Hmm, another shambolic Thameslink day today, whatever the root cause it once again demonstrates the inherent fragility and unreliability of the Thameslink concept.
(And if it's not a Desiro S**tty failing then infrastructure failures in Sussex achieve the same outcome on a regular basis).
I think we all get the point now that you have a grump about Thameslink because it will upset your personal requirements, and will use any failure related to the Thameslink Programme to make out it is a badly flawed concept.
I could list every time a 319 has sat down somewhere on the route, or a 377 / 387 for that matter. Or every infrastructure failure on the GN (like yesterday at Welywn). Or train failure on the GN. Or any other issue on the GN that could affect the GN, or in future lines south of the river. But I don't because I don't have a personal agenda.
Similar negative arguments were made in 1986/7/8 about linking the MML and Brighton Main Line. And guess what? Thameslink as a concept has been an outstanding success. Growth on the line after opening was stunning and has remained good. It is one of the few railways in this country that makes a profit when taking all costs into account. It has made certain towns and cities on the line far better places to live than previously. And this has been demonstrated in other, new, cross City rail routes both in this country and across the world. Hence the proposal to link the GN into Thameslink as far back as 1989.
It is not perfect. No railway is. It may not suit your requirements. No railway can please everybody all the time. But it will transform the rail service on the GN lines for the better, overall. It's called progress.
Or perhaps we should go back to the glory days pre-1988 with an hourly DMU shuttle from Hitchin to Huntingdon, and not even that from Royston to Cambridge?
Last edited: