Service pattern after Marshlink electrified

[HST43257]

What do people think the East Coastway service pattern should be once Ore to Ashford is electrified?

I’m not sure whether I’d keep it similar to how it is but replace 171s with 377s, or whether I’d extend the service from Brighton or London.

 

[DPQ]

In before Javelins to St Pancras...

 

[PerryPacer]

I would replace the 171s and cascade them to other routes and replace them with 377s, similar to @HST43257 and I would also extend the Javelin to at least Hastings, with possibly a limited HS Service to Bexhill in the peak hours.

 

[RobShipway]

What do people think the East Coastway service pattern should be once Ore to Ashford is electrified?

I’m not sure whether I’d keep it similar to how it is but replace 171s with 377s, or whether I’d extend the service from Brighton or London.

I don't think that you have the paths to extend to London either via Ashford, Hastings or Lewes. That just leaves you with extending from Eastbourne to Brighton, but I don't believe that you have the paths there either.

But the class 171's would be replaced with an Electrostar EMU style unit. If the South Eastern Javelin services could be extended from Ashford to Hastings, that would be one step. The other step I would take is to be running class 377 units between Haywards Heath and Hastings, such that the trains get in before the Javelin's depart Hastings for St Pancras as DPQ has stated.

 

[yorksrob]

The key thing is that you won't be limited to two carriages, so you can have an hourly semi-fast Brighton to Hastings extended to Ashford.

(In my fantasy world this would be a phase 1 CIG, but we'll have to make do with something modern).

 

[bramling]

The key thing is that you won't be limited to two carriages, so you can have an hourly semi-fast Brighton to Hastings extended to Ashford.

(In my fantasy world this would be a phase 1 CIG, but we'll have to make do with something modern).

Hourly Ashford to Brighton seems the obvious thing to do, perhaps add in the odd peak extra from Ashford to Hastings if necessary. Likewise 4-car 377 is the obvious rolling stock to use.

The only real reason not to run through to Brighton is if reliability on the single-line sections becomes too much of an issue.

Regarding the last point, surely being an ex-SER line the correct Mk1 stock to use would be CEPs?

 

[30907]

The key thing is that you won't be limited to two carriages, so you can have an hourly semi-fast Brighton to Hastings extended to Ashford.

IF the layout issues at Ashford could be resolved easily, a through Javelin calling at Rye would be good, but it would be difficult/ impossible to combine with another route.
I'd also question whether you could reliably run 2tph over the single line.
A second tph Ashford-Rye all day might be worth it though.

 

[yorksrob]

Hourly Ashford to Brighton seems the obvious thing to do, perhaps add in the odd peak extra from Ashford to Hastings if necessary. Likewise 4-car 377 is the obvious rolling stock to use.

The only real reason not to run through to Brighton is if reliability on the single-line sections becomes too much of an issue.

Regarding the last point, surely being an ex-SER line the correct Mk1 stock to use would be CEPs?

I must admit, in my experience, the single track sections didn't tend to generate much of an issue. Trains tended to cross at Rye with the double track East of Appledore being in reserve most of the time.

In terms of stock, the CEP's just weren't as good after refurb, and running through to Brighton as an extension of coastway, surely Brighton stock must be priority !

(Personally, I've sampled the route in both CEP and CIG (albeit phase2) stock, so feel well placed to pontificate )

IF the layout issues at Ashford could be resolved easily, a through Javelin calling at Rye would be good, but it would be difficult/ impossible to combine with another route.
I'd also question whether you could reliably run 2tph over the single line.
A second tph Ashford-Rye all day might be worth it though.

That section is very popular, and whilst I don't downplay the routes potential for HS1 services, I feel the coastway connection has proved successful and should be continued.

My view is if they're going to turn it into a Javelin extension, they may as well double it at the same time.

