• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (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 Blackfriars

Status
Not open for further replies.

aleggatta

Member
Joined
28 Sep 2015
Messages
537
Just reading through this and I'm curious, is there any reason why 4 through platforms wouldn't have worked with a junction at the north end of the station, as opposed to 2 bays 2 throughs?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

30907

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Sep 2012
Messages
17,866
Location
Airedale
Just reading through this and I'm curious, is there any reason why 4 through platforms wouldn't have worked with a junction at the north end of the station, as opposed to 2 bays 2 throughs?
Lack of space, essentially.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
I'm surprised the western most part of Blackfriars rail bridge was not strengthened and re-built to provide additional terminating platform(s). There used to be 4 terminating platforms on the eastern side. Once the through Thameslink platforms were rebuilt and the terminating platforms switched to the western side, the number of terminating platforms reduced to 2.

The 2 terminating platforms seem sufficient at the moment given that only 8-car units serve the platforms and they have a 30 minute interval service at present. But with rail traffic growing, one wonders whether a 3rd or 4th terminating platform would be welcomed in future given there is relatively little potential for growth at either Charing Cross or Cannon Street.

The 2 bays can take 8tph between them comfortably, and 12tph at a stretch. (This is 8 or 12 in and another 8 or 12 out). There isn’t capacity on the approach tracks anywhere south of Loughborough Junction for more trains than that. Therefore no need for more platforms.

The bays were built to the west as the Thameslink plan up to 2012 had all services from London Bridge / Denmark Hill directions routed through the core, and all from the Herne Hill direction terminating. The routes were to be segregated in normal service, hence the configuration. As is well publicised the DfT changed its mind on that, but only as the finishing touches were being applied to the rebuilt Blackfriars.

Finally, were such platforms built you’d need to be able to get trains to them. That would mean building a new viaduct on non-railway land. That piece of land is worth rather more than £100million. A viaduct would be the same again, at least. Seems a lot of money to pay for something that doesn’t result in any additional train services for passengers.
 
Joined
30 Jan 2013
Messages
111
But the commuters of Sutton kicked up a stink at losing their direct trains to City, Farringdon and Kings Cross St Pancras. They did this far too late to change the design.

Don’t think it was the residents of Sutton who objected to the doubling of the frequency on the loop, iirc it was MP for Wimbledon who did the moaning. As has been said on previous threads though, this is probably one of the easiest London-only service changes which delivers the most number of seats (for London) per buck, so is almost certain to come up sooner rather than later, and no amount of people moaning at having to change at Blackfriars will make a difference.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,264
Don’t think it was the residents of Sutton who objected to the doubling of the frequency on the loop, iirc it was MP for Wimbledon who did the moaning. As has been said on previous threads though, this is probably one of the easiest London-only service changes which delivers the most number of seats (for London) per buck, so is almost certain to come up sooner rather than later, and no amount of people moaning at having to change at Blackfriars will make a difference.
If everything pans out as published, Southern will be running round the loop into Blackfriars bays as well as the through trains, so at that stage we’ll definitely find out if “changing at Blackfriars” is a show stopper in practice. I’d have thought for a start that many peak commuters to the city will walk from the station rather than travel a few yards on towards City T/L station...
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
If everything pans out as published, Southern will be running round the loop into Blackfriars bays as well as the through trains, so at that stage we’ll definitely find out if “changing at Blackfriars” is a show stopper in practice. I’d have thought for a start that many peak commuters to the city will walk from the station rather than travel a few yards on towards City T/L station...
City Thameslink is itself a bit of a walk from most City destinations. I'd guess many people would head for the Circle Line instead.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,264
City Thameslink is itself a bit of a walk from most City destinations. I'd guess many people would head for the Circle Line instead.
Fair point, so even with through trains many city bound people will prefer to get off there anyway?
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
Fair point, so even with through trains many city bound people will prefer to get off there anyway?
I suppose for those near Barbican and Moorgate a through train to Farringdon and changing there might be quicker than getting the Circle the long way round (and probably having to wait for multiple District services to go through first). And those working around Farringdon and Kings Cross would have a change instead of a through train.
 

