How could Southeastern get more siding/depot space?

[carriageline]

The 12 car plan still exists but not for overnight stabling. It would only be for daytime stabling so a Kent Coast Train (12 car 375) could stable between peaks as it gets them an extra train that can’t come / go empty to Grove Park as there’s not then enough capacity through London Bridge at contra-peak.

As for stabling in London Bridge it’s a horrible idea. If a signal failure / train failure strikes at somewhere like Charing Cross, Cannon Street or Waterloo East or one of the two terminals is out of action, not only do you divert trains to the other but you also start/terminate at London Bridge and still have trains passing through each way around them. It’s the same reason stabling at New Cross during the day would be such a bad idea.

Sorry, I wasn’t thinking about during the day, more during the night which perhaps isn’t such a big problem?

During the day the service wouldn’t take it!

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Sorry, I wasn’t thinking about during the day, more during the night which perhaps isn’t such a big problem?

During the day the service wouldn’t take it!

I think overnight you'd potentially struggle as well, purely because you'd have engineering work and other considerations that would preclude regular and reliable stabling.

 

[carriageline]

I think overnight you'd potentially struggle as well, purely because you'd have engineering work and other considerations that would preclude regular and reliable stabling.

Engineering works doesn’t cause issues at Cannon & Charing. They simply swap the platform the stock is berthed in to enable the platform to be accessed for inspection etc!

Plus line blockages can be taken around berthed trains, not sure if it’s a different matter at a through platform though.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Engineering works doesn’t cause issues at Cannon & Charing. They simply swap the platform the stock is berthed in to enable the platform to be accessed for inspection etc!

Plus line blockages can be taken around berthed trains, not sure if it’s a different matter at a through platform though.

Yes but the rules are different for stabling at ‘through lines’, and whilst it is permitted in some locations (local instructions advise this), I doubt London Bridge would be acceptable. And whilst I agree at terminus stations you just ‘VAR’ the berthing platforms, you will find it more difficult to do at somewhere of the scale of London Bridge. I think even Dartford is almost prohibitive if not disallowed.

 

[Horizon22]

Engineering works doesn’t cause issues at Cannon & Charing. They simply swap the platform the stock is berthed in to enable the platform to be accessed for inspection etc!

Plus line blockages can be taken around berthed trains, not sure if it’s a different matter at a through platform though.

3 trains are normally berthed at Charing Cross and Cannon Street every night anyway. Any more than that and you start running into potential service start-up issues as the berthed services are not always the 1st trains of the day.

Not to mention berthing at terminals is terribly inefficient.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

3 trains are normally berthed at Charing Cross and Cannon Street every night anyway. Any more than that and you start running into potential service start-up issues as the berthed services are not always the 1st trains of the day.

Not to mention berthing at terminals is terribly inefficient.

Berthing at Charing Cross and Victoria is efficient when the drivers are based there. If the stock is rotating properly on and off Slade Green (etc) there's no reason why the train can't be part-prepped in the platforms at 5am before they go out.

 

[Horizon22]

Berthing at Charing Cross and Victoria is efficient when the drivers are based there. If the stock is rotating properly on and off Slade Green (etc) there's no reason why the train can't be part-prepped in the platforms at 5am before they go out.

Stock surely is prepared already if berthed overnight. I'm more saying economically efficient - there's going to be a lot more people wanting to take a 5am train from Dartford to Charing Cross than vice versa.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Stock surely is prepared already if berthed overnight. I'm more saying economically efficient - there's going to be a lot more people wanting to take a 5am train from Dartford to Charing Cross than vice versa.

and that stock leaves Slade Green / Dartford at 5am also...

The way the franchise is set up obscurely requires ~0500 trains to places from Charing Cross and now ~0530/0600 trains from Cannon Street. These are effectively resourced from the terminals.

 

[Horizon22]

and that stock leaves Slade Green / Dartford at 5am also...

The way the franchise is set up obscurely requires ~0500 trains to places from Charing Cross and now ~0530/0600 trains from Cannon Street. These are effectively resourced from the terminals.

Well exactly - runs all the way to a London terminal to then run incredibly lightly loaded back down to Dartford. Instead, in an ideal scenario you should berth and run the franchised minimum early morning services from the London terminals. Then you can use that stock in the right way, not running things contra-peak and making additional trips that aren't really necessary.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Well exactly - runs all the way to a London terminal to then run incredibly lightly loaded back down to Dartford. Instead, in an ideal scenario you should berth and run the franchised minimum early morning services from the London terminals. Then you can use that stock in the right way, not running things contra-peak and making additional trips that aren't really necessary.

I don’t think you’ve understood.

