Your suggestions for the next Southeastern franchise

[ScotGG]

They may be thinking that following the London Bridge works and the planned Thameslink Timetable that they won't be able to run enough trains to take more.

They wouldn't need to boost SE frequencies to boost SE capacity. Having all peak trains to Charing Cross and Cannon St as 10-car would be a start. There's a lot of 6 and 8 car services.

Its already mostly a 12-car ready network and the NR document makes it clear it wouldn't be that expensive to make fully 12-car ready. Needs the stock with SDO and then some alterations to signals.

Thameslink's planned 2018 table does very little for SE Metro routes.

 

[ScotGG]

Somehow I doubt it. There's also an issue that the accompanying public consultation turned out to have completely wrong (way too low) figures for the numbers of new houses planned for the Thamesmead and Bexley areas over the next few years. It's impossible to know if the same wrong figures were used in the metro route growth estimates, but my money is going to be on that they were, and those estimates are therefore not worth much.

That's elementary stuff. Lets hope they realise it and soon. How far along are they with potential bidders going off old figures?

 

[HH]

They wouldn't need to boost SE frequencies to boost SE capacity. Having all peak trains to Charing Cross and Cannon St as 10-car would be a start. There's a lot of 6 and 8 car services.

Its already mostly a 12-car ready network and the NR document makes it clear it wouldn't be that expensive to make fully 12-car ready. Needs the stock with SDO and then some alterations to signals.

Thameslink's planned 2018 table does very little for SE Metro routes.

Strengthening trains will happen and may be sooner than you think.

 

[glbotu]

A 15 minute metro timetable? Doesn't every metro route already have at least that. Greenwich line has more - every 10 mins to Cannon St and 2 per hour to Charing Cross which could go to Thameslink. Surely not cutting remaining 6 an hour to 4?

I think the point is more ensuring that the service is REGULAR 4tph along routes.

Currently, at Greenwich, for example, you have 2tph to Dartford, 2tph to Cannon St via Barnehurst and 2tph to Cannon St via Crayford. I think the idea is to ensure the service is consistent enough to be easy to use, rather than just maintaining the service at 4tph along cores, because that opens up facility to have metro-level orbital-ish services, not just radial (like Sidcup - Abbey Wood), or even things as simple as the Victoria - Dartford (via Barnehurst) service, which is only 2tph. You could, say, move the entire Dartford service to the Barnehurst line and run it to Victoria, with all the rounders going via Greenwich and Hither Green.

 

[ComUtoR]

I think the point is more ensuring that the service is REGULAR 4tph along routes.

Currently, at Greenwich, for example, you have 2tph to Dartford, 2tph to Cannon St via Barnehurst and 2tph to Cannon St via Crayford. I think the idea is to ensure the service is consistent enough to be easy to use, rather than just maintaining the service at 4tph along cores,

Could you explain this a little better please. For me Greenwich to Cannon Street is a train every 10 minutes. That is very consistent and easy to use. Never on this planet do I consider Cannon Street via Barnehurst or Crayford to be a valid service.

Greenwich to Slade Green - 6tph
Greenwich to Cannon Street - 6tph

If you live along the line of route you get 6 trains an hour and that's pretty good tbh.

because that opens up facility to have metro-level orbital-ish services, not just radial (like Sidcup - Abbey Wood),

What's the difference between 'orbital and radial' please

or even things as simple as the Victoria - Dartford (via Barnehurst) service, which is only 2tph. You could, say, move the entire Dartford service to the Barnehurst line and run it to Victoria, with all the rounders going via Greenwich and Hither Green.

The problem there is that you then only have one station with the ability to get to Dartford. If everything goes round each loop then nothing goes to Dartford. If you were at Slade Green or Crayford I think you'd be a little upset.

I think you have to remember that the rounders are more about moving people along the line of route locally. There is a very good service along the routes. If your going into London you have many options. With everything due to stop at London Bridge you just shift people up the route into London Bridge to change for Blackfriars, Cannon, or the Cross. Or Change at Lewisham.

 

[glbotu]

Could you explain this a little better please. For me Greenwich to Cannon Street is a train every 10 minutes. That is very consistent and easy to use. Never on this planet do I consider Cannon Street via Barnehurst or Crayford to be a valid service.

Greenwich to Slade Green - 6tph
Greenwich to Cannon Street - 6tph

If you live along the line of route you get 6 trains an hour and that's pretty good tbh.

