TfL to take over most, if not all London suburban services

[deltic]

As Class355/7 states the biggest change will be simplification of services with services only serving One London terminal and therefore far more interchange being required. While the benefits will be huge for London as a whole there will be thousands of well heeled and connected commuters up in arms about it when they realise what will happen to their beloved train service. SRA proposed this many years ago and had to give up due to the outcry it caused. However with far more people travelling than ever before it was only a matter of time that such changes would come about.

 

[swt_passenger]

Read the prospectus please chaps?

It does NOT say anywhere that the routes will all be branded LO, it refers to TfL specification and control. It refers to additional frequencies only where possible. It clearly discusses the difficulties of pathing local and long distance services over the same infrastructure. It mentions that there'll be no changes to infrastructure ownership.
For the pessimists, even if LO becomes station operator it doesn't prevent long distance TOC services calling at those stations, does it?

 

[bicbasher]

Worth remembering it'll be off-peak enhancements, which for Southeastern passenegers will be a big improvement on the current 2tph evening and Sunday service they currently get on most branches.

 

[swt_passenger]

It says in the document Thames link services out of Kings Cross are going to be part of it.

What it says in full is "plus northern services from King’s Cross and Moorgate currently operating as part of the TSGN franchise". That to me means GN inner routes only, which is what has always been anticipated.

 

[theageofthetra]

There will also be the situation of pensioners living in say Sevenoaks/Dunton Green etc having TFL services but no Freedom Pass as its just outside Greater London.

 

[Class377/5]

What it says in full is "plus northern services from King’s Cross and Moorgate currently operating as part of the TSGN franchise". That to me means GN inner routes only, which is what has always been anticipated.

Indeed. Although the complete wording has a typo

Services to the south of London from Victoria and London Bridge, plus northern services from King’s Cross and Moorgate currently operating as part of the Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern franchise

Does 'suggest' that the peak Peterborough will either be TfL services or Thameslink.

 

[swt_passenger]

I
Does 'suggest' that the peak Peterborough will either be TfL services or Thameslink.

It it suggests Peterborough, then why does it not suggest Kings Lynn/Cambridge as well?

I read 'northern' in that context as just a geographic area, in the same as they use 'to the south of' earlier in that sentence. It still probably just means metro routes north and south of London that are currently parts of the overall TSGN grouping. No-one would suggest TfL takeover of London to Brighton, so why might they include Peterborough?

 

[Class377/5]

It it suggests Peterborough, then why does it not suggest Kings Lynn/Cambridge as well?

I read 'northern' in that context as just a geographic area, in the same as they use 'to the south of' earlier in that sentence. It still probably just means metro routes north and south of London that are currently parts of the overall TSGN grouping. No-one would suggest TfL takeover of London to Brighton, so why might they include Peterborough?

I'd forgotten about Kings Lynn. I'd agree with you other than Thameslink services.

 

[Greenback]

It's patently obvious that that is a solution that anyone could implement, if they were allowed to.

That's the point, though, isn't it? By taking away parts of the National Rail system and giving them to TfL, it will allow improvements to be made which will never be done by the TOC's under a franchised system. Isn't it all about giving the power to do things to the office of the Mayor of London?

Or I have I completely misunderstood how it works?

 

[jon0844]

I am not surprised at this at all, and think I've been saying this (originally as a lone voice) for years. I remember Elaine Holt alluding to this with her talks with TfL back in 2006.

Things work pretty slowly though, but 10 years on, I think common sense has prevailed.

And, for what it's worth, plenty of people I've spoken with over the last year or two were of a similar belief that we'd get TfL taking over most suburban services into the capital. It makes sense, as London continues to ooze outwards.

 

[hwl]

On the potential improvements table at the end.

SE "more rolling stock - arround 92 extra carriages"

Presumably confirmation of 23 x 377/1 with TSGN supplying 2 377/7 units to C2C as the reason for the reduction from 25 to 23

 

[LLivery]

I feel like there is a lack on common sense here. TfL are clearly not going to take over GN services to Peterborough, Thameslink (they even left it off the map published last year) or the East Grinstead service before someone says it. Of course other TOCs will continue to serve suburban stations like Twickenham, Surbition, Clapham Junction and Orpington as usual. This is already the case Norwood Jun, New Cross Gate, Hackney Downs etc.

TfL will take the Shepperton line, Weybridge via Hounslow and Chatham via Sidcup because its not practical to do otherwise. As for Windsor & Eaton Riverside and Guildford via Effingham I expect them to also be taken by TfL, would be sensible to take Woking slows too. If TfL can run to Stevenage and Reading, Guildford shouldn't be too much of a problem, would be totally reasonable to ask for some Surrey/Kent CC financial support, doubt they would though.

 

[EM2]

That's the point, though, isn't it? By taking away parts of the National Rail system and giving them to TfL, it will allow improvements to be made which will never be done by the TOC's under a franchised system. Isn't it all about giving the power to do things to the office of the Mayor of London?

Or I have I completely misunderstood how it works?

It can be done by TOCs given a long enough term, see Chiltern as an example.

 

[urbophile]

In the light of Owen Jones's (and others') comments about bus services, it looks like there is one rule for the capital and another for everyone else. Free for all chaos for those of us at the mercy of privatised and uncoordinated companies; efficiency and common sense for Londoners benefitting from public control (if not ownership).

 

[EM2]

What grates with me most of all, is the perception that TfL is the magic wand that will fix everything, it will all be sweetness and light and the sky will be full of glittering rainbows.

