http://www.transportbriefing.co.uk/story.php?id=4878
quote
Network Rail plans for 32 Thameslink trains an hour
Filed 09/04/08

Up to 32 trains an hour will run between London and the south coast
along Thameslink routes by 2015, according to information contained
within Network Rail's newly published South London Route Utilisation
Strategy.

The RUS shows what timetable enhancements passengers can expect to see
from implementation of the £5.5bn Thameslink Programme, signed off by
the government last summer (Transport Briefing 24/07/07). It promises
new through-London services from towns including Maidstone, Tunbridge
Wells, East Grinstead and Horsham. However other places that were
expected to gain Thameslink services under the Thameslink 2000 plans
worked up by Network Rail's predecessor Railtrack, such as Dartford,
Eastbourne, Littlehampton, Ashford and Guildford, will not be included
on the new network. In order to reduce train crossovers, the current
Wimbledon loop services will no longer run through London, instead
terminating at Blackfriars.

Key Output 2 - the fully upgraded Thameslink network due to be
delivered in 2015 - will provide 18 peak time trains an hour through
London Bridge - four per hour through London to Brighton (two of which
will have limited stops), two trains per hour to East Grinstead, four
to Tonbridge with two going on to Tunbridge Wells, four to Gatwick
Airport with two going on to Horsham, and four stoppers running to
Sydenham and East Croydon. An additional six trains will run through
London via Elephant and Castle with four heading to Orpington/
Sevenoaks and two running to Maidstone. A further eight trains will
start and terminate at Blackfriars, providing four services along the
Wimbledon loop plus two running to and from Herne Hill and two heading
to Rochester in Kent.

The current proposals will deliver at least two peak trains per hour
on each Thameslink route but 10 of the routes merge, providing four
trains per hour for most stations. Two unpaired two-train-per-hour
routes are required to allow 6tph via Elephant & Castle and 18 via
London Bridge. The figure 18 has been arrived at to take full
advantage of the London Bridge/Borough Market Viaduct upgrade while
addressing bottlenecks at Herne Hill and on the Catford loop which
will not be resolved by the Thameslink project.

It is understood that timetable planners have omitted Eastbourne and
Littlehampton from the enlarged Thameslink network because it was not
feasible to run two trains per hour from these destinations. Services
via Greenwich will in future terminate at Cannon Street rather than
Charing Cross so that there is no need for them to cross over the
Thameslink tracks. South Eastern suburban routes are deemed better
suited to 20 minute service patterns than the usual 15 or 30 minute
service patterns, explaining why Dartford - which is already served by
Charing Cross, Cannon Street and Victoria trains, is no longer
included on the planned Thameslink network.

One knock-on effect of the Thameslink Programme will be a reduction in
the number of peak trains serving the Cannon Street terminus from 25
to 20 trains per hour. On delivery of Key Output 2 Cannon Street
trains will maintain their current three platforms at London Bridge
(two in the peak direction, one in the off-peak) but changes to track
at London Bridge will mean that it will no longer be possible to bring
in additional rolling stock from the Grove Park sidings via
Blackfriars. As a result, Tunbridge Wells and Paddock Wood trains that
currently terminate at Cannon Street will be converted to cross-London
Thameslink routes.

North of the capital current plans envisage 16 of the through London
services continuing up the Midland Main Line (as used by current
Thameslink trains run by First Capital Connect) while eight would
serve the East Coast Main Line routes using the new connection built
at St Pancras. Previous proposals specified 14 MML trains with 10 ECML
services. Given that the South London RUS focuses on service provision
south of the capital details of Thameslink calling patterns north of
London are not yet clear.

Meanwhile, Network Rail has acknowledged that delivery of Key Output 0
of the Thameslink Programme has slipped from December 2008 to March
2009. This percursor to main works will effectively join South Eastern
and First Capital Connect's timetables through Blackfriars and the
central London tunnels so that the Blackfriars bay platforms can be
closed to allow work on the station upgrade to commence. It will also
include the closure of the Moorgate branch line. Key Ouput 1, due to
be delivered in 2011, will add Rochester, Maidstone East, Sevenoaks,
Orpington and extra stopping services to Three Bridges to current
Thameslink destinations.
Unquote

With the transfer of the Thameslink Sutton Loop services to other
south eastern destinations – and their termination at Blackfriars will
these service continue to be part of the Thameslink franchise or would
they be better integrated into a southern franchise or even possibly
LOROL. Would a connection to the ELL be of advantage?