Sure, from Cannon Street, you wouldn't go to Barnehurst via Greenwich, you'd go via Bexleyheath. But from Abbey Wood you might.

What's the difference between 'orbital and radial' please

Orbital - "around" Central London
Radial - into and out of Central London.

eg: If you're at Slade Green and want to go to Sidcup, that would be an oribital journey, if you're at Slade Green and want to go to Greenwich, that's a radial one.

The problem there is that you then only have one station with the ability to get to Dartford. If everything goes round each loop then nothing goes to Dartford. If you were at Slade Green or Crayford I think you'd be a little upset.

I think you have to remember that the rounders are more about moving people along the line of route locally. There is a very good service along the routes. If your going into London you have many options. With everything due to stop at London Bridge you just shift people up the route into London Bridge to change for Blackfriars, Cannon, or the Cross. Or Change at Lewisham.

The point I was making was that the desire for 4tph frequencies was to keep routes consistent. Currently, there are a lot of inter-weaving 30 minute services, which cause capacity constraints on the many flat junctions around the network. My understanding is that the goal is to simplify that into fewer (ie: less diverse, could be a greater total) 15 min services. How to achieve this is absolutely not easy. My example wasn't a great one, as you pointed out, getting all the rounders through Greenwich and Sidcup, with the Dartfords through Barnehurst would mean no-one from the other lines would be able to get to Dartford.

Realistically speaking, the only true 4tph service is Victoria - Orpington, which has a consistent "metro" stopping pattern all the way.

The Hayes branch is nearly there, but only half the trains stop at Lewisham, which is similar to the service along the SEML between Orpington and London Bridge (again, only half the trains from Orpington stop at Lewisham).

That means that passengers from Hayes only have a half-hourly service to Lewisham (and all the connections from there), or have to go all the way into London Bridge to make those connections work. The "Loop" lines (Sidcup, Barnehurst and Greenwich) are probably the most consistent (if we assume that Cannon St and Charing X are interchangeable because of connections at London Bridge), in that other than their ultimate destination, they're almost self-contained metro style routes (although Sidcup only gets a half-hourly to Lewisham as well).

 

[ComUtoR]

Sure, from Cannon Street, you wouldn't go to Barnehurst via Greenwich, you'd go via Bexleyheath. But from Abbey Wood you might.

Your example gave Greenwich as the departure station, hence my confusion.

The point I was making was that the desire for 4tph frequencies was to keep routes consistent. Currently, there are a lot of inter-weaving 30 minute services, which cause capacity constraints on the many flat junctions around the network. My understanding is that the goal is to simplify that into fewer (ie: less diverse, could be a greater total) 15 min services.

The way to achieve it is to either reduce service or make them simple up and down service. It's because they loop it makes it appear inconsistent but in reality it isn't. When your traveling up and down the local lines you have a superb service with very frequent trains. Its only the end service that are an issue but that is resolved because they all have high frequency services into London and the 'via' of it doesn't matter.

How to achieve this is absolutely not easy. My example wasn't a great one, as you pointed out, getting all the rounders through Greenwich and Sidcup, with the Dartfords through Barnehurst would mean no-one from the other lines would be able to get to Dartford.

Yep. Each of the 3 stations absolutely need an option into Dartford. You can't increase that to 4tph from each station as there isn't the capacity into Dartford. The loops work well as they are because they aren't constrained by Dartford Junction or passengers numbers boarding from Dartford. Dartford still has a great service into London as it serves all 3 SE London Terminals and with services up from Gil and Gravesend augments the services already going up each line to London.

That means that passengers from Hayes only have a half-hourly service to Lewisham (and all the connections from there), or have to go all the way into London Bridge to make those connections work.

Hayes is tricky because again, capacity at Lewisham is limited. You could easily have all services from Hayes go via Lewisham but for the sake of a consistent 4tph service is it really worth it ? Would you force all Hayes services into Cannon or Cross rather than having them as both.

 

[fusionblue]

"No new infrastructure expected."

There's a lot of irony around spending all this money on fixing/"untangling" London Bridge but adding more complexity to Lewisham with the extra flydown track. They are going to have to do something there eventually (and, at a smaller extent, the flat crossings to Ladywell and Hither Green off the mainline are the next major ones).

 

[ComUtoR]

"No new infrastructure expected."

There's a lot of irony around spending all this money on fixing/"untangling" London Bridge but adding more complexity to Lewisham with the extra flydown track.

The flyover was improved dramatically. It was a much needed upgrade and sooooooo much better than before.