Some trains arrive into Charing Cross / Cannon Street late in line with franchise obligations and have no return work towards country - these stable overnight. They work early trains from London, again in line with franchise obligations, meaning very few ECS trips then have to come into London to make these trains.

The trains therefore leaving Dartford at 0500 (can’t have the same train in two places at 0500, especially when they’re ~15 miles geographically different...) come out of Slade Green or Dartford sidings with very few dead miles.

In short, what you’re suggesting is berthing even more stuff in London which then has to go empty towards country instead of investing in facilities in North Kent etc; as the early trains from London are already berthed appropriately.

Do you now understand?

 

[Horizon22]

I don’t think you’ve understood.

Some trains arrive into Charing Cross / Cannon Street late in line with franchise obligations and have no return work towards country - these stable overnight. They work early trains from London, again in line with franchise obligations, meaning very few ECS trips then have to come into London to make these trains.

The trains therefore leaving Dartford at 0500 (can’t have the same train in two places at 0500, especially when they’re ~15 miles geographically different...) come out of Slade Green or Dartford sidings with very few dead miles.

In short, what you’re suggesting is berthing even more stuff in London which then has to go empty towards country instead of investing in facilities in North Kent etc; as the early trains from London are already berthed appropriately.

Do you now understand?

No I understand perfectly thanks. Late night trains of course berth for services in the morning. But there is still a lot of early morning trains that come up empty from Dartford / Slade Green / Grove Park and then go back out as the first service. A perfect example is the 0450 service from Charing Cross; this isn't formed of a berthed train but arrives empty in the morning. In a sensible world this would be a berthed unit, but that might be just down to timetabling inefficiency.

There's no issue with trains coming in late at all. The reason we were discussing this was because the original comment was about berthing more trains at London Terminals, and I reckon that is more inefficient, which I think we agree on. Berthing more trains at a terminal should ideally (except the very very early services) not be done at all, because it isn't economically or practically worthwhile.

 

[ComUtoR]

Pretty sure you can berth a train on Platform 1 at Dartford.

 

[Doomotron]

They could stick some sidings in the 4-track alignment between Sandling and Folkestone (or, even better, bring back the 4-track alignment entirely as well as the other island at Folkestone Central, rebuilding Folkestone East station and Folkestone Harbour station, but we can dream).

There's a bit of empty space at Deal station (including the gap between the platforms where another track was) which could be use to put some sidings down.

There's some sidings at Folkestone East (where trains for Folkestone Harbour would reverse) that can't be accessed without going onto the Harbour branch I think; these could be made accessible.

 

[contrad!ction]

Pretty sure you can berth a train on Platform 1 at Dartford.

You can indeed. 2L88 berths in 1 every (weekday) night and forms the first one up the North Kent in the morning.

 

[KingJ]

Regarding Chart Leacon, it looks like there may have been a bit of a breakthrough - the upcoming inquiry into Network Rail's compulsory purchase of the site under the Transport and Works Act 1992 has now been cancelled as all objections, including those by the current landowner, have been withdrawn. Relatedly perhaps, the current owner of the site lost a court case against Ashford Borough Council's inclusion of Chart Leacon in their local plan, which was part of Network Rail's justification for a compulsory purchase. Presumably the current owner realised that they were unlikely to be able to contest the compulsory purchase, and so having lost their legal case against the inclusion of the site in the local plan realised that they would have no choice but to sell up.

However, it looks like Network Rail only applied to compulsory purchase part of the site, which will provide 5x 12 car berthing roads and 1x12 car reception road (plus ancillary office space/parking etc). It's unknown at the moment if they have now actually purchased the whole site instead.

The report by WSP on possible stabling sites, albeit with an Ashford bias, also makes for interesting reading.

 

[brad465]

You can indeed. 2L88 berths in 1 every (weekday) night and forms the first one up the North Kent in the morning.

Were they always berthing something in Dartford station overnight? Or did the closure of one of the carriage sidings to the east mean they had to start doing that?

 

[Daz28]

Are there any places where an otherwise too valuable site could have a stabling yard built with overhead development?
Going mental with the crayons is two level stabling viable with electric trains?
Desperate times an all that!

Make Grove Park double deck, upper deck accessed from one side, lower deck from the other side. Sink it in the ground so that it doesn’t spoil the landscape. Problem solved. Could do the same at Slade Green.

 

[Meerkat]

You couldn’t do sinking into the ground at an existing depot as that would involve shutting the current one whilst you dug it out. Admittedly the White City underground depot coped whilst they built Westfield but things are different when you are building a £1.6Bn shopping centre on top....

 

[rdlover777]

why not reopen the old shed at Faversham where the line splits?

