Your suggestions for the next Southeastern franchise

[yorksrob]

I think Paddock Wood to Maidstone West merits two trains an hour but I'm not sure Ashford merits four trains an hour?

Ashford could certainly do with a semi-fast in addition to the two stoppers via Tonbridge. Whether an extra two I wouldn't know.

Perhaps the second one would be better picking up via Maidstone East ?

Out of interest, how are they fitting these extra trains in ? I was under the impression that capacity on the two track Sevenoaks-Orpington section had been used up by additional Tunbridge Wells services a few years back.

 

[Bromley boy]

Ashford could certainly do with a semi-fast in addition to the two stoppers via Tonbridge. Whether an extra two I wouldn't know.

This throws open the HS1 v classic lines “fast” service debate once again...

 

[yorksrob]

This throws open the HS1 v classic lines “fast” service debate once again...

Well, much as I like Pluckley, I can't see there being much need for four stoppers along the route !

 

[JamesRowden]

Out of interest, how are they fitting these extra trains in ? I was under the impression that capacity on the two track Sevenoaks-Orpington section had been used up by additional Tunbridge Wells services a few years back.

The timetabling rules along the route allows a train every 5 minutes. That allows 12tph. The Sevenoaks metro services take 6-8 minutes longer than a non-stop service and so use up 3 paths reducing the mainline service capacity to 6tph. Allowing trains to run every 4+2/7 minutes would allow there to be a total capacity of 14tph, the Sevenoaks metro services would again take 3 paths each leaving 8tph of mainline paths. Therefore it would seem that either the signalling will be upgraded or the timetabling rules are simply being relaxed.

 

[yorksrob]

The timetabling rules along the route allows a train every 5 minutes. That allows 12tph. The Sevenoaks metro services take 6-8 minutes longer than a non-stop service and so use up 3 paths reducing the mainline service capacity to 6tph. Allowing trains to run every 4+2/7 minutes would allow there to be a total capacity of 14tph, the Sevenoaks metro services would again take 3 paths each leaving 8tph of mainline paths. Therefore it would seem that either the signalling will be upgraded or the timetabling rules are simply being relaxed.

That sounds fairly pragmatic - I suspect there's not a signalling upgrade as the route was only done comparatively recently. The alternative is that they may be splitting and joining trains at Tonbridge?

 

[JamesRowden]

Terminating all metro services at Orpington and serving the stations between Orpington and Sevenoaks with mainline services would be simpler and offer the same sort of mainline journey times as splitting/joining at Tonbridge (and a better frequency between London and Tonbridge, plus substantially better journey times to London for those stations, and no path crossing south east of Orpington station). I wonder if a bid including such a system would be accepted even if not explicitly shown as an option in the ITT.

 

[yorksrob]

Terminating all metro services at Orpington and serving the stations between Orpington and Sevenoaks with mainline services would be simpler and offer the same sort of mainline journey times as splitting/joining at Tonbridge (and a better frequency between London and Tonbridge, plus substantially better journey times to London for those stations, and no path crossing south east of Orpington station). I wonder if a bid including such a system would be accepted even if not explicitly shown as an option in the ITT.

Well, they certainly used to stop at Chelsfield in the 90's.

 

[HH]

It's already been explained to you why there will be a slight reduction in capacity at Cannon Street.

Yes. And that confirms what I said. I have yet to see any point from you. Indeed given that you don't seem to like what I say even though you clearly know it is true, are you part of the DfT team?

 

[Southern]

Should think Chelsfield, Knockholt and Dunton Green would be quite well suited to the Tunbridge Wells terminators - would seem a slightly retrograde step to add them to Kent Coast\Hastings services.

3tph for Ashford - Dover sounds promising, hopefully see an end to the 40+ minute gaps in service the line currently experiences.

 

[Antman]

Yes. And that confirms what I said. I have yet to see any point from you. Indeed given that you don't seem to like what I say even though you clearly know it is true, are you part of the DfT team?

No I'm not part of the DfT team, the irony is that you accuse them of lacking railway knowledge when clearly it's you that hasn't got a clue!

 

[hwl]

No I'm not part of the DfT team, the irony is that you accuse them of lacking railway knowledge when clearly it's you that hasn't got a clue!

I suspect HH knows DfT slightly better than some of us currently do and knows quite how clueless and two-faced DfT can be.

 

[Antman]

I suspect HH knows DfT slightly better than some of us currently do and knows quite how clueless and two-faced DfT can be.

Sounds to me like he has some sort of axe to grind?

 

[otomous]

Yes. And that confirms what I said. I have yet to see any point from you. Indeed given that you don't seem to like what I say even though you clearly know it is true, are you part of the DfT team?

