Should the Inner South London line stations to Victoria service have been saved?

[Another-Level]

Having just had a search through them, none of the published route strategies seem to mention re-instating the present SLL service following the London Bridge rebuild. There has to be a long term 33% cut in terminating services at London Bridge to reflect the reduced number of platforms anyway...

The previous poster made clear it was a rumour so it wouldn't appear on any route strategies. Why would it?

It's only Network Rail saying that terminating services at London Bridge must be cut by a third whilst flatly refusing other options.

 

[bicbasher]

Having just had a search through them, none of the published route strategies seem to mention re-instating the present SLL service following the London Bridge rebuild. There has to be a long term 33% cut in terminating services at London Bridge to reflect the reduced number of platforms anyway...

I remember seeing a Thameslink 2019 document which suggests that they'll replace services from Caterham (and poss Tattenham Corner) which currently use the terminating platforms, although it'd raise concerns about stopping services on the Sydenham slow to East Croydon.

 

[Another-Level]

BicBasher, since you regularly post misleading information, can you post the excerpts from that document so that we can take a look?

 

[bicbasher]

BicBasher, since you regularly post misleading information, can you post the excerpts from that document so that we can take a look?

Trolling on here now, oh what a surprise! :roll:

Here's the Thameslink programme diagram, this document was discussed on this forum previously.

http://uat.emt-iln.co.uk/SiteCollectionDocuments/TLP Route Diagram.pdf

 

[swt_passenger]

The previous poster made clear it was a rumour so it wouldn't appear on any route strategies. Why would it?

It's only Network Rail saying that terminating services at London Bridge must be cut by a third whilst flatly refusing other options.

I mentioned it wasn't in an RUS, because quite often in this forum, people use the term 'rumour' unnecessarily when something has already been formally proposed in an RUS. In this case, I'm simply highlighting that there is not much to support the rumour.

'...only Network Rail saying...'

They are responsible for the overall timetable - and presumably they believe that there is a particular optimum service frequency for a station with 6 terminal platforms.

If you know different I'm sure they'll be pleased to hear where their own service planners are going wrong.

 

[Another-Level]

Trolling on here now, oh what a surprise! :roll:

Here's the Thameslink programme diagram, this document was discussed on this forum previously.

http://uat.emt-iln.co.uk/SiteCollectionDocuments/TLP Route Diagram.pdf

Hardly support what you've previous said.

Enough of your name calling as clearly you're saying that because you're unable to debate the issue properly when challenged. Trolling doesn't apply to me.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I mentioned it wasn't in an RUS, because quite often in this forum, people use the term 'rumour' unnecessarily when something has already been formally proposed in an RUS. In this case, I'm simply highlighting that there is not much to support the rumour.



They are responsible for the overall timetable - and presumably they believe that there is a particular optimum service frequency for a station with 6 terminal platforms.

If you know different I'm sure they'll be pleased to hear where their own service planners are going wrong.

I'm sure the planners are fully aware about the SLL issues. There's a difference between optimum service and disregard for South Londoners. I suspect the latter.

 

[bicbasher]

Trolling doesn't apply to me.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
.

Very funny, I'm sure if people read the East Dulwich Forum where you tell people as undisputedtruth they have low esteem issues for having a different viewpoint and take topics off on tangents that may well take your rose tinted specs off.

I posted the link to this thread to see if you could debate this serious issue sensibly and once again, you resort to trolling and using every scrap of an excuse in the book to back up your claims.

Apologies to the mods for taking this thread off topic myself.

 

[tbtc]

The platform at London Bridge can easily be extended to accommodate the SLL trains but Network Rail refuses to do so.

Also, platforms 17 to 23 were removed from London Bridge station during their last redevelopment in the mid 70s. Again, they could easily reinstate them as they're currently used as a car park.

Wow - it sounds so easy. I'm sure there must be a catch...

 

[bicbasher]

With more through services going through London Bridge after the Thameslink Programme is complete, bar the inner SLL, what other services could use those extra paths if those platforms were re-instated?

 

[A-driver]

Bicbasher is right with the terminating services-it seems that the plan is that currently terminating services from tattenham and Horsham will run through the core as will the current peak terminating services to east grinstead and Brighton.