 

[Greenback]

It can be done by TOCs given a long enough term, see Chiltern as an example.

Exactly, but again, that's the point as I see it. It frees up services form the constraints of the franchise system. That's why TfL, the Mayor and many other stakeholders have been pushing for it for years. It could be seen as empire building, but it allows more local control over specifications about what will run.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Equally, for all the good sides of Chiltern, they have headed where the money was (InterCity services and Bicester Village) and in doing so have neglected their inner and outersuburban services somewhat.

I'm sure TfL would not allow that in their new setup. Might they also end up interested in Aylesbury to Marylebone, and in the other Chiltern line suburban services?

 

[Greenback]

What grates with me most of all, is the perception that TfL is the magic wand that will fix everything, it will all be sweetness and light and the sky will be full of glittering rainbows.

Of course, I have my doubts about that! It should, in theory at least, be much easier for things to be put right with TfL running things than it would be with a TOC.

 

[urpert]

There will also be the situation of pensioners living in say Sevenoaks/Dunton Green etc having TFL services but no Freedom Pass as its just outside Greater London.

Presumably that's no different to pensioners living in Watford or Shenfield?

(on a related matter - I wonder if they will extend the zones to include Swanley and Sevenoaks...)

 

[Blindtraveler]

Good news me says, and whilst I dont know if the same level of transformation can be brought about we will at least have consistancy in terms of ticketing and customer care which will be good. Bring it on I say.

 

[urpert]

What grates with me most of all, is the perception that TfL is the magic wand that will fix everything, it will all be sweetness and light and the sky will be full of glittering rainbows.

To be fair, comparing those few stations and services in South London which are now LOROL's responsibility with Southeastern's does give some justification to that idea.

 

[jon0844]

What grates with me most of all, is the perception that TfL is the magic wand that will fix everything, it will all be sweetness and light and the sky will be full of glittering rainbows.

A fair few people realised they when LO took over services from Liverpool Street. I've also experienced the lack of Information given (and certainly lack of detail in a lot of information) during disruption.

I did see in the Evening Standard article a few posters who did point out the grass isn't always greener, amongst comments about how great it is that these train operators are being sacked and run by what I assume people think is a state run operation.

Still, when you see all the 'we don't make a profit' posters I can see why.

I do wish TfL would take over bus services outside the capital on the same basis, but obviously they won't/can't.

 

[OxtedSignaller]

It's a great idea but I don't see how it's going to work on Southern and Thameslink franchises if the majority of their services are being taken over by TfL. Who's going to want to run just the coastal services and a few more exceptions. So can someone clarify what southern services are being taken over is it just the metros or Redhill and grinstead for example. I don't see why they wouldn't run overground to east grinstead if there running it to sevenoaks...

 

[LLivery]

Presumably that's no different to pensioners living in Watford or Shenfield?

(on a related matter - I wonder if they will extend the zones to include Swanley and Sevenoaks...)

Probably just use zones 7-9. I think it would be a good time to re-zone the entire network now.

 

[jon0844]

Keep them as a management contract? There must still be good opportunities for services into London from Brighton, Cambridge and so on. TfL wouldn't be running these outer suburban services, or local services well outside the capital that don't go into London.

 

[urpert]

It's a great idea but I don't see how it's going to work on Southern and Thameslink franchises if the majority of their services are being taken over by TfL. Who's going to want to run just the coastal services and a few more exceptions. So can someone clarify what southern services are being taken over is it just the metros or Redhill and grinstead for example. I don't see why they wouldn't run overground to east grinstead if there running it to sevenoaks...

Surely the Brighton main line and Gatwick are the cash cows (and major attractions) of the Southern franchise?

 

[nottsnurse]

In the light of Owen Jones's (and others') comments about bus services, it looks like there is one rule for the capital and another for everyone else. Free for all chaos for those of us at the mercy of privatised and uncoordinated companies; efficiency and common sense for Londoners benefitting from public control (if not ownership).

Speak for yourself (and wherever you live). In Nottingham we have a very well organised bus network, with a fair amount of coordination between 'City' bus providers (NCT) and the 'County' providers (Trent Barton etc).

 

[LLivery]

It's a great idea but I don't see how it's going to work on Southern and Thameslink franchises if the majority of their services are being taken over by TfL. Who's going to want to run just the coastal services and a few more exceptions. So can someone clarify what southern services are being taken over is it just the metros or Redhill and grinstead for example. I don't see why they wouldn't run overground to east grinstead if there running it to sevenoaks...

Safe to say all the purple routes on the Southern Map will probably be taken over. Everything else will be left, where season ticket prices make them a fortune.

 

[A0]

In the light of Owen Jones's (and others') comments about bus services, it looks like there is one rule for the capital and another for everyone else. Free for all chaos for those of us at the mercy of privatised and uncoordinated companies; efficiency and common sense for Londoners benefitting from public control (if not ownership).

I wouldn't quote Owen Jones as a credible source for anything. Frankly the guy doesn't remember what a nationalised rail service looked like, still less a nationalised bus service.

Some of us DO remember and are in no hurry to return to what we had before.

 

[LLivery]

Speak for yourself (and wherever you live). In Nottingham we have a very well organised bus network, with a fair amount of coordination between 'City' bus providers (NCT) and the 'County' providers (Trent Barton etc).

I'm also in Notts at the moment and I can't believe the price of Trent Barton, its insane. The lack of integration of smartcards with the Trams and City buses is stupid too.