• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Should the GX Brand be scrapped Post-COVID

Status
Not open for further replies.

Chiltern006

Member
Joined
3 Oct 2018
Messages
685
whats your thoughts on this, GX has been out of service since March 2020, and the paths could be used for a semi fast Southern London-Brighton, and then potentially a London- Gatwick stopper via Redhill

aswell we have 6 GX 387s transferring to GN, so will this brand survive

thoughts?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
101,839
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
My inclination is yes, the brand should be scrapped. Perhaps the red livery could be rebranded "Southern Express" for the fast Brighton Mainline services.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
20,509
To the extent that there is a path which starts at Victoria and ends at Gatwick and can't easily be used to run to anywhere beyond there because four lines become two, is isn't as bad a use of the railway as people suggest.

However, if demand at Gatwick is going to be very much subdued for a while, a terminal remains closed and moreover, if there is no high value airline travel from Gatwick Airport perhaps ever again, Gatwick Express isn't needed.
 
Last edited:

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
The alternative tactic is to keep it, but reverse the current pricing strategy to price people *onto* it, to relieve other services.
 

RAPC

Member
Joined
30 May 2010
Messages
319
To the extent that there is a path which starts at Victoria and ends at Gatwick and can't easily be used to run to anywhere beyond there because four lines become two, is isn't as bad a use of the railway as people suggest.

However, if demand at Gatwick is going to be very much subdued for a while, a terminal remains closed and moreover, if there is no high value airline travel from Gatwick Airport perhaps ever again, Gatwick Express isn't needed.

Completely agree. It's the demand part that is likely to suppress any need for the forseeable future. Despite any positive spin that Gatwick puts out, demand will remain heavily down there. Perfect storm of some capacity at Heathrow, lower demand (especially for LGW long-haul) and other airports trying to pick off some low cost demand with keener airport pricing. (A few announcements due in the coming months that are expected to back this up)

Assuming the above, it is hard to see the need for the additional GX capacity for a few years.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
70,939
Location
Yorkshire
I don't care what happens to the brand, but GTR should not be pretending it is a separate company, as that's illegal.

Indeed, if anyone has been charged an excess/penalty/additional fare by GTR when using the ''wrong" brand, please do get in touch with me urgently.

I think the only reason a separate brand name exists for this service is because DfT/GTR want to mislead people into paying more money; given this is illegal there is no good reason to continue with the brand name.

However I agree with others that if there is spare capacity to run an additional train from Victoria to Gatwick, due to capacity being available, it makes sense to run this service once the demand for it has returned.
 

riceuten

Member
Joined
23 May 2018
Messages
648
I've never been a fan of the Gatwick Express, the fact you paid a considerable premium for at best a 5 minutes faster journey, and the fact it operated half-empty almost all the time, even during the rush hour. I remember one of their managers boasting that the train did not stop at intermediate stations even when there were problems on other lines, as "customers who have paid a premium shouldn't be punished by the failure of other TOCs".

AND the fact that even now, the ticket gates at Platform 10 at Victoria STILL reject most tickets as being non GEx, and KeyGo cards don't work there.
 

Jan Mayen

Member
Joined
30 Sep 2020
Messages
712
Location
Sussex
I don't care what happens to the brand, but GTR should not be pretending it is a separate company, as that's illegal.

Indeed, if anyone has been charged an excess/penalty/additional fare by GTR when using the ''wrong" brand, please do get in touch with me urgently.

I think the only reason a separate brand name exists for this service is because DfT/GTR want to mislead people into paying more money; given this is illegal there is no good reason to continue with the brand name.

However I agree with others that if there is spare capacity to run an additional train from Victoria to Gatwick, due to capacity being available, it makes sense to run this service once the demand for it has returned.
The legality or otherwise of Gatwick Express Only/ Not Gatwick Express routings was discussed in this thread. Has anyone ever challenged it in the courts or anywhere else?

I've never been a fan of the Gatwick Express, the fact you paid a considerable premium for at best a 5 minutes faster journey, and the fact it operated half-empty almost all the time, even during the rush hour. I remember one of their managers boasting that the train did not stop at intermediate stations even when there were problems on other lines, as "customers who have paid a premium shouldn't be punished by the failure of other TOCs".