Surely there will be MORE trains from London Bridge to Blackfriars (Previously none in the peaks as Thameslinks were diverted via Elephant) which will increase the overall frequency to the City; and Blackfriars may be just as useful to many going to Cannon Street now, given they're only about half a mile apart. It's a small compromise for a greater overall service I would have thought.

 

[Antman]

Surely there will be MORE trains from London Bridge to Blackfriars (Previously none in the peaks as Thameslinks were diverted via Elephant) which will increase the overall frequency to the City; and Blackfriars may be just as useful to many going to Cannon Street now, given they're only about half a mile apart. It's a small compromise for a greater overall service I would have thought.

Indeed but he seems determined to continue his crusade against the DfT.

 

[otomous]

Indeed but he seems determined to continue his crusade against the DfT.

We will never see improvements without compromises. I’m disappointed that the DFT rolled over and didn’t go for one terminus one route on SE. Hayes to Vic/Charing X seems worse of all worlds to me, we had City or West End, one or the other would have been better, and now we have a weird one West End one sort of West End!

 

[Antman]

We will never see improvements without compromises. I’m disappointed that the DFT rolled over and didn’t go for one terminus one route on SE. Hayes to Vic/Charing X seems worse of all worlds to me, we had City or West End, one or the other would have been better, and now we have a weird one West End one sort of West End!

I would have thought Hayes to Victoria is far more useful than Cannon Street which really is only a peak hour destination.

 

[cle]

Should think Chelsfield, Knockholt and Dunton Green would be quite well suited to the Tunbridge Wells terminators - would seem a slightly retrograde step to add them to Kent Coast\Hastings services.

3tph for Ashford - Dover sounds promising, hopefully see an end to the 40+ minute gaps in service the line currently experiences.

Yes I'd have thought so. Maybe 1tph stopper for local journeys (although would buses suit better?) - and then skip stop on 'outer' suburbans like either Tunbridge Wells or the Ashford slows. Leave new Ashford fasts and Hastings trains alone - and flight them. Would all of the outers need to stop at Orpington, or would some flighted need to skip ahead?

 

[Bromley boy]

We will never see improvements without compromises. I’m disappointed that the DFT rolled over and didn’t go for one terminus one route on SE. Hayes to Vic/Charing X seems worse of all worlds to me, we had City or West End, one or the other would have been better, and now we have a weird one West End one sort of West End!

Charing Cross is actually as central as it gets - all road sign distances from London are counted from Charing Cross .

On a more serious note, is it not reverting to Hayes - Charing +/CST in normal service, as it was prior to the LBG works, with Vic an alternative for weekends/engineering works?

 

[Lukespenceruk1]

Glad to see that the Sidcup Line will be gaining a Victoria service. I think this will be used well considering it seems popular when Victoria services are diverted via sidcup line during engineering works or emergencies.

 

[otomous]

Charing Cross is actually as central as it gets - all road sign distances from London are counted from Charing Cross .

On a more serious note, is it not reverting to Hayes - Charing +/CST in normal service, as it was prior to the LBG works, with Vic an alternative for weekends/engineering works?

I would have thought Hayes to Victoria is far more useful than Cannon Street which really is only a peak hour destination.

It’s more the continued lack of consistency that I have issue with. It also doesn’t improve return journeys. If all trains went Hayes to Cannon Street, say, I’d know that I just jump on the first train of 4tph to Lewisham from wherever I started, to wait no more than 15mims for a train to Hayes. Now it will still be case of planning a journey to try to ensure I don’t arrive at Lewisham just as the Hayes train has left, leaving me with a half hour wait. A missed opportunity.

 

[otomous]

Charing Cross is actually as central as it gets - all road sign distances from London are counted from Charing Cross .

On a more serious note, is it not reverting to Hayes - Charing +/CST in normal service, as it was prior to the LBG works, with Vic an alternative for weekends/engineering works?

No, new franchise spec is 2tph to Vic and Charing Cross apiece, to my mind a fiddly inconsistent compromise.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

On a more serious note, is it not reverting to Hayes - Charing +/CST in normal service, as it was prior to the LBG works, with Vic an alternative for weekends/engineering works?

I don't think so. The document is here, with Hayes line requirements on page 10. Unless I've badly misread something, it certainly looks to me like from 2022 Hayes is getting 2tph to Victoria and 2tph to Charing Cross (not calling at Lewisham) as the normal timetable - with no more Hayes-Cannon Street services.

