London Overground - the future?

[Bald Rick]

Also does anyone know if the net subsidy for the Overground Network has gone down or up since it was taken over from Silverlink?
With and without capital repayments on all the upgrades that have been built.

Difficult to assess easily as revenue is retained by TfL, and Silverlink didn't break down it's accounts by route (at least not publicly)

But it is reasonably certain that subsidy has increased considerably, and that is before the capital repayments are taken into account.

Whilst patronage may have doubled (or even trebled) in terms of farebox, costs will have done also, and the gap will be wider. In Silverlink days it was a shoestring railway - Chief Planner will confirm. Since then there has been a substantial increase in staff, a more than doubling of the fleet, and large increases in other running costs eg traction power, domestic power, station maintenance etc. There is also a much larger back office staff to make it all tick, and a fleet of TfL people there to mark LOROLs homework.

 

[tbtc]

Difficult to assess easily as revenue is retained by TfL, and Silverlink didn't break down it's accounts by route (at least not publicly)

But it is reasonably certain that subsidy has increased considerably, and that is before the capital repayments are taken into account.

Whilst patronage may have doubled (or even trebled) in terms of farebox, costs will have done also, and the gap will be wider. In Silverlink days it was a shoestring railway - Chief Planner will confirm. Since then there has been a substantial increase in staff, a more than doubling of the fleet, and large increases in other running costs eg traction power, domestic power, station maintenance etc. There is also a much larger back office staff to make it all tick, and a fleet of TfL people there to mark LOROLs homework.

Even if passenger numbers have trebled, the net increase in revenue is presumably going to be pretty small (due to Oyster capping and whatnot).

So trains may be busier without seeing much more money.

 

[bicbasher]

I don't use their services myself, so it's all hearsay, but the running theme from what I've been reading on this is that they are properly scraping the barrel for the bare minimum service provision as per the franchise agreement - just like Silverlink were, mostly. No desire to improve services or innovate, just do the minimum job and get paid. Perhaps installing ticket gates and staffing all stations would be an excellent starting point for improving things

Indeed, although I would say that unlike Silverlink, the trains are heavily used in the peak as most in SE London have no option but to use Southeastern's metro services to travel into London.

The pro TfL argument has always been more than sticking some roundels and a lick of paint at the likes of Erith and Slade Green, it's the bare bone mentality of Southeastern's management of the metro services.

 

[Latecomer]

I found a document on TfL's 'projects' webpage, and it seems to agree with the three routes you've listed above:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/projectsandschemes/27147.aspx

It links to another page about 'stations outside London, which also supports Cheshunt being the limit:

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/projectsandschemes/27201.aspx

However this is slightly less than the WA routes shown in the 'Mayor's Rail Vision' proposals, which included those three routes but also the line to Hertford East.

That's Fig 13 in this: http://www.london.gov.uk/priorities...l-vision-investing-in-rail-services-in-london

It's an interesting one because I think that although Hertford East is a little way out there are no through services so I don't see how it would work unless the four or so stations between Cheshunt and Hertford East were also made part of the devolved service? I would have thought common sense would include that branch? Although it would mean Hertford would have a TfL run service from the East and normal TOC operation from Hertford North.

Cambridge is too far but I could also see a case for TfL to take over the route up to Stansted as well given that the airport is considered to be a 'London' airport. Harlow on the way there is certainly London commuter belt too.

 

[A-driver]

I can't see what people think will change if TFL take over routes like the WA, SE or moorgates. Ok they may staff stations and introduce new units but that is something the dft could do with any of those franchises now. But they arnt going to build new lines which is the only way to sort out the issues.

Especially with the southeastern and Moorgate trains there is no more capacity. The 'London end' of both routes, south of Finsbury park or west of lewisham is used to capacity as it is. Trains can't get any longer and they will still be affected by everything that affects punctuality now. If a mainline stopper is late at Woolmer green junction and so late out of Welwyn then it will still hold up the stopper on the flyover weather that be an FCC stopper or a TFL stopper and that train will still be 6 mins late off of Hatfield and therefore arrive into Moorgate at least one minute after it should have departed heading north meaning the driver will still need the 5 mins to turn the train around and the train will continue to loose time...

 

[Antman]

I can't see what people think will change if TFL take over routes like the WA, SE or moorgates. Ok they may staff stations and introduce new units but that is something the dft could do with any of those franchises now. But they arnt going to build new lines which is the only way to sort out the issues.