On Apr 11, 10:22 am, Mwmbwls wrote:
With the transfer of the Thameslink Sutton Loop services to other
south eastern destinations - and their termination at Blackfriars will
these service continue to be part of the Thameslink franchise or would

I never understood why it was part of it in the first place.
Thameslink was supposed to be a north to south express route. Not a
north to obscure-suburb-in-sw-london local train. I mean why Sutton?
Why not Wandsworth or Dulwich or Chessington or ..... If anyone
suggested the northbound thameslink had a terminus at Barnet everyone
would laugh, but for some reason if its in south london no ones bats
an eyelid.

B2003

On 11 Apr, 10:53, Boltar wrote:
On Apr 11, 10:22 am, Mwmbwls wrote:

With the transfer of the Thameslink Sutton Loop services to other
south eastern destinations - and their termination at Blackfriars will
these service continue to be part of the Thameslink franchise or would

I never understood why it was part of it in the first place.
Thameslink was supposed to be a north to south express route. Not a
north to obscure-suburb-in-sw-london local train. I mean why Sutton?
Why not Wandsworth or Dulwich or Chessington or ..... If anyone
suggested the northbound thameslink had a terminus at Barnet everyone
would laugh, but for some reason if its in south london no ones bats
an eyelid.

B2003

It's become an express route now, but at the time I think it was
envisaged to be away of avoiding turning round suburban services at
termini.

Note how originally there was no first class in the 319/0s, and it
only came in with the later, smaller fleet of 319/1s. Now the smaller
fleet of 319/1s has become the "Metro" 319/3s and the 319/0s have
mostly become the "Cityflier" 319/4s with first class put in.

Thamselink directly replaced the local services from St Pancras and
the services that had been running from Holborn Viaduct, which at
various times included services to Wimbledon and Sutton.

So I guess the reason for it was purely because services used to go
that way from Holborn Viaduct.

On Apr 11, 10:53*am, Boltar wrote:
I never understood why it was part of it in the first place.
Thameslink was supposed to be a north to south express route. Not a
north to obscure-suburb-in-sw-london local train. I mean why Sutton?
Why not Wandsworth or Dulwich or Chessington or ..... If anyone
suggested the northbound thameslink had a terminus at Barnet everyone
would laugh, but for some reason if its in south london no ones bats
an eyelid.
You are right up to a point. Thameslink fused not only semi fasts
from Bedford,Luton and Saint Albans to Brighton etc but also locals
starting in the main at Saint Albans. Although many of these ran
through to Moorgate following the Old Widened lines train patterns -
some ran through to Blackfriars - going straight on to the Sutton loop
was just a convenience when the peak hour traffic through London
Bridge was blocked. With the recasting of Blackfriars terminal
platforms - it makes sense to change the arrangements. IIRC at some
stage there was a plan to run the ELL through to East Dulwich before
Clapham Junction became the south London station of choice- hence my
suggestion for a partial ELLX transfer..

On 11 Apr, 10:22, Mwmbwls wrote:

http://www.transportbriefing.co.uk/story.php?id=4878

(quoted text snipped)

With the transfer of the Thameslink Sutton Loop services to other
south eastern destinations - and their termination at Blackfriars will
these service continue to be part of the Thameslink franchise or would
they be better integrated into a southern franchise or even possibly
LOROL. Would a connection to the ELL be of advantage?


Dare I suggest that the precise question of which franchisee actually
runs these services is of less interest to a whole host of other
issues, though I would thing it would be logical that the Sutton Loop
should be grouped together with the rest of the 'South London Metro'
routes rather than whoever runs the Thameslink routes.

All that said what I think is of great interest is whether the 'South
London Metro' routes are transferred over to TfL control when the
current Southern franchise expires, so they become another part of the
London Overground network. However if this were to happen I don't
necessarily think that they'd have to be run by LOROL, as TfL could
appoint another concessionaire for these routes.

Anyway the whole issue of what happens after the current Southern
franchise expires is still unclear as decisions still have to be made.
I guess one possibility is that under the new franchise one franchisee
will run all the South Central routes (both Brighton main line &
Sussex Coast etc *and* South London Metro), but the South London Metro
routes will be run along the basis of a concession agreement with TfL
- thought perhaps having a company with split responsibilities like
this would simply be too complicated to work in reality (i.e. having
to answer to two different masters).

