Remaining Great Northern services post Thameslink to be rolled into London Overground and LNER?

[Ianno87]

There used to be 6tph to Amersham (4 Met/2 Chiltern) with a halfhourly shuttle to Chesham to Chalfont, formed of a 4 car A Stock train.

With the impending full rollout of S8 trains which are formed of fixed 8 car trains and the bay at Chalfont only taking 4 Car, a decision was taken to divert 2 of the Amersham trains to Chesham. So in effect the Amersham services were cut back.

At the time, I think Amersham boasted one of the lowest ratios of off-peak demand relative to the peak on the whole of LU - something like a 90% dropoff for the off-peak.

 

[bramling]

However there's a good track record with TfL running the Metropolitan Line services well outside their area. Provided the bulk of the passengers are London-bound commuters, I don't foresee any particular issues with TfL running the services and being answerable to their customers. However, when it comes to investment, there can be all sorts of complications, as anyone who has followed the Croxley Link saga will know. Would TfL want to fund infrastructure enhancements in Stevenage? It would be up against major projects within London, and TfL has limited investment.

I wouldn’t regard the Met to Amersham as a good track record at all.

Withdrawal of all but peak fast services in order to increase stops at stations like Pinner and Northwick Park, which just happen to be in London.

Meanwhile, no progress on the Croxley Link which just happens not to be in London.

Based on this, I could envisage conflicts over whether trains omit calls nearer to London, and no Stevenage bay - although that will no doubt be funded by the DFT at some stage anyway.

I just can’t see what TFL would do that isn’t there anyway, apart from orange paint and floods of pointless not-particularly-competent staff - as we already see on London Overground. And why introduce all the inefficiency of forcing things like crew duties and rolling stock diagrams to be separated out? Even if separation may work out for now, there’s no guarantee things would stay that way.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

At the time, I think Amersham boasted one of the lowest ratios of off-peak demand relative to the peak on the whole of LU - something like a 90% dropoff for the off-peak.

Somewhere , I have the all day loadings for the outer Met from my time in the first Crossrail project , when Aylesbury was a contender. Even now I think there was way too much all day service planned north of Ricky - anyway we are getting well off track here ....

Back on line -the success on the GN inners over even the last few years has been quite astounding (I worked in a modest job for FCC for 10 months) , and the additions to the post peak PM service from 3 cars to a modest level of 6 was well deserved. The train planning team - a good bunch - went out and recc'd around and showed the levels of standing was quite exceptional. Shame the 313's are seeing out their days in a very mucky external condition. ....but new trains beckon. IMHO - the possible transfer of outer GN to "LNER" will materially improve the bottom line , as the all day flows to the Cambridge , in particular, are excellent and very responsive to extra capacity being put in off peak.

 

[Fred26]

Building work on the fifth platform at Stevenage will start by the end of the year. Management have been informing staff, but I haven't seen an official briefing.

 

[Mikey C]

Somewhere , I have the all day loadings for the outer Met from my time in the first Crossrail project , when Aylesbury was a contender. Even now I think there was way too much all day service planned north of Ricky - anyway we are getting well off track here ....

Back on line -the success on the GN inners over even the last few years has been quite astounding (I worked in a modest job for FCC for 10 months) , and the additions to the post peak PM service from 3 cars to a modest level of 6 was well deserved. The train planning team - a good bunch - went out and recc'd around and showed the levels of standing was quite exceptional. Shame the 313's are seeing out their days in a very mucky external condition. ....but new trains beckon. IMHO - the possible transfer of outer GN to "LNER" will materially improve the bottom line , as the all day flows to the Cambridge , in particular, are excellent and very responsive to extra capacity being put in off peak.

The area served by the Moorgate services (Moorgate, Old Street and to an extent Essex Road) has really come up in the world over the last few years, silicon roundabout, nearby Hoxton etc which must surely have boosted demand significantly I remember when Old Street was quiet in the evening, now it's a bustling destination

 

[ChiefPlanner]

The area served by the Moorgate services (Moorgate, Old Street and to an extent Essex Road) has really come up in the world over the last few years, silicon roundabout, nearby Hoxton etc which must surely have boosted demand significantly I remember when Old Street was quiet in the evening, now it's a bustling destination

Just a bit ! - slightly off topic , friend of mine was an LT motorman in the late 1960's - and late turns on the Northern City line at weekends saw some trains with just him and the guard on board. BR thinned the MG services down quickly after 1976 , with diversions to Kings Cross after about 2100 due to very low patronage. London has changed immeasurably.....