Especially with the southeastern and Moorgate trains there is no more capacity. The 'London end' of both routes, south of Finsbury park or west of lewisham is used to capacity as it is. Trains can't get any longer and they will still be affected by everything that affects punctuality now. If a mainline stopper is late at Woolmer green junction and so late out of Welwyn then it will still hold up the stopper on the flyover weather that be an FCC stopper or a TFL stopper and that train will still be 6 mins late off of Hatfield and therefore arrive into Moorgate at least one minute after it should have departed heading north meaning the driver will still need the 5 mins to turn the train around and the train will continue to loose time...

Exactly, it appears to be little more than a cosmetic idea

 

[swt_passenger]

It's an interesting one because I think that although Hertford East is a little way out there are no through services so I don't see how it would work unless the four or so stations between Cheshunt and Hertford East were also made part of the devolved service? I would have thought common sense would include that branch? Although it would mean Hertford t have a TfL run service from the East and normal TOC operation from

The point of the comparison was just to show that online info varies, and that therefore their plans may have changed at some stage. Because some documents explain Cheshunt as being the last station that tends to rule out Hertford East, at least initially.

But clearly IF TfL did take over the line to Hertford East, stations between Cheshunt and Hertford East would be included, (assuming TfL were majority operator).

 

[jopsuk]

Aye, real impovements for the GN and WA suburbun services requires:

• Some way of improving Moorgate turnaround times to allow intensive workings in and out
• Ideally, an extra set of lines to Welwyn and to Hertford, to allow inner suburbun services to be wholly seperated
• Grade seperated fast lines from Hackney Downs to Broxbourne- to get through the Clapton bottleneck and avoid the interaction of stopping Lea Valley and Cambridge/Stansted services

 

[W230]

Received a note through the door from Network Rail this week to say that replacement of the Lee Valley Viaduct on the Gospel Oak to Barking line commences next weekend.

I knew from local information that the viaduct was in a bad way and that there is a 20mph PSR in place over that stretch (I think it's 20mph anyway) but there's been a hive of activity next to the location for the last few months and it seems work starts imminently.

The NR brief says it was opened in 1896 and it is apparently showing it's age quite seriously!

To anyone who might want to photograph it (or just ride over it) before the spans start being replaced, it is possible to walk right under/up to it by entering the Thames Water treatment site off Forest Road, E17. Costs £1 to enter the site with ample parking.

Or take a LOROL service between South Tottenham & Blackhorse Road (it's walkable from Blackhorse Road in less than 10 minutes).

NR timetable:
7/8th July - enabling works for bridge removal.
13/15th July - removal of two deck spans, replace track and re-ballast.
17/19th August - removal of three deck spans, replace track and re-ballast.
24/30th December - removal of seven deck spans, replace track and re-ballast.

Mods: feel free to delete if already posted elsewhere.

 

[glbotu]

Could extra capacity be found by routing some GN services onto the NLL via the Canonbury curve (possibly a considerably upgraded Canonbury curve)? You could then have a service of Semi-Fasts to Thameslink, Fasts to King's Cross and split Hertford Loop and Welwyn services evenly between Moorgate and Stratford.

 

[jon0844]

Won't the new lines between Alexandra Palace and Finsbury Park help by letting faster trains pass, rather than risk being stuck behind all the way to WGC when there are delays at Moorgate?

Sure the DfT could have made any franchises operate like London Overground, forcing stations to remain open and staffed etc, but they haven't and I doubt that they ever will (the most might be Oyster acceptance to WGC and Hertford North as originally planned). This is the real advantage for passengers, more so than new branding.

Of course, whether the current stock is modified to give more standing room (opening cab ends in the middle of fixed 6-car trains) or there's new stock with an interior akin to a 378, thus allowing significantly more people on existing services with no timetable changes, there are ways to solve the problem and the 313s will have to be a replaced relatively soon anyway, so you can't even opt to do nothing at all.

Extending Oyster would be a massive boost for inner suburban users, with cheaper singles and much more flexibility. Bad news for RPIs though as you can't really have the wrong ticket then!