 

[ScotGG]

There's some controversy in Kent about missing out stations. Are they speeding up services that were slowed when HS1 begun?

One other thing I've noticed is that quieter Medway stations like Swanscombe wil stay at 2 trains per hour. Would it really cost much time to stop the other 2 trains to Gillingham/Gravesend at these stations to make 4 trains per hour?

Swanscombe has the big theme park coming, but they also have many homes on the drawing board, as do places like Stone Crossing. I know the DfT and NR expect everyone moving in to use HS1 but if near those stations people will probably go for the services via Dartford as it'll take 20 mins to reach Ebbsfleet and cost far more. Heading to the City or West End? The "old" lines are better - cheaper, not any more time consuming once reaching Ebbsfleet by bus from home + then Kings Cross to the City by tube is factored in.

They've seen a decent spike the past couple of years though from low numbers. Plenty of growth could be coming but the plans seem resolute not to improve tph.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Could you explain this a little better please. For me Greenwich to Cannon Street is a train every 10 minutes. That is very consistent and easy to use. Never on this planet do I consider Cannon Street via Barnehurst or Crayford to be a valid service.

To add to glbotu's explanation, he's talking about trains going East, not West, from Greenwich: Although there's a train every 10 minutes heading east, they go to 3 different destinations, which means there's, for example, only a half-hourly service to Dartford.

A better example might be the Bexleyheath line: There are 6 trains an hour, which you'd think would be good. But the trouble is, heading into London, 2 of them go to Cannon Street, 2 to Charing Cross, and 2 to Victoria. If you're in central London and want to get to Bexleyheath, it's a real pain figuring out which London terminus is the best one to go to at any given time. Not only that, but the 6 trains per hour along the line are not evenly spaced out. To take one example, Eastbound from Eltham, trains leave at 11, 17, 23, 41, 47 and 53 minutes past the hour: Instead of every 10 minutes, there are two 18-minute gaps there.

That's the kind of thing that would be massively improved with regular trains to single destinations, at least every 15 minutes (though I'd hope on the Bexleyheath line, every 10 minutes).

 

[DynamicSpirit]

"No new infrastructure expected."

There's a lot of irony around spending all this money on fixing/"untangling" London Bridge but adding more complexity to Lewisham with the extra flydown track. They are going to have to do something there eventually (and, at a smaller extent, the flat crossings to Ladywell and Hither Green off the mainline are the next major ones).

I have wondered about 'no new infrastructure'. If it really means 'no infrastructure at all' then it's very hard to see how the aim of regular metro services at least every 15-mins can be completely achieved on the lines to Dartford. Is there any way you could do it?

I wondered off-hand whether, if you allow a small amount of new infrastructure, you could do it by running all Greenwich and Crayford line trains to Dartford, but running all Bexleyheath line services to Slade Green. If you built a small piece of new track and a new platform at Slade Green to run them in on the west side of the existing station, then they could do so without any conflicting moves with the Greenwich line services, although the turnaround time at Slade Green would have to be very short to keep the 6tph on the Bexleyheath line. That would mean you'd have 12 tph going to Dartford (4 from the Crayford line, 6 from Greenwich line, and the 2 Gillingham trains), up from today's 10tph. Could that work?

 

[ComUtoR]

I wondered off-hand whether, if you allow a small amount of new infrastructure, you could do it by running all Greenwich and Crayford line trains to Dartford, but running all Bexleyheath line services to Slade Green.

You cannot completely remove an entire service to Dartford from a local station. From Bexleyheath you want NO trains to Dartford ? That will then affect all through services from London; including Vic's.

If you built a small piece of new track and a new platform at Slade Green to run them in on the west side of the existing station, then they could do so without any conflicting moves with the Greenwich line services, although the turnaround time at Slade Green would have to be very short

Which side is 'West' The Loop side ?

to keep the 6tph on the Bexleyheath line.

The 6tph comes from having both through services and loop services (iirc) Your proposal is to cut the through services to Dartford. Unless you want those to continue and then loop back as well. But then its the same proposal. Your removing an entire service to Dartford. You then push passengers from that line onto the other two. That would cause serious overcrowding.

That would mean you'd have 12 tph going to Dartford (4 from the Crayford line, 6 from Greenwich line, and the 2 Gillingham trains), up from today's 10tph. Could that work?

Where do the Vic's go ? How would you split Cannon and Cross between the two lines ? Does the Bexleyheath purely become a rounder service only ?