 

[Mikey C]

Just a bit ! - slightly off topic , friend of mine was an LT motorman in the late 1960's - and late turns on the Northern City line at weekends saw some trains with just him and the guard on board. BR thinned the MG services down quickly after 1976 , with diversions to Kings Cross after about 2100 due to very low patronage. London has changed immeasurably.....

Except the underground Northern City line stations

 

[transmanche]

BR thinned the MG services down quickly after 1976 , with diversions to Kings Cross after about 2100 due to very low patronage.

AFAIR, it wasn't until the late 1980s that evening and weekend services were diverted to Kings Cross

 

[Kite159]

AFAIR, it wasn't until the late 1980s that evening and weekend services were diverted to Kings Cross

And it's only been a couple years since the services were sent back to Moorgate at weekends & late evenings.

The stations have changed since the 1970s... They had NSE branding installed

 

[Joe Paxton]

The stations have changed since the 1970s... They had NSE branding installed

Everything had NSE branding installed! Mr Green and his minions were very thorough in that regard, it must be said.

 

[Searle]

The area served by the Moorgate services (Moorgate, Old Street and to an extent Essex Road) has really come up in the world over the last few years, silicon roundabout, nearby Hoxton etc which must surely have boosted demand significantly I remember when Old Street was quiet in the evening, now it's a bustling destination

Indeed, Old Street is busy all day now, especially in the evening. The whole roundabout is about to be redeveloped (about time IMO), so it will only get busier after that is complete. Really nice area as well IMO

 

[Joe Paxton]

Huge amounts of fresh air on the Watford service (which is nothing more than a reversing point after (really) Northwood , especially off peak. Whilst Harrow to Northwood has probably benefited , outer Metro-Land tends to focus on Chiltern , (largely) , which gives them crowding and not much of a revenue stream frankly Amersham to Harrow as they probably fail to get the full ORCATS / Travelcard allocation as it is done of "diaries" (hardly the best method to apportion actual travel journeys by choice of train) ...so I understand anyway.

Actually with Oyster and contactless - which most Chiltern pax from Amersham to Harrow will be using (whether PAYG or Travelcard) - then it's easy to work out how many passengers were on Chiltern as they will probably pass through the gateline at Marylebone (apart from a few pax making local journeys on Chiltern).

For PAYG, this Oyster/contactless usage data is a crucial part of the revenue allocation, and for Travelcard seasons loaded on Oyster the usage data is now part of the mix for Travelcard revenue allocation (and is obviously rather more reliable than the diaries that a few paper Travelcard season holders fill out).

For what it's worth, whilst I am a proponent of 'Overgroundisation', I retain a healthy scepticism about the immense recorded jump in passenger numbers on the NLL & WLL - rather, I think a fair number of people realised the era of the free ride was over! However I also think there was a lot of suppressed demand.

 

[jon0844]

Virtually no fast trains from Amersham and Chesham , with a legacy of higher pricing also. Do not forget Mayor Kahn's TFL kyboshed the Croxley - Watford extension of the Met. It's in Herts - !

I agree that LO may want to run trains to bring people to London, but when it comes to major upgrades and infrastructure projects, I am sure they'd be less interested.

Does LO have a lot of say/control at stations outside London, namely Waltham Cross to Hertford East? They're all GA run and apart from a few orange signs on one platform at Cheshunt, it certainly doesn't seem that TfL is that concerned about the running of the station or information provision.

I would expect LO not to take over stations on the ECML, perhaps the Hertford Loop, as Thameslink trains will still be serving them. Perhaps some of the shacks like Welham Green, Brookmans Park etc. But would LO actually want to run them when they're outside London?

They may have done it elsewhere in the past, but I doubt the Mayor would want the headache if possible.

 

[Joe Paxton]

I agree that LO may want to run trains to bring people to London, but when it comes to major upgrades and infrastructure projects, I am sure they'd be less interested.

Does LO have a lot of say/control at stations outside London, namely Waltham Cross to Hertford East? They're all GA run and apart from a few orange signs on one platform at Cheshunt, it certainly doesn't seem that TfL is that concerned about the running of the station or information provision.

If it's not an LO managed station then no they don't have a great deal of control, it's much the same situation as any TOC calling at a station run by another TOC - this exists within Greater London, for example at New Cross, managed by Southeastern but also served by LO. They can have their say of course if they feel the provision of facilities is inadequate or not up to scratch.

TfL do have a general interest in promoting public transport in London, and in the past they have helped to fund improvements at NR stations in London run by other TOCs (and at stations not served by LO or LU) though nowadays money is rather tighter. They have also lobbied the DfT when the latter has been drawing up commitments for new franchises to ensure the new TOC makes various improvements to stations and services in London. Outside of London, any such activity would fall to the county council or unitary authority, or even the district council.