 

[ChiefPlanner]

LOROL do a great job , and have transformed the operation on the NLR (though to be fair in the latter days of Silverlink , there was a distinct improvement , but nothing like the step change when new trains , new and improved infrastructure and massive increases in staffing levels really came in. Significantly , the revenue risk lies with TfL - so LOROL can concentrate on running a good service. Difficult to make comparisins - but the NLR side of the operation probably gets a hefty increase in the operating budget.

Even in the dark days of the mid 1990's - and after the disastrous EPS upgrade - which shut Camden Road to east of Willesden HL for over a year - even the smallest increase in service and capacity paid dividends - a pair of extra high peak Stratford - Camden shuttles after re-opening were full and standing within a week of introduction. When the Clapham - Willesden went electric (getting rid of the awful , unreliable 117 DMU sets - patronage nearly doubled in a year , with no extra services) - the climb back started with a regular all day 4 tph Stratford - Richmond.

The constraint then was not just not enough 313 sets and patchy route operations - but the fact that the revenue "earned" did not register due to endemic free riding and the Travelcard "lag" which meant any extra revenue apportionment took over a year to be re-allocated.

 

[D365]

In reply to several of the posts, I have a few comments which I wish to make.

It seems rather sensible for TfL to take over some of the WA suburban routes in future, considering how there are proposals of various sorts to upgrade the lines and as such there is an opportunity to improve service. Hertford East may also make sense if Crossrail 2 is going to take over the branch in the future. In the meantime, until more detailed work has taken place on Crossrail 2 and the future of the WA lines, the 315/317 fleet will presumably soldier on - though the latter will be receiving a life-extension rebuild.

Would it be worthwhile for a 313/PEP life extension to take place? On GN, this might entail reformation into 6-car units (as has been explained before) as well as the fitting of ETCS systems, AC motors, refurbished interiors with 2+2 (or perhaps hybrid longitudinal à la S8), toilets, air-conditioning... (NR's 313121 has been fitted with a toilet; no idea if it is DDA-compliant, but would WC facilities be useful on doubled-up units?) However, with all that work, one might as well invest in a new fleet; 6-car Desiro City/700?

I read in "Eastern Electric" by John Glover that when originally opened as part of BR, way back when the 313/PEP fleet were spring chickens, NCL handled 18tph in each direction at peak times. Is this correct and couldn't the line still handle this? if still possible there would be no need to divert to NLL/KGX. Isn't the plan still to have WGC inners taken over fully by Thameslink with 8-car 700s?

It might seem that with a 'traditional' TOC, they are only providing the minimum possible service and have no real desire to innovate. I don't suppose the profit margins are high enough, and even if they were... Leave the new concessions to operation only and have the bright sparks doing the innovation, I suppose!

 

[bicbasher]

Exactly, it appears to be little more than a cosmetic idea

Try commuting on the Sydenham line where the improvements are far from cosmetic. 12tph off-peak of which 8tph are operated by London Overground, even on a Sunday afternoon.

You can keep your 2tph on a Sunday on Southeastern thank you very much!

 

[Antman]

Try commuting on the Sydenham line where the improvements are far from cosmetic. 12tph off-peak of which 8tph are operated by London Overground, even on a Sunday afternoon.

You can keep your 2tph on a Sunday on Southeastern thank you very much!

Hasn't there been a subsequent reduction in London Bridge services?

Not much scope for peak hour improvements on SET with much of the network already at full capacity.

 

[jon0844]

I think the key is that LO (or TfL) seems to be of the thinking that public transport is a service and can be subsidised more. The opposite of the DfT/Government thinking.

As such, there are many benefits to the passenger. The investment in more stock, staff and easier ticketing - all things that suddenly make a service much more popular and gives people a feeling of security.

I'm not suggesting for one second that existing services are unsafe (although the NLL under Silverlink certainly made me feel uncomfortable) but there is definitely a perception that LO is safer from having more staff, brighter looking stations and more open rolling stock.

Sent from my SGP311 using Tapatalk HD

 

[SF-02]

I can't see what people think will change if TFL take over routes like the WA, SE or moorgates. Ok they may staff stations and introduce new units but that is something the dft could do with any of those franchises now. But they arnt going to build new lines which is the only way to sort out the issues.

Especially with the southeastern and Moorgate trains there is no more capacity. The 'London end' of both routes, south of Finsbury park or west of lewisham is used to capacity as it is. Trains can't get any longer and they will still be affected by everything that affects punctuality now.