The SLL was originally to be axed for the works at LB anyway regardless of LOROL and I seem to remember hearing rumours that it would go before LOROL had any plans to take it.

 

[Another-Level]

Wow - it sounds so easy. I'm sure there must be a catch...

Yep, Network Rail losing their cushy car parking space. A great loss to us all.

 

[bicbasher]

Bicbasher is right with the terminating services-it seems that the plan is that currently terminating services from tattenham and Horsham will run through the core as will the current peak terminating services to east grinstead and Brighton.

The Tattenham Corner ones make sense as they currently use the fast on the Sydenham line (except Sundays) and Horsham, Caterham paths only uses the fast line during peaks.

So that would leave (going off the top of my head) these off peak services using the terminating platforms at London Bridge.

Tonbridge 1tph
Reigate 1tph
Uckfield 1tph
Caterham 2tph
Victoria (Outer SLL) 2tph
West Croydon via Selhurst 2tph
Beckenham Junction 2tph

Three mainline and four metro services after 2019.

 

[Another-Level]

Bicbasher is right with the terminating services-it seems that the plan is that currently terminating services from tattenham and Horsham will run through the core as will the current peak terminating services to east grinstead and Brighton.

The SLL was originally to be axed for the works at LB anyway regardless of LOROL and I seem to remember hearing rumours that it would go before LOROL had any plans to take it.

I was referring post #32.

 

[bicbasher]

There's a difference between optimum service and disregard for South Londoners. I suspect the latter.

South Londoners who on the route have an extensive public transport system.

Peckham Rye is less than 5 mins walk away from routes 36 and 436 which have a bus every 3/4 mins towards Victoria at the end of Rye Lane along with night bus services.

There's also route 343 to London Bridge, although I confess that bus service isn't perfect thanks to it's long winded routing via the Aylesbury Estate.

Denmark Hill has Route 185 which operates every 12 minutes to Victoria and 5/10 mins walk away from Camberwell Green which has routes 36/436 and 185 which provide a very regular bus service along the Victoria to Camberwell corridor, which also serves Oval and Vauxhall tube stations which locals also use.

Route 40 also runs from Denmark Hill to London Bridge every 7/8 minutes which connects the local hospitals and is a few minutes walk from Route 35 which also serves LB.

 

[OxtedL]

If you don't want to cut SLL services, maybe you want to cut some of the rather stuffed and rather longer Uckfield services? Or the rammed Redhill line services? There are plenty of other ways for us all to get home after all. Any suggestions?

 

[Another-Level]

South Londoners who on the route have an extensive public transport system.

Peckham Rye is less than 5 mins walk away from routes 36 and 436 which have a bus every 3/4 mins towards Victoria at the end of Rye Lane along with night bus services.

There's also route 343 to London Bridge, although I confess that bus service isn't perfect thanks to it's long winded routing via the Aylesbury Estate.

Denmark Hill has Route 185 which operates every 12 minutes to Victoria and 5/10 mins walk away from Camberwell Green which has routes 36/436 and 185 which provide a very regular bus service along the Victoria to Camberwell corridor, which also serves Oval and Vauxhall tube stations which locals also use.

Route 40 also runs from Denmark Hill to London Bridge every 7/8 minutes which connects the local hospitals and is a few minutes walk from Route 35 which also serves LB.

Quite a number of East Dulwich forum members have ridiculed BicBash suggestion in using the bus service. It just adds 45 minutes to a commuting journey into central London.

 

[bicbasher]

Quite a number of East Dulwich forum members have ridiculed BicBash suggestion in using the bus service. It just adds 45 minutes to a commuting journey into central London.

The journey time given for a journey from Peckham on route 36 is 32 minutes during the daytime and 36 mins during the peak to Victoria.

http://www.londonbusroutes.net/times/036N136.htm

And how about answering OxtedL's perfectly legitimate question?

 

[Class377/5]

BicBasher, since you regularly post misleading information, can you post the excerpts from that document so that we can take a look?

Why are you jumping on everything he said? It's clear your havent got anything to back your view up expect your opition where Bic has.

You do realise that cutting the Inner SLL is due to Thameslink works at London Bridge not anything to do with the ELLX don't you?

Hardly support what you've previous said.

Enough of your name calling as clearly you're saying that because you're unable to debate the issue properly when challenged. Trolling doesn't apply to me.