With regards to a connection to the ELL, it's a nice idea but I think
once ELLX phase 2 is in place (linking Clapham Junction via Peckham
Rye to Canada Water and beyond) there simply won't be any spare
capacity left on the core ELL route to funnel more trains along it. If
any Sutton Loop trains were fed up to London Bridge via Peckham Rye
(as indeed a few already are at peak times) then there'd be same-
platform interchange with ELLX trains there.

No doubt there is going to be a certain amount of uproar over this
decision to terminate Sutton Loop trains at Blackfriars, just you wait
- after all people will have made decisions to buy houses and settle
near Sutton Loop stations on the basis of the existing service
pattern, and I don't think there was ever much in the public
conciousness that suggested through Thameslink services were under
threat. Of course changing at Blackfriars isn't really going to be
very hard - indeed if things work as they should the Thameslink route
through the centre of town should run smoothly and frequently. But
passengers do like their through services, which is IMO fair enough.

On Apr 11, 11:14*am, Mizter T wrote:
On 11 Apr, 10:22, Mwmbwls wrote:

http://www.transportbriefing.co.uk/story.php?id=4878

(quoted text snipped)

With the transfer of the Thameslink Sutton Loop services to other
south eastern destinations - and their termination at Blackfriars will
these service continue to be part of the Thameslink franchise or would
they be better integrated into a southern franchise or even possibly
LOROL. Would a connection to the ELL be of advantage?

Dare I suggest that the precise question of which franchisee actually
runs these services is of less interest to a whole host of other
issues, though I would thing it would be logical that the Sutton Loop
should be grouped together with the rest of the 'South London Metro'
routes rather than whoever runs the Thameslink routes.

All that said what I think is of great interest is whether the 'South
London Metro' routes are transferred over to TfL control when the
current Southern franchise expires, so they become another part of the
London Overground network. However if this were to happen I don't
necessarily think that they'd have to be run by LOROL, as TfL could
appoint another concessionaire for these routes.

Anyway the whole issue of what happens after the current Southern
franchise expires is still unclear as decisions still have to be made.
I guess one possibility is that under the new franchise one franchisee
will run all the South Central routes (both Brighton main line &
Sussex Coast etc *and* South London Metro), but the South London Metro
routes will be run along the basis of a concession agreement with TfL
- thought perhaps having a company with split responsibilities like
this would simply be too complicated to work in reality (i.e. having
to answer to two different masters).

With regards to a connection to the ELL, it's a nice idea but I think
once ELLX phase 2 is in place (linking Clapham Junction via Peckham
Rye to Canada Water and beyond) there simply won't be any spare
capacity left on the core ELL route to funnel more trains along it. If
any Sutton Loop trains were fed up to London Bridge via Peckham Rye
(as indeed a few already are at peak times) then there'd be same-
platform interchange with ELLX trains there.
The peak hour services were the ones I was thinking of in order to
relieve London Bridge but as you say it could be busy on the ELL.

No doubt there is going to be a certain amount of uproar over this
decision to terminate Sutton Loop trains at Blackfriars, just you wait
- after all people will have made decisions to buy houses and settle
near Sutton Loop stations on the basis of the existing service
pattern, and I don't think there was ever much in the public
conciousness that suggested through Thameslink services were under
threat. Of course changing at Blackfriars isn't really going to be
very hard - indeed if things work as they should the Thameslink route
through the centre of town should run smoothly and frequently. But
passengers do like their through services, which is IMO fair enough.

I agree - apologies I was eliding South London Metro aspirations by
TfL with LOROL - this branding, rebranding merry go round taxes the
grey cells.

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008, Boltar wrote:

On Apr 11, 10:22 am, Mwmbwls wrote:

With the transfer of the Thameslink Sutton Loop services to other
south eastern destinations - and their termination at Blackfriars will
these service continue to be part of the Thameslink franchise or would

I never understood why it was part of it in the first place. Thameslink
was supposed to be a north to south express route. Not a north to
obscure-suburb-in-sw-london local train. I mean why Sutton? Why not
Wandsworth or Dulwich or Chessington or .....

It's got to be somewhere, hasn't it? If it was Chessington, you'd be
asking why not Sutton.

If anyone suggested the northbound thameslink had a terminus at Barnet
everyone would laugh,

Er, you know that the Thameslink inners terminate at St Albans, right?
That's barely outside London.

tom

--
Ed editor textorum probatissimus est -- Cicero, De officiis IV.7

Mwmbwls wrote:
http://www.transportbriefing.co.uk/story.php?id=4878
quote
Network Rail plans for 32 Thameslink trains an hour
Filed 09/04/08

Up to 32 trains an hour will run between London and the south coast
along Thameslink routes by 2015, according to information contained
within Network Rail's newly published South London Route Utilisation
Strategy.