As has been said on here - the DfT have no will to change so things wont! TfL do have the will to do something. That's the crucial difference.

No one I know expects the networkers or 376's on southeastern to be replaced - they are fine. Nor expect more peak time trains - there are no new paths and that is fine. Off peak can be improved, there are paths and much stock in depots, and the vast majority of stations are unbarriered. These can be changed, TfL have suggested changing them, they have record of doing them, and the DfT and southeastern don't nor show any interest in changing that.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Not much scope for peak hour improvements on SET with much of the network already at full capacity.

He was talking about Sunday which isn't peak time, and when the Southeastern service is just 2 trains per hour on many London metro routes.

 

[D365]

As has been said many times - the DfT have no will to change so things wont! TfL do have the will to do something. That's the crucial difference.

No one I know expects the networkers or 376's on southeastern to be replaced - they are fine. Nor expect more peak time trains - there are no new paths and that is fine. Off peak can be improved, there are paths and much stock in depots, and the vast majority of stations are unbarriered. These can be changed, TfL have suggested changing them, they have record of doing them, and the DfT and southeastern don't nor show any interest in changing that.

That reminds me that there has been the suggestion to extend the 376 fleet to 6 cars and add a few more units, if this is possible. The fleet could be considered anomalous within a 12-car railway, they say. Class 378 is similar enough, supposedly, so it should be easier enough for Derby...

Of course, there's never the will to change... *sigh* I don't know what I'm saying.

 

[HSTEd]

Replace the class 376 units with other 4-car units... perhaps Class 319s or additional Class 377s.
Then cascade the 376s to the Northern electrification projects.

 

[swt_passenger]

Then cascade the 376s to the Northern electrification projects.

Are they not third rail only? Although nearly everything is convertible if you throw enough cash at it...

 

[HSTEd]

Are they not third rail only? Although nearly everything is convertible if you throw enough cash at it...

The wikipedia picture of 376033 seems to show a pantograph well on the middle vehicle.

 

[Eagle]

Are they not third rail only? Although nearly everything is convertible if you throw enough cash at it...

376s all have pantograph wells (in fact I think all Electrostars do).

 

[A-driver]

376s all have pantograph wells (in fact I think all Electrostars do).

That dosnt mean they are 'AC ready'.

They don't have pantographs, ADD systems, VCBs, APC, transformers and the related systems, HTCs, aux compressors etc.

Ok that could all be installed but its certainly not cheap, especially for an entire fleet.

 

[bicbasher]

Hasn't there been a subsequent reduction in London Bridge services?

The Sydenham line saw a reduction from 6tph off-peak to 4tph in May 2010 but saw an increase to 10 car services during the peak and the Inner SLL was axed last December on the Southern side.

 

[Bald Rick]

I read in "Eastern Electric" by John Glover that when originally opened as part of BR, way back when the 313/PEP fleet were spring chickens, NCL handled 18tph in each direction at peak times. Is this correct and couldn't the line still handle this? if still possible there would be no need to divert to NLL/KGX. Isn't the plan still to have WGC inners taken over fully by Thameslink with 8-car 700s?

It did indeed handle 18tph. But it was over provision. As the service reduced to 12tph the signalling was changed (presumably to save maintenance). So the line can't handle this now. It can - just - manage 14tph, but that is a squeak.

Some WGC inners will still go to Moorgate and be 313s. Some will skip certain stops and head through the TL core, and be 8 car 700s.

 

[Fred26]

Could the signalling be changed back?

 

[jon0844]

I think that with new stock or an internal layout change on the 313s, you could easily provide the necessary peak capacity without any new services.

 

[Fred26]

I'd like to see the seats ripped out of the centre portion of each coach and replace them with tube-style bench seats.

 

[petersi]

Could the signalling be changed back?

Yes
But will not be due to other schemes for signalling
IE apparently it is due to be resignaled in the next Decade

Information in the public RUS docs at networkrail web site

 

[Mojo]

I think the key is that LO (or TfL) seems to be of the thinking that public transport is a service and can be subsidised more. The opposite of the DfT/Government thinking.

Furthermore, TfL's role is much more than just operating trains (and buses) but they play a much wider role in terms of implementing various policies relating to the environment, job creation and retention, supporting the economy, supporting effective land use planning and so on.