ChiefPlanner

Established Member
Joined
6 Sep 2011
Messages
7,768
Location
Herts
City Thameslink is itself a bit of a walk from most City destinations. I'd guess many people would head for the Circle Line instead.

It all depends - daughter works at King William St , commutes in from SAC. The first option on her mind was to travel to London Bridge and cross the Thames on foot , - but this is slow due to very heavy pedestrian traffic - but alighting at City Thameslink has less crowded pavements , and takes a bit longer ( a couple of minutes) - therefore she mixes and matches. NOT using the tube is a major benefit. (and I can support that - though the sub - surface lines are clearly better than the crush and heat of the deep level tubes).
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
It all depends - daughter works at King William St , commutes in from SAC. The first option on her mind was to travel to London Bridge and cross the Thames on foot , - but this is slow due to very heavy pedestrian traffic - but alighting at City Thameslink has less crowded pavements , and takes a bit longer ( a couple of minutes) - therefore she mixes and matches. NOT using the tube is a major benefit. (and I can support that - though the sub - surface lines are clearly better than the crush and heat of the deep level tubes).
But I'd guess if she lived somewhere on the Sutton loop and commuted in via Blackfriars (so no easy London Bridge option), she'd be just as likely to alight there as at City Thameslink.
 

ChiefPlanner

Established Member
Joined
6 Sep 2011
Messages
7,768
Location
Herts
But I'd guess if she lived somewhere on the Sutton loop and commuted in via Blackfriars (so no easy London Bridge option), she'd be just as likely to alight there as at City Thameslink.

Yes - not much difference at all , and a pleasant walk that you can vary by doing the backstreets. Done it loads of times.

Used to live in SW19 - the poor end I hasten to add.
 
Joined
30 Jan 2013
Messages
111
If everything pans out as published, Southern will be running round the loop into Blackfriars bays as well as the through trains, so at that stage we’ll definitely find out if “changing at Blackfriars” is a show stopper in practice. I’d have thought for a start that many peak commuters to the city will walk from the station rather than travel a few yards on towards City T/L station...

As someone whose closest station is on the loop, this would be great news.

Is it tied into the moving of the trams out of Wimbledon station though to provide platform capacity back to both faces?
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,264
As someone whose closest station is on the loop, this would be great news.

Is it tied into the moving of the trams out of Wimbledon station though to provide platform capacity back to both faces?
No, it was part of the intended 2018 Thameslink timetable, and some segments of the eventual Southern services already run through Wimbledon in the peaks, they just cannot go all the way to Blackfriars yet because the platforms are still in use by Southeastern.

here they appear as peak only extras on realtimetrains:
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/se...6/0200-0159?stp=WVS&show=all&order=wtt&toc=SN
 

adrock1976

Established Member
Joined
10 Dec 2013
Messages
4,450
Location
What's it called? It's called Cumbernauld
As you are probably aware, after the bridge and tracks on the western side were demolished in the 1960s, a buillding appeared on the South bank in the space previously occupied by these tracks (and the old goods station).
This would have made it difficult to re-use the old bridge piers due to the alignment of the remaining tracks. However, I see that this building has now gone. It was demolished within the last 2 hears.
It makes me wonder whether they were aware of the pending demolition of this building when they redesigned Blackfriars. It definitely looks like they have missed an opportunity.

Hi,
The western bridge supports were from the first bridge and were deemed "weak" back in, I think, the 19080's.

They apparently would not be strong enough to support the weight of a train and are essentially abandoned. The new cross-river northbounf platform was bulit onto one of each of the pillars but just for the weight of the platform required encasing in concrete and stone. To have upgraded them to support the weight of perhaps two fully laden 12 car trains would have been incredibly challenging and expensive.

It may look like a wasted opportunity but I don't think there were any other options.
Cheers,
Jason

This was discussed elsewhere (i.e. here) I think, but the site is already being redeveloped I think....and basically the small amount of space required to have tracks able to reach those piers was rejected. :(

sixtrack.jpg

Regarding the disused bridge piers, were the ones on the left where the investment banker Roberto Calvi's body was found hanging from back in 1982?
 

modernrail

Member
Joined
26 Jul 2015
Messages
1,018
I use the loop regularly and I will admit I enjoy and make use of the through trains a lot.

A few points/questions if I may.

