I thought the Horsham, Littlehampton, East Grinstead and Tattenham Corner services were going through the core from the May 2018 timetable change?
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both 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!
London Bridge reconstruction works
- Thread starter acepepper
- Start date
- Status
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
Its an extra 4tph in May 2018 with 4tph more added in Dec 2018 when fully 24tph service operates.
As I walked down platform 8 for the penultimate time today, going from the concourse to the Southeastern platforms, I couldn't help wondering why the first new through platforms weren't built in that space before platforms 5 and 6 closed. Couldn't we then have just progressively slewed track and kept services going?
I have moved some posts as someone has alerted to me that some were mistakenly posted to this thread.
Just a reminder that this thread is to discuss the progress of the actual infrastructure works.
To discuss the temporary timetable, and your (probably negative) experiences of it, please use London Bridge - new timetable during reconstruction works commencing 5th January instead.
Thanks
Just a reminder that this thread is to discuss the progress of the actual infrastructure works.
To discuss the temporary timetable, and your (probably negative) experiences of it, please use London Bridge - new timetable during reconstruction works commencing 5th January instead.
Thanks
Just had a look at realtime for the trains which arrive at Sydenham. The 1724 (London Vic-London Bridge), 1737 (London Bridge - London Vic), 1751 West Croydon - Dalston, 1809 London Bridge - London Vic and 1922 London Bridge - Caterham where all cancelled, on top of all the London Bridge - West Croydon 10 car services.
I would hate to be at Canada Water. If one thing goes wrong on the ELL like has done in the past it will be a disaster.
I would hate to be at Canada Water. If one thing goes wrong on the ELL like has done in the past it will be a disaster.
I have moved some posts as someone has alerted to me that some were mistakenly posted to this thread.
Just a reminder that this thread is to discuss the progress of the actual infrastructure works.
To discuss the temporary timetable, and your (probably negative) experiences of it, please use London Bridge - new timetable during reconstruction works commencing 5th January instead.
Thanks
You moved my post, but it related to tonights issues which were caused by the infrastructure! Or at least thats what they said! Signalling failure apparently
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Isn't that the plan? I guess the problem is getting access to 5 and 6 whilst the works are going on?
Take a walk up to the country end of platforms 5 and 6, and ask yourself where the country end of the new platforms 6-9 that will serve Charing Cross services will be. And that is your answer.
You could experiment with walking to Green Park or Westminster to grab a Jubilee line to...erm..London Bridge
Westminster is a better spaced out station compared to Victoria and lots would get off at Westminster
The issue is passenger access to those new platforms till the new ground level concourse is partially opened in August 2016. Not much point rushing the platforms if they can't be used for other reasons.
They have effectively already made a start on the new platforms in the area behind the temporary ticket office and the bus station for the last 6 months.
Initially CHX services will be routed through Up loop (up) and P4 (down) while the P5/6 island is demolished then in a couple of months when enough demolition is completed the Up services will swap to the P5 tracks with the track slewed across the current platform access ramp where it will be joined to the existing CHX up line on the old viaduct. This 2nd phase will allow the clearance of the Up Loop and P6 track areas at the country end.
theageofthetra
On Moderation
In the plans I have seen I can't see how the large number of passenger who will come out the new low level Tooley St entrance will cross that road? A large % use the (presumably to be closed) footbridge across to the Cottons centre. Surely there should be a subway to the other side? Also what will happen to that ugly 60's concrete bridge that crosses Tooley St further up?- is that going too?
The other footbridge further to the west links to Colechurch House and is I think owned by the Corporation of London. Not sure what its future is. From memory the transport and works order boundary line was the middle of Tooley Street so I'd presume they stay unless something has been sorted outside the order. The passageway under the tracks to the Cottons footbridge will still be there as it is where the emergency exits from the platforms 1-9 go to and it will be a useful way to get to/ from the bus station to More London etc. and beyond.
If they are going to be removed I hope Southwark Council are going to pedestrianise Tooley Street in the rushhour as it will be difficult to have upto 1000 pedestrians trying to cross the road a minute:roll:
theageofthetra
On Moderation
It is precisely this which needs clarifying. Since the construction of More London far more people cross Tooley St than say 10 years ago- why on earth was a subway not part of the plans?
Because the other side of the road is full of buildings, and building a compliant subway would mean knocking a few down?
I work on 'the other side of the road'. There must be 4 pedestrian crossings in about 300 metres. Why would anyone in their right mind want to go out of their way to descend a further 4 metres or so to only come back up the other end, when it is very simple to cross the road.
Look at the use of the subway under Bishopsgate direct from Liverpool St station, compared to those crossing the road.
Both bridges stay, and the Hays bridge becomes unpaid. I'm willing to bet the Hays escalators are broken within a week of the gate line going.
It looks to me from the final track layout (available here) that the Thameslink platforms at London Bridge may not be exclusively Thameslink.