It’s more the continued lack of consistency that I have issue with. It also doesn’t improve return journeys. If all trains went Hayes to Cannon Street, say, I’d know that I just jump on the first train of 4tph to Lewisham from wherever I started, to wait no more than 15mims for a train to Hayes. Now it will still be case of planning a journey to try to ensure I don’t arrive at Lewisham just as the Hayes train has left, leaving me with a half hour wait. A missed opportunity.

At peak times it might not be that bad because it looks to me like the specs give an additional 2tph to Charing Cross during the peak hours only. Even so, I do agree with you that the Hayes line has rather drawn the short straw, with (outside the rush hour) a half hour gap between services to either destination and no reasonable interchange. It would arguably have been a lot better if all Hayes trains had just gone to Victoria, with reasonable connections at Lewisham for CST/CHX (That would also have had the bonus of guaranteeing a regular 15-minute interval between Lewisham and Victoria - as opposed to the actual franchise specs, which are simply 4 tph with the biggest allowed gap between services being 20 minutes).

 

[HH]

Sounds to me like he has some sort of axe to grind?

Not at all. I have seen more of their workings than most and am therefore more aware of their shortcomings.

 

[HH]

Surely there will be MORE trains from London Bridge to Blackfriars (Previously none in the peaks as Thameslinks were diverted via Elephant) which will increase the overall frequency to the City; and Blackfriars may be just as useful to many going to Cannon Street now, given they're only about half a mile apart. It's a small compromise for a greater overall service I would have thought.

Yes, but they are Thameslink Trains, which have already been announced. Blackfriars is also close to London Bridge. I'm sure there will be winners, but there will also be losers. The current prevailing political wind is that there should never be losers.

I'm not saying any of this is bad or unnecessary; what I'm saying is that the downsides have never been communicated.

 

[leshuttle]

When Maidstone East to Cambridge Thameslink services start via (but not stopping at) Chislehurst wonder how that will fit in with the 8tph off Tonbridge when there's late running/disruption/etc.

 

[frediculous]

The document is here.

Looking at that document, it seems the minimum requirement through Rainham is only 2tph to Victoria, plus the 2tph to St Pancras. This is a drop from the 3tph to Victoria that currently exists (one of which stops where I work at Denmark Hill). Of course this ignores the addition of 2tph Thameslink trains through the core.

 

[BluePenguin]

Does anyone know what journey times or stopping patterns are to be expected for the Ashford to Charing Cross fasts? I am hoping that they will start from Ramsgate instead of Dover as having to change would negate any time savings.

I had a look at a franchising briefing document I found but there was nothing on there about any of this apart from the fact that was a lot of opposition against removing any of the stopping services because of housing building at Headcorn or something. I hate that 48% so much.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Does anyone know what journey times or stopping patterns are to be expected for the Ashford to Charing Cross fasts? I am hoping that they will start from Ramsgate instead of Dover as having to change would negate any time savings.

I don't think that information is available yet because most of it is up to what the franchisee decides. The DfT specify certain things - such as that there must be 4tpfh from Ashford to London via Tonbridge, and that 2 of those should be fast, but a lot of the detail is left up to the bidders - presumably to decide what kind of timetable they can work out that best satisfies the specs. I don't recall the document saying where the Ashford to CHX fasts should originate, so I'd imagine that will be decided by the franchisee (and could even change during the franchise).

 

[Antman]

I don't think so. The document is here, with Hayes line requirements on page 10. Unless I've badly misread something, it certainly looks to me like from 2022 Hayes is getting 2tph to Victoria and 2tph to Charing Cross (not calling at Lewisham) as the normal timetable - with no more Hayes-Cannon Street services.



At peak times it might not be that bad because it looks to me like the specs give an additional 2tph to Charing Cross during the peak hours only. Even so, I do agree with you that the Hayes line has rather drawn the short straw, with (outside the rush hour) a half hour gap between services to either destination and no reasonable interchange. It would arguably have been a lot better if all Hayes trains had just gone to Victoria, with reasonable connections at Lewisham for CST/CHX (That would also have had the bonus of guaranteeing a regular 15-minute interval between Lewisham and Victoria - as opposed to the actual franchise specs, which are simply 4 tph with the biggest allowed gap between services being 20 minutes).

I actually took the opposite view and thought the mid Kent line to Hayes has got a better deal, the only downside being no direct service to Cannon Street New Cross and St Johns but that shouldn't be a big deal off peak.

Surely anybody for London Bridge would change at Lewisham from a Victoria service? I'm assuming it would also stop at Denmark Hill which is another useful link for Kings College Hospital?

 

[cle]

The loss of the ELL at New Cross isn't ideal, nor is only 2tph to London Bridge - but I suppose they can jump onto it at Peckham Rye and it's better for Clapham Junction routings.