AND the fact that even now, the ticket gates at Platform 10 at Victoria STILL reject most tickets as being non GEx, and KeyGo cards don't work there.
I'm a fan of the Gatwick Express mostly BECAUSE it's half empty. My routine commute in the morning used to involve changing at Gatwick Airport rather than a direct train. The fact that it was half empty and didn't stop was a bonus. However, stopping at East Croydon during disruption was not that unusual in the last few years.

I can confirm that the Victoria ticket gates for platforms 9-12 accept Keygo. At least it accepted mine two days ago.

I hope that a dedicated service gets reintroduced when/if Gatwick Airport gets busy. The reason Gatwick Express (and Rapid City Link before it) existed was so that travellers with suitcases etc didn't have to battle with commuters to get on and off trains in a brief station stop.
 
Last edited:

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
18,337
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
The alternative tactic is to keep it, but reverse the current pricing strategy to price people *onto* it, to relieve other services.

I’d go with that as a reasonable solution.

The current situation benefits no one - paths used up whilst in practice people cram into the first available train.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
20,509
The current situation benefits no one - paths used up whilst in practice people cram into the first available train.
Who doesn't it benefit? On the trains which run to Brighton, passengers from Brighton get a fast service to London. On the trains which terminate at Gatwick, there is no path available for them to go any further anyway if we want the other stations to get a reasonable service.

We could agree that Brighton doesn't need a service which is non-stop to Gatwick which would help with more paths on the two-track section but there aren't necessarily spare platforms at Brighton either.
 

HST43257

Established Member
Joined
10 Apr 2020
Messages
1,606
Location
York
I don’t think it should stay. It’s a method of (sort of) stealing tourist’s money, even though many have now realised this, hence the jam packed SN services and the quiet GX services. They just need to make sure there’s 8tph 12 car (out of London) off peak (4 Brighton, 2 ore/littlehampton & 2 bognor/portsmouth/southampton) and probably 2-4 more in the peaks if this is possible.
 

Nicholas Lewis

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2019
Messages
6,906
Location
Surrey
I don't care what happens to the brand, but GTR should not be pretending it is a separate company, as that's illegal.

Indeed, if anyone has been charged an excess/penalty/additional fare by GTR when using the ''wrong" brand, please do get in touch with me urgently.

I think the only reason a separate brand name exists for this service is because DfT/GTR want to mislead people into paying more money; given this is illegal there is no good reason to continue with the brand name.

However I agree with others that if there is spare capacity to run an additional train from Victoria to Gatwick, due to capacity being available, it makes sense to run this service once the demand for it has returned.
Yup the unknowing tourists on planes who get conned into buying a GX ticket. BR came up with Gatwick Express brand and premium pricing other operators have just followed suit although FCC had there own more competitive fares.

GX does use up capacity as its non stop through C.Jcn and E.Croydon and I for one would favour reintroduction of a fast Victoria via Redhill service that terminates at Gatwick instead but layout at Gatwick on the slow line side already has the Bedford TLk service occupying 1 or 2 for 50mins every hour due to the long layover.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
18,337
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
Who doesn't it benefit? On the trains which run to Brighton, passengers from Brighton get a fast service to London. On the trains which terminate at Gatwick, there is no path available for them to go any further anyway if we want the other stations to get a reasonable service.

We could agree that Brighton doesn't need a service which is non-stop to Gatwick which would help with more paths on the two-track section but there aren't necessarily spare platforms at Brighton either.

I don’t disagree with the above, just that fairly empty GX services isn’t a good use of the infrastructure, if they’re only carrying a small number of punters then perhaps they might better be removed altogether for performance benefits.

However trying to get the maximum value by encouraging as many Gatwick/London users as possible on to them seems a better solution, leaving the capacity on other services for people travelling to/from further out.
 

