TfL considering Sydenham corridor AM improvement

[Sad Sprinter]

Please post the diagram I’d like to see a “what if” scenario.

Here it is! So happy I’ve kept so many train magazines from over the years.

 

[NorthKent1989]

View attachment 145280

Here it is! So happy I’ve kept so many train magazines from over the years.

The concept of the “Fleetline” metro is rather interesting, especially since this was probably published around the time of the JLE opening, and the Liz Line was more than a dozen years away at this point.

Funny how back them they considered the Woolwich line to be converted into this Fleetline metro and the Bexleyheath and Sidcup lines would carry on to Gravesend evans Gillingham, today it’s the reversal, Woolwich line trains are the ones TfL designate the Gillingham trains to whenever the idea of Turning South London orange pops up every so often.

I also note how the Thameslink doesn’t serve the Sydenham corridor but has lines out to Kent in this scenario

As for Deptford Park itself, I wonder if it’s located near the old Bermondsey Spa Road station? Some local groups around there are lobbying for its reopening but I don’t see it happening.

Interesting that they considered a branch to Thamesmead, I’m surprised this has never resurfaced, I’m glad they never revisited this idea.

Thank you for uploading this

 

[Samzino]

Source: IanVisits

Saw this interesting map of the overground proposal into London bridge.

 

[PTR 444]

The concept of the “Fleetline” metro is rather interesting, especially since this was probably published around the time of the JLE opening, and the Liz Line was more than a dozen years away at this point.

Looking at the map, I wonder how the old C&SLR tunnels would have been utilised. AFAIK they were severed during construction of the Jubilee Line Extension to allow them to be used as ventilation shafts.

 

[dub]

View attachment 145280

Here it is! So happy I’ve kept so many train magazines from over the years.

ELL via Tulse Hill - so close but so far does anyone know where it was planned to go?

 

[matt_world2004]

TfL have paid operators for specific service enhancements before. I think it is more likely they will pay southern to restore some of their previously cut services in the morning peak than run overground services there in the peak only. The southern drivers would have the route knowledge. There is less complication about the ticketing issues

Plus they can easily withdraw funding for the route if the demand is not there and they do not get the bad publicity

 

[JonathanH]

I think it is more likely they will pay southern to restore some of their previously cut services in the morning peak than run overground services there in the peak only. The southern drivers would have the route knowledge. There is less complication about the ticketing issues

Presumably if this happened Southern would run some peak extras from Norwood Junction. When they used to run prior to 2018, they went into London Bridge, and then returned empty via Tulse Hill to Selhurst. That is fine in the morning peak, but in the afternoon they used to have to go through to West Croydon and return fast.

Is it really worth Southern leasing extra rolling stock to run two peak extras into London Bridge from Norwood Junction?

Crystal Palace to London Bridge shorts are a whole lot simpler and more importantly London Overground have the spare rolling stock.

 

[PGAT]

TfL have paid operators for specific service enhancements before. I think it is more likely they will pay southern to restore some of their previously cut services in the morning peak than run overground services there in the peak only. The southern drivers would have the route knowledge. There is less complication about the ticketing issues

Plus they can easily withdraw funding for the route if the demand is not there and they do not get the bad publicity

I don’t think this makes much sense in this scenario. From what I perceive the only reason TfL are even considering going to London Bridge is because Southern will NOT pick up the slack.

 

[NorthKent1989]

Looking at the map, I wonder how the old C&SLR tunnels would have been utilised. AFAIK they were severed during construction of the Jubilee Line Extension to allow them to be used as ventilation shafts.

You’re right, which leads to think that this map may predate the JLE, it also maybe an alternate “Fleet line” route, by having it take over the Greenwich & Woolwich lines down to Dartford.

 

[ctrh136]

Some certainly skip it but I think that's because a Thameslink is right behind and there's no capacity for a call in the timetable. But yes, I'm always glad I'm not at NWD trying to fight my way onto one of these services.

It's because there's an extra TL train from East Grinstead at peak times that runs in the slot used for those trains to stop at NWD if that makes sense.

 

[bicbasher]

TfL are still considering Dalston Junction to Crystal Palace extras instead which may be simpler to manage than the London Bridge option.

 

[cslusarc]

Easy depends on your perspective, because there's rolling stock that is committed to running almost empty services around that time. For example, could quite easily use the units that do the first service from Dorking to Horsham and back. The people commuting into Horsham for 8am or going back into London for a 0945 arrival could be happily accommodated by one double decker bus each. The problem is politics, trains are very lightly loaded at all times of day between Dorking and Horsham, but if that's your village, you're naturally going to make a lot of noise about it and play it up, rather than accepting a bus replacement for the good of the wider economy. In a way I can't blame anyone for that.

 

[Basil Jet]

Looking at the map, I wonder how the old C&SLR tunnels would have been utilised. AFAIK they were severed during construction of the Jubilee Line Extension to allow them to be used as ventilation shafts.

They were also never enlarged like the rest of the C&SLR and so would need to be enlarged before they could carry any modern LU tube stock.