List edited for clarity:

four per hour to Brighton.
two per hour to East Grinstead.
four to Tonbridge with two going on to Tunbridge Wells.
four to Gatwick Airport with two going on to Horsham.
four stoppers running to Sydenham and East Croydon.
four heading to Orpington/Sevenoaks.
two running to Maidstone.
four services along the Wimbledon loop
two running to and from Herne Hill and
two heading to Rochester in Kent.

Please correct me if I'm being a bit geographically challenged, but isn't
the only one of these destinations that is on the South Coast actually
Brighton? What's with these journalists ffs...

With the transfer of the Thameslink Sutton Loop services to other
south eastern destinations – and their termination at Blackfriars will
these service continue to be part of the Thameslink franchise or would
they be better integrated into a southern franchise or even possibly
LOROL. Would a connection to the ELL be of advantage?

I agree that the Wimbledon loop services wouldn't need to be part of
Thameslink, (as I suggested when I raised the Wimbledons being curtailed a
week ago) but I can't see an obvious way of connecting them to the ELL. Is
there a practical route - and would the ELL have enough capacity anyway
amongst the 16 tph it will already have?

Paul S

On Apr 11, 3:58 pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote:
Mwmbwls wrote:
http://www.transportbriefing.co.uk/story.php?id=4878
quote
Network Rail plans for 32 Thameslink trains an hour
Filed 09/04/08

Up to 32 trains an hour will run between London and the south coast
along Thameslink routes by 2015, according to information contained
within Network Rail's newly published South London Route Utilisation
Strategy.

List edited for clarity:

four per hour to Brighton.
two per hour to East Grinstead.
four to Tonbridge with two going on to Tunbridge Wells.
four to Gatwick Airport with two going on to Horsham.
four stoppers running to Sydenham and East Croydon.
four heading to Orpington/Sevenoaks.
two running to Maidstone.
four services along the Wimbledon loop
two running to and from Herne Hill and
two heading to Rochester in Kent.

Please correct me if I'm being a bit geographically challenged, but isn't
the only one of these destinations that is on the South Coast actually
Brighton? What's with these journalists ffs...

With the transfer of the Thameslink Sutton Loop services to other
south eastern destinations - and their termination at Blackfriars will
these service continue to be part of the Thameslink franchise or would
they be better integrated into a southern franchise or even possibly
LOROL. Would a connection to the ELL be of advantage?

I agree that the Wimbledon loop services wouldn't need to be part of
Thameslink, (as I suggested when I raised the Wimbledons being curtailed a
week ago) but I can't see an obvious way of connecting them to the ELL. Is
there a practical route - and would the ELL have enough capacity anyway
amongst the 16 tph it will already have?


I'd imagine that the potential route would be from Tulse Hill -
Peckham Rye (rather than to Herne Hill and Blackfriars), joining ELL
phase 2 at Peckham Rye.
This would avoid the flat crossing of the South Eastern mainline at
Herne Hill, but at the cost of the Blackfriars to Tulse Hill route.


Paul S

"Andy" wrote

I'd imagine that the potential route would be from Tulse Hill -
Peckham Rye (rather than to Herne Hill and Blackfriars), joining ELL
phase 2 at Peckham Rye.
This would avoid the flat crossing of the South Eastern mainline at
Herne Hill, but at the cost of the Blackfriars to Tulse Hill route.

It makes sense for the Wimbledon/Sutton Loop service to become
self-contained from Blackfriars. It will keep to the west side between
loughborough junction and the new bay platforms at Blackfriars, so will not
conflict with Thameslink at all. It also minimises conflicts at Tulse Hill.
Currently off-peak from London Bridge via the South London Line there are
2tph to Victoria via Denmark Hill. These will be diverted to start from
Bellingham.
2tph to Smitham via Crystal Palace
2tph to Beckenham Junction
2tph to West Croydon via Selhurst. These do conflict with Thameslink trains
between Tulse Hill and Streatham Junctions.
While Blackfriars may not be the ideal London terminus for all Wimbledon
Loop passengers, they do have a wide choice by one change, at Wimbledon to
Waterloo or LUL District Line, at Sutton or Herne Hill to Victoria, at Tulse
Hill to London Bridge, at Elephant to LUL Northern or Bakerloo Line (though
this interchange desperately needs improvement), and at Blackfriars to LUL
Circle Line and to Thameslink.

Peter