• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

THAMESLINK services to Kent and Sussex routes 2018

Status
Not open for further replies.

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
4,008
There is some logic to your maths, but if you travel near to the front then cross-platform applies to 100% of the Up trains. Even if not, it's a quicker transfer than most train to tube ones.

And headed Down, agreed. But would doubled frequencies not mitigate some of this time in terms of netting out over the course of a travelling week. Mornings yes you leave in time for a specific train, but evenings you may not - or may find yourself procrastinating at your desk until it's time for the next train. At a higher frequency, you might gain back more personal time.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Class377/5

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,594
There is some logic to your maths, but if you travel near to the front then cross-platform applies to 100% of the Up trains. Even if not, it's a quicker transfer than most train to tube ones.

And headed Down, agreed. But would doubled frequencies not mitigate some of this time in terms of netting out over the course of a travelling week. Mornings yes you leave in time for a specific train, but evenings you may not - or may find yourself procrastinating at your desk until it's time for the next train. At a higher frequency, you might gain back more personal time.

Depends on if you count walking around a platform as cross platform, I don't. So it's 50% cross platform on the up.

Also you fail to note that not everyone can can be in front carriage, even if they wanted to. And running through the Core will be at the same frequencis as it with the additional used to go to Blackfriars used to balance the load.

Still no-one has given a decent reason why the Sutton services should terminate that stands up. NR path crossing excuse didn't stand up hence why it was scrapped. And make no excuse that we run more trains today crossing without issue so it is proven wrong.
 

BRX

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
3,602
Depends on if you count walking around a platform as cross platform, I don't. So it's 50% cross platform on the up.

Also you fail to note that not everyone can can be in front carriage, even if they wanted to. And running through the Core will be at the same frequencis as it with the additional used to go to Blackfriars used to balance the load.

Still no-one has given a decent reason why the Sutton services should terminate that stands up. NR path crossing excuse didn't stand up hence why it was scrapped. And make no excuse that we run more trains today crossing without issue so it is proven wrong.

As someone who lives on the Wimbledon Loop - the real problem is the terrible reliability which surely could only be improved by making the loop trains self-contained. At the moment things going wrong north of London seem to completely mess up services. And it only takes a couple of consecutive trains to be cancelled and some delayed ones to leave you with an hour gap between trains and no easy alternative route. This happens all the time.

I do like the fact that I can get a train direct to Farringdon or St Pancras, when everything's working. But I'd happily sacrifice that for an improvement in reliability because the way things are at the moment, if you need to get somewhere by a certain time you really have to factor in an extra 45 minutes or so just to cover yourself for the likelihood of your train being cancelled or delayed. I'd rather take the hit of a 10 minute transfer at Blackfriars and as places to wait for a train go - it's got one of the best views from the platform anywhere in the UK.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,267
As someone who lives on the Wimbledon Loop - the real problem is the terrible reliability which surely could only be improved by making the loop trains self-contained. At the moment things going wrong north of London seem to completely mess up services. And it only takes a couple of consecutive trains to be cancelled and some delayed ones to leave you with an hour gap between trains and no easy alternative route. This happens all the time...

Presumably people who understood the advantages to workings to/from the bays, such as reliability and increased frequency, didn't make enough noise during the consultation, and were drowned out by those who swayed the DfT the other way.

(Which has to be fair been discussed many times before, so probably unwise to start again now...)
 

BRX

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
3,602
Presumably people who understood the advantages to workings to/from the bays, such as reliability and increased frequency, didn't make enough noise during the consultation, and were drowned out by those who swayed the DfT the other way.

I tried to make the point to the people running the campaign but they didn't seem interested, at least not the chap I talked to.
 

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
4,008
Well I don't think walking to the front and around a train is so awful - all level after all. But clearly there is a self-fulfilling message and position to reinforce on the issue.

I think the Wimbledon loop should terminate at Blackfriars, and possibly even then not run as a loop - longer time and slight crayoning but 4tph shuttling to Wimbledon and then 4tph direct to Sutton and beyond via Hackbridge.

Wimbledon to Sutton becoming Tramlink, especially with CR2 - and feeding into that.
 

southern442

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2013
Messages
2,186
Location
Surrey
Well I don't think walking to the front and around a train is so awful - all level after all. But clearly there is a self-fulfilling message and position to reinforce on the issue.

I think the Wimbledon loop should terminate at Blackfriars, and possibly even then not run as a loop - longer time and slight crayoning but 4tph shuttling to Wimbledon and then 4tph direct to Sutton and beyond via Hackbridge.

Wimbledon to Sutton becoming Tramlink, especially with CR2 - and feeding into that.

That's rather inconvenient for those that live on or around the loop.
 

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
4,008
That's rather inconvenient for those that live on or around the loop.

