Alex Terrell wrote:
(Aidan Stanger) wrote\...
No, the shortage of paths is on the CTRL, as a lot more people are
expected to start using Eurostars once they run at high speeds all the
way.
They always say that. But lets assume passenger numbers treble. That
would fill six trains per hour.
I think the main point is that they don't want the domestic services to
prevent future growth in international services. They want the passenger
numbers to do far more than just treble.
What they want and what's realistic are two very different things.
Knocking 30 minutes off the journey time won't treble volumes,
especially with the rise of low cost airlines. So we still have 10 tph
for domestic services.
Knocking 30 minutes off the journey time won't treble volumes
immediately, but what makes you think that it won't do so over 20 years?
| snip
Overall, I accept that some of the lines are not suitable for high
speed services. But that means that Ashford and Ebbsfleet need to
become hubs for normal train services (remember, CTRL will have huge
capacity), such as:
Via Ebbsfleet:
- Tonbridge to Dartford
- Dartford to Sittingbourne
- A new tram / light rail service from Ebbsfleet to Bluewater, and
ideally on to somewhere inside the M25. I haven't figured out a path,
but Bluewater seems to be a place where lots of people want to go to,
and Ebbsfleet will be a place where lots of people can go to.
Kent County Council have figured out a path, and are building a busway
called Fastrack (whick despite its name, will be unguided) along the
route. A future conversion to light rail is tentatively planned.
- Of course, CrossRail from Isle of Dogs to Ebbsfleet
....is an insane waste of money!
(As an aside, I'd also propose building an Olympic village
accommodation within walking distance of Ebbsfleet. That would put
athletes within ~10 minutes of Stratford. Later it could be turned
into affordable housing)
So Athletes would have to rely on the high speed trains that the crowds
would also rely on?
| snip
It would be much quicker to get to Dover via Folkestone, so I see no
point in extending using the high speed trains to run there via
Faversham if those trains are well designed.
As I understand the Dover - Folkstone tunnel is not suitable for high
speed trains.
I have already explained to you why it is! They were thought to be
unsuitable because of incompatibility with end doors, but high speed
trains with end doors were around decades ago!
So I would run conventional trains from Ashford to
Folstone to Dover to Ramsgate, with high speed trains splitting at
Ashford to go to Folkstone and Ramsgate.
It would still be advantageous to have conventional trains do so as
well.
On the North Kent Line the high speed trains could get overcrowded in
the peaks if they went all the way to Ramsgate. That's part of the
reason I suggested turning them back at Rochester. That way commuters
for whom Stratford and Kings Cross are much better destinations would
have cross platform interchange at Rochester (which has double faced
platforms, unlike Chatham and Gillingham), but passengers without such a
strong preference of London termini would continue to go to Victoria.
Getting overcrowded is a sign of success and clearly something the
train operators would like.
Not if the train operators are competent. Some trains getting
overcrowded is a sign of bad timetabling!
Bear in mind these could be 12 or 16 car trains. Perhaps only half the
train would continue from Rochester (or Ebbsfleet, if Strood and Rochester
stations can't take 16 carriage trains.
The station length is not the problem. The trains are almost certain to
be a success, but overcrowding would be unpopular with the passengers.
I still think 2 tph to Tonbridge would be good, but if the track can't
take it, then the older trains should run Tonbridge to Dartford. (It
makes no sense to stop at Paddock Wood and Strood).
I don't know about Tonbridge, but Dartford is not a suitable terminus.
Tonbridge is as it's a major interchange. I don't know about Dartford
- pick somewhere else, bearing in mind that many commuters from west
of Ebbsfleet will also want to take CTRL.
There is really only one sensible alternative: London. However, traffic
on the Medway Valley line is unlikely to ever half fill a train of the
length needed for services in the London suburbs. Presumably that's why
the service was cut back to Strood in the first place.
FWIW I don't think Paddock Wood is a good choice of terminus. When BR
was originally broken up, AIUI there was planned to be a Maidstone to
Gatwick Airport microfranchise, but the plan was abandoned and the
service pattern went back to how it was before.
Buses from Strood are not the answer, as the Medway Bridge is crowded
enough already. Those passengers who want to take the bus can do so from
Maidstone.
Then more train services
The trains can't do it directly without reversing at Strood, and IIRC
the junction at Strood is flat and quite busy (and will be busier once
the high speed trains start running).
Passengers can change at Strood. As long as there's about 8 tph, and
it's cross platform, that's not too big an issue.
On what basis do you assume that? Considering that it's quicker by car,
and that a lot of Chatham is a long way from the railway, I'd say it's a
bigger issue than you think.
Why do you assume they'll only start with the "core service" option?
After all, this consultation provoked several suggestions on how to
operate the service more efficiently.
Let's hope. Have they placed rolling stock orders?
Not AFAIK. Shall we take this to uk.railway?
Agreed - and thanks for your thoughts.
[Followups set to uk.railway only]