 

[brad465]

why not reopen the old shed at Faversham where the line splits?

That doesn't look like a large space to reuse, using the existing sidings as a scale.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

How about that land around Stewart’s Lane Depot? Couldn’t the depot itself be turned Into South Eastern stabling?

Shame they didn’t keep the Addiscome branch for stabling.

 

[millemille]

I can't see the 707's coming over and being used on SE Metro services. The last thing that SE need is another small fleet of unique - to them - trains with an odd number of vehicles in each formation.

When I worked there the 376's - a similar proposition to 707's - were a massive ball ache to maintain.

Even the simplest thing, the fact that SG depot's maintenance shed is designed for an even number of vehicles on each road. So if you had to bring a 376 into the shed you lose a 4 car space and had an empty unusable, and much needed, space on a maintenance road.

Then you have shunting/yard management issues, maintenance staff training and competency, material/stores stockholding and space needed and soft issues like ownership of performance/reliability.

The 376's were unloved and no depot was willing to step and take ownership of their performance; SG was "home of the Networker" and Ramsgate was "the" Electrostar depot. So any difficult faults - which was pretty much anything over and above black box out/black box in - saw us having to move the 376 down to Ramsgate or Ramsgate staff having to come up to SG and hold a metaphorical gun to the head of all involved to get the unit fixed and back in service. And that was with Electrostar knowledge in the company. There's no Desiro knowledge within SE anywhere.

I guess one option might be to invest in turning Grove Park into a proper maintenance depot and making that the 707 depot, but that's a lot of work....

 

[SlimJim1694]

I guess one option might be to invest in turning Grove Park into a proper maintenance depot and making that the 707 depot, but that's a lot of work...

Same problems with Grove Park... it's too valuable as a stabling point for 12 car formations.

 

[Horizon22]

Same problems with Grove Park... it's too valuable as a stabling point for 12 car formations.

You just run back to the age old problem of a lack of depot space whilst requiring new stock. Outberthing at stations is already on the high side. Unfortunately, there will now have been a cumulative 5 years of passenger growth with nothing but DAs and no answer to the depot question and currently no Elizabeth line.

 

[Meerkat]

Are there any sites for a brand new depot?
I am thinking of a new trains deal that includes maintenance and the provision of a depot.

 

[hkstudent]

I can't see the 707's coming over and being used on SE Metro services. The last thing that SE need is another small fleet of unique - to them - trains with an odd number of vehicles in each formation.

When I worked there the 376's - a similar proposition to 707's - were a massive ball ache to maintain.

Even the simplest thing, the fact that SG depot's maintenance shed is designed for an even number of vehicles on each road. So if you had to bring a 376 into the shed you lose a 4 car space and had an empty unusable, and much needed, space on a maintenance road.

Then you have shunting/yard management issues, maintenance staff training and competency, material/stores stockholding and space needed and soft issues like ownership of performance/reliability.

The 376's were unloved and no depot was willing to step and take ownership of their performance; SG was "home of the Networker" and Ramsgate was "the" Electrostar depot. So any difficult faults - which was pretty much anything over and above black box out/black box in - saw us having to move the 376 down to Ramsgate or Ramsgate staff having to come up to SG and hold a metaphorical gun to the head of all involved to get the unit fixed and back in service. And that was with Electrostar knowledge in the company. There's no Desiro knowledge within SE anywhere.

I guess one option might be to invest in turning Grove Park into a proper maintenance depot and making that the 707 depot, but that's a lot of work....

tbh, to deal with passenger growth, it maybe good for Network Rail to source some land somewhere in the middle of Kent for a new depot for long term solution.

 

[Horizon22]

Are there any sites for a brand new depot?
I am thinking of a new trains deal that includes maintenance and the provision of a depot.

Extension of Slade Green is possible (the land is there), as is the potential of bring back Chart Leacon which is supposed to be happening but that's alongside TL running down that way which is pretty much dead in the water.

 

[millemille]

Are there any sites for a brand new depot?
I am thinking of a new trains deal that includes maintenance and the provision of a depot.

For SE Metro? Hoo Junction has been spoken about in the past by several train manufacturers as part of a TSP package.

 

[Meerkat]

Hoo Junction seems a long way out, whereas Slade Green seems a near perfect location to an amateur.
I guess the issue would be trying to keep Slade Green open during expansion or finding temporary stabling somewhere, and also leaving provision for Crossrail to get through the site at some point

 

[Horizon22]

I guess the issue would be trying to keep Slade Green open during expansion or finding temporary stabling somewhere, and also leaving provision for Crossrail to get through the site at some point

You're really presuming an extension soon considering the current delays?