Why do Sudbury & Harrow Road and Sudbury Hill Harrow have such an appalling service?

[swt class 450]

Just wondering why do both Sudbury & Harrow Road and Sudbury Hill Harrow have such a bad service? Is there a particular reason for this? Both stations only have limited services during Monday to Friday daytimes with no evening or weekend services at all.

They also both have very basic facilities. They both only have one PERTIS machine each (but no TVMs) both of which have been broken for over a year.

Both stations are in very busy areas and have lots of shops and houses and buildings nearby. The both also have excellent connections to the London Underground Piccadilly Line (Sudbury & Harrow Road is a two minute walk from Sudbury Town and Sudbury Hill Harrow is a two minute walk from Sudbury Hill).

Wembley Stadium / Northolt Park / South Ruislip / West Ruislip all get an hourly service seven days a week from early morning to late night despite the fact that all of the areas are pretty much the same size and just as busy as Sudbury & Harrow Road and Sudbury Hill Harrow stations.

Is it possible that at some point they will get a proper service (at least hourly in each direction from early morning to late night seven days a week)? I thought this was meant to happen when Chiltern Railways got their 172s? But that plan seems to have disappeared?

 

[alex17595]

I think the main reason is that there is no loops there and anything that stops will block the main line. There is not point putting loops in as the area already served by the Underground.

 

[mr_jrt]

They are stations surrounded by other routes to London with better services (that go to more useful places than Marylebone), and they have the double whammy of being on two-track sections of Chiltern's line to Birmingham, (where longer journeys are far more profitable). It's not surprising, really.

My personal solution to this would be to create a new branch of the Jubilee Line from Neasden, and rebuild the partial four track formation that was put in place when the line was built. Chiltern can then wash their hands of the stations (running through non-stop), the Jubilee gets somewhere useful to send their excess capacity so they can increase the service in their core without overloading the turnback sidings at West Hampstead and Willesden Green (I seem to recall hearing the capacity is needed out to Wembley/Neasden anyway, but not on the Stanmore branch - hence the proposals to take over the Uxbridge branch - this would remove the need to do that), and by serving Wembley Stadium stadium station, the loss of capacity to Wembley Park station is minimised.

 

[HSTEd]

HS2 destroying the long distance (to near Birmingham) market might help.
But other than that the stations are stuck in limbo caused by the costs of the closure procedure.

 

[Greenback]

I think it's capacity related. I think Chiltern are better off focusing on outer suburban and longer distance services, though I recognise that there might be a few people who want to go form those stations to somewhere in the Birmingham direction.

Like alex17585 says, the Underground caters for those heading to London

 

[XDM]

Mrjrt's idea is excellent,solving several problems in one go. Shame railways,even on existing formations,are so prohibitively expensive to build. I shall plug his Jubilee branch idea whenever I get a chance.

 

[Clip]

Just wondering why do both Sudbury & Harrow Road and Sudbury Hill Harrow have such a bad service? Is there a particular reason for this? Both stations only have limited services during Monday to Friday daytimes with no evening or weekend services at all.

They also both have very basic facilities. They both only have one PERTIS machine each (but no TVMs) both of which have been broken for over a year.

Both stations are in very busy areas and have lots of shops and houses and buildings nearby. The both also have excellent connections to the London Underground Piccadilly Line (Sudbury & Harrow Road is a two minute walk from Sudbury Town and Sudbury Hill Harrow is a two minute walk from Sudbury Hill).


Is it possible that at some point they will get a proper service (at least hourly in each direction from early morning to late night seven days a week)? I thought this was meant to happen when Chiltern Railways got their 172s? But that plan seems to have disappeared?

Sudbury Hill Harrow has an hourly service in each direction and you answered your own question with the fact that the tube is close by to both stations which run a much higher frequency so apart from the morning and evening peaks for Sudbury & Harrow road there really isn't really much need for anything there during the day/weekend.

And this helps free up more paths for trains from further afield. Though they could've put some tracks through the middle of Wembley to at least have a loop in the same way as West Ruislip but that wont happen now.

And they are a nightmare to manage with the Pertis being regularly being broken into or vandalised in some way you have to ask why harrow road is even still open.

 

[The Planner]

Could you get platforms in on your proposed Jubilee line idea and the 2 fast tracks as I assume the original layout was platforms on the outside.

