Thameslink service should be revised to increase reliability

[30907]

Of course the other issue is the SE fast services which limit Catford Loop availability. It's crazy to me that these trains take up such valuable space in a massively overcrowded corridor which is often the subject of proposals for redevelopment and even new tube line (eg BLE to Peckham, catford).

Really? Currently the peak service (including Lewishams) is 6tph plus 2 "fasts" which have masses of pathing, so fewer trains than via Herne Hill. That compares with around 1980 when there were at least 9tph plus 3 fasts. I don't think infrastructure is holding up service increases!

AIUI any Bakerloo extension will serve the Old Kent Road and go to Lewisham. If it serves Catford it will replace the Mid-Kent line.

 

[MPW]

Really? Currently the peak service (including Lewishams) is 6tph plus 2 "fasts" which have masses of pathing, so fewer trains than via Herne Hill. That compares with around 1980 when there were at least 9tph plus 3 fasts. I don't think infrastructure is holding up service increases!

AIUI any Bakerloo extension will serve the Old Kent Road and go to Lewisham. If it serves Catford it will replace the Mid-Kent line

Not sure if "really?" is you asking a question or intended to convey frustration at my post. I'll reply as though you're unsure what I meant.

The passenger loading on trains and buses is high on the corridor, in my experience. From memory the SE Route Utilisation report for catford loop references freight and long-distance trains reducing capacity, and was written <10yrs ago.

Perhaps there was a different service pattern and pinch points across the wider network in the 1980s. I didn't do extensive research before posting (hope that's clear in how I phrased it).

My point about BLE maybe wasn't clear enough. I'm aware the mid-kent line is the current frontrunner. The Catford loop serves areas which lost out when BLE proposal was redrawn via OKR and lewisham instead of Peckham. So without doing my own modelling or research, it seems logical that there would be political support and some business case for improved service on this alternative route.

 

[Bald Rick]

I wasn't suggesting that all of the current peak-only TL services would continue to be part of TL - the introduction of a full time Oxford service would be more important.

What happens to the extra peak TL services, and the passengers on them, then?

 

[30907]

Not sure if "really?" is you asking a question or intended to convey frustration at my post. I'll reply as though you're unsure what I meant.

The passenger loading on trains and buses is high on the corridor, in my experience. From memory the SE Route Utilisation report for catford loop references freight and long-distance trains reducing capacity, and was written <10yrs ago.

There were, indeed, rather more outer-suburban trains then, but freight was offpeak only.

The Catford loop serves areas which lost out when BLE proposal was redrawn via OKR and lewisham instead of Peckham. So without doing my own modelling or research, it seems logical that there would be political support and some business case for improved service on this alternative route.

If the traffic is there, as you indicate, certainly there would be a case - perhaps reviving the Victoria-Bellingham that was proposed back then, if Blackfriars (or the core) hasn't the capacity.

 

[SE%Traveller]

One of the frustrating things about the Services going down the loop is that the Semi Fast from Gillingham follows the Stopper from Sevenoaks such that it catches up with it by Catford and then crawls along behind to Denmark Hill taking 20 mins. I'd often wondered if you delayed the Sevenoaks Stopper by 5 minutes you could avoid this and it could take the current Rainham path to Luton (with the latter returning to SE) with the Gillingham service having a clear run.

Ironically this is exactly what happens on Sunday, with the Gillingham (sometimes Dover) doing the stretch to Denmark Hill in 12 mins rather than 20 and the Sevenoaks Service arrives in tandem with the Rainham in Blackfriars at xx04/ xx34...

 

[30907]

One of the frustrating things about the Services going down the loop is that the Semi Fast from Gillingham follows the Stopper from Sevenoaks such that it catches up with it by Catford and then crawls along behind to Denmark Hill taking 20 mins. I'd often wondered if you delayed the Sevenoaks Stopper by 5 minutes you could avoid this and it could take the current Rainham path to Luton (with the latter returning to SE) with the Gillingham service having a clear run.

To eliminate all the pathing (Up direction only for those who are unfamiliar) unfortunately you need to delay the Sevenoaks by 7 min not 5, which then conflicts with the Maidstone-Charing Cross at Swanley. Running the Gillingham 5 earlier is possible (but not 7), but you then catch up the Orpington Thameslink at DMK.
Annoyingly, I can't see a solution without a much wider timetable recast.