 

[JonathanH]

Extension of HS1 trains to Hastings and Eastbourne is certainly top of the shopping list for local politicians.

https://twitter.com/SallyAnn1066/status/1369564751269933056

Time for Action Not Words on HS1
When it comes to the project to extend HS1 rail line from Ashford International to Hastings and on to Eastbourne, the time for talk and warm words has to come to an end, the time for action is now. 1/3

Yesterday I asked a Minister what firm commitments can be made to unlock the funding for this project and finally get spades in the ground.
I was encouraged that Network Rail are submitting final plans this April to the DfT, but I am concerned that progress remains slow. 2/3

I will continue to push for HS1 to get going because I believe getting from London to Hastings in an hour by train will be a game changer for our area - turbo-charging our economy, supporting the tourism, and seeing high-skilled, high-paying businesses invest in our area 3/3

https://www.huwmerriman.org.uk/campaigns/high-speed-rail-london?page=1

High Speed Rail to London
High Speed Rail Bexhill
I am working with local Conservative MPs and Councillors and the rail authorities to deliver direct trains from Bexhill to London (via Ashford). A fleet of new trains will deliver a journey time of just 78 minutes. I will work with our partners to deliver the business case and lobby to turn this into reality. The impact on our community, from increased investment, jobs and tourists, would be vast and would link us to our capital and beyond.

I doubt it is that high on the railway agenda - but there are some plans https://www.railfuture.org.uk/display2544. More rolling stock would be needed to get them on to Eastbourne.

However, running a local as well would need double track.

Arguably you want Brighton to Ashford, Victoria to Hastings and St Pancras to Eastbourne - 377s on the Southern services and a 395 on the HS1 service.

I guess the question is which one gets the stops between Eastbourne and Hastings and whether the same train gets the stops on the Marshlink section.

Another question is whether extra rolling stock for the HS1 services should be 'common user' and run interchangeably with the 395s or whether one of the HS1 routes should get dedicated new rolling stock.

 

[zwk500]

Extension of HS1 trains to Hastings is certainly top of the shopping list for local politicians.

https://twitter.com/SallyAnn1066/status/1369564751269933056

I doubt it is high on the railway agenda. More rolling stock would be needed to get them on to Eastbourne.

It's been talked about for years and always comes up against the rather big question of how does it get paid for.

IF Marshlink got electrified I'd want to be running 1tph Brighton-Ashford, with skip-stops on the smaller stations for 1tp2h. It's likely to end up with electric trains in one form or another but I suspect it's less likely to have the traction power supplied to the train at the lineside...

 

[yorksrob]

Extension of HS1 trains to Hastings and Eastbourne is certainly top of the shopping list for local politicians.

https://twitter.com/SallyAnn1066/status/1369564751269933056


https://www.huwmerriman.org.uk/campaigns/high-speed-rail-london?page=1


I doubt it is that high on the railway agenda - but there are some plans https://www.railfuture.org.uk/display2544. More rolling stock would be needed to get them on to Eastbourne.

However, running a local as well would need double track.

Arguably you want Brighton to Ashford, Victoria to Hastings and St Pancras to Eastbourne - 377s on the Southern services and a 395 on the HS1 service.

I guess the question is which one gets the stops between Eastbourne and Hastings and whether the same train gets the stops on the Marshlink section.

Another question is whether extra rolling stock for the HS1 services should be 'common user' and run interchangeably with the 395s or whether one of the HS1 routes should get dedicated new rolling stock.

Doesn't a Victoriaservice still do all stations Eastbourne -Hastings? And you'd have an hourly Brighton -Hastings stopper.

 

[JonathanH]

Doesn't a Victoriaservice still do all stations Eastbourne -Hastings? And you'd have an hourly Brighton -Hastings stopper.

Yes, but the issue is that running a train from London on HS1 and then stopping at places like Doleham and Three Oaks rather negates the time saving for Hastings and Bexhill.

So, yes, stops west of Hastings in the Victoria to Hastings and east of Hastings in a Brighton to Ashford seems to make sense.

 

[JamesRowden]

Rye to Ore with a stop at Winchelsea is scheduled to take 14.5 minutes. So a reliable greater than hourly service can be achieved without extra double track between Ore and Rye by either:

• Upgrading the line speed (it is very slow at the moment).
• Running an every 40 minute service.

An every 40 minute service would provide a better variety of connections at Ashford over a 2 hour cycle (so less need for services to run through Ashford for connectivity). Perhaps the East Coastway services via Lewes could be scheduled to run to Ore every 20 minutes with every other service running through to Ashford.

