Kent Route Study out

[Mordac]

Outline of the major options set in the study:

Options set out in the study include:

By 2024:

Lengthening high speed, South London metro and Kent commuter peak time trains to 12-cars, where possible and where demand requires it.
Platform extensions to facilitate longer trains, including at Woolwich Dockyard and minor work at Waterloo East
Creating a link between High Speed 1 and the Marshlink route to facilitate faster trains to Hastings and Rye. This could include an electrification scheme or bi-mode trains that can run under diesel or electric power.
Increasing capacity at Cannon Street by creating a siding to stable trains. This would allow for an extra train in the high peak hour (8am-9am).
Crowding relief schemes at Lewisham, Peckham Rye and Denmark Hill stations to improve the passenger experience.
New signalling systems, including Traffic Management technology, to maximise train performance on busy sections where capacity is constrained, such as Orpington to London. Traffic Management is similar to air traffic control and is able to adapt in real time to minimise disruption.

Long term:

Rebuilding Charing Cross station to allow for more and longer trains to terminate there, potentially extending the platforms across the Thames.
Provide additional tracks on the route into Victoria to allow more and longer trains to terminate there.
Creating a southern link from Ebbsfleet International via Fawkham to stations on the Bromley South route.
Creating a link between Faversham and Ashford, a route poorly-served by road.

Summary here: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Kent-Route-Study-Summary.pdf

Draft fostudyr consultation: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Kent-Route-Study-Draft-for-Consultation.pdf

Technical appendix: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-co...Technical-Appendix-Draft-for-Consultation.pdf

I don't know the area so this means almost nothing to me, but I thought it needed a thread.

 

[yorksrob]

Nice to see some decent plans for the Marshlink.

And a local service to Ebbsfleet via Fawkham in the long term. Almost the rebirth of the Gravesend West branch !

 

[30907]

Intrigued by the Faversham- Ashford suggestion.

The LCDR climbs quite steeply West out of Canterbury, so there'd be quite a height difference to overcome in a SW-NW curve West of Chartham.
This would provide the fastest route, but I wonder if a reasonable solution might be economically achieved by a connecting spur in the other direction plus reversal at Canterbury E or W.
The Canterbury W variant would use the trackbed of the wartime spur (which came in handy after the 1953 floods!), but would involve extra trains using the busy level crossing on St Dunstan Street.
The Canterbury E variant would mean a new formation, but this could double as an alternative route to Dover (also mentioned in the study).
Neither station is ideally suited to reversing trains, but neither is desperately busy either.

 

[kentman]

In the Blue sky part :

London Charing Cross
5.11.2. Charing Cross has just six 12-car platforms and Platforms 4, 5 and 6 are very narrow, leading to operational restrictions. Class 465 units cannot operate in 12-car into these platforms and selective door operation is used on Class 375 units. A major rebuild of the station could allow it to be extended south over the river, like Blackfriars, providing compliant platforms and greater passenger circulation. At concept level, a new link to Waterloo from a southern entrance to Charing Cross may supersede Waterloo East allowing the station area to be used for additional track capacity, but there are likely to be many issues with a project on this scale.

 

[urpert]

Sounds like they're as good as admitting they're planning to replace Networkers with 700s:

The Networker rolling stock, which operates many of the metro services, is approximately 25 years old, so is likely to be replaced in the coming decade and this would provide the opportunity to provide higher capacity trains.

However, the busiest services are already at the maximum 8-car length and an alternative to lengthening other services could be to use high density rolling stock, such as Class 700s.

 

[yorksrob]

Sounds like they're as good as admitting they're planning to replace Networkers with 700s:

They won't have outlasted the EPB's then.

 

[telstarbox]

Does crowding relief mean more stairs and exits?

 

[yorksrob]

Intrigued by the Faversham- Ashford suggestion.

The LCDR climbs quite steeply West out of Canterbury, so there'd be quite a height difference to overcome in a SW-NW curve West of Chartham.
This would provide the fastest route, but I wonder if a reasonable solution might be economically achieved by a connecting spur in the other direction plus reversal at Canterbury E or W.
The Canterbury W variant would use the trackbed of the wartime spur (which came in handy after the 1953 floods!), but would involve extra trains using the busy level crossing on St Dunstan Street.
The Canterbury E variant would mean a new formation, but this could double as an alternative route to Dover (also mentioned in the study).
Neither station is ideally suited to reversing trains, but neither is desperately busy either.

I'd missed that.

Growing up in Ashford, Faversham was somewhere we' rarely visited, given its proximity, largely due to the poor road and rail connections.

 

[urpert]

Does crowding relief mean more stairs and exits?

Well, they could start by replacing the second footbridge at Bromley South with a new structure with passenger lifts and perhaps extend it to provide a second exit (peak only?) to the Waitrose car park area...