It'd be close to CR2 stations as is - and wouldn't say 6-12tph trams be better than the current 2, going up to 4tph - to get them to Wimbledon?
 

phil281

Member
Joined
9 Mar 2011
Messages
184
I've always thought the Wimbledon loop services should go to London Bridge via Peckham Rye. Then the Beckenham Junction/West Croydon terminators be turned into thameslink services. Would build in more durability to the thameslink service. I guess the key obstacle would be tulse hill and paths through there.
 

387star

On Moderation
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
6,653
Why do Thames link no longer serve Rochester and Ashford as they used to?

Why are services shared with southeastern drivers?
 

Failed Unit

Established Member
Joined
26 Jan 2009
Messages
8,857
Location
Central Belt
Why do Thames link no longer serve Rochester and Ashford as they used to?

Why are services shared with southeastern drivers?

The service was created when Blackfriars was getting rebuilt. The services originally terminated there. When the bays were removed they needed to do something with them so they sent them to Kentish Town. They have got intergrated in ever since.

They were Southeastern services - hence why they drive them.
 

Class377/5

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,594
Why do Thames link no longer serve Rochester and Ashford as they used to?

Why are services shared with southeastern drivers?

Technically Thameslink never served either. The service 'terminated' for FCC/Thameslink and became a Southeastern service.

However the service was only temporary arrangement due to the bays at Blackfriars being closed. It survived on basis of the stock diagrams but has now ended.

Services are shared with SE drivers due to the said closure of Blackfriars bays and FCC/Thameslink drivers driving the former SE services into Kent meaning some SE drivers were displaced and then worked parts of the FCC/TL services.

Long term things are supposed to change with drivers transferring. Oh And Ashford will become a proper Thameslink destination in 2018 with class 700s serving the station as a peak only extension of the Maidstone east services (also calling at Bearstead).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The service was created when Blackfriars was getting rebuilt. The services originally terminated there. When the bays were removed they needed to do something with them so they sent them to Kentish Town. They have got intergrated in ever since.

They were Southeastern services - hence why they drive them.

Are we answering everything at the same time tonight? :lol:
 

bionic

Member
Joined
8 Nov 2013
Messages
883
The current plans are that SE drivers will no longer be driving Thameslink routes after May 2018. GTR have recruited a load of new drivers who will be taking the work over once the GTR depot at Orpington opens in 2018 along with (presumably) some displaced Blackfriars drivers who opt to move there. Orpington SE depot is expected to shrink as a result as it currently has the best part of twenty Thameslink diagrams a day during the week.
 

Minstral25

Established Member
Joined
10 Sep 2009
Messages
1,768
Location
Surrey
When does the next stage of the consultations start?

Will we get any information before then as to what people have said in their responses?
 

Class377/5

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,594
When does the next stage of the consultations start?

Will we get any information before then as to what people have said in their responses?

I believe its in a couple of months. Not sure if we are getting feedback to far ahead of the consultation.
 

Minstral25

Established Member
Joined
10 Sep 2009
Messages
1,768
Location
Surrey
I have been looking at proposed services from Thameslink down the Brighton and Redhill main lines and I believe the current proposed splits of services to Brighton & Gatwick/Horsham will make the timetable very odd.

What I mean is that the splits are half-hourly Bedford to Brighton, Cambridge to Brighton, Bedford to Gatwick, Peterborough to Horsham - the latter two being via Redhill.

I'd expect the Bedford to the Core service to run every 15 minutes to get an even 4 per hour north of the core, so then I expect the East Coast trains (PBO) & (CBG) to slot in exactly evenly between so that the service from London Bridge to East Croydon is every 7.5 minutes, which again makes sense to spread loads.

So arriving at London Bridge from the core will be every 30 minutes. BDM, CBG, BDM, PBO and repeat constantly.

Trouble is with current planned pairs departing south these will be Gatwick via Redhill, Horsham via Redhill, Brighton, Brighton. That means from London Bridge the via Redhill service will be 7.5 minutes then 22.5 minutes and the Brighton services the same.

This is a pretty illogical pattern and ruins any attempt at turn up and go.

To me it would make sense to run the pairs as follows: -

1x Bedford to Brighton
1x Peterborough to Gatwick
1x Bedford to Brighton
1x Cambridge to Horsham

and thus make the service on the Brighton and Redhill Main Lines even at every 15 minutes
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
I have been looking at proposed services from Thameslink down the Brighton and Redhill main lines and I believe the current proposed splits of services to Brighton & Gatwick/Horsham will make the timetable very odd.

What I mean is that the splits are half-hourly Bedford to Brighton, Cambridge to Brighton, Bedford to Gatwick, Peterborough to Horsham - the latter two being via Redhill.

I'd expect the Bedford to the Core service to run every 15 minutes to get an even 4 per hour north of the core, so then I expect the East Coast trains (PBO) & (CBG) to slot in exactly evenly between so that the service from London Bridge to East Croydon is every 7.5 minutes, which again makes sense to spread loads.