 

[MPW]

BLE branch with station at Surrey canal Road, then taking overground tracks to new Cross and the other taking over greenwich line. Frees up more paths for ELL core and could run more CST trains via lewisham.

Yes greenwich branch passengers might not like. Yes it reduces BLE frequency to Lewisham. But... more importantly.... would look nice on a map and my line (grove park) might get more services

edit: yes, this is also the wrong thread for this discussion and does not deserve any responses.

 

[cle]

I would think/hope that a Bakerloo extension at NXG would be a huge feeder from the Sydenham line.

And hopefully justify a rebuild to enable all fast services to call there. Would relieve London Bridge / tubes and the core a lot. And allow good access to Lewisham and its connections as needed.

 

[JonathanH]

And hopefully justify a rebuild to enable all fast services to call there. Would relieve London Bridge / tubes and the core a lot. And allow good access to Lewisham and its connections as needed.

Any rebuild to allow all fast services to stop would need four fast line platforms. While it might be observed that London Bridge Thameslink only has two platforms, there would be a need to accommodate London Bridge terminal services as well.

 

[PGAT]

I think the Epsom, Caterham and Tattenham Corner services could use the slow line platforms and cross over whilst departing New Cross Gate, but the train wouldn't be able to cope with the additional passengers

 

[JonathanH]

I think the Epsom, Caterham and Tattenham Corner services could use the slow line platforms and cross over whilst departing New Cross Gate, but the train wouldn't be able to cope with the additional passengers

It imagine it might work in the down direction, but on the up is more of a problem if the platform at New Cross Gate is occupied.

 

[cle]

Any rebuild to allow all fast services to stop would need four fast line platforms. While it might be observed that London Bridge Thameslink only has two platforms, there would be a need to accommodate London Bridge terminal services as well.

Yes I would expect that if it was a full rebuild, and a big hub vision. I would doubt it would. Maybe one down and two up. Or a few services don't call. It's not quite the OOC/Reading situation in terms of line speed, spacing, frequency.

Tat/Cat is a fraction, usage-wise, of other routes. And if 50% want Victoria and 50% want LB (but some maybe Cannon St or Charing Cross, vs TL Core), then they can easily switch at Purley or EC to fast trains to what they need. And have slow trains.

 

[JonathanH]

Tat/Cat is a fraction, usage-wise, of other routes. And if 50% want Victoria and 50% want LB (but some maybe Cannon St or Charing Cross, vs TL Core), then they can easily switch at Purley or EC to fast trains to what they need. And have slow trains.

Yes. One obvious question is why Caterham and Tattenham Corner have fast trains at all in the new, more efficient, Southern timetable.

Would those services be better running as slows between Norwood Junction and London Bridge, with passengers changing as appropriate for a faster service. If the timetabling could be done right, it could be same platform interchange at East Croydon.

 

[PGAT]

Once again, probably overcrowding in the peak hours prevents more stops

 

[JonathanH]

Once again, probably overcrowding in the peak hours prevents more stops

But those passengers would get off at East Croydon if there was a faster train behind. I think it is accepted that East Croydon is a much quieter station than it used to be now in the morning peak and that trains leave for London with spare capacity.

 

[cle]

Yes, and as I mentioned - passengers will go to a mix of Victoria, LB terminators and TL core services. And they can change at Purley too, so it may not be completely overrun. Purley also serves points south (people might commute to Gatwick/area), Croydon itself may well be an employment/shopping/leisure point for many, or they might need intermediate points in South London. So I think a big change would dissipate. For many years, they had suburban services.

So either that enables NXG sooner, or it enables some other services to come online. The most popular change mooted is Rainham TL to transfer to Epsom semis. Ironically, that would nicely free up space in LB's terminating platforms for said Tat/Cats.

 

[Thebaz]

So either that enables NXG sooner, or it enables some other services to come online. The most popular change mooted is Rainham TL to transfer to Epsom semis. Ironically, that would nicely free up space in LB's terminating platforms for said Tat/Cats.

The Epsoms and TatCats currently conveniently share a diagram so it wouldn't be freeing up any more platforms than are currently free.

 

[LBMPSB]

You’re right, which leads to think that this map may predate the JLE, it also maybe an alternate “Fleet line” route, by having it take over the Greenwich & Woolwich lines down to Dartford.

If you look closely at the map you will see it is a cut and paste item that someone has made up and not official. Even the font for London Bridge is wrong.

 

[30907]

If you look closely at the map you will see it is a cut and paste item that someone has made up and not official. Even the font for London Bridge is wrong.

Are you referring to the track plan in #26 (which you have linked to?) or the TfL-style diagram in #33? I am guessing the second.

 

[CapitalStar378]

Does anyone know why the Overground has switched platforms at Crystal Palace from platform 5 to platform 3? Platform 3 used to just have 4 or so services a day previously.

 

[87015]

Signs of progress suggested elsewhere

Realtime Trains | Departures from London Bridge between 0200 and 0159 on 25/02/2024

Train information at London Bridge between 0200 and 0159 on 25/02/2024. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

 

[PGAT]

LO will be running to/from London Bridge on Easter Sunday due to ELL core being closed

 

[telstarbox]

Nice!