 

[NorthKent1989]

I’m of the opinion that if the Woolwich line is going to be lumbered with Thameslink long term, then it should be rerouted at Charlton to run via Lewisham at least.

The Woolwich line is an oddity of the Dartford routes in that it’s 2tph and traditionally it’s the outer-suburban Gillingham route, the other lines (Greenwich, Bexleyheath and Sidcup) can be brought up to 6tph and are ripe for a Overground takeover, while the Blackheath/Woolwich route is a far better fit for such a Thameslink service.

I’ve heard that once Blackheath tunnel is finished being refurbished that the 700s may start using that route whenever there are diversions on the Deptford-Charlton route, is this true?

 

[LBMPSB]

I‘ve never seen ‘transponders’ at the London end if Radlett Jn*, and even if they were / are there it was nothing to do with the then proposed TM system. The TM would (and one day will) takes info from the Train Describers in the signalling centres. It doesn‘t need ant additional train identification.

* unless you mean the Auto Power Cutoffs for the OLE neutral section just south of Radkett Jn?

Never heard of transponders for TM, TM is not directly connected to the Signalling system. ETCS works through the GSM-R system, which uses the same masts as the GSM-R radio system. The proposed 'Traffic Management' for Thameslink was conceived as part of the Thameslink Programme. We were promised it year after year, then suddenly after millions had been spent on its development, it was scrapped. It was meant as a standalone system that was to use train schedules and live data from train movements, train crew diagrams, stock diagrams, to adjust schedules of trains to keep the service running with minimal delays. It could not talk with TRUST/TOPS. Its area did not cover the complete Thameslink Area, only Luton to Three Bridges I believe. So it could not know how trains were doing outside this area. It did not control signalling directly, only indirectly through train schedules which the Signalling systems proposed Immediate Route Signalling system read to regulate trains. This then led to Union isuses, because it was proposed that Train Running Controllers could alter the regulation of trains at junctions without talking to Signallers who signalled the areas concerned. ECTS ATO is limited to between London Bridge and Kentish Town. Designed to allow free flowing through the core section, ATO ensures each train is run as efficient as conditions allow, more effiecient that a Train Driver can. ETCS allows for 32 pathways an hour through the Core each direction, with only 24 scheduled trains an hour being the maximum. This allows 8 pathways each direction for perturbation, allowing the throughput of late trains using Traffic Management with out affecting right time trains, now left to the Signallers judgement at the time or Train Running Controllers decison made in advance.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Jun 2024 ==

I’m of the opinion that if the Woolwich line is going to be lumbered with Thameslink long term, then it should be rerouted at Charlton to run via Lewisham at least.

The Woolwich line is an oddity of the Dartford routes in that it’s 2tph and traditionally it’s the outer-suburban Gillingham route, the other lines (Greenwich, Bexleyheath and Sidcup) can be brought up to 6tph and are ripe for a Overground takeover, while the Blackheath/Woolwich route is a far better fit for such a Thameslink service.

I’ve heard that once Blackheath tunnel is finished being refurbished that the 700s may start using that route whenever there are diversions on the Deptford-Charlton route, is this true?

Having spent seven years Signalling Greenwich Thameslinks at North Kent East Junction, I have proposed several times, that if the service ran as the old North Kent semi fast from Gillingham via Charlton & Blackheath to London Bridge then on to Luton, it would be a better service for passengers and would ease the regulation/ conflicting movements at North Kent East. It would even go through Lewisham on/off the slow lines at St johns with no conflicts at Lewisham. But it seems it is a DfT requirement to make up for loss of Charing Cross Greenwich services.

 

[NorthKent1989]

Having spent seven years Signalling Greenwich Thameslinks at North Kent East Junction, I have proposed several times, that if the service ran as the old North Kent semi fast from Gillingham via Charlton & Blackheath to London Bridge then on to Luton, it would be a better service for passengers and would ease the regulation/ conflicting movements at North Kent East. It would even go through Lewisham on/off the slow lines at St johns with no conflicts at Lewisham. But it seems it is a DfT requirement to make up for loss of Charing Cross Greenwich services.