 

[mr_jrt]

Mrjrt's idea is excellent,solving several problems in one go. Shame railways,even on existing formations,are so prohibitively expensive to build. I shall plug his Jubilee branch idea whenever I get a chance.

Thank you. The other thing to consider is that currently the stations are next to useless for reaching anywhere nearby as there are no other stops between Wembley Stadium and Marylebone. Being able to interchange at Neasden to the Met and Jubilee would transform their usefulness, especially if Neasden were also given platforms on the Dudding Hill line when the station was rebuilt for the new branch (though obviously, this could all be done without a conversion to the Jubilee line, but it helps).

Where the concept struggles however is at the western end. Do you terminate at Sudbury Hill and abandon Northolt Park? Do you build a new wider (read:expensive) formation (including a new bore for the South Harrow Tunnel) to Northolt Junction that never existed previously? Do you add a chord up to the Picc Line to Rayner's Lane? All things that would need to be considered.

 

[mr_jrt]

Could you get platforms in on your proposed Jubilee line idea and the 2 fast tracks as I assume the original layout was platforms on the outside.

The devil is always in the details, unfortunately I can confirm you are correct - the stations on this section were built with side platforms and through roads unlike most of the GCR's mainline stations which had a central island platform and outer through loops (which would have made things much easier!). The options therefore would be to replace the former central roads with an island platform (as was done at Wembley Stadium) and then widen the formation to add the new outer through roads - expensive, and potentially a deal breaker if line speeds were too greatly impacted that you had to buy up a lot of new land to keep them straightish. The other option is to stick with side platforms (i.e. leave the faster central through roads) and add some grade separation at the end of the line, a-la Welwyn station on the ECML. This shouldn't be too expensive if it's only needed for tube stock.

 

[MarlowDonkey]

This shouldn't be too expensive if it's only needed for tube stock.

Isn't the bigger problem whether there's enough railway owned land between the stations to install a four track line?

 

[jopsuk]

if I was making with the crayons on mr_jrt's plan, I'd suggest that the ideal would be a rebuild through this section from the ground up, with the Chiltern tracks on the north side of the alignment. There would need to be new bores at South Harrow Tunnel, and perhaps some gardens taken through Northolt Park.

At Northholt junction join this Jubilee branch onto the Central Line, and share tracks/platforms through South Ruislip and Ruislip Gardens. Do some rebuilding in the depot site to create a pair of running leading down to Ickenham, take the Jubilee through to terminate at Uxbridge OR divert the Central to Uxbridge and terminate the Jubilee at West Ruislip. The latter is probably better for creating a better spread of direct trains (rather than having two routes from Uxbridge to Neasden) whilst still allowing connections (ideal in disruption)

 

[Dr Hoo]

As originally constructed both stations were on a nice four-track alignment, with the platforms on loops. Great foresight by the Great Central.

Tragically when Network SouthEast's euphemistically described "total route modernisation" of the Chiltern lines was undertaken a 'scorched earth' approach was taken and platforms relocated so as to prevent any reinstatement of quadruple track at sensible cost, thus ensuring that for evermore the two places could only receive a token service.

 

[sk688]

Marlyebone- West Ruislip , every station has an appalling service . Northolt Park and Wembley Stadium are hardly better . The issue is of course , the two tracks , as well as ( I believe ) the two track bridge at Petts Hill ( just south of Northolt Park , which just recently having been rebuilt , probably wont be rebuilt again

As originally constructed both stations were on a nice four-track alignment, with the platforms on loops. Great foresight by the Great Central.

Tragically when Network SouthEast's euphemistically described "total route modernisation" of the Chiltern lines was undertaken a 'scorched earth' approach was taken and platforms relocated so as to prevent any reinstatement of quadruple track at sensible cost, thus ensuring that for evermore the two places could only receive a token service.

Why was this approach taken ? Surely as part of TRM , it would have been better to restore it to how it was in GCR days ( i.e 4 track ) .

 

[sk688]

Just wondering why do both Sudbury & Harrow Road and Sudbury Hill Harrow have such a bad service? Is there a particular reason for this? Both stations only have limited services during Monday to Friday daytimes with no evening or weekend services at all.

They also both have very basic facilities. They both only have one PERTIS machine each (but no TVMs) both of which have been broken for over a year.