A big side effect from removing service to Dartford from either of the routes is the pressure it will cause to Local traffic and the Local bus network. I couldn't imagine not being able to get from Dartford to Bexleyheath by train. *not that the station is in a crap place anyway.

 

[BluePenguin]

Having read the suggested changes to the franchise on the consultation, the suggestion that struck me as most appealing was more direct trains for longer distances.

Since the introduction of HS1, the mainline appears to have become a giant metro- like stopping service throughout Kent.

Granted, the high-speed services have been amazing and created better connections to the north, although it would be nice to be able to get to the likes of Waterloo East, London Bridge and Charing cross without the tube.

I am in favour of trains running fast from Ashord to Tonbridge and from Rochester to Victoria. The only fast service I have found left is the 09:23 from Charing Cross to Ramsgate. A few other forum members have spoken about their nostalgia of travelling on the fast services in the past.

Of course stations in between deserve a service just as much as anywhere else, but surely a stopping serve from Ashford to Tonbridge and from Gillingham to Bromley South would be possible? It used to be possible in 2008 and existed up to 2010 so I don't see why it would not be now.

Looking at old timetables it appears that stations such as Swanley, St Mary's cray, farningham road and sole street only used to be on the stopping services from Gillingham so why that was scrapped and the stations were added to the Dover service I don't know.

They never seem to listen, next thing all of the stations on the Sevenoaks stopping service will be added as well!

South West Trains seem to manage to have both fast and stopping services on their long distance routes within their network so it is puzzling why Southeastern will not do the same.


Does anyone else agree with me?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Which side is 'West' The Loop side ?

Yes

The 6tph comes from having both through services and loop services (iirc) Your proposal is to cut the through services to Dartford. Unless you want those to continue and then loop back as well. But then its the same proposal. Your removing an entire service to Dartford. You then push passengers from that line onto the other two. That would cause serious overcrowding.

I think you're somewhat exaggerating the impact. I'm not sure how important the commuter market into Dartford is. However, if Dartford is the priority, then the impact of my suggestion looks pretty good to me:

• Greenwich line stations currently have a half-hourly service to Dartford. That would change to every 10 minutes. (Ignoring the Gillingham trains)
• Bexleyheath line stations currently have a service every 15 minutes to Dartford. That would change to every 10 minutes, but would no longer be direct - you'd need to change at Slade Green. This would add maybe 5-10 minutes to journey times, but would be balanced by a more frequent service, and the removal of conflicting moves just south of Slade Green may well further improve this by allowing more reliable or quicker journey times between Slade Green and Dartford.
• Crayford line stations currently have a service every half hour to Dartford. That would change to every 15 minutes.

That looks mostly good to me, no?

Where do the Vic's go ? How would you split Cannon and Cross between the two lines ? Does the Bexleyheath purely become a rounder service only ?

That's to some extent a separate question. Personally, I'd send all Bexleyheath line trains to Cannon street, and have most trains that approach Lewisham from Hither Green/Ladywell go to Charing Cross or Victoria - because that would largely solve the bottleneck of conflicting moves at Lewisham and therefore give a more reliable service. Once the London Bridge rebuild is complete, changing there to get to Charing Cross/Cannon Street shouldn't be much of an issue.

 

[infobleep]

Having read the suggested changes to the franchise on the consultation, the suggestion that struck me as most appealing was more direct trains for longer distances.

Since the introduction of HS1, the mainline appears to have become a giant metro- like stopping service throughout Kent.

Granted, the high-speed services have been amazing and created better connections to the north, although it would be nice to be able to get to the likes of Waterloo East, London Bridge and Charing cross without the tube.

I am in favour of trains running fast from Ashord to Tonbridge and from Rochester to Victoria. The only fast service I have found left is the 09:23 from Charing Cross to Ramsgate. A few other forum members have spoken about their nostalgia of travelling on the fast services in the past.

Of course stations in between deserve a service just as much as anywhere else, but surely a stopping serve from Ashford to Tonbridge and from Gillingham to Bromley South would be possible? It used to be possible in 2008 and existed up to 2010 so I don't see why it would not be now.

Looking at old timetables it appears that stations such as Swanley, St Mary's cray, farningham road and sole street only used to be on the stopping services from Gillingham so why that was scrapped and the stations were added to the Dover service I don't know.

They never seem to listen, next thing all of the stations on the Sevenoaks stopping service will be added as well!