It was definitely a last minute decision and a last minute one, pretty sure that from 2010-2015 Charing Cross trains via Greenwich were peak only? And that all CX trains during this era was via Blackheath as the Gillinghams.

Either way it would make far more sense routing it via Blackheath for the reasons you stated above.

 

[gsc777]

Not to add my two cents to the conversation but, in my experience as a regular user of the line from Gatwick and East Croydon to Cambridge, people are delusional for thinking these services aren't being used!

I know the naked eye is hardly the most reliable source, but those trains are busy, if not packed, for almost the entire journey. A lot will change (in and out) at London Bridge, Farringdon and St Pancras, but a genuine number of these people are going from the south to Stevenage, Hitchin, Letchworth and Cambridge. Plus, these trains are a god-send for students (a good proportion of students): the fast GN trains to KX are good but expensive, and the Liverpool Street trains are cheap but deathly slow, whereas the Thameslink is good speed, connects to nine LU lines, including the EL (KX only would be 6, LS would be 7). I get that it might seem like we're grasping at similar straws here, but in the eyes of the commuter, delays are inevitable but good connections aren't. I can't speak for the Peterborough—Horsham service myself, but the Cambridge—Brighton is an absolute must, or at the very least Cambridge—Three Bridges because the Gatwick connection saves people having to use Stansted which is inconvenient for the many, MANY international students and tourists. Convenience will always top, I fear. But what do I know?

Cambridge “booming” doesn’t necessarily equate to it not being viable to add a couple of stops to a non-stop service, to account for the fact that a lot of Cambridge passengers apparently are now choosing to use Thameslink instead.

Booming or otherwise, it isn’t really reasonable for Cambridge to expect to keep the 2tph non-stop effectively as a backstop in case of problems with Thameslink. It isn’t like the competition is great - the GA service is slow, and going by road London to Cambridge is hit and miss at best.

Off-peak the Cambridge fasts seem to have plenty of spare seats these days, during the week at least.



I always thought Rainham wasn’t the most sensible idea, even as a means simply of being able to stick 2tph. It’s problematic enough Thameslink combining three distinct areas (GN, Midland and South Central), without adding a fourth for very little benefit. And it hardly provides great journey opportunities that didn’t previously exist, as the SE side has both city and west end termini. It would be interesting to know how many through journeys are made on the Rainham service, I’ve always got the impression it’s relatively few. As an aside that and Sevenoaks also seem to be where the 700/0s suffer the most vandalism.

Would there now be track capacity to send them to Reigate instead? I realise this would require some infrastructure work at Reigate.

Time to sound like an idiot who doesn't know anything, but if we need a new terminus does any of Sutton, Epsom, Leatherhead, Dorking Horsham or Guildford work via the West Croydon—Sutton line? As a Waddon local (and a Cambridge student before I get jumped for looking like I'm lying) I'd love to see some significant Thameslink services to Waddon, Wallington and Carshalton Beeches to rival the services that the Mitcham Junction and Wimbledon lines receive. I'm looking at Guildford as well — it already has 2 routes to Waterloo (fast on the PDL, slow via Claygate), so rather than a third Waterloo route it would be very cool to see Guildford not only get direct trains into London Bridge and St Pancras, but also direct EL connections at Farringdon and connecting Guildford to northbound services. A Guildford—Luton Airport would be cool, as Gatwick and Heathrow already have decent road links. This could work especially well with Crossrail 2, which would take over the stopping services to Epsom anyway.

 

[Magdalia]

Time to sound like an idiot who doesn't know anything, but if we need a new terminus does any of Sutton, Epsom, Leatherhead, Dorking Horsham or Guildford work via the West Croydon—Sutton line?

I make quite a few journeys between the Fens and some of these. The "one change" links to most of Surrey and Sussex, at London Bridge or East Croydon, is another reason why the Cambridge-Brighton service is well used.

One thing that doesn't help is that, if everything is running on time, the Cambridge trains are always following the Sutton via Hackbridge trains through the core going south, and the Sutton via Hackbridge trains are always following the Cambridge trains through the core going north.