I'm sure the planners are fully aware about the SLL issues. There's a difference between optimum service and disregard for South Londoners. I suspect the latter.

That map is based on the Jacobs report for the DfT. it's now semi offical map as it was sent to the TOC's and sent up on thier website. It recommended that Thameslink and Southern be merged for cost saving reasons and low and behold it was.

Considering you say your not a troll, you seem to insult anyone who doesn't share your view over the future of the SLL rudely. Have you been keeping up with the work over the SLL? It's been looked into a lot but end of the day it's fairly lightly used on some very busy tracks outside of the peaks.

I remember seeing a Thameslink 2019 document which suggests that they'll replace services from Caterham (and poss Tattenham Corner) which currently use the terminating platforms, although it'd raise concerns about stopping services on the Sydenham slow to East Croydon.

Any document is out of date now as part of the new Thameslink franchise bid was to suggest what the service pattern post 2017 will be. However by 2020 when new replacement franchises come in for Thameslink/Southern and Southeastern we may see some massive changes yet.

The currently open consultation on Thameslink new franchise may provide some new information but the announcement on the first set of routes from the expanded Thameslink services will be announced in summer 2013. (Informed law at work here)

Note as well that the idea has been that the destinations served by the 'Thameslink' Core trains is supposed to be flexible to allow changes in the future to help balance services out more and go where people truely want it to.

 

[Clip]

The signalling centre is at the other end of the car park. As LB is being redeveloped, a new signalling structure could be constructed where trains can pass underneath. Simple really.

WOW!! I dread to think how much money you have just added to the bill for redeveloping London Bridge.

I would think that sort of thing would not come cheap as I dont imagine it would be as simple as you think - which is probably just raising the structure.

Maybe one of the Infratrusture gents would hazard a guess for us.

And then you can tell us how its going to be paid for.

 

[The Ham]

Another-Level, can you explain what you would want to see (assuming that the SLL service in its current form does not continue) that would mean that you find the new service, if not equal, at least acceptable?

 

[87015]

WOW!! I dread to think how much money you have just added to the bill for redeveloping London Bridge.

I would think that sort of thing would not come cheap as I dont imagine it would be as simple as you think - which is probably just raising the structure.

Maybe one of the Infratrusture gents would hazard a guess for us.

And then you can tell us how its going to be paid for.

London Bridge 'box goes as part of Thameslink eventually anyway doesn't it, replaced by a 'super PSB' at Three Bridges for pretty much the entire Central division?

Although I've no idea why its being mentioned as there is bucketloads of platform space after Thameslink anyway (and 14-16 are far from full at the moment)

 

[Another-Level]

Why are you jumping on everything he said? It's clear your havent got anything to back your view up expect your opition where Bic has.

Bic Bash and I have exchanged views on another forum. So I know what he's like.

You do realise that cutting the Inner SLL is due to Thameslink works at London Bridge not anything to do with the ELLX don't you?

I fully understand the reasons behind the termination of the SLL and fully recognise how the decision making process was flawed.

That map is based on the Jacobs report for the DfT. it's now semi offical map as it was sent to the TOC's and sent up on thier website. It recommended that Thameslink and Southern be merged for cost saving reasons and low and behold it was.

I didn't ask for a map. I merely asked for the excerpts that Bic Bash referred to.

Considering you say your not a troll, you seem to insult anyone who doesn't share your view over the future of the SLL rudely. Have you been keeping up with the work over the SLL? It's been looked into a lot but end of the day it's fairly lightly used on some very busy tracks outside of the peaks.

If I wanted to insult someone then I would have been far stronger in my language.

The population in the SLL area, Lambeth and Southwark, will increase substantially which makes it more important to retain the SLL service.

Any document is out of date now as part of the new Thameslink franchise bid was to suggest what the service pattern post 2017 will be. However by 2020 when new replacement franchises come in for Thameslink/Southern and Southeastern we may see some massive changes yet.

I'm aware of the current Southeastern and Thameslink franchise consultations.

The currently open consultation on Thameslink new franchise may provide some new information but the announcement on the first set of routes from the expanded Thameslink services will be announced in summer 2013. (Informed law at work here)

See previous answer.