- What is it that terminating Sutton Loop rather than Denmark Hill services at Blackfriars would do for capacity? I am not asking that in a passive aggressive way..I just don't understand the point yet.

- If they wanted to get people on board with the idea of using Blackfriars as an interchange station they should have built it as one. It takes absolutely ages to cross the station, especially to change from southbound core to a southbound from the bay. Arguably they should stop the 8 cars right up to the north side ticket barriers rather than half way down the platform to speed up the transfer a bit. A footbridge halfway down would bave been the real solution though.

Changing at Blackfriars can easily add 10-15 minutes on to what is only usually a 20 minute journey for me. That is a very steep increase and that is when services are are actually turning up to/ from London Bridge to change on to.

- There are lots of times services are disrupted from London Bridge and so the 10-15 minutes extra becomes more, plus the train from London Bridge turns up full.

- As lots of places have gained services through the core, why take away services from established routes with very full loadings at peaks? Again, geniune question. Sometimes the debate on this one seems to presume that loop services are empty and not many people are going north or Blackfriars. Services are rammed and I would estimate about 2/3 if not more are using core stations. Southbound peak services are usually full and standing by City Thameslink.
 

bionic

Member
Joined
8 Nov 2013
Messages
883
What is it that terminating Sutton Loop rather than Denmark Hill services at Blackfriars would do for capacity? I am not asking that in a passive aggressive way..I just don't understand the point yet.

Services from Herne Hill are already on the correct side of the Holborn lines (slow) for the bays when they reach the four track section at Loughborough Junction. Trains from Denmark Hill are already on the correct side of the Holborn lines (fast) for the core at Loughborough Junction. By putting trains from Denmark Hill in the bays and trains from Herne Hill into the core you are creating needless conflicting moves across junctions both on the up and the down that could be removed entirely by simply terminating the Suttons at Blackfriars and extending the Sevenoakses to Luton or St Albans.
 

Verulamius

Member
Joined
30 Jul 2014
Messages
243
This needless conflict between Loughborough Junction and Blackfriars for Denmark Hill and Herne Hill trains is a theoretical issue.

In practice is there sufficient track capacity for it not to be a problem?
 

modernrail

Member
Joined
26 Jul 2015
Messages
1,018
This needless conflict between Loughborough Junction and Blackfriars for Denmark Hill and Herne Hill trains is a theoretical issue.

In practice is there sufficient track capacity for it not to be a problem?
That is sort of what I am thinking, are those conflicts in reality reducing capacity that operators are wanting to/could use for other services.

I suspect the conflicts are causing delays. However, as it always seems to be the London Bridge input into the core that ia given priority (massive assumption on my part there) I would rather take my chances and wait for the new signialling system in the core to go live.

A friend who lives in Denmark Hill thinks quite the opposite ;) She had to endure 6 months of changing at Blackfriars whilst heavily pregnant and had to start leaving an extra 30 minutes to get to and from work, so an extra hour a day.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
31,264
This needless conflict between Loughborough Junction and Blackfriars for Denmark Hill and Herne Hill trains is a theoretical issue.

In practice is there sufficient track capacity for it not to be a problem?
Yes, theoretical only and it’s been emphasised by insiders in many previous discussions that it doesn’t cause problems.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,793
Location
Nottingham
This needless conflict between Loughborough Junction and Blackfriars for Denmark Hill and Herne Hill trains is a theoretical issue.

In practice is there sufficient track capacity for it not to be a problem?

Yes, theoretical only and it’s been emphasised by insiders in many previous discussions that it doesn’t cause problems.
Really?

In theory the effect of a conflict can be eliminated by ensuring that conflicting movements over a junction are not timetabled to take place at the same time - though it's difficult to do that when there are conflicting junctions in close succession as there are on the routes south via Elephant.

But when this happens on a ultra-busy network like Thameslink, as soon as a train is late it creates a conflict with another train. Whichever train is delayed (further) to avoid the conflict is then potentially causing a conflict somewhere else. There is a risk of a minor delay snowballing into something much more serious.

