The fixation on viewing this as an end to end service doesn't help. When it comes to the movement of people, we need to do this efficiently.
People south travel into the core and there is a clear benefit to that. That shuffle of people in the core needs to be prevented or at least limited. Same with a change at London Bridge. It needs to be limited to stop the needless shuffling about of people. Previously there was a lot of people who would travel into Cannon then walk down towards Blackfriars or jump straight onto the tube and go round that way. Getting into that part of the City from Kent had to be done via the tube or a punishing morning walk. With the service coming up through Kent and through into Blackfriars a lot of that movement has been stopped. That is a huge benefit to the commuters. Same with those who used to come up from the South London Side of Kent and change trains at Blackfriars. The platforms were a nightmare for overcrowding and confusion. Again, by running services through the core all that has been ameliorated. I don't travel North to South but when I drive it you see the same happening. People travel into the core, not through it. I couldn't tell you where people changed because I haven't experienced it.
I agree entirely with you on this point. That's presumably why there was such an outcry from the Wimbledon Loop commuters when it was originally planned to terminate their trains at Blackfriars, and similarr;y why I earlier quoted the options of running to Kentish Town/West Hampstead (regardless of the logistics, didn't the Sevenoaks trains terminate at one or other (or both) of these stations previously? Don't know why I mentioned Blackfriars as I know you can't get to the terminal platforms from London Bridge.
The end to end mentality can also be said of Brighton <> Bedford. No-one in their right mind uses it end to end. I find it odd that there isn't the same call to cull their services. Or cut them short at Kentish etc.
I do and a lot of people from my area do, although admittedly we are 25 miles south of Bedford. It's handy for a day out by the sea. How else would we get there? It's quite a trek round the M25 and there's the problem of parking at the destination. Most people go to London but its not at all unusual to have a few passengers going all the way. Brighton is an attractive destination with plenty to do and makes a good day out. Also connections onto the East and West Coastway along with other connections on the way if you need them. All in all an ideal destination point for Thameslink.
The end to end service makes perfect sense to me because I see it as two halves. People who travel Kent <> Core and those who travel Bedford <> Core with some crossover of those who need the more leisure based destinations or those who live on the fringes and travel North <> South.
Yes but they should be two equal halves in relation to stopping patterns, as was originally proposed back in the early 90s.
Ideally there has to be 3 service patterns. All stations, Semi-Fast, and Fast. This gives passengers and commuters flexibility and greater choice as well as reduced journey times. Something has to run all stations Core <> North. Personally I couldn't care if this was a Brighton, Sutton, or Rainham service. I think the problem is that there isn't anywhere South that is realistic to turnback on a regular basis. Theoretically you could run Luton <> Beckenham Junction or using the same mentality as West Hampstead you could run Luton <> Blackfriars <> ECS to Herne Hill. It just becomes stupidly complex and wastes pathways for no real reason. Playing crayons with trains is silly. We have to think about moving people and the most efficient way to do it. If you had a service running North <> Core and a service running South <> Core you are running two services. Having longer and through services just creates that link and combines them into a single more efficient service.
All stations > Core > All stations
Semi Fast > Core > Semi fast
Fast > Core > Fast
Agreed but this should be distance based too. The old idea of City Metro and City Flyer worked well.
Where they come to and from I personally don't care. Rainham as the all stations serves the purpose because it's metro based and there are other options traveling from Kent into London.
But its too long a route to be metro based. I agree with 700007 (5614) , London Teacher and The Box Photter (partly) who have posted further up the page. If it were possible to do so, I would terminate the present North Kents at Dartford. Alternatively have them as stoppers from Rainham to Dartford and then fast to London.
Rainham going down via the North Kent is a tedious debate but that side of Kent absolutely needed the option to run into and through the core. Core <> London Bridge <> Kent really is a game changer and something I fully support. The other side of Kent is served by services coming up from Sevenoaks/Orpington. The future is going to link Maidstone and Ashford to that part of London. The options the Kent passengers have increased. This is a huge benefit for the passenger.
Yes but the advantage is South of the Thames to London only.
If these services existed years ago I would have saved a fair few quid and quite a bit of time. I know more than a few people who see the same benefits and from an anecdotal perspective, watching the change to how the people move about I really have seen a dramatic change.
When I get a train, all I see is where I get on and where I get off. I choose the most efficient way of doing it. Least changes and quickest time. I'm sure I'm not the only one who doesn't care where the train came from or where its going to.
Well I don't necessarily care where it's come from but I do care where it's going to and how long it will take to get there. You mentioned RAF Museum at Hendon earlier, but I did an opposite but similar sort of trip to Chatham Dockyard museum a few months ago. I could have caught one train all the way, but saved half an hour osr so in each direction by changing at St Pancras. And in time to come, if I didn't want to pay the HS1 surcharge, I will be able to change at Farringdon and again at Abbey Wood and maybe still save time. So.....nobody in their right mind would be likely to use this service end to end.
Compare this with the 90s. Two trains an hour to Brighton which were a darned sight faster than they are now - (and it was indicated that journey times would improve when London Bridge and Blackfriars had been remodelled). Two an hour from Luton or Bedford to Guildford - semi fast either side of the core, and the Luton Sevenoaks stoppers. Lots of reasonable journey opportunities. Then they changed to running the stoppers round the Wimbledon loop and in general terms that worked okay too. not the fastest journey to Wimbledon but quite convenient if you were going to Kingston or anywhere else in South West London. They wer journeys you would do, rather than direct routes which would be stupid to take.
Back to the whether anybody in their right mind would use Bedford - Brighton end to end..... I must say that with every timetable amendment over the last few years the prospect does become a little bit less attractive what with longer journey times and, more recently, concrete seats. All in all, a huge disappointment after all the promises of the last 25 years.