The Thameslink service originated in 2018 but the Southern service was revised post Covid. One innovation was a 2tph London Bridge-Epsom service that runs on the fast lines between News Cross Gate and Norwood Junction. It would be nice if this could be integrated into Thameslink, and even better if it could run through to/from Dorking.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

I make quite a few journeys between the Fens and some of these. The "one change" links to most of Surrey and Sussex, at London Bridge or East Croydon, is another reason why the Cambridge-Brighton service is well used.

One thing that doesn't help is that, if everything is running on time, the Cambridge trains are always following the Sutton via Hackbridge trains through the core going south, and the Sutton via Hackbridge trains are always following the Cambridge trains through the core going north.

The Thameslink service originated in 2018 but the Southern service was revised post Covid. One innovation was a 2tph London Bridge-Epsom service that runs on the fast lines between News Cross Gate and Norwood Junction. It would be nice if this could be integrated into Thameslink, and even better if it could run through to/from Dorking.

Is there not an argument to transfer the Kings Lynn service to Thameslink? Although that would be an awful long way for one of those desiro units

 

[Royston Vasey]

Is there not an argument to transfer the Kings Lynn service to Thameslink? Although that would be an awful long way for one of those desiro units

I guarantee that if they did that, late running would be dealt with by turning at Cambridge or Ely and Kings Lynn's service would suffer chronically. Anyway, the Kings Lynn services interwork with Cambridge stoppers, so unpicking that and giving it to Thameslink would wreck all that 8 car neatness and relative reliability, and there wouldn't be enough 700/1s anyway. 12 cars would also be a problem up the branch, although Kings Lynn P1 itself would be ok.

 

[Magdalia]

Is there not an argument to transfer the Kings Lynn service to Thameslink? Although that would be an awful long way for one of those desiro units

There are many more pressing reasons why this is a very bad idea.

Beyond Cambridge is too far from the core.

Single line sections north of Ely would be very bad for resilience.

Possible power supply issues with 12 car trains.

Various stations have platforms that can't take 12 car trains.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

One thing that doesn't help is that, if everything is running on time, the Cambridge trains are always following the Sutton via Hackbridge trains through the core going south, and the Sutton via Hackbridge trains are always following the Cambridge trains through the core going north.

In what sense does that not help? The Cambridge trains are after all presumably always going to be following/be followed by something.

 

[Magdalia]

In what sense does that not help? The Cambridge trains are after all presumably always going to be following/be followed by something.

It doesn't help me! Every journey in both directions involves a wait of 27 minutes.

 

[cle]

Time to sound like an idiot who doesn't know anything, but if we need a new terminus does any of Sutton, Epsom, Leatherhead, Dorking Horsham or Guildford work via the West Croydon—Sutton line? As a Waddon local (and a Cambridge student before I get jumped for looking like I'm lying) I'd love to see some significant Thameslink services to Waddon, Wallington and Carshalton Beeches to rival the services that the Mitcham Junction and Wimbledon lines receive. I'm looking at Guildford as well — it already has 2 routes to Waterloo (fast on the PDL, slow via Claygate), so rather than a third Waterloo route it would be very cool to see Guildford not only get direct trains into London Bridge and St Pancras, but also direct EL connections at Farringdon and connecting Guildford to northbound services. A Guildford—Luton Airport would be cool, as Gatwick and Heathrow already have decent road links. This could work especially well with Crossrail 2, which would take over the stopping services to Epsom anyway.

The Thameslink service originated in 2018 but the Southern service was revised post Covid. One innovation was a 2tph London Bridge-Epsom service that runs on the fast lines between News Cross Gate and Norwood Junction. It would be nice if this could be integrated into Thameslink, and even better if it could run through to/from Dorking.

This semi-fast Epsom is often seen as a Rainham replacement option. Many benefits - fast journeys from West Croydon into the core, and the other stations -

Funnily enough, this route was a very old Thameslink service, all the way to Guildford. Which then became a Croydon-Guildford operation.