With only 16 Thameslinks per hour going through in a 2.5/5 formation that leaves up to 8x 5 minute gaps.
The track layout seems to imply (although the crossovers are indicated as only for out of course running) that some down "slow" Charing Cross trains on the "north" down track will use Thameslink platform in the evening peak and some morning up charing cross "slow" trains will cross onto the Blackfriars bound Thameslink track after leaving new platform 6 at London Bridge.
With only 16 Thameslinks per hour going through in a 2.5/5 formation that leaves up to 8x 5 minute gaps.
The track layout seems to imply (although the crossovers are indicated as only for out of course running) that some down "slow" Charing Cross trains on the "north" down track will use Thameslink platform in the evening peak and some morning up charing cross "slow" trains will cross onto the Blackfriars bound Thameslink track after leaving new platform 6 at London Bridge.
Yabbadabba
Member
- Joined
- 23 May 2014
- Messages
- 385
As far as i understand it the Thameslink platforms 4&5 will signalled under ETCS and the lines to Charing Cross and Cannon Street will be conventional signalling. The slotting arrangements of how and when the connecting crossovers can be used have not been worked yet, but it would only be under total perturbation conditions and will exclusive of the other train service group while it takes place, from what I was told at a meeting.
That assumes the TL trains will be on 2.5 / 5 gaps. They won't.
Because they require 90sec dwell at London Bridge (as it will be the busiest London Station for TL trains) they will generally be on 3.5 / 4 gaps with pathing time inserted on the second train to make it so. The first train then gets the same pathing time after London Bridge to fit into either the core, or the fast lines south of New cross Gate both of which will be operating at 24tph (maybe only 22tph on the latter, to be sorted).
Interesting, as I understood it s the ETCS is an "overlay" the conventional signalling will stay so there shouldn't be anything preventing non ETCS trains using the ETCS bit (obviously it would reduce capacity)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Nonetheless though, there is still some capacity through those thameslink lines around London Bridge that will be very handy for "slow" peak hour charing cross trains (theoretically 8 TPH but realistically, given what you state above, and a conflicting move for down charing cross trains with up thameslink 4 TPH) even if only used for recovery from delays etc. Or they could be really radical and run a couple of Greenwich line to Charing Cross trains an hour that way.
Presume the reason there is a down loop between Blackfriars and Metropolitan junction is so that an extra train can be got out of Blackfriars and parked there if delays occur stopping Blackfriars being blocked back to Herne Hill trains.
Last edited:
Sorry but no, there isn't the capacity, and there is no proposal to put CHX trains on Thameslink lines or vice versa in normal service; only in extreme disruption or planned engineering works. The whole point of the layout is to segregate the flows, and that will not be unpicked.
The loop is so that London Bridge trains will be clear of the Herne hill route quicker, such that the next train can be signalled into Blackfriars more quickly. Every second counts at 24tph.
Ps - I produced the slide concerned.
PPs - forgot to mention that the Charing x lines and TL lines will be under the control of different signallers.
Last edited:
Why is that needed? There will already be 2 Charing Cross platforms in each direction handling 14 tph in the peak direction (i.e. assuming counter peak ECS so fewer in the counter peak direction?) with 28tph* stopping in the peak direction and much more dwell time in the platform at London Bridge particularity in the Up direction.
Why not keep things simpler and more reliable?
* Charing Cross can only handle 29tph max so no real need to cope with more than the planned 28tph as you hit problems elsewhere instead.
Yabbadabba
Member
- Joined
- 23 May 2014
- Messages
- 385
Yep
London Bridge Platforms 1-3 Cannon Street Workstation.
London Bridge Platforms 4-5 Thameslink Core South Workstation.
London Bridge Platforms 6-9 Charing Cross Workstation.
London Brigde Platforms 10-15 London Bridge Central Workstation.
Hense the need for some kind of slotting arrangements or signalling controls to run over someone else's railway.
London Bridge Platforms 1-3 Cannon Street Workstation.
London Bridge Platforms 4-5 Thameslink Core South Workstation.
London Bridge Platforms 6-9 Charing Cross Workstation.
London Brigde Platforms 10-15 London Bridge Central Workstation.
Hense the need for some kind of slotting arrangements or signalling controls to run over someone else's railway.
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
Out of interest, why do Cannon Street trains only need 3 platforms, as against the 4 for Charing Cross trains? Don't the same arguments for needing 2 platforms in each direction for Charing Cross apply to Cannon Street?
Good question, and one I have been waiting years for someone to ask so I can answer.
The capacity constraint into Cannon St is the stretch through Boro Market Jn round the corner and on to the viaduct. In theory this limits services to a maximum of 22 tph each way. The fact that more get in during the morning peak is because of the succession of empties that come out via the Met curve to Blackfriars, this releases some outbound paths that are used by inbounds. Even so, the max peak flow in any direction is 25tph, with a lower number the other way. This is perfect for a tidal flow through London Bridge, with 2 in the peak direction, and one in the other.