This could take the form of:

• 1tph Victoria to Ore (running through to Ashford every 2 hours).
• 1tph Brighton to Ore (Semi-fast) (running through to Ashford every 2 hours).
• 1tph Brighton to Ore (stopper) (running through to Ashford every 2 hours).

 

[yorksrob]

Yes, but the issue is that running a train from London on HS1 and then stopping at places like Doleham and Three Oaks rather negates the time saving for Hastings and Bexhill.

So, yes, stops west of Hastings in the Victoria to Hastings and east of Hastings in a Brighton to Ashford seems to make sense.

Yes, you wouldn't attempt the HS1 stuff without redoubling.

 

[HST43257]

I wonder if 1tph on Marshlink as a Brighton extension would be good, with Maidstone-like Javelin peak services? Could be looking at 1h10 (with upgrades) from London to Hastings, compared to 1h35 on the SE lim stop.

in terms of marshlink calling pattern on the 1tph stopper after Ore, it would be Three Oaks (1tp2h), Winchelsea (1tp2h), Rye, Appledore, Ham Street and Ashford, as current. Doleham could close or get a minimal service.

 

[leytongabriel]

Rye to Ore with a stop at Winchelsea is scheduled to take 14.5 minutes. So a reliable greater than hourly service can be achieved without extra double track between Ore and Rye by either:

• Upgrading the line speed (it is very slow at the moment).
• Running an every 40 minute service.

An every 40 minute service would provide a better variety of connections at Ashford over a 2 hour cycle (so less need for services to run through Ashford for connectivity). Perhaps the East Coastway services via Lewes could be scheduled to run to Ore every 20 minutes with every other service running through to Ashford.

This could take the form of:

• 1tph Victoria to Ore (running through to Ashford every 2 hours).
• 1tph Brighton to Ore (Semi-fast) (running through to Ashford every 2 hours).
• 1tph Brighton to Ore (stopper) (running through to Ashford every 2 hours)Haven

Haven't 40m interval services which don't give you an easy to remember X past the hour service been unpopular with user groups, to the extent that some have preferred 1tph to a notionally more frequent 40m service/

 

[JamesRowden]

Haven't 40m interval services which don't give you an easy to remember X past the hour service been unpopular with user groups, to the extent that some have preferred 1tph to a notionally more frequent 40m service/

I would think that the main reason for not having every 40 minute services would be timetabling them with every 60/30 minute services.

People making a scheduled connection with another hourly service which creates an over 40 minute connection should definitely prefer the service to be every 40 minutes rather than hourly.

I don't think that accounting for very picky users, who could just check the train times in advance, should be more important than making journeys effectively faster and more frequent.

The primary issue with running an every 40 minute Marshlink service at the moment will be that:

• The Marshlink would require 4 rather than 2 diesel trains to operate a Hastings-Ashford shuttle (because of the single tracking meaning that trains need to pass at Rye) (although maybe this would be good for battery trains since it would provide significant periods of time to recharge at Hastings and Ashford).
• Running every 40 minute services beyond Hastings or Ashford would create timetable complications with the every 60 minute timetables.

The hypothetical situation of Marshlink electrification of this thread allowed me to develop a creative potential solution to allow a more frequent Marshlink service, whilst having all of the services running through via Lewes, and the additional stock and crew required (compared to running an hourly Marshlink service) would probably be just 1 extra EMU and crew in service.

 

[DJ_K666]

Hourly Ashford to Brighton seems the obvious thing to do, perhaps add in the odd peak extra from Ashford to Hastings if necessary. Likewise 4-car 377 is the obvious rolling stock to use.

The only real reason not to run through to Brighton is if reliability on the single-line sections becomes too much of an issue.

Regarding the last point, surely being an ex-SER line the correct Mk1 stock to use would be CEPs?

What's really needed in the light of this GBR thing is stock that's built to modern standards that's indistinguishable in appearance from a mk1. (Let's call it a hypothetical mk6 for sake of argument)

 

[yorksrob]

What's really needed in the light of this GBR thing is stock that's built to modern standards that's indistinguishable in appearance from a mk1. (Let's call it a hypothetical mk6 for sake of argument)

Yes, built to modern crashworthiness, but in all other respects identical to a CIG.

The loop at Rye is well placed for an hourly service. Not sure how it would work for forty minute intervals.