I think Dorking or Horsham might be better (plus interworking / stabling potential at the latter?) to keep it more 'Southern' network focused overall. Also it's far slower than routes into Waterloo. It could take over a pair of tph (e.g. out of Victoria) - from that route which might be useful elsewhere, if this was doable as an extension from Epsom. So could be something else unlocked - like 2tph Victoria to Epsom Downs via Carshalton, perhaps (I know that route is pegged for more tph, at least to Belmont)

 

[DynamicSpirit]

It doesn't help me! Every journey in both directions involves a wait of 27 minutes.

Ah! I see what you mean! That makes a lot more sense now (I was imagining you were talking about helping Thameslink generally, which made less sense)

 

[gsc777]

This semi-fast Epsom is often seen as a Rainham replacement option. Many benefits - fast journeys from West Croydon into the core, and the other stations -

Funnily enough, this route was a very old Thameslink service, all the way to Guildford. Which then became a Croydon-Guildford operation.

I think Dorking or Horsham might be better (plus interworking / stabling potential at the latter?) to keep it more 'Southern' network focused overall. Also it's far slower than routes into Waterloo. It could take over a pair of tph (e.g. out of Victoria) - from that route which might be useful elsewhere, if this was doable as an extension from Epsom. So could be something else unlocked - like 2tph Victoria to Epsom Downs via Carshalton, perhaps (I know that route is pegged for more tph, at least to Belmont)

Could Peterborough—Horsham as a mock of the Sutton Loop line? Services run clockwise into Horsham via Gatwick, then out via Dorking, and then an opposite anticlockwise service?

Guildford is a commuter haven, so I really do see potential there. Especially since many Surrey residents end up as Cambridge students (for better or for worse) there could be demand for Guildford as a Surrey/Hampshire hub running north. Perhaps 2tph Guildford—St Pancras, of which one runs to Cambridge and one runs to Luton for the airport connection? On the flip side, a direction Thameslink—Portsmouth Harbour interchange could provide some good travel routes, though this would probably be replaced by the Clapham Junction interchange on Crossrail 2, whenever that happens.

Someone also mentioned Reigate — does GWR have a chokehold on the North Downs Line? A Thameslink connection that connects to Reigate, Dorking, Guildford and Reading all in one go can't be a bad idea, though it would probably never be used for long distance travel by Reading commuters (they have GWR and the EL anyway). GWR could still run the Redhill reversal service to Gatwick, maybe at 1tph.

On the topic of Redhill, what about a service to Tonbridge, or even Tunbridge Wells? The Redhill—Tonbridge line is just a little shuttle as of now, so could be integrated into the stopping BML Thameslink? I'm just spewing ideas here, I suppose. The South East could use a Thameslink link, especially without CrossCountry involved, even if they do have HS1.

 

[JonathanH]

On the topic of Redhill, what about a service to Tonbridge, or even Tunbridge Wells? The Redhill—Tonbridge line is just a little shuttle as of now, so could be integrated into the stopping BML Thameslink?

Sending a 12 coach commuter train down a line with short platforms that barely sustains a 3-coach shuttle is not sensible.

 

[cle]

Reigate was planned to have a third 12 car platform which would have likely turned 2tph to Thameslink.

As to Tonbridge, a recent thread did have people (including me) saying how underused that line is. Also to Ashford. Thameslink might be interesting to Tunbridge Wells - not the fastest London journey but new connectivity. Then again maybe it could run up via Sevenoaks instead of the Rainham.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Could Peterborough—Horsham as a mock of the Sutton Loop line? Services run clockwise into Horsham via Gatwick, then out via Dorking, and then an opposite anticlockwise service?

Guildford is a commuter haven, so I really do see potential there. Especially since many Surrey residents end up as Cambridge students (for better or for worse) there could be demand for Guildford as a Surrey/Hampshire hub running north. Perhaps 2tph Guildford—St Pancras, of which one runs to Cambridge and one runs to Luton for the airport connection? On the flip side, a direction Thameslink—Portsmouth Harbour interchange could provide some good travel routes, though this would probably be replaced by the Clapham Junction interchange on Crossrail 2, whenever that happens.

Someone also mentioned Reigate — does GWR have a chokehold on the North Downs Line? A Thameslink connection that connects to Reigate, Dorking, Guildford and Reading all in one go can't be a bad idea, though it would probably never be used for long distance travel by Reading commuters (they have GWR and the EL anyway). GWR could still run the Redhill reversal service to Gatwick, maybe at 1tph.