South West Trains seem to manage to have both fast and stopping services on their long distance routes within their network so it is puzzling why Southeastern will not do the same.


Does anyone else agree with me?

South West Trains do manage both fast and stopping services but at certain times of the day, they run so many trains and certain trains and routes have to skip stations, they otherwise serve. Would the same not occur on Southeastern if they ran lots more trains? Or would they be able to run just enough to avoid such a thing, whilst still running more than they do now?

On South West Trains for example, in morning high peak one cannot get a train from Woking to Clapham Junction without changing at Surbtion. At Surbtion trains to places like Wimbledon and Clapham Junction are not as frequent as they are off peak. From Surbtion there are only 4 trains an hour. 7.11, 7.31, 7.41, 8.01, 8.11, 8.31, 8.56, 9.01... Off peak that frequency is doubled.

It is the infrastructure and number of trains running in the peak that leads to this. Would something similar occur on Southeastern if they ran more services?

 

[ComUtoR]

I think you're somewhat exaggerating the impact. I'm not sure how important the commuter market into Dartford is.

Dartford became part of the Oyster recently and the housing market is on the boom in the area; especially with the mass house building that's going on. Commuter wise I don't think the Dartford - Bexleyheath etc is important because people tend to commute into London rather than commute locally. But the problem then becomes how much are you shifting those commuters in Dartford onto the other two lines. Creating more of an issue than it solves. However my point is more of the locals. Removal of any option from Dartford to all stations along the Bexleyheath would be bad. Forcing a change at Slade Green I think would create more of a problem. You will need to re-time the service so that there isn't a wait. It will push more services round the loop and I think it would create a bit of a bottleneck.

That's to some extent a separate question. Personally, I'd send all Bexleyheath line trains to Cannon street, and have most trains that approach Lewisham from Hither Green/Ladywell go to Charing Cross or Victoria - because that would largely solve the bottleneck of conflicting moves at Lewisham and therefore give a more reliable service. Once the London Bridge rebuild is complete, changing there to get to Charing Cross/Cannon Street shouldn't be much of an issue.

I agree. I think I've posted the same suggestion before. Everything North Kent side goes to Cannon. Everything Mid Kent side goes Vic or Cross. It would be a little draconian because of the Hayes services don't get a Cannon Street service. Vic's will need to move to the Dartford Loop and Orpingtons/Sevenoaks will be affected as where do you send their Cannon Street services ?

I'd certainly hate to be a planner

 

[glbotu]

Dartford became part of the Oyster recently and the housing market is on the boom in the area; especially with the mass house building that's going on. Commuter wise I don't think the Dartford - Bexleyheath etc is important because people tend to commute into London rather than commute locally. But the problem then becomes how much are you shifting those commuters in Dartford onto the other two lines. Creating more of an issue than it solves. However my point is more of the locals. Removal of any option from Dartford to all stations along the Bexleyheath would be bad. Forcing a change at Slade Green I think would create more of a problem. You will need to re-time the service so that there isn't a wait. It will push more services round the loop and I think it would create a bit of a bottleneck.

I think that maybe looking at the outward parts of town is the wrong approach. Great though it would be to just send everything into Dartford, that's not feasible and realistically, 2tph along local axes (which can be handled by buses), is probably sufficient in many cases. The importance is sorting things out at the London end, where we have lots and lots and lots of flat junctions, with services pretty much going from anywhere to anywhere.

I agree. I think I've posted the same suggestion before. Everything North Kent side goes to Cannon. Everything Mid Kent side goes Vic or Cross. It would be a little draconian because of the Hayes services don't get a Cannon Street service. Vic's will need to move to the Dartford Loop and Orpingtons/Sevenoaks will be affected as where do you send their Cannon Street services ?

I'd certainly hate to be a planner

Well, if we look at current frequencies. We've got 6tph from Bexleyheath and 4tph from Crayford, with 4tph from Orpington and 4tph from Hayes available to present themselves at Lewisham (ie: the complex series of junctions between St John's, Hither Green and Ladywell). We've also got 6tph from Greenwich North of New Cross.

Let's work on the premise that we "don't care" what happens at the Dartford end, (ie: we don't need to specify 4tph along any given axis around there). We also want to achieve 4tph on any given line into London and maximising connectivity (ie: have lots of trains at Lewisham), while minimising flat junction conflicts.