Both stations are in very busy areas and have lots of shops and houses and buildings nearby. The both also have excellent connections to the London Underground Piccadilly Line (Sudbury & Harrow Road is a two minute walk from Sudbury Town and Sudbury Hill Harrow is a two minute walk from Sudbury Hill).

Wembley Stadium / Northolt Park / South Ruislip / West Ruislip all get an hourly service seven days a week from early morning to late night despite the fact that all of the areas are pretty much the same size and just as busy as Sudbury & Harrow Road and Sudbury Hill Harrow stations.

Is it possible that at some point they will get a proper service (at least hourly in each direction from early morning to late night seven days a week)? I thought this was meant to happen when Chiltern Railways got their 172s? But that plan seems to have disappeared?

Sudbury Hill Harrow now has an off peak service M-F 1tph

 

[HSTEd]

Why was this approach taken ? Surely as part of TRM , it would have been better to restore it to how it was in GCR days ( i.e 4 track ) .

For what purpose?
Chiltern was rebuilt into a low-cost to operate commuter railway.
If the TOC didn't insist on wanting to play with the big boys by running fast Birmingham trains this bottleneck would be much less of an issue.

 

[northwichcat]

As a northerner I find it surprising that Sudbury Hill Harrow has 1tph in each direction and a last train at 20:59 but apparently has an 'appalling' service and 'no evening service.' If we started a thread about station with a service equal or worse than that there would be hundreds of threads.

 

[jopsuk]

Right but the comparison here isn't with places in the North, the comparison is with every other station in London, where 6+tph (up to 32tph on some parts of the Underground) and late evening running (overnight Friday and Saturday night on select routes) is the standard.

 

[northwichcat]

Right but the comparison here isn't with places in the North, the comparison is with every other station in London, where 6+tph (up to 32tph on some parts of the Underground) and late evening running (overnight Friday and Saturday night on select routes) is the standard.

But as mentioned in the original post Sudbury is served by the LU - it has three stations on the Piccadilly line so that probably caters for the demand between Sudbury and London. So why make a fuss about only having an hourly national rail service to London? With Sudbury Hill Harrow only getting 70,000 National Rail journeys per annum from an hourly service I imagine the benefit:cost ratio for an improved service is very poor - up here stations needed annual usage of 200,000 or more to be considered to get an enhancement from 1tph in each direction to 2tph under the new Northern franchise.

If the argument is supposed to be passengers on trains from Birmingham and Oxford could change to the LU at Sudbury if more services stopped there is there any evidence for that? WCML passengers seem to prefer to travel to Euston over changing to underground services at Watford Junction (with Watford Junction calls being cut back with very few objections.)

 

[The Planner]

If the proposals by Chiltern and the WM&C route study come off and trains make it down to Old Oak then they could start to get an improved service as paths would get released.

 

[jopsuk]

But as mentioned in the original post Sudbury is served by the LU - it has three stations on the Piccadilly line so that probably caters for the demand between Sudbury and London.

Indeed. Almost a bigger mystery is why they weren't just shut down entirely.

 

[swt class 450]

The National Rail stations at Sudbury & Harrow Road and Sudbury Hill Harrow are far more convinient that the Piccadilly Line though. Chiltern Railways takes about 10 to 12 minutes to get to Central London. Where as the Piccadilly Line takes about 44 to 52 minutes to get to Central London. I think if Chiltern Railways ran a proper frequent service than both of these stations would both see a huge increase in passenger numbers.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

The National Rail stations at Sudbury & Harrow Road and Sudbury Hill Harrow are far more convinient that the Piccadilly Line though. Chiltern Railways takes about 10 to 12 minutes to get to Central London. Where as the Piccadilly Line takes about 44 to 52 minutes to get to Central London. I think if Chiltern Railways ran a proper frequent service than both of these stations would both see a huge increase in passenger numbers.

I'll assume 'proper frequent' to mean 3tph as a minimum. Doing that would presumably annihilate the pathing of any non-stop services into or out of Marylebone, especially if you wished to repeat it for all stations to West Ruislip. There just isn't the capacity for the Oxford / Birmingham fasts, regional stuff out to High Wycombe and an all shacks metro service.

 

[30907]

As originally constructed both stations were on a nice four-track alignment, with the platforms on loops. Great foresight by the Great Central.