On the topic of Redhill, what about a service to Tonbridge, or even Tunbridge Wells? The Redhill—Tonbridge line is just a little shuttle as of now, so could be integrated into the stopping BML Thameslink? I'm just spewing ideas here, I suppose. The South East could use a Thameslink link, especially without CrossCountry involved, even if they do have HS1.

While individually, I can see the merit of some of those, sending Thameslink trains off on ever more different branches is not likely to help its reliability.

I would imagine in principle what would most improve Thameslink reliability is to select just a couple of different lines as the Thameslink lines and have Thameslink entirely take over those lines while not running anywhere else, thereby minimising the possibility of Thameslink importing delays from different routes, and from other London termini, as well as providing a high frequency on those routes. I guess it would also help if those routes incorporate some ability to turn back very late running trains before their usual terminus so they can be got back on time.

I realise though that's easier said than done.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Aug 2024 ==

As to Tonbridge, a recent thread did have people (including me) saying how underused that line is. Also to Ashford. Thameslink might be interesting to Tunbridge Wells - not the fastest London journey but new connectivity. Then again maybe it could run up via Sevenoaks instead of the Rainham.

I'm not sure Thameslink is the answer to making better use of Redhill-Tonbridge. Doing that wouldn't really help passengers because anyone at or East of Tonbridge can already access Thameslink by just getting a SouthEastern train to London Bridge (or St Pancras) and changing there - with much faster journey times to London than would be possible via Redhill. I'd imagine if you want to provide better journey opportunities using Redhill-Tonbridge and get more people using that line, the most effective way would be to do something like an Ashford-Redhill-Gatwick-Brighton service. Or consider extending the Strood-Paddock Wood service to Gatwick. But that would have nothing to do with Thameslink.

 

[cle]

I agree except for the smaller matter of the stations whose direct London service was taken - and this might be more compelling than the East Grinstead line (and cheaper maybe!)

But yes Tonbridge onwards has a faster link to LB. I had forgotten about St Pancras but also true!

So maybe the regional options (Medway Valley or North Downs) make more sense.

 

[Magdalia]

Could Peterborough—Horsham as a mock of the Sutton Loop line? Services run clockwise into Horsham via Gatwick, then out via Dorking, and then an opposite anticlockwise service?

Sutton works because it is a loop, eliminating the need for reversals.

The current mode of operation at Horsham involves no conflicting movements: trains via Dorking reverse in platform 1, the Thameslink trains reverse in platform 3, and the Arun Valley through trains use platforms 2 and 4.

a direction Thameslink—Portsmouth Harbour interchange could provide some good travel routes

This already exists with single changes between Thameslink and the Arun Valley trains. Since the last timetable change it is now every 30 minutes.

While individually, I can see the merit of some of those, sending Thameslink trains off on ever more different branches is not likely to help its reliability.

I agree, but the London Bridge-Epsom service is already sharing tracks with Thameslink between New Cross Gate and Norwood Junction.

 

[gsc777]

Sutton works because it is a loop, eliminating the need for reversals.

The current mode of operation at Horsham involves no conflicting movements: trains via Dorking reverse in platform 1, the Thameslink trains reverse in platform 3, and the Arun Valley through trains use platforms 2 and 4.


This already exists with single changes between Thameslink and the Arun Valley trains. Since the last timetable change it is now every 30 minutes.


I agree, but the London Bridge-Epsom service is already sharing tracks with Thameslink between New Cross Gate and Norwood Junction.

Ah, looking at the track layout at Horsham, this makes more sense. Thank you, Raildar! Also I forgot that Victoria also have services to Portsmouth, I keep thinking they got cancelled with the Southampton service, haha. I suppose you could always change at Brighton too if you wanted.

Another loop I just found (though not sure if at all reliable or useful) — you could run services clockwise down via Redhill onto the North Downs line, which runs up to Guildford, and then back round via the Mole Valley, and then the reverse for the anticlockwise service. These would probably have to be stoppers of some kind, though you could run non-stop from East Croydon to Redhill, and from Epsom to West Croydon, if you really wanted to.