If this isn't seen as a problem, that's probably because it's the critical flat junction at the end of the busiest section of Thameslink (the one at the other end is grade separated) so it's a high priority to timetable out conflicts there. This is likely to mean that junctions elsewhere on the route are timetabled sub-optimally and problems pop up somewhere else. Approaching trains will also be given a lot of timetable padding to recover minor delays before they get there, so if on time they are likely to have to wait.
 

bionic

Member
Joined
8 Nov 2013
Messages
883
This needless conflict between Loughborough Junction and Blackfriars for Denmark Hill and Herne Hill trains is a theoretical issue.

In practice is there sufficient track capacity for it not to be a problem?

If it is only a theoretical issue, it's a theoretical issue that has held me up countless times.
 

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
4,008
It's also with the proviso of doubling loop services, so what may be lost in one form of convenience could be gained in another form of it. This is where average journey times come in too (i.e. penalty of missing a train, or leaving work at a different times/set time re average wait).
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
There was a discussion about Thameslink last month, and one of Bald Rick’s replies is presumably still valid this month:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/thameslink-ideas.187554/page-3#post-4140819

I was talking about Herne Hill in that post.

Nevertheless, the timetable on the Loughboro’ Jn to Blackfriars corridor is designed to work with trains moving between the pairs of lines. This does introduce a constraint on the system though, and the fewer you can have the better for Thameslink.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
Changing at Blackfriars can easily add 10-15 minutes on to what is only usually a 20 minute journey for me.

I find this a bit odd. I use Blackfriars regularly. I get from either entrance to a train in 90 seconds. It can’t possibly take 10 minutes to change trains, even if you were using the lifts.
 

Ethano92

Member
Joined
26 Jun 2017
Messages
415
Location
London
It's also with the proviso of doubling loop services, so what may be lost in one form of convenience could be gained in another form of it. This is where average journey times come in too (i.e. penalty of missing a train, or leaving work at a different times/set time re average wait).

This is exactly it. I suspect the only reason the Sutton loop can be so quiet at times is because Sutton and wimbledon have far more frequent services from other operators and south Merton/Morden South could potentially also be an opportunity to take some passengers of the northern line which is busy right from Morden. In reality, how many customers will happily change from an every 2 minute service to an every 30 minute service, it removes flexibility. Commuting from wimbledon to st Pancras? Getting a train every 4 minutes to vauxhall then the Victoria line every 90 seconds sounds a lot more appealing than having to leave at an exact time each day without fail otherwise you may have a 30 minute wait on your hand. It all comes down to preference.
 
Last edited:

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,398
Location
UK
I find this a bit odd. I use Blackfriars regularly. I get from either entrance to a train in 90 seconds. It can’t possibly take 10 minutes to change trains, even if you were using the lifts.

I suspect that this is more about train times and connections, rather than the physical changing of platforms.
 

Horizon22

Established Member
Associate Staff
Jobs & Careers
Joined
8 Sep 2019
Messages
7,446
Location
London
I use the loop regularly and I will admit I enjoy and make use of the through trains a lot.


- If they wanted to get people on board with the idea of using Blackfriars as an interchange station they should have built it as one. It takes absolutely ages to cross the station, especially to change from southbound core to a southbound from the bay. Arguably they should stop the 8 cars right up to the north side ticket barriers rather than half way down the platform to speed up the transfer a bit. A footbridge halfway down would bave been the real solution though.

Changing at Blackfriars can easily add 10-15 minutes on to what is only usually a 20 minute journey for me. That is a very steep increase and that is when services are are actually turning up to/ from London Bridge to change on to.

Really, 10 minutes? If you are at the "front" from the north going southbound, then the stairs are very close.
 

modernrail

Member
Joined
26 Jul 2015
Messages
1,018
Really, 10 minutes? If you are at the "front" from the north going southbound, then the stairs are very close.
There needs to be a train on the platform you are transferring to to have successfully changed! So it is transfer time PLUS time until the next train, plus a margin of error as you are probably on your way to work. That easily adds up to 10-15 minutes even for somebody fit and able, especially as the errors that require margin are particularly pronounced on Thameslink in general. As an example today I went to catch a northbound at Blackfriars to make a Eurostar connection and the next 6 trains were delayed.

For interest, no-deal planning in Brussels appears to be well ahead of that in London.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20191001_224310_422.jpg
    IMG_20191001_224310_422.jpg
    611.6 KB · Views: 64
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top