| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
 |
|
Menu
| London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
| London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#8
August 12th 04, 03:18 PM
posted to uk.transport.london
|
|||
|
|||
CTRL to benefit Kent: What services?
Alex Terrell wrote:
(Aidan Stanger) wrote... Alex Terrell wrote: (Aidan Stanger) wrote... Alex Terrell wrote: Thinking about this, I now agree - forget running CrossRail trains through the CTRL. But what domestic services should be run through the CTRL from 2007? After all, operators should start to order rolling stock about now. There was a consultation about this last year. The SRA had identified the core service destinations as Gravesend, Canterbury West and Folkestone Central, and were seeking views on extending it to Rainham, Faversham, Ramsgate (either way) or Maidstone West. Service frequency was to be 8tph peak, 4tph offpeak. Does that mean 8 tph to Gravesend, then 4 tph to Canterbury West and 4 to Folkstone Central? That would mean a lot of people travelling to these stations to get to London. No, it means 8tph London to Ebbsfleet, then 4tph to Gravesend and 4tph to Ashford, 2 of which would then continue to Folkestone Central and 2 would continue to Canterbury West. There are various options for running the trains further than that, though none involve Hastings via Rye (the population is too low to justify electrification, let alone high speed trains). So 8 tph limited commuter services. That means with 4 Eurostar services, the CTRL Phase 2 will only be taking 12 tph. They should at least be extending the Gravesend services to Chatham, and some beyond to Ramsgate. They talk about 8 eurostar tph, but can't even fill 3 at the moment, and for some bizarre reason they want to keep Waterloo International just to operate a few Eurostar per day. Really? Last I heard they were planning to close Waterloo International. Diverting some trains to Waterloo would increase the number of available paths on the CTRL. There aren't expected to be as many paths available as you think. But there would if they replace 8 car paths to London Bridge with 12 or 16 Car paths to Stratford and St Pancras. 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. (snip) I also put a case for converting the Maidstone West line to light rail, and (after A2 capacity is freed up by the opening of the Lower Thames Crossing) taking over 2 lanes of the A2 to extend it to Ebbsfleet. Not sure I follow. The Lower Thames Crossing was only proposed, not planned. (It might be needed as more people try and drive to Ebbsfleet.) 'Tis generally accepted that it will be needed eventually, and ITYF it is planned, though not in great detail. How long it will be before it gets built depends on several other factors, including whether the Thames Gateway Bridge gets built as planned, as both it and the Lower Thames Crossing would be partly paid for with the revenue from Dartford tolls. Lower Thames Crossing is needed now. If London Gateway port goes ahead, even more so. So do you still object to my plan to use freed up A2 capacity for a light rail line from Ebbsfleet to Cuxton, where it would join the Maidstone line (which would also be converted to light rail). Why can't the existing line go from Ebbsfleet to Gravesend, through the Strood tunnel, and on to Maidstone West, Paddock Wood, and Tonbridge. It can, though it wouldn't be much faster than the existing services to Maidstone. By the time it reached Tonbridge, it would be substantially slower than the existing route to London. That's quite an inefficient use of these trains, which are more expensive than normal trains. I estimate 1 hour from Tonbridge to St Pancras, compared with about 40 minutes to Waterloo East. The Maidstone - St.Pancras time is officially estimated to be 46 minutes. The Medway Valley Line is unsuitable for high speed running. People might use it if they wanted to go from Tunbridge Wells or Tunbridge to Stratford, or St Pancras if Thameslink 2000 doesn't happen. 'Tis still quicker by Tube. From Maidstone, it will be quickest to take the CTRL. The alternative for many will be to drive to Ebbsfleet. It will also help people commuting into Maidstone. ....Which is a less important destination than Rochester/Chatham UIVMM. The other problem is that quite a lot of people commute between Maidstone and the Chatham area, and rail has a very low market share because it finishes up on the wrong side of the Medway. A light rail proposal was developed to solve this problem, but stalled due to lack of funding. If a lot of money's going to be spent on that line, serving Chatham's a better objective than high speed services. But a high frquency of services from Dartford to Sittingbourne, as well as frequent buses from Strood, would partially solve that issue. People could get from Tonbridge and Maidstone to Rochester via Strood. But they'd have great difficulty providing a convenient service when it's not a one seat ride. If the CTRL trains ran to Maidstone then they'd have no connection with the trains to Victoria. However, if they ran via Rochester then they'd connect with both the Maidstone and East Kent services. 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. Also, improving the existing service would be possible by constructing a short connection near the M26 so that the express trains can run via Orpington instead of taking the longer route via Swanley. Do you know whether any action is being taken? On the CTRL website I see no mention of a connection with the North Kent line. There will be one. The core service is as certain as UK rail plans can be, although how far the trains will be extended remains to be seen. Better than nothing. It'll run for a year, then there'll be a study for 2 years, then they'll decide there's an urgent need to extend services. Then they'll order rolling stock, and services will be extended about 2013. 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. |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| "South Bank to benefit from zone 1 stations" | London Transport | |||
| Benefit cost ratio on street signs | London Transport | |||
| Would Oyster benefit me? | London Transport | |||
| North London commuters to benefit from secure cycle parking in Finsbury Park | London Transport News | |||
| Hayes (Kent) line | London Transport | |||
Threaded Mode