Given where the Greenwich services "show up", they have to go to Cannon Street. Otherwise, they'd have to do complicated cross overs onto the fasts and we don't want to get in the way of those. How much better could Lewisham handle everything coming into the Southbound platforms not crossing over into St John's - ie: all via Tanner's Hill or to Victoria. There'd be a huge temptation to send the whole Hayes service via the avoiding line, but that means stopping 4tph on the fasts at New Cross or forcing everyone express to London Bridge and Charing Cross, which I'd posit wouldn't be good enough from a connectivity standpoint. We still have 8tph turning up at Hither Green as well. Currently, Tanner's Hill flydown handles 6tph, if we can push that up to 8tph (which might be feasible, if we decide to take out the 2tph from Ladywell, that bypass Lewisham), we could run all the Hayes services via Tanners hill and then one of either Orpington/Sevenoaks or Crayford services to Victoria, with the other via Tanner's Hill to Charing Cross. Well, Orpington already has 4tph to Victoria (via Bromley South), so we should run the "SEML Slow" services to Charing Cross and the Crayford services to Victoria (which eliminates an awful lot of flat crossings at Lewisham). It also means everyone who needs to change from Charing Cross services to Victoria services has an easy same-platform interchange at Lewisham. With any Cannon Street passengers able to use London Bridge. The greatest inconvenience comes for St John's and New Cross passengers from areas that aren't North Kent, which have to change platforms at Lewisham.

That leaves the Bexleyheath services, which should all run to Cannon Street, via St John's and New Cross.

I think this works, without horribly disadvantaging anyone.

 

[Antman]

I don't know if this has been mentioned on here but proposals to reduce the number of trains calling at stations between Tonbridge and Ashford haven't been well received. I don't think Pluckley justifies 2tph but Paddock Wood, Marden, Staplehurst and Headcorn probably do.

http://www.kentnews.co.uk/news/coul...use-small-stations-in-kent-to-close-1-4980833

 

[Roast Veg]

Marden could definitely see a reduction in services if the road connection to Paddock Wood were better, as it stands commuters from there would have quite a struggle. Interesting to see the Hastings line is also being considered, some reduced-stop services to Tunbridge Wells would be an alternative to High Speed Hastings.

 

[Hophead]

Last time the franchise was let, DfT were keen to reduce the service at quite a few stations - down to just 6 trains per day, I seem to remember. Sounds like they are trying again.

 

[Antman]

I've often wondered whether all conflicting movements at Lewisham could be eliminated? Obviously all trains from the Woolwich and Bexleyheath lines would have to go to Cannon Street but changing at London Bridge shouldn't be too difficult once the rebuilding is complete. The Victoria service to/from the Bexleyheath line could go via Sidcup instead and possibly onto Gravesend? I certainly concur with what others have said about a service needing to be maintained from all three branches to Dartford and this must be a planners nightmare with so many conflicting requirements. Then there is the Gillingham service, that would have to go to Cannon Street as well unless it was rerouted via Sidcup, the journey time would be quicker and the time saving would allow an extra stop at Swanscombe to be added as somebody suggested previously. But then again the DLR connection at Woolworth would be lost.

I've also pondered whether another 2tph to Hayes could be justified and indeed accommodated? The line does seem to be busy throughout the day (incredible really that it once had only 2tph) although the extra 2tph from Thameslink on the Catford loop line might relieve some of the strain? I was thinking 2 Hayes trains to Cannon Street, 2 to Victoria and 2 to Charing Cross the latter bypassing Lewisham.

On the Hastings line, I'm rather dubious about the HS1 idea, could 3tph be justified with a fast service calling only at St Leonards Warrior Square, Tunbridge Wells, London Bridge, Waterloo East and Charing Cross replacing one of the 2tph that currently terminate at Tunbridge Wells?

 

[JamesRowden]

On the Hastings line, I'm rather dubious about the HS1 idea, could 3tph be justified with a fast service calling only at St Leonards Warrior Square, Tunbridge Wells, London Bridge, Waterloo East and Charing Cross replacing one of the 2tph that currently terminate at Tunbridge Wells?

My idea for an off-peak SEML service would be:

• 4tph Cannon Street to Orpington via Lewisham (metro)
• 3tph Charing Cross to Dover/Ramsgate/Margate via Tonbridge (various stopping patterns)
• 2tph Charing Cross to Tunbridge Wells (stopping all stations between Orpington and Tunbridge Wells)
• 3tph Charing Cross to Hastings/Ore/Eastbourne via Tunbridge Wells (various stopping patterns)

The fact that there are no stations in northern Hastings means that it makes sense for all services to Hastings via Tunbridge Wells to call at Battle. The limited linespeed through Tonbridge and the connections available limits the benefits of Hastings services running non-stop through Tonbridge (outside the peak).