My impression (from first travelling the line in the early 70s) that the basic layout was double track with loops at the stations only (same on the joint section). Had there been a four-track section (as with South to West Ruislip) it would have been worth retaining, as you could have let fasts overtake stoppers with minimal delay, but a loop at a station alone is less use.

 

[swt class 450]

I'll assume 'proper frequent' to mean 3tph as a minimum. Doing that would presumably annihilate the pathing of any non-stop services into or out of Marylebone, especially if you wished to repeat it for all stations to West Ruislip. There just isn't the capacity for the Oxford / Birmingham fasts, regional stuff out to High Wycombe and an all shacks metro service.

By "proper frequent service" i mean at least one train an hour an each direction from early morning to late night seven days a week. More would be brilliant but this is the minimum. What i dont understand is why Wembley Stadium / Northolt Park / South Ruislip / West Ruislip are able to get a more frequent service? I know the capacity is limited but surely if they just adjusted the timetables a bit than Sudbury & Harrow Road and Sudbury Hill Harrow could get a similar service?

 

[Ianno87]

Mrjrt's idea is excellent,solving several problems in one go. Shame railways,even on existing formations,are so prohibitively expensive to build. I shall plug his Jubilee branch idea whenever I get a chance.

Why?

Extending an extra tube line into an area already served by the Piccadilly, Bakerloo (plus Overground) and (on the periphery) the Metropolitan line makes no sense whatsover.

For the most part, the Bakerloo duplicates the Central London connectivity that a Jubilee extension would provide anyway. And you-ve just stuffed the capability of the Jubillee Line to clear passengers from events at Wembley too, by halving the service between Wembleys Park and Stadium.

In any case, the wide Chiltern Route formation at this point would be exceedingly useful for masts should the line ever be electrified.

 

[swt class 450]

Another easier option could be to reinstate a four track section from just South of South Ruislip to just North of West Ruislip to improve capacity.

 

[Ianno87]

By "proper frequent service" i mean at least one train an hour an each direction from early morning to late night seven days a week. More would be brilliant but this is the minimum. What i dont understand is why Wembley Stadium / Northolt Park / South Ruislip / West Ruislip are able to get a more frequent service? I know the capacity is limited but surely if they just adjusted the timetables a bit than Sudbury & Harrow Road and Sudbury Hill Harrow could get a similar service?

Every stop you add slows the train by 2-3 minutes. So the next fast service to Birmingham/Oxford/wherever will catch up 3 minutes sooner, hitting the journey time (and thus £££). The whole Chiltern timetable is sequenced around a careful sequence of Fast/Fast/Semi-fast/Stopper/Aylesbury via Amersham every half hour, with the next fast catching up the preceding half-hour's stopper somwhere 'to country'.

 

[Ianno87]

Another easier option could be to reinstate a four track section from just South of South Ruislip to just North of West Ruislip to improve capacity.

Problem is, that stopper woild have to sit and wait in the loop for 2-3 consecutive faster trains to overtake for the sequence to work further north (not just one). So the Denhamites etc get hit by a 10+ minute journey time extension.

 

[mr_jrt]

My impression (from first travelling the line in the early 70s) that the basic layout was double track with loops at the stations only (same on the joint section). Had there been a four-track section (as with South to West Ruislip) it would have been worth retaining, as you could have let fasts overtake stoppers with minimal delay, but a loop at a station alone is less use.

I've seen maps from when the line was built that were easier to search, but if you look on the National Library of Scotland site you can see the OS maps from the 1950s that show the lines with sufficient detail (i.e. http://maps.nls.uk/geo/find/#zoom=15&lat=51.5574&lon=-0.3316&layers=61&b=4&point=51.5564,-0.3275 and on to http://maps.nls.uk/view/102895036).

At least 4 tracks through Wembley Stadium to just east of St. Johns Rd. (just east of the WCML), then down to 2 tracks on a shallow embankment to Sudbury & Harrow's 4 track section. There was a short 3-track section to Maybank Ave., then a short two-track section to Sudbury Hill's 4-track section, which narrows past Wood End Rd. down to three tracks, then very quickly down to two through the tunnel and on to Northolt Park, which was only ever two tracks.

All the embankments were and still are quite shallow, so could easily be widened for any additional lines.