 

[jon0844]

As with Watford, the St Abbey Line, Stevenage and even the rather far fetched plans for services between St Albans and Hatfield (from reinstating the Alban Way as a tram line, to simply fixing the roads to allow a smoother service for buses) it seems Herts County Council has very little interest in this sort of thing, especially if they have to fund anything.

 

[Joe Paxton]

As with Watford, the St Abbey Line, Stevenage and even the rather far fetched plans for services between St Albans and Hatfield (from reinstating the Alban Way as a tram line, to simply fixing the roads to allow a smoother service for buses) it seems Herts County Council has very little interest in this sort of thing, especially if they have to fund anything.

I think a significant part of the problem is that county councils often don't have the capacity or capabilities to pursue such things - it's why I've always been sympathetic to the concept of regional governance, though quite how that would work in terms of the south east outside of London is a difficult question.

Besides, these days the attention of councils is focused on rather more pressing issues, such as which vital part of their social care provision they are going to have to cut to make ends meet.

 

[jon0844]

I think a significant part of the problem is that county councils often don't have the capacity or capabilities to pursue such things - it's why I've always been sympathetic to the concept of regional governance, though quite how that would work in terms of the south east outside of London is a difficult question.

Besides, these days the attention of councils is focused on rather more pressing issues, such as which vital part of their social care provision they are going to have to cut to make ends meet.

That's true. I can see why things like public transport and highways is a low priority, but at the same time I do think they also employ people who aren't that interested even if they had all the money in the world.

Off topic, but recently I noticed HCC's real time bus info service was down. A server error meaning I couldn't check any bus times. I reported it three days later to HCC, surprised nobody else had noticed already, and they came back to ask 'Are you using our app or website?'. At this point, I couldn't help but wonder how a) nobody had noticed already b) they didn't simply try their website AND app to see if there was a problem.

It still isn't working 6 days on. No information for the whole county and no acknowledgement that it's being worked on.

 

[Bald Rick]

Except the underground Northern City line stations

Where’s that like button

For what it's worth, whilst I am a proponent of 'Overgroundisation', I retain a healthy scepticism about the immense recorded jump in passenger numbers on the NLL & WLL - rather, I think a fair number of people realised the era of the free ride was over! However I also think there was a lot of suppressed demand.

No doubt revenue protection caused a big leap in passenger numbers; someone in London Overground told me that revenue went up double digits in the first few weeks of them taking over, with same trains and ostensibly no change to the service except more people and new uniforms.

However I think the big change was the near trebling of capacity, both in terms of train capacity and frequency, plus oysterisatipn happening at around the same time. Add in the huge growth in development in the corridor (some of which has been triggered by the Overground!) and you have the answer. The two Westfields alone must add a couple of million passengers a year.

 

[matt_world2004]

Where’s that like button

No doubt revenue protection caused a big leap in passenger numbers; someone in London Overground told me that revenue went up double digits in the first few weeks of them taking over, with same trains and ostensibly no change to the service except more people and new uniforms.

That and it's presence on a tube map must have done wonders for demand.. It will be interesting to see what happens to GwR and Heathrow Express revenue now that they are going to be on a tube map. Diamond geezer thinks the presence of the Elizabeth line is going to increase hexes revenue by being on the map.

 

[Failed Unit]

That and it's presence on a tube map must have done wonders for demand.. It will be interesting to see what happens to GwR and Heathrow Express revenue now that they are going to be on a tube map. Diamond geezer thinks the presence of the Elizabeth line is going to increase hexes revenue by being on the map.

That will be interesting to watch. No idea why the northern city line was removed from the tube map. But be interesting to see if putting it back on the map will see a big jump. I guess someone from Willesden may not know they can get to Moorgate with a single change.

Hex - it will make no difference. I think HEx will be very empty when Elizabeth line opens. (Unless it reduces the price). For me personally the speed advantage will be gone as I will only need to change once (can avoid Paddington). I suspect many won’t pay the premium especially if they are heading to the city. A lot of people visiting my office HEx and Taxi. They will just walk from Moorgate in the future. (But I guess that is a different thread)

 

[Mikey C]

That will be interesting to watch. No idea why the northern city line was removed from the tube map. But be interesting to see if putting it back on the map will see a big jump. I guess someone from Willesden may not know they can get to Moorgate with a single change.

