Essex Thameside services to be diverted to Liverpool Street?

Status
Not open for further replies.

ChristopherJ

Member
Joined
8 Aug 2005
Messages
383
Location
London, UK
Anyone else read the article in the latest magazines that mention the specification for the next Essex Thameside franchise includes diverting many services in to Liverpool Street to enable Fenchurch Street to be closed for engineering work more regularly and also that it is the only London terminal station not to have interchange to the London Underground?

I have only three words to describe this proposal and they are...

Gun. Shoot. Foot. :roll:

The section of the Essex Thameside route between Barking and London Fenchurch Street has only just within the last year been resignalled to enable more c2c services to call at West Ham and to increase capacity in to Fenchurch Street.

Instead, lets abandon the newly upgraded section and divert all services across both the GOBLIN which already has intense 15 min passenger service plus frequent freight traffic and the GEML with an even more intense 10 min passenger service in to Liverpool Street - plus Crossrail is due to absorb the GEML electric lines from 2017, more complications!

Journey times to London will increase because a diversion to Liverpool Street takes approximately 10 mins longer than direct to Fenchurch Street - most of that additional time is spent negotiating the chord line between Woodgrange Park Junction and Forest Gate Junction which only has a 15-20mph speed limit, then following behind a local metro service on the electric lines for the remainder of the journey in to Liverpool Street.

If passengers dislike like Fenchurch Street (I would imagine most are from Southend-on-Sea) because it has relativitly poor interchanges to the London Underground (only a minute walk to Tower Hill - the horror of a minute walk!) then they have a choice: go to Southend Victoria and travel directly with Greater Anglia. Simples?
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

calc7

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2011
Messages
2,097
I think the main problem with FST is that Tower Hill is on two of the most soul-destroying lines on the Zone 1 network. Nothing worse than turning up on the eastbound platform and waiting 14 minutes for the next Circle Line train.

Perhaps the connection at Limehouse for the frequent DLR to Bank should be more widely publicised?
 

D1009

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2012
Messages
3,166
Location
Stoke Gifford
If passengers dislike like Fenchurch Street (I would imagine most are from Southend-on-Sea) because it has relativitly poor interchanges to the London Underground (only a minute walk to Tower Hill - the horror of a minute walk!) then they have a choice: go to Southend Victoria and travel directly with Greater Anglia. Simples?
Why would you imagine most are from Southend-on-Sea ? Iisn't there anywhere in between worth considering ?
 

calc7

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2011
Messages
2,097
Why would you imagine most are from Southend-on-Sea ? Iisn't there anywhere in between worth considering ?
I think they mention Southend because there's another realistic option to travel to London from there, unlike many of the other places on this route.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
16,183
Location
Yorkshire, Yorkshire, Yorkshire
Anyone else read the article in the latest magazines that mention the specification for the next Essex Thameside franchise includes diverting many services in to Liverpool Street to enable Fenchurch Street to be closed for engineering work more regularly
I don't have a source for what you are quoting, but are you essentially talking about evening "LTS" services running to Liverpool Street like happened for many years?

If Engineering work needs doing then what is the alternative?

Instead, lets abandon the newly upgraded section and divert all services across both the GOBLIN which already has intense 15 min passenger service plus frequent freight traffic and the GEML with an even more intense 10 min passenger service in to Liverpool Street - plus Crossrail is due to absorb the GEML electric lines from 2017, more complications!
15 minute GOBLIN passenger service?

Certainly not at the late times when engineering diversions would be taking place?
 

Essexman

Member
Joined
15 Mar 2011
Messages
1,112
I regularly use Fenchurch Street, but only Tower Hill if going via Embankment as there's choice of Circle or District Line. For Kings Cross, Euston, Paddington etc I always walk to Aldgate (or Liverpool Street) where again you don't have to rely on Circle Line.
Alternatively I change at West Ham for Jubilee.
Liverpool Street is less favourable then Fenchurch street - and it takes a few minutes longer from Barking.
 

W-on-Sea

Member
Joined
18 Dec 2009
Messages
1,135
I'm sure I read this *somewhere* as a suggestion/proposal, not a definite franchise requirement nor concrete proposal. And at least one c2c manager is deeply pessimistic about how realistic such a proposal might be.

Personally, I can't imagine it will happen, for all the reasons you state, and others. Popular demand on the part of the users of the line was one of the reasons the evening service to FST was restored. Plus, the demographics of both Limehouse and West Ham, as well as the DLR at both, and for that matter theOverground at Shadwell, have dramatically improved the passenger use of the FST in recent years. Granted that Westfield and other developments around Stratford increase its attraction as a destination, too.

As for FST's lack of tube access...one can get from any platform at Tower Hill to any at FST (via Crosswall entrance) more quickly than one can get from the Central Line to the platforms typically used by c2c at LST.
 

Stats

Member
Joined
27 Sep 2009
Messages
943
DfT's clarifications answer this point:

Is it intended that any services should continue to run to London Liverpool Street?

DfTs answer:
It is likely to be for bidders to decide whether or not to operate any services into London Liverpool Street. Current arrangements enable drivers to maintain route knowledge, enabling diversion into Liverpool Street to minimise disruption during track maintenance on the approach to Fenchurch Street. Bidders will be strongly encouraged to maintain this capability.