 

[DynamicSpirit]

In the Blue sky part :

London Charing Cross
5.11.2. Charing Cross has just six 12-car platforms and Platforms 4, 5 and 6 are very narrow, leading to operational restrictions. Class 465 units cannot operate in 12-car into these platforms and selective door operation is used on Class 375 units. A major rebuild of the station could allow it to be extended south over the river, like Blackfriars, providing compliant platforms and greater passenger circulation. At concept level, a new link to Waterloo from a southern entrance to Charing Cross may supersede Waterloo East allowing the station area to be used for additional track capacity, but there are likely to be many issues with a project on this scale.

Definitely very blue sky. I'm trying to figure out how that would work. It seems to imply moving the station further South, so I'm guessing you'd see something like a Northern entrance where Embankment currently is, and a Southern entrance roughly opposite the Royal Festival Hall. That would give a considerably longer walk to Waterloo main than people currently get from Waterloo East (even longer when trains are not run as 12-car). And ditto Embankment is a bit less useful than the current entrance for people heading for the West End. It also sounds like the sort of thing that you'd need to completely close Charing Cross for quite a long time to build it. That's an awful lot of trains that you need to find somewhere for them to terminate at. And building on a bridge over the river is definitely not going to come cheap, even by railway standards!

Surely there must be better/less disruptive ways to provide compliant platforms if that's the main issue?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Intrigued by the Faversham- Ashford suggestion.

The LCDR climbs quite steeply West out of Canterbury, so there'd be quite a height difference to overcome in a SW-NW curve West of Chartham.
This would provide the fastest route, but I wonder if a reasonable solution might be economically achieved by a connecting spur in the other direction plus reversal at Canterbury E or W.
The Canterbury W variant would use the trackbed of the wartime spur (which came in handy after the 1953 floods!), but would involve extra trains using the busy level crossing on St Dunstan Street.
The Canterbury E variant would mean a new formation, but this could double as an alternative route to Dover (also mentioned in the study).
Neither station is ideally suited to reversing trains, but neither is desperately busy either.

As far as I can make out, it looks like the maps in the document already show a new chord connecting the Ashford-Canterbury line to Canterbury East. Since I can't imagine there's a huge demand for Ashford-Dover via Canterbury and there are no other obvious purposes for such a chord other than your suggestion, I wonder if Network Rail are already thinking of your idea: Reversing at Canterbury East. That certainly avoids the rather unfortunate problem of Ashford-Faversham trains passing by Canterbury without stopping there.

 

[Mikey C]

Sounds like they're as good as admitting they're planning to replace Networkers with 700s:

Why would they need to replace the Networkers to provide higher capacity stock? It's not as if there's wasted space on them and they could always take seats out if they wanted more standing space.

 

[hwl]

Why would they need to replace the Networkers to provide higher capacity stock? It's not as if there's wasted space on them and they could always take seats out if they wanted more standing space.

No SDO or ETCS compatibility, no regeneration working on the GEC units, narrow door widths causing dwell time issues...

Suspension rebuild to deal with a higher total weight range.

More stock needed which would leave a micro fleet of new stock. Far more 2 car units than needed which can't be used on 12 car services. Reliability issues which new stock would help reduce the depot space issues that go with a larger fleet size...

 

[Medicy]

Point 4.7.7. of the report says that a shuttle bus operates between Dover Priory and the Eastern Docks, when surely that hasn't operated (from memory) for two years now?

 

[urpert]

No SDO or ETCS compatibility, no regeneration working on the GEC units, narrow door widths causing dwell time issues...

Suspension rebuild to deal with a higher total weight range.

More stock needed which would leave a micro fleet of new stock. Far more 2 car units than needed which can't be used on 12 car services. Reliability issues which new stock would help reduce the depot space issues that go with a larger fleet size...

Plus it's been stated many times on here (though I have no knowledge of whether it's true) that there are only limited things you can do to the seating layout on Networkers due to under seat equipment, ruling out changing them to 2+2 or even lower density.

 

[30907]

As far as I can make out, it looks like the maps in the document already show a new chord connecting the Ashford-Canterbury line to Canterbury East. Since I can't imagine there's a huge demand for Ashford-Dover via Canterbury and there are no other obvious purposes for such a chord other than your suggestion, I wonder if Network Rail are already thinking of your idea: Reversing at Canterbury East. That certainly avoids the rather unfortunate problem of Ashford-Faversham trains passing by Canterbury without stopping there.

The chord you mention (and which started me thinking!) has the tag "if Folkestone-Dover is closed." I take it this refers to a long-term closure, which has been contemplated more than a few times because of sea walls, tunnels, landslips etc.