 

[Roast Veg]

There are currently no services that pass through High Brooms either, even in the high peak, for similar reasons to Battle.

 

[AddieH]

There are fundamental issues with these proposals to send all Bexleyheath line trains to Cannon Street. It's not where most people want to go. I was stood on the platform at Welling this morning watching up trains go through and loading is clearly unbalanced.

Many of the services to CST are Networkers and the services to CHX are Class 376 (10 carriage). The CST networkers have plenty of seating space at Welling and the Class 376 are already standing only at Welling. I suspect that loading will become more balanced again when the CST services go back to stopping at London Bridge. However this suggests that CST is not necessarily the most desirable final destination.

For many of us who commute via the Bexleyheath line our final destination is Westminster or the West End. I know that one of the people making that commute, having seen him on the train, is David Evennett, recently MP, and currrently candidate for Bexleyheath and Crayford. If your workplace is between Victoria and Charing Cross that makes either a desirable terminus. Having walked to work from LBG and CST that's not practical on a regular basis and a travel card is a substantial step up in costs of a London Terminals ticket.

So the other option, changing at Lewisham. Despite the recent work to open up the old station building Lewisham is an unsuitable place to make lots of people change from platform 3 to platform 1 in the morning and platform 2 to platform 4 on the way home. The old subway and its stairwells particularly the ones to platform 4 are unsuitably narrow. The newer subway is better, but doesn't help you get from platform 3 to platform 1 or handle the bunching you get at the top of the steps to platform 1. Let's now turn attention to platform 2 and the well known curve and distance from train to platform. It's tolerable now, but is it a good idea to increase the risk by forcing more people over that troublesome gap? Furthermore platform 2 already bottlenecks as most of the train is well past the exit and route to platform 4 and so already forces people disembarking into a long queue to shuffle along the fairly narrow platform while avoiding any last people leaping over the big gap.

In some ways there are parallels to the Wimbledon loop scenario a while back, however Lewisham is an even less practicable place to interchange a larger number of passengers.

Turning to journey opportunities as discussed earlier it seems likely that Hayes and Sidcup routes would maintain services to Charing Cross. Much of the North Kent line will benefit from Crossrail and the opportunity to get to into the West End area via Tottenham Court Road. What does the Bexleyheath line get, a forced change at Lewisham via a station unsuitable for large scale interchange onto a standing room only train.

What benefit the Bexleyheath line?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Turning to journey opportunities as discussed earlier it seems likely that Hayes and Sidcup routes would maintain services to Charing Cross. Much of the North Kent line will benefit from Crossrail and the opportunity to get to into the West End area via Tottenham Court Road. What does the Bexleyheath line get, a forced change at Lewisham via a station unsuitable for large scale interchange onto a standing room only train.

What benefit the Bexleyheath line?

Well, if all Bexleyheath line trains went to Cannon Street (and remember, this is only speculation at the moment, there are no definite plans), one obvious benefit would be a turn-up-and-go frequency. Right now, sure, you can get to lots of different London terminals, but each one only every half hour - so for many people it's very likely that that the train to their preferred terminus goes at an inconvenient time. It will also make it easier to return from many parts of central London: Right now, if - say - you are at - say - Tottenham Court Road, and need to get to Bexleyheath, you have to carefully check train times to figure out if you're best off heading for Victoria, Charing Cross, or Cannon Street. Wouldn't it be easier if you knew that you just needed to head for Cannon Street and you wouldn't have to wait more than a few minutes there because the trains go every 10 minutes?

The other benefit is a regular service interval. Right now there may be 6 trains per hour, but Eastbound they are so irregularly spaced that gaps between trains during the day range from 5 minute to 18 minutes. That's not very good for people making local journeys from Lewisham eastwards.

 

[Antman]

There are fundamental issues with these proposals to send all Bexleyheath line trains to Cannon Street. It's not where most people want to go. I was stood on the platform at Welling this morning watching up trains go through and loading is clearly unbalanced.

Many of the services to CST are Networkers and the services to CHX are Class 376 (10 carriage). The CST networkers have plenty of seating space at Welling and the Class 376 are already standing only at Welling. I suspect that loading will become more balanced again when the CST services go back to stopping at London Bridge. However this suggests that CST is not necessarily the most desirable final destination.