47271

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2015
Messages
2,983
I used to be a very frequent user of Gatwick Express in the mid 2000s. I loved it because I could sit in the rear coach inbound, or the front back from the Victoria, and generally never see another passenger. I could see that this was a poor use of scarce resource, but on the rare occasions that anyone else turned up in the carriage, I understood the value of them being able to load vast suitcases into an uncrowded environment.

Surely this is all that Gatwick Express needs to be: pretty much the guarantee of a seat for exhausted and disorientated air passengers, and decent space for luggage. This can be delivered by a combination of using the right stock slotted into the timetable in the right way, and under no circumstances should it justify anyone getting overcharged for a non existent premium service.

I know that none of this is an issue at the moment while there are no air passengers, but I don't understand why it's proving so difficult to organise in normal operations any more?
 

MarkyT

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2012
Messages
6,660
Location
Torbay
I'd remove the separate branding and any fare differentials and continue to run the trains with Croydon and Clapham Junction stops added. Most arriving air passengers would still gravitate to these trains as they would be waiting for them when they descended to platform level and they thus could retain their extra luggage provision. Perhaps the Southern express brand could gain some airport reference as basically nearly all fast trains to and from the south coast serve Gatwick, the most comprehensively rail linked airport in UK.
 

Minstral25

Established Member
Joined
10 Sep 2009
Messages
1,830
Location
Surrey
Reality is most Gatwick Passengers use the non-Airport branded Southern and Thameslink Services anyway, only a few get mugged for the extra GX (Gatwick Express) fare, so I would scrap the Brand.

In terms of the paths, the Brighton extensions should stay as they are as an express to airport and coast (but no premium prices) & the GX terminators should be extended to Brighton as well but calling at Clapham, Three Bridges, Haywards Heath and Preston Park. When doing that the old Southern service should not be reintroduced and the current Eastbourne & Littlehampton trains should remain separated. The main constraint on paths was always the platforms at Brighton, but with the Southern service removed there is room for the other ex-GX terminator to be extended.

Of Course the Airport will insist on its prestigious service and DfT will fall over themselves to provide it. So there will be no change and most airport passengers will remain on the Southern/Thameslink services causing overcrowding (post Covid obvs)
 

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
4,372
It should definitely be scrapped. As to what to do with the 2tph (keeping the Brightons as is - but hopefully adding CJ/EC calls) - there are a few options beginning with the most conservative:

Add CJ/EC calls and terminate at Gatwick anyway. No fare differentials.
Add CJ/EC calls, Gatwick and then terminate at Three Bridges or Horsham (swapping out the Reigate Thameslink when that is ready)
Add CJ/EC calls, call Redhill and terminate at Gatwick. No fare differentials. Re-instate a faster Redhill-Vic.
Add CJ/EC calls, and run to Hove, to mix it up from Brighton.

+ Coastal ideas, if paths were possible.
 

TT-ONR-NRN

Established Member
Joined
30 Dec 2016
Messages
10,859
Location
Salford Quays, Manchester
I think it has been said multiple times that the current number of trains through Clapham Junction on the BML Fast Lines cannot be sustained if they make calls at Clapham Junction due to pathing restrictions.
 

Aictos

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2009
Messages
10,403
Yup the unknowing tourists on planes who get conned into buying a GX ticket. BR came up with Gatwick Express brand and premium pricing other operators have just followed suit although FCC had there own more competitive fares.

GX does use up capacity as its non stop through C.Jcn and E.Croydon and I for one would favour reintroduction of a fast Victoria via Redhill service that terminates at Gatwick instead but layout at Gatwick on the slow line side already has the Bedford TLk service occupying 1 or 2 for 50mins every hour due to the long layover.
Strange as I've just looked at the Thameslink services that terminate at Gatwick Airport and they are using up a platform for no longer then around 20 minutes per service which is a average of 40 minutes in every hour that Platform 2 is in use by them so how you could come up with 50 minutes is beyond me.

Other then scrapping the GatEx service and using the paths to better provide improved reliability of the Brighton Mainline which I think should be considered, reducing the cost of using it should be considered too.
 