Edit:
However, the consultation document issued a month later explores the possibility of moving Sunday morning engineering works to Monday - Wednesday evenings with the result that all Mon-Wed services after 2100 would serve Liverpool Street but with the advantage of running more trains on Sunday including extending the Grays-Barking shuttle to Fenchurch Street. It also states that [DfT] expect bidders to review the opportunity to run more services into Liverpool Street.
 
Last edited:

TheManWho

Member
Joined
15 Jul 2010
Messages
84
As I'm sure you're aware (I assume you're a regular c2c user to get so "upset" by this), c2c services have diverted into Liverpool Street for a numer of years now, or at least, for as long as I can remember. There have always been at least 2 late night journeys from Liverpool Street, and more recently one very early morning journey to Liverpool Street. Personally speaking, I actually prefer the line is when the line runs through Stratford (London) for the Underground and leisure connections.

Whilst the line between Barking and Limehouse may have recently been upgraded to allow more trains to stop at Barking, there are other reasons as to why the line may need to be closed for engineering works. It's not exactly "abandoning" the newly upgraded section of track- the track will still be used for the majority of the time, and more importantly, when those upgrades are needed the most (i.e peak hours).

I wouldn't exactly call use of the line between Barking and Forest Gate Jcn "intensive" save for the 15 minute LO service and freight services, trains can easily be pathed around these- if the trains are diverted during the daytime at weekends, a typical 15 minute frequency can be maintained between Barking and Liverpool Street, which can also be pathed between the GEML Metro services. Whilst there may be a speed limit through Forest Gate Jcn, the c2c services run non-stop to Stratford, thus GEML Metro services won't often get "stuck behind" the c2c train, except for a few moments at Forest Gate Jcn. Clever pathing would put the diverted c2c services infront of the GEML Metro services. Obviously when Crossrail services begin there may be further issue- but who knows, by then the engineering works may well have finished ;)

According to the current timetable, the journey from Liverpool Street to Barking is 15 minutes, the same as from Fenchurch Street to Barking (late at night.) The extra minutes at other times may be for pathing through Forest Gate Jcn and on the GOBLIN.

I don't know any passengers who "dislike" Fenchurch Street, for the commuters it's within walking distance to the city, and it's only a very short walk from the Underground at Tower Hill- similarly, for leisure passengers it's a quick, convenient route into Central London. Many c2c passengers do actually change at Limehouse now to take DLR services into Bank for alternative tube lines- this has particularly been the case during the escalator works at Bank. I wouldn't neccessarily call the interchange "poor"

Finally, if trains were no longer diverted into Liverpool Street, what would the other options be? There's no real facility to run a high frequency service to West Ham (due to lack of crossovers), so the only other option would be to be dumped at Barking, and have to continue the journey on the District Line into London (around 30 minutes to Tower Hill.)

I'd much rather have to go to Liverpool Street than get dumped at Barking.

**edit** as a regular user of c2c services at all sorts of hours (from first train, to last train during all days of the week) I've never known it to take an extra 10 minutes when diverted. c2c users are also very lucky that line closures at Fenchurch Street/Limehouse are always very well advertised, very well in advance.

Anyone else read the article in the latest magazines that mention the specification for the next Essex Thameside franchise includes diverting many services in to Liverpool Street to enable Fenchurch Street to be closed for engineering work more regularly and also that it is the only London terminal station not to have interchange to the London Underground?

I have only three words to describe this proposal and they are...

Gun. Shoot. Foot. :roll:

The section of the Essex Thameside route between Barking and London Fenchurch Street has only just within the last year been resignalled to enable more c2c services to call at West Ham and to increase capacity in to Fenchurch Street.

Instead, lets abandon the newly upgraded section and divert all services across both the GOBLIN which already has intense 15 min passenger service plus frequent freight traffic and the GEML with an even more intense 10 min passenger service in to Liverpool Street - plus Crossrail is due to absorb the GEML electric lines from 2017, more complications!

Journey times to London will increase because a diversion to Liverpool Street takes approximately 10 mins longer than direct to Fenchurch Street - most of that additional time is spent negotiating the chord line between Woodgrange Park Junction and Forest Gate Junction which only has a 15-20mph speed limit, then following behind a local metro service on the electric lines for the remainder of the journey in to Liverpool Street.

If passengers dislike like Fenchurch Street (I would imagine most are from Southend-on-Sea) because it has relativitly poor interchanges to the London Underground (only a minute walk to Tower Hill - the horror of a minute walk!) then they have a choice: go to Southend Victoria and travel directly with Greater Anglia. Simples?
 

MidnightFlyer

Veteran Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
12,846
To be fair it isn't that big an issue as it stands - it is a 5 / 6 minute walk to each, though certainly it could be better signposted and mapped. However, if by 'direct links' you mean railway, then that, in my eyes, would be a complete and utter waste of money.
 

calc7

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2011
Messages
2,097
To be fair it isn't that big an issue as it stands - it is a 5 / 6 minute walk to each, though certainly it could be better signposted and mapped. However, if by 'direct links' you mean railway, then that, in my eyes, would be a complete and utter waste of money.
Indeed that connection is no longer than getting to some lines from the Kings Cross concourse. It is just the psychological barrier that it is a "different station" that puts people off.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top