Note as well that the idea has been that the destinations served by the 'Thameslink' Core trains is supposed to be flexible to allow changes in the future to help balance services out more and go where people truely want it to.

You've told nothing new.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

London Bridge 'box goes as part of Thameslink eventually anyway doesn't it, replaced by a 'super PSB' at Three Bridges for pretty much the entire Central division?

Although I've no idea why its being mentioned as there is bucketloads of platform space after Thameslink anyway (and 14-16 are far from full at the moment)

When does the 'super PSB' at Three Bridges becomes live?

 

[bicbasher]

No where lost any services to London Bridge and everywhere is still served by Southern aswell as LO. Victoria might be tighter but the South London side of London Bridge has lots of short trains they need to lengthen before using any 'lack of capacity' excuse - even the high peak most are 4 cars with a few 6 car circuits and a solitary 8 car (which is on the emptiest train of the lot!)

Since December 2011, 10 car 377s are used on metro services to West Croydon via Sydenham in the evening peak and from Norwood Junction in the morning peak.

Some off-peak outer SLL services use 8 car 377s.

 

[tbtc]

South Londoners who on the route have an extensive public transport system.

Peckham Rye is less than 5 mins walk away from routes 36 and 436 which have a bus every 3/4 mins towards Victoria at the end of Rye Lane along with night bus services.

There's also route 343 to London Bridge, although I confess that bus service isn't perfect thanks to it's long winded routing via the Aylesbury Estate.

Denmark Hill has Route 185 which operates every 12 minutes to Victoria and 5/10 mins walk away from Camberwell Green which has routes 36/436 and 185 which provide a very regular bus service along the Victoria to Camberwell corridor, which also serves Oval and Vauxhall tube stations which locals also use.

Route 40 also runs from Denmark Hill to London Bridge every 7/8 minutes which connects the local hospitals and is a few minutes walk from Route 35 which also serves LB.

Given all the bus services (and other rail ones in the area), why are we arguing so much about a half hourly train service?

 

[bicbasher]

Given all the bus services (and other rail ones in the area), why are we arguing so much about a half hourly train service?

Agreed, it's hardly a Beeching style closure. It's been replaced for the majority of stations with a 4tph service. LOROL have built up a reputation for improving lesser used lines in London as seen with Silverlink and the ELL extension phase 1 and 2 are considered a success, phase 3 should give similar results.

I could understand more if it was a service where there was no realistic public transport alternative, but there will be either a slightly longer wait or journey to Victoria which involves changing by rail or use local bus routes.

 

[Southern]

Peckham Rye and Denmark Hill customers also have the alternative of Blackfriars, offering a connection to Victoria via Circle/District lines. Every half hour and an increased frequency at peak times. Clapham High Street and Wandsworth Road are both in easy reach of a tube station and there is always the short detour to Clapham Junction via LO.

 

[Another-Level]

Given all the bus services (and other rail ones in the area), why are we arguing so much about a half hourly train service?

It's not a case of we, as clearly some people here don't use the SLL. But the people who do use the service value its easy access into central London areas.

You must be joking about the bus suggestion, right? A bus could take up to an hour to get to Victoria while a train gets there in 15 minutes.

 

[OxtedL]

It's not a case of we, as clearly some people here don't use the SLL. But the people who do use the service value its easy access into central London areas.

You must be joking about the bus suggestion, right? A bus could take up to an hour to get to Victoria while a train gets there in 15 minutes.

Remind me what you're suggesting happens instead again, given as London Bridge is off limits as soon as Thameslink kicks off there?

 

[Another-Level]

Remind me what you're suggesting happens instead again, given as London Bridge is off limits as soon as Thameslink kicks off there?

Certainly not a bus journey for sure.

 

[tbtc]

It's not a case of we, as clearly some people here don't use the SLL. But the people who do use the service value its easy access into central London areas.

You must be joking about the bus suggestion, right? A bus could take up to an hour to get to Victoria while a train gets there in 15 minutes.

Yeah, a bus - the kind of thing that people use to get into central London once their train arrives in Victoria.

I'm struggling to see which stations are going to be badly hit by the logical move of withdrawing this service, given that they will still get their other services to Victoria (which currently runs within five minutes of the South London Line service)?

Two trains in under five minutes, then nothing for half an hour is pretty inefficient.