MarkyT

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2012
Messages
6,660
Location
Torbay
I think it has been said multiple times that the current number of trains through Clapham Junction on the BML Fast Lines cannot be sustained if they make calls at Clapham Junction due to pathing restrictions.
It's partly due to signal spacing being designed for comparatively high through speed, which prevents the next train being brought up very close behind, as at some other very busy stations such as East Croydon. Put simply, if the fast lines were better optimised for everything stopping, then they could do just that, but it would be at the price of lower through speed (with conventional signalling). Some places manage very high stopping throughputs with 'closing up' signals, additional signals almost at the ramp on the running in end. Thameslink took it a step further with mid platform signals at core stations so the next train can start to enter while the previous one is still pulling out, and the more recent ETCS installation further splits up the blocks to exploit this to an even greater extent. At Clapham Junction there have also been track layout mods proposed that could assist in allowing more fast line calls, on both the SW and SC sides.
 

paul1609

Established Member
Joined
28 Jan 2006
Messages
7,813
Location
Wittersham Kent
Id go along with abolishing Gatwick Express but Id also abolish Transpennine Express splitting the services between LNER, Northern and AWC. Cross Country Id abolish all services north of Leeds and split the remainder in Birmingham between GWR and EMR. Id abolish all the remaining sleeper services and the LNER service to Inverness.
 

Fincra5

Established Member
Joined
6 Jun 2009
Messages
2,515
It should definitely be scrapped. As to what to do with the 2tph (keeping the Brightons as is - but hopefully adding CJ/EC calls) - there are a few options beginning with the most conservative:

Add CJ/EC calls and terminate at Gatwick anyway. No fare differentials.
Add CJ/EC calls, Gatwick and then terminate at Three Bridges or Horsham (swapping out the Reigate Thameslink when that is ready)
Add CJ/EC calls, call Redhill and terminate at Gatwick. No fare differentials. Re-instate a faster Redhill-Vic.
Add CJ/EC calls, and run to Hove, to mix it up from Brighton.

+ Coastal ideas, if paths were possible.
No space at Hove in normal cirumstances. Plus they're already service by the Victoria to Littlehampton (via Hove) services 2tph..
 

paul1609

Established Member
Joined
28 Jan 2006
Messages
7,813
Location
Wittersham Kent
No space at Hove in normal cirumstances. Plus they're already service by the Victoria to Littlehampton (via Hove) services 2tph..
Indeed the Littlehampton to Brighton stopping service was removed off peak to provide the path for the second Littlehampton to Victoria.
 

43096

On Moderation
Joined
23 Nov 2015
Messages
16,153
BR came up with Gatwick Express brand and premium pricing
BR did at least use rolling stock for Gatwick Express that was superior to anything else on the Brighton line at the time. The 387s are frankly an embarrassment, being more expensive to travel on and less comfortable than the normal 377s. I would think GX is testing the Trade Descriptions Act, particularly with first class.
 

Turtle

Member
Joined
18 Mar 2013
Messages
363
whats your thoughts on this, GX has been out of service since March 2020, and the paths could be used for a semi fast Southern London-Brighton, and then potentially a London- Gatwick stopper via Redhill

aswell we have 6 GX 387s transferring to GN, so will this brand survive

thoughts?
YES!
 

Nicholas Lewis

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2019
Messages
6,906
Location
Surrey
Strange as I've just looked at the Thameslink services that terminate at Gatwick Airport and they are using up a platform for no longer then around 20 minutes per service which is a average of 40 minutes in every hour that Platform 2 is in use by them so how you could come up with 50 minutes is beyond me.

Other then scrapping the GatEx service and using the paths to better provide improved reliability of the Brighton Mainline which I think should be considered, reducing the cost of using it should be considered too.
OK in 23mins occupation time but when you all time to come in and depart as well that makes it 25mins in terms of reoccupation time
BR did at least use rolling stock for Gatwick Express that was superior to anything else on the Brighton line at the time. The 387s are frankly an embarrassment, being more expensive to travel on and less comfortable than the normal 377s. I would think GX is testing the Trade Descriptions Act, particularly with first class.
Agreed
seconded
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top