So arriving at London Bridge from the core will be every 30 minutes. BDM, CBG, BDM, PBO and repeat constantly.

Trouble is with current planned pairs departing south these will be Gatwick via Redhill, Horsham via Redhill, Brighton, Brighton. That means from London Bridge the via Redhill service will be 7.5 minutes then 22.5 minutes and the Brighton services the same.

This is a pretty illogical pattern and ruins any attempt at turn up and go.

To me it would make sense to run the pairs as follows: -

1x Bedford to Brighton
1x Peterborough to Gatwick
1x Bedford to Brighton
1x Cambridge to Horsham

and thus make the service on the Brighton and Redhill Main Lines even at every 15 minutes

You have just summed up one of the dozens of issues that the Thameslink timetable people have been grappling with for the last 7 years. There are so many variables, each time you solve one you create another.
 

Minstral25

Established Member
Joined
10 Sep 2009
Messages
1,768
Location
Surrey
You have just summed up one of the dozens of issues that the Thameslink timetable people have been grappling with for the last 7 years. There are so many variables, each time you solve one you create another.


Only dozens - why I am not surprised.

What I don't get is why keep to the Dogma of the announced pairings as surely the suggested change would make the whole Southern section a lot smoother to organise. 15 minute paths evenly used would surely help the planning?
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
Only dozens - why I am not surprised.

What I don't get is why keep to the Dogma of the announced pairings as surely the suggested change would make the whole Southern section a lot smoother to organise. 15 minute paths evenly used would surely help the planning?

Not if any go to Kent, as the peak timetable is based on a 20 minute cycle (or 22)
 

BRX

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
3,602
This is the sort of bewilderingly complex problem that, one day, perhaps an artificial intelligence system will be able to solve better than humans on their own.
 

Minstral25

Established Member
Joined
10 Sep 2009
Messages
1,768
Location
Surrey
Not if any go to Kent, as the peak timetable is based on a 20 minute cycle (or 22)

I was only looking at off-peak as Peak is well beyond my brain power.

So basically lack of co-ordination over 7 years between Kent and Sussex leaves a awkward service from Thameslink. Not really useful to passengers as one train will be packed followed by an empty with the current plans (slightly over-emphasised but principle will be so)

Why doesn't Kent move to 15 minute basis as well - surely this will be needed in next 5-10 years anyway as services get more crowded.
 

43074

Established Member
Joined
10 Oct 2012
Messages
2,003
What I don't get is why keep to the Dogma of the announced pairings as surely the suggested change would make the whole Southern section a lot smoother to organise. 15 minute paths evenly used would surely help the planning?

Faster services between Cambridge & Gatwick was one of the key benefits that has been announced, your proposal of Peterborough & Cambridge services going via Redhill certainly makes sense but that would be to the expense of shorter journey times between Cambridge & Gatwick. To backtrack on that promise would potentially be quite embarrassing.

Not if any go to Kent, as the peak timetable is based on a 20 minute cycle (or 22)

I don't understand this, the 2018 peak timetable proposes 2tph Rainham to Luton, 2tph Maidstone East to Cambridge & 2tph from each of Orpington and Sevenoaks to run via the Catford Loop so I don't understand how this forces a 20 minute cycle - can you explain the link here please?

IMO they'd be better off focusing the Kent services on the Catford Loop, any services via London Bridge should run onto the BML because having parallel movements in the London Bridge area (i.e. between Thameslink & Kent lines) sort of defeats one of the key objectives of the whole project.
 

Minstral25

Established Member
Joined
10 Sep 2009
Messages
1,768
Location
Surrey
Faster services between Cambridge & Gatwick was one of the key benefits that has been announced, your proposal of Peterborough & Cambridge services going via Redhill certainly makes sense but that would be to the expense of shorter journey times between Cambridge & Gatwick. To backtrack on that promise would potentially be quite embarrassing.
.

So 8 minutes for 150 passengers a day between Cambridge and Gatwick are more important than the convenience for 20,000 plus a day travellers between London and Brighton line stations.

Embarrassing maybe but actually benefits far more people.
 

30907

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Sep 2012
Messages
17,867
Location
Airedale
Why doesn't Kent move to 15 minute basis as well - surely this will be needed in next 5-10 years anyway as services get more crowded.

Without checking for threads, I assume that something of the sort will happen - except of course that there isn't the capacity to run all routes at 15 minute frequency, so the actual solution will be much more complex. After 40 years of a relatively stable timetable, commuters will find it fun...
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,771
politics comes in to play and ensures that "Cambridge to Brighton" has long been a headline output of the Thameslink programme- neater timetables be dammed!
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
28,013
Location
UK
This is the sort of bewilderingly complex problem that, one day, perhaps an artificial intelligence system will be able to solve better than humans on their own.

But by then AI will have made us all redundant and we won't be needing to travel anywhere anyway.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top