For many of us who commute via the Bexleyheath line our final destination is Westminster or the West End. I know that one of the people making that commute, having seen him on the train, is David Evennett, recently MP, and currrently candidate for Bexleyheath and Crayford. If your workplace is between Victoria and Charing Cross that makes either a desirable terminus. Having walked to work from LBG and CST that's not practical on a regular basis and a travel card is a substantial step up in costs of a London Terminals ticket.

So the other option, changing at Lewisham. Despite the recent work to open up the old station building Lewisham is an unsuitable place to make lots of people change from platform 3 to platform 1 in the morning and platform 2 to platform 4 on the way home. The old subway and its stairwells particularly the ones to platform 4 are unsuitably narrow. The newer subway is better, but doesn't help you get from platform 3 to platform 1 or handle the bunching you get at the top of the steps to platform 1. Let's now turn attention to platform 2 and the well known curve and distance from train to platform. It's tolerable now, but is it a good idea to increase the risk by forcing more people over that troublesome gap? Furthermore platform 2 already bottlenecks as most of the train is well past the exit and route to platform 4 and so already forces people disembarking into a long queue to shuffle along the fairly narrow platform while avoiding any last people leaping over the big gap.

In some ways there are parallels to the Wimbledon loop scenario a while back, however Lewisham is an even less practicable place to interchange a larger number of passengers.

Turning to journey opportunities as discussed earlier it seems likely that Hayes and Sidcup routes would maintain services to Charing Cross. Much of the North Kent line will benefit from Crossrail and the opportunity to get to into the West End area via Tottenham Court Road. What does the Bexleyheath line get, a forced change at Lewisham via a station unsuitable for large scale interchange onto a standing room only train.

What benefit the Bexleyheath line?

Surely it will be better to change at London Bridge when it's fully reopened rather than Lewisham?

I appreciate that Cannon Street isn't the most popular destination but obviously only so many trains can be accommodated at Charing Cross. Do we try and have trains from both termini to all destinations, except New Cross, Greenwich etc, or accept that the Woolwich and Bexleyheath lines will only be served by Cannon Street trains which will be much easier from an operational perspective and allow a more frequent service to be operated?

 

[ComUtoR]

Surely it will be better to change at London Bridge when it's fully reopened rather than Lewisham?

The Bexleyheath line also serves Victoria.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Surely it will be better to change at London Bridge when it's fully reopened rather than Lewisham?

I appreciate that Cannon Street isn't the most popular destination but obviously only so many trains can be accommodated at Charing Cross. Do we try and have trains from both termini to all destinations, except New Cross, Greenwich etc, or accept that the Woolwich and Bexleyheath lines will only be served by Cannon Street trains which will be much easier from an operational perspective and allow a more frequent service to be operated?

I think AddieH is talking about people going to Victoria, whom he's suggesting would change at Lewisham. However, even there I think you're correct.

Right now: Lewisham-Victoria takes 20 minutes, goes every half hour.

If everything on the Bexleyheath line, went to Cannon Street, and you want to get to Victoria and don't want to change at Lewisham, then you can go to Cannon Street (Lewisham-Cannon Street = 14-15 mins), then Circle/District line to Victoria (11-12 minutes). Add a few minutes to change, and you're talking an extra 10 or so minutes journey time, compensated by that you now get a train every 10 minutes - so virtually turn-up-and-go instead of every half hour. That seems a reasonable trade-off to me.

 

[Antman]

I think AddieH is talking about people going to Victoria, whom he's suggesting would change at Lewisham. However, even there I think you're correct.

Right now: Lewisham-Victoria takes 20 minutes, goes every half hour.

If everything on the Bexleyheath line, went to Cannon Street, and you want to get to Victoria and don't want to change at Lewisham, then you can go to Cannon Street (Lewisham-Cannon Street = 14-15 mins), then Circle/District line to Victoria (11-12 minutes). Add a few minutes to change, and you're talking an extra 10 or so minutes journey time, compensated by that you now get a train every 10 minutes - so virtually turn-up-and-go instead of every half hour. That seems a reasonable trade-off to me.

As it stands now passengers from the Mid Kent line and from the Hither Green direction have to change at Lewisham for Victoria so it's as broad as it's long although I can understand Bexleyheath line users feeling they are getting a raw deal.

Didn't there used to be 4tph between Lewisham and Victoria?

On the Hastings service, the 08.04 to Cannon Street seems to be about the fastest at one hour 26 minutes with four intermediate stops.