 

[cle]

Sutton as a loop point makes perfect sense. Another could be a swap to via West Croydon and up towards Wimbledon (give the Carshalton route a TL Core - Sutton - Epsom option instead) - or stick that service into Blackfriars bays.

 

[gsc777]

Sutton as a loop point makes perfect sense. Another could be a swap to via West Croydon and up towards Wimbledon (give the Carshalton route a TL Core - Sutton - Epsom option instead) - or stick that service into Blackfriars bays.

If services are terminating at Blackfriars then I think they should be longer distance than Epsom (I disagree with how short the Orpington/Sevenoaks services are too ) but making a core through Carshalton isn't a bad shout. Maybe it could run to Dorking, or Guildford through the Mole Valley. Do you reckon the timetable would allows a non-stop service between Sutton and Epsom?

 

[cle]

I think Cheam is more important than many of the subsequent stops, like Ashstead. Sutton-Epsom isn't so long to give a big saving. I think Wimbledon-Epsom should be a goal, for a different day

But if this was semi-fast out of Blackfriars, I'd skip Loughborough, Hackbridge and the Mitcham stations - if pathable, and if not taking away other services. Maybe Streatham too, as it gets all the loopers. And yes I think at least Dorking is desirable - and then Horsham or Guildford.

If Horsham, you're likely swapping with the long-standing Victoria service, may not be popular. I think if anything they'd prefer Waterloo. But we're adding complexity a bit - if Blackfriars is now a Southern terminus. As well as a SE one (and TL through).

 

[PGAT]

There isn’t much point of running fast between Sutton and Epsom as when the fast Dorking/Horsham services still existed they had to wait outside Epsom for a terminating service to vacate the platform when that time could have been spent stopping at Ewell East instead. Also according to ORR passenger flow statistics London Bridge is the most desirable destination from Ewell East

 

[gsc777]

Bearing in mind here, based on the original thread the point here is trying to find a better south terminal for the Luton—Rainham service, so we already have a terminus up north: Luton! So perhaps a Luton—Guildford service via Epsom and Dorking might be the way to go...

I think Cheam is more important than many of the subsequent stops, like Ashstead. Sutton-Epsom isn't so long to give a big saving. I think Wimbledon-Epsom should be a goal, for a different day

But if this was semi-fast out of Blackfriars, I'd skip Loughborough, Hackbridge and the Mitcham stations - if pathable, and if not taking away other services. Maybe Streatham too, as it gets all the loopers. And yes I think at least Dorking is desirable - and then Horsham or Guildford.

If Horsham, you're likely swapping with the long-standing Victoria service, may not be popular. I think if anything they'd prefer Waterloo. But we're adding complexity a bit - if Blackfriars is now a Southern terminus. As well as a SE one (and TL through).

I think a Waterloo service from Horsham is a fever dream, but keeping London Bridge around feels quite important (Northern, Jubilee and Southeastern provide way more connections than District and Circle, in my opinion). Naturally, it would run non-stop between Norwood Junction and London Bridge.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Aug 2024 ==

I think Cheam is more important than many of the subsequent stops, like Ashstead. Sutton-Epsom isn't so long to give a big saving. I think Wimbledon-Epsom should be a goal, for a different day

But if this was semi-fast out of Blackfriars, I'd skip Loughborough, Hackbridge and the Mitcham stations - if pathable, and if not taking away other services. Maybe Streatham too, as it gets all the loopers. And yes I think at least Dorking is desirable - and then Horsham or Guildford.

If Horsham, you're likely swapping with the long-standing Victoria service, may not be popular. I think if anything they'd prefer Waterloo. But we're adding complexity a bit - if Blackfriars is now a Southern terminus. As well as a SE one (and TL through).

There isn’t much point of running fast between Sutton and Epsom as when the fast Dorking/Horsham services still existed they had to wait outside Epsom for a terminating service to vacate the platform when that time could have been spent stopping at Ewell East instead. Also according to ORR passenger flow statistics London Bridge is the most desirable destination from Ewell East

Actually, could services run from Blackfriars out and down the Arun Valley? Maybe a service to Littlehampton or Bognor Regis?