wires in the peaks on the slows anyway,
because that branch will *never* be electrified.

Bi-mode!

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On May 5, 5:49*pm, D DB 90001 wrote:
Unfortunately even if they extend crossrail to Reading it still can't
replace all the stopping services because there are 2 stopping
services an hour from Oxford which call at many of the intermediate
stations. So then you would either have to electrify the line to
Oxford (ooh, look a flying pig)

Certain to happen under any proposed GWML electrification plan, so why
not bring it forward out of operational convenience?

or more realistically terminate slow
Oxford services at Reading and inconvenience passengers from
intermediate stations between Reading and Oxford.

....but I agree this is more likely. Will the remodelled Reading allow
easy cross-platform interchange between slow Oxford terminators and
London services?

Of course there is
the option of running the Oxford slow services under the wires on the
slows but this would take up valuable crossrail paths and of course
result in more diesels under wires which is a waste of fuel. And no,
I'm not even going to suggest that putting a loco on and off at
reading is a viable idea, because it's not going to happen.

Agreed.

Maybe in the short term they will continue to run under the wires
until more of the Great Western Mainline and branches are electrified
and then they can remove that anomaly. Talking of branches there would
still be the outstanding issue of Henley trains which would almost
certainly run under the wires in the peaks on the slows anyway,
because that branch will * never* be electrified.

No, that doesn't follow - it's quite possible there'll be a positive B/
CA for short stretches of electrification that remove the need for
long-ish diesel workings and allow the slow lines to be all-Crossrail,
once the core suburban network is electrified.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

On 5 Mai, 18:49, D DB 90001 wrote:

and then they can remove that anomaly. Talking of branches there would
still be the outstanding issue of Henley trains which would almost
certainly run under the wires in the peaks on the slows anyway,
because that branch will * never* be electrified.-

ditto for the Marlow and Windsor branches.

But wouldn't these be no brainer candidates for the much vaunted
infill alectrification scheme, if ever it takes off?

Mizter T wrote:
On May 5, 4:05 pm, Barry Salter wrote:


NEW CROSSRAIL ROUTE SAFEGUARDED


It's only safeguarding of course, which doesn't mean it's actually
going to happen, just that if it ever does it'll be a bit easier.

There have been plenty of comments on these newsgroups in the past
that getting Crossrail to Reading might not be all that it's cracked
up to be in certain quarters, what with a Crossrail train from Reading
into central London being slower that a fast non-stop service to
Paddington (where interchange with Crossrail would of course be
available).

I don't hold any particularly strong opinions on this issue (not that
my opinions on such things really matter!), but I'd be interested if
anyone could explain why extending Crossrail to Reading is widely held
to be so important.

I'm one of those that doesn't think Reading will be that useful a Crossrail
terminus IF all the proposed Crossrail services remain as all station
stoppers. However, if there is a way of having a Crossrail fast service -
perhaps as far as Ealing for instance it could be a useful way of freeing up
capacity on longer distance services.

However there is a similar debate about whether or not it should be Heathrow
Express or Connect that runs through onto Crossrail - it seems to hinge on
the lack of capacity and conflicting moves required on the crossovers from
main to relief running lines?

What I suspect is more significant [than the safeguarding] is that NR are to
run Crossrail [their wider network changes] and Reading remodelling as a
combined project under one manager...

Paul S