Mizter T wrote:
On 14 Dec, 17:08, solar penguin wrote:
On 14 Dec, 13:05, Mizter T wrote:


So it is at Denmark Hill where I'd expect the loss of a direct service
to London Bridge will be felt most acutely, and also where the voices
of opposition will be the loudest.
And don't forget Denmark Hill also has direct train services to
Elephant & Castle and Blackfriars.


Yes, but whilst I'm always keen to suggest people should be a bit less
averse to utilising Shank's pony, Blackfriars and London Bridge are
nonetheless in somewhat different necks of the wood (and Blackfriars
isn't really any good for access to Guy's Hospital). Plus of course
the benefit of London Bridge is the wide range of interchange
opportunities it offers.

Elephant & Castle does indeed offer an interchange of sorts with the
Northern and Bakerloo lines - but it's a pretty clunky interchange.
Denmark Hill to London Bridge via Elephant & Castle is not a route I'd
particularly recommend - in particular going southbound, as one would
have to hit the half-hourly train from E&C to Denmark Hill (the
Blackfriars - Sevenoaks service). The preferable rail route to LB
would be via a change at Peckham Rye or Queens Road Peckham.

What I haven't got my head round is the exact reasoning behind the
South London Line being chucked out of London Bridge. I guess it
occupies a valuable platform, which is space that is much needed. I'm
unclear as to whether this space is needed permanently for Thameslink
'2000' or whether it is just needed for the duration of construction
works... I thought it was the latter, but perhaps it's the former.

The rebuilt London bridge will have fewer terminal platforms in favour
of more through platforms.

Dave