Hex - it will make no difference. I think HEx will be very empty when Elizabeth line opens. (Unless it reduces the price). For me personally the speed advantage will be gone as I will only need to change once (can avoid Paddington). I suspect many won’t pay the premium especially if they are heading to the city. A lot of people visiting my office HEx and Taxi. They will just walk from Moorgate in the future. (But I guess that is a different thread)

A slightly off topic moan, but to me TfL took the childish approach that only their services should be on the Tube Map, hence including Overground services to places like Cheshunt (which are of little interest to most of Londoners) but leaving out the Thameslink core (West Hampstead to London Bridge/Elephant) and GN Moorgate services from Finsbury Park... which serve far more people AND could easily be of use to others who aren't aware of them

 

[matt_world2004]

A slightly off topic moan, but to me TfL took the childish approach that only their services should be on the Tube Map, hence including Overground services to places like Cheshunt (which are of little interest to most of Londoners) but leaving out the Thameslink core (West Hampstead to London Bridge/Elephant) and GN Moorgate services from Finsbury Park... which serve far more people AND could easily be of use to others who aren't aware of them

I believe the original reason thameslink was removed was because the engineering related disruption reduced capacity and it was removed at the request of the operator

 

[Joe Paxton]

I believe the original reason thameslink was removed was because the engineering related disruption reduced capacity and it was removed at the request of the operator

That's my understanding too - if it's on the Tube map then people will have an expectation, at least in the centre, that the service is akin to a Tube line. Thameslink most definitely has not been like that for the past few years!

It's a fair enough question re the Northern City line (GN Moorgate-Finsbury Park), especially since it started running at the weekend again. That said, for say a London Bridge to Highbury & Islington journey I'd point people who just want to get there to use the Tube (via KXSP) - though in the high peak period the GN train won't be as packed (but the most crowded part of that journey would likely be the Northern line City branch).

 

[AM9]

A slightly off topic moan, but to me TfL took the childish approach that only their services should be on the Tube Map, hence including Overground services to places like Cheshunt (which are of little interest to most of Londoners) but leaving out the Thameslink core (West Hampstead to London Bridge/Elephant) and GN Moorgate services from Finsbury Park... which serve far more people AND could easily be of use to others who aren't aware of them

I think the clue is in the map's name 'tube map'. Much of the public see all TfL's rail services as 'the tube', the stations and trains are signified by Roundels (in various colurs) on nearly all maps (not just TfL tube maps) so why not have a less cluttered map for them which does contain all the interchange points with NR stations. The number of passengers served by other lines is irrelevant on a tube map, -even lines that pass through tube-shaped tunnels. Leaving the National Rail lines of the London 'metro' map reduces it's complexity but for the many who might need to get from Castle Bar Park to Sundridge Park TfL provide a downloadable map just in case there isn't one posted on either of those stations.

 

[higthomas]

Ah, the Tube map. Don't get me started on that one!
But possibly slightly off topic!

 

[LeeLivery]

TfL running trains out to Stevenage may annoy some, but I doubt most will care. Has there been any complaints to about Reading?

Well I didn't say Khan would be PM, only that it is his political ambition. Here's not the place for further musing on that.

I think we may need to disagree on CR2. TfL has the statutory remit to develop and integrate London's transport system subject to Mayoral strategies / policies. I don't see how CR2 could be independently developed by Network Rail. For one thing they don't possess the planning expertise to take forward such a huge scheme. Before you chuck Thameslink Project back at me that predates TfL by many years and originated in BR that *did* have a planning function. The DfT and TfL are joint sponsors for CR2 which recognises the legislative position and also the precedent that was agreed for Crossrail (a scheme that again originated in BR but which has had a very long term LT / TfL involvement. I have Crossrail stuff from the 90s from my time at LU).

Fair enough and I wasn't chucking Thameslink at you, I was using it as an example. TfL's finances are struggling, it would not surprise me if it was taken out of their hands by the government and developed differently. Like HS2, it doesn't have to be solely with NR.

I think the clue is in the map's name 'tube map'. Much of the public see all TfL's rail services as 'the tube', the stations and trains are signified by Roundels (in various colurs) on nearly all maps (not just TfL tube maps) so why not have a less cluttered map for them which does contain all the interchange points with NR stations. The number of passengers served by other lines is irrelevant on a tube map, -even lines that pass through tube-shaped tunnels. Leaving the National Rail lines of the London 'metro' map reduces it's complexity but for the many who might need to get from Castle Bar Park to Sundridge Park TfL provide a downloadable map just in case there isn't one posted on either of those stations.