 

[JamesRowden]

Not sure how it would work for forty minute intervals.

Trains would arrive at Ashford shortly after after the previous train has left, and trains would arrive at Hastings just as the previous train leaves (times can be modified by adding/removing stops and modifying the passing time at Rye).

 

[DJ_K666]

Yes, built to modern crashworthiness, but in all other respects identical to a CIG.

The loop at Rye is well placed for an hourly service. Not sure how it would work for forty minute intervals.

Exactly. Or a CEP if youre a South Eastern resident. You'd know it was safe through Ore tunnel too

 

[yorksrob]

Exactly. Or a CEP if youre a South Eastern resident. You'd know it was safe through Ore tunnel too

I was a South Eastern resident, but I'd still say CIG !

 

[DJ_K666]

I was a South Eastern resident, but I'd still say CIG !

Ok yes that would be ok. Maybe new Reps and VEPs for the South West.

 

[Ianno87]

The key thing is that you won't be limited to two carriages, so you can have an hourly semi-fast Brighton to Hastings extended to Ashford.

(In my fantasy world this would be a phase 1 CIG, but we'll have to make do with something modern).

Hourly Ashford to Brighton seems the obvious thing to do, perhaps add in the odd peak extra from Ashford to Hastings if necessary. Likewise 4-car 377 is the obvious rolling stock to use.

The only real reason not to run through to Brighton is if reliability on the single-line sections becomes too much of an issue.

Regarding the last point, surely being an ex-SER line the correct Mk1 stock to use would be CEPs?

I must admit, in my experience, the single track sections didn't tend to generate much of an issue. Trains tended to cross at Rye with the double track East of Appledore being in reserve most of the time.

In terms of stock, the CEP's just weren't as good after refurb, and running through to Brighton as an extension of coastway, surely Brighton stock must be priority !

(Personally, I've sampled the route in both CEP and CIG (albeit phase2) stock, so feel well placed to pontificate )




That section is very popular, and whilst I don't downplay the routes potential for HS1 services, I feel the coastway connection has proved successful and should be continued.

My view is if they're going to turn it into a Javelin extension, they may as well double it at the same time.

The benefit of splitting the Brighton-Ashford service in May 18 was no longer having the timings at Ashford determined by fitting into the Brighton-Lewes metro pattern. So the arrival/departure times at Ashford can be properly optimised for connections to/from St Pancras. Previously at least one direction had a 25-ish minute wait.

 

[yorksrob]

The benefit of splitting the Brighton-Ashford service in May 18 was no longer having the timings at Ashford determined by fitting into the Brighton-Lewes metro pattern. So the arrival/departure times at Ashford can be properly optimised for connections to/from St Pancras. Previously at least one direction had a 25-ish minute wait.

That's an interesting perspective. I was always under the impression that the split was due to overcrowding of the two carriages between Hastings and Brighton.

I suppse that since we're unlikely to get our fast trains to Charing Cross back for the timebeing, we'll have to make do with HS1.

 

[Ianno87]

That's an interesting perspective. I was always under the impression that the split was due to overcrowding of the two carriages between Hastings and Brighton.

Yes, that was the main reason, but the opportunity was taken to retime the connections at Ashford at the same time.

 

[yorksrob]

Sorry - posted on wrong thread

 

[Bald Rick]

IF the layout issues at Ashford could be resolved easily, a through Javelin calling at Rye would be good, but it would be difficult/ impossible to combine with another route.

It’s not easily resolved. It’s expensive.

 

[HST43257]

Do we just accept that HS1 will not make it to Rye and Hastings anytime soon?

If this is the case, would you have a 2nd stopper tph? 1 fast SN tph along with 1 slow?

I might opt for a 1tph limited stop and a 1tp2h slow service. All southern

 

[Bald Rick]

Do we just accept that HS1 will not make it to Rye and Hastings anytime soon?

Personal opinion - I think so. It needs new trains of some form, and a fair bit of complicated track / signalling / electrification work at Ashford. It also needs to change the signalling on HS1, which means HS1 possessions...

It’s a big investment to, essentially, give Hastings passengers a slightly quicker trip to London. With a change in commuting habits, it is quite conceivable that that may be achieved a different, and much cheaper way.