Also the passenger flow is very peaky, there are very few passengers contra peak Cannon st to London Bridge. This means the contra peak dwell times can be less than peak direction (indeed from late 2016 it might be that some don't stop), meaning more trains can use the one platform.
Now, ideally, it would have been preferable to rebuild Met Jn area to get more capacity. However when it was looked at, it appears there is no way of doing it without widening the viaduct in some way. I walk under that viaduct twice a day, and widening it would make the new viaduct at Boro Market look like child's play.
Also to fit another platform in would mean widening the viaduct at London Bridge itself, and although that is possible, there would be a whole lot more compulsory purchase and demolition down Tooley St.
The key challenge now is how to keep the peak flow rate into Cannon St in the morning peak when the Met curve comes out of use and the empties via Blackfriars have to come out via LBG. As mentioned above, this might be achieved by causing a couple of contra peak trains to skip the London Bridge stop.
Last edited:
A slightly more detailed question if I may?
Is the circa 200m section of 2 tracks at Borough Market Junction the larger issue or if you were going to 3 track that (for example by replacing bridges over the current 3+1 track structures over Joiner Street, Station Approach and Borough High Street) then would you soon hit capacity limits maybe at just 1/2 tph more on the 3 track section North West Of Borough High street?
If the 3 tracking that bit, then there appears to have been a bit of extra space left between the Western Approach Viaduct and the existing structures that might be useful? Were the Northern side of the new Borough Market Bridge and the new western approach viaduct designed to be part of larger contiguous structures if the existing ones were replaced?
Is resignalling with some ATO type system in the medium term an easier way to add a little more capacity?
Last edited:
Another option would have been for a couple of peak Thameslink trains per hour to run via Cannon Street to the Greenwich line which would have much the same benefit.
However I digress, I can see that it is not planned to mix the lines through London Bridge, however if the pair of lines through Borough Market carrying Thameslink is carrying 16 TPH and the pair serving Charing X is carrying 28TPH, and the "slow" Charing cross line from Waterloo connects directly to the Thameslink line through Borough Market....
...it is not hard to forsee that Charing Cross trains straying onto Thameslink lines is likely going to happen in practice during the peaks. The panels may be separate but they won't be signalled manually, a computer will make most of the decisions. Even if it never happens on day one, I think it will likely creep in.
Indeed how long will it take after 2018 before someone has a brainwave and works out that if 4 of the Thameslink Brighton line trains went non stop via Herne Hill then Thameslink through London Bridge would be 12 an hour at 5 minute intervals that would release paths for Charing Cross trains.........
It the connections are there I think that they will be used, sooner or later.
The originally planned Thameslink Dartford services were via New Cross not via Greenwich... Hence the track layout as seen on Baldrick's slide.
On your last thought it would it just be easier to use the released capacity at Herne Hill to run more SE services to Victoria instead where there is spare capacity at the SE platforms...
The crunch is the stretched out junction where it goes 2 to 3 track round the corner. It needs to be 2>4 tracks, but to do that means either lowering the junction speeds which with 12 coach trains actually lowers capacity, or stretching the junction out more, which drives complete remodelling of Cannon St throat (again) AND moves all the signals such that capacity is actually lowered.
ATO is indeed the answer, but no plans yet.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I'll bet you a sizeable sum on that.
The computers will be deliberately programmed NOT to route that way unless preplanned for engineering work. Indeed in normal operation the CHX and TL computers don't need to talk to each other.
You keep saying there will be capacity to do it - there won't. There might be theoretical capacity on a short stretch of the TL lines, but it is not useable if you can't get trains to and from it without causing delay to other services. The capacity constraint is the platforms at LBG which on lines 4 and 5 will be fully occupied.
I'm not convinced they are though, even with dwell times slightly longer than say Farringdon, they still have eight an hour less than the TL core stations each way. In any case, even if CX trains used the TL lines through Borough Market they wouldn't need to use the TL platforms.
There are three tracks "reserved" for Charing X. The two nearest the southern lines would be the "fast" tracks and then the third would be effectively an up slow (in AM peak) with trains using platform 6 then crossing straight onto the TL lines through borough market and then onto the CX slows beyond borough market, staying unconflicting with the down and up charing cross fasts.
Similarly down trains in the evening peak from the Charing X slows would run onto the down TL at Borough Market and use either platform 3 or 4 before continuing along the down Thameslink or along one of the Cannon St lines enabing them to get to New Cross without any conflict with the Down Charing x fast.
Yes it is all conjecture, as we are talking many years hence but, the infrastructure will be there to do it and will be there for decades to come, and I think it will be too tempting a low hanging fruit to ignore.
Its certainly a very flexible layout though and a huge improvement on the '70s and '80s resignallings that took out a lot of capacity.
Last edited:
- Status