I've never once heard anyone refer to the DLR, Trams or Cable Car as the tube and I only ever hear BBC London annoyingly refer to LO as the tube but no one else. The problem with the clutter argument is that as soon as TfL gets its hands on NR routes, it puts it on the tube map - leading to the cluttered mess it is now and will no doubt continue doing it. Thameslink is one of the busiest lines in the country and is left off because they don't run it while the 4tph Enfield & Cheshunt line is on there. That isn't putting the interests of passengers first. Furthermore, to find a printed copy of the Rail & Tube map to take with you at a TfL station is like gold dust - even at stations which are also served by other TOCs, they only push the tube map which for my station doesn't show half of the services. TfL claims they want an integrated transport network in London but they are purposely not trying to integrate non-TfL NR lines and pretending the only way to do it is by devolution. The West Midlands has proven an integrated transport network does not need to be run by one operator.

 

[swt_passenger]

TfL running trains out to Stevenage may annoy some, but I doubt most will care. Has there been any complaints to about Reading?

Numerous complaints about the rolling stock being inadequate. Just like the new GN Moorgate stock complaints really.

 

[Failed Unit]

Would hate to be calculating ORCATs now.

Flow 1.
Welwyn Garden City - Moorgate
Option 1 - Welwyn Garden City - Farrington, Farrington - Moorgate
Option 2 - Welwyn Garden City - Moorgate direct
Option 3 - Welwyn Garden City - Finsbury Park, Finsbury Park - Moorgate

Be interesting how they select the most likely route once they are all possible. Option 2 is the slowest (but not by much) and may be preferred by many as at least you have a seat throughout.

But I see others points, we already have Hadley Wood managing to retain 4tph, but Brookmans Park and Welham Green dropping down to 2.

I think to be honest if they trains run on time that most people won't care. If we end up with a pricewar at stations where both opeartors exist that would be interesting. I guess for the majority of us, just get rid of GTR ASAP.

 

[swt_passenger]

Would hate to be calculating ORCATs now.

Flow 1.
Welwyn Garden City - Moorgate
Option 1 - Welwyn Garden City - Farrington, Farrington - Moorgate
Option 2 - Welwyn Garden City - Moorgate direct
Option 3 - Welwyn Garden City - Finsbury Park, Finsbury Park - Moorgate

Be interesting how they select the most likely route once they are all possible. Option 2 is the slowest (but not by much) and may be preferred by many as at least you have a seat throughout.

Your option 1 needs a different ticket to the other 2 surely?

 

[AM9]

... I've never once heard anyone refer to the DLR, Trams or Cable Car as the tube and I only ever hear BBC London annoyingly refer to LO as the tube but no one else. The problem with the clutter argument is that as soon as TfL gets its hands on NR routes, it puts it on the tube map - leading to the cluttered mess it is now and will no doubt continue doing it. Thameslink is one of the busiest lines in the country and is left off because they don't run it while the 4tph Enfield & Cheshunt line is on there. That isn't putting the interests of passengers first. Furthermore, to find a printed copy of the Rail & Tube map to take with you at a TfL station is like gold dust - even at stations which are also served by other TOCs, they only push the tube map which for my station doesn't show half of the services. TfL claims they want an integrated transport network in London but they are purposely not trying to integrate non-TfL NR lines and pretending the only way to do it is by devolution. The West Midlands has proven an integrated transport network does not need to be run by one operator.

Additions to the TfL tube map are where those lines are completely under TfL's control to the limit of services, e.g. the most far-flung lines such as Shenfield, Cheshunt, Watford Junction, and Amersham/Chesham (historic) are well outside TfL's primary brief which only covers the GLA. When Crossrail opens fully, the line to Reading will probably be added as would the Hayes branch if it gets a Bakerloo service.
To add the Thameslink core would be confusing as that splits both north of St Pancras and South of Blackfriars. So do they also include London Bridge? Then why not Elephant and Castle, - or might as well go to East Croydon. Then in the north there's Finsbury Park & West Hampstead. If that's done they might as well add Stratford to Tottenham Hale, Stratford International to St Pancras, London Bridge to Lewisham and Abbey Wood, Waterloo to Richmond & Wimbledon, and Victoria to Balham (National Rail). Once the map is extended beyond TfL's rail services there would be constant pleading of cases for any of these.
It's true that Thameslink is one of the busiest lines in the country but most of that is into the core from outside (and vice versa), principally commuter traffic with a reduced flow off-peak. So most of those passengers either know central London rail services like the back of their hand or have already accessed the information at their stations of origin (NR). Despite that, I've not noticed the lack of the TfL & National Rail maps, especially in Zone 1.