Modern Railways says that the Crossrail to Tring plan is going cold. I
am surprised. They can't be planning to terminate 60% of the trains at
Paddington / Old Oak indefinitely. After all, they are talking about
extending the Bakerloo southward because Elephant is too near to London
to generate significant flow into London... surely Paddington is even
nearer.

I've been thinking about the different philosophies on the big 3
projects. Thameslink has 12 southern branches, far more than either of
the Crossrails. I think with Crossrail 1, the aim is to run 24tph from
Paddington to Liverpool Street, and the extensions into the suburbs are
less important. But with Thameslink the branches are everything and the
tunnel through the middle is just a way of not having to build loads of
platforms at Blackfriars and St Pancras.

But I think the 12 southern branches on Thameslink is a mistake, and
will cause so many people to wait around on the Zone 1 southbound
platforms for up to half an hour for their train home that the stations
will be regularly closed for crowding. This will be resolved about 6
months after the project opens by ditching about half of the southern
branches and running the other ones quarter-hourly.

On 2015\12\14 14:36, Basil Jet wrote:
Modern Railways says that the Crossrail to Tring plan is going cold. I
am surprised. They can't be planning to terminate 60% of the trains at
Paddington / Old Oak indefinitely. After all, they are talking about
extending the Bakerloo southward because Elephant is too near to London
to generate significant flow into London... surely Paddington is even
nearer.

I've been thinking about the different philosophies on the big 3
projects. Thameslink has 12 southern branches, far more than either of
the Crossrails. I think with Crossrail 1, the aim is to run 24tph from
Paddington to Liverpool Street, and the extensions into the suburbs are
less important. But with Thameslink the branches are everything and the
tunnel through the middle is just a way of not having to build loads of
platforms at Blackfriars and St Pancras.

But I think the 12 southern branches on Thameslink is a mistake, and
will cause so many people to wait around on the Zone 1 southbound
platforms for up to half an hour for their train home that the stations
will be regularly closed for crowding. This will be resolved about 6
months after the project opens by ditching about half of the southern
branches and running the other ones quarter-hourly.

I meant to ask, is there any platform in the world which has 12
different half-hourly services?

In message , at 14:39:02 on Mon, 14 Dec
2015, Basil Jet remarked:
I've been thinking about the different philosophies on the big 3
projects. Thameslink has 12 southern branches, far more than either of
the Crossrails. I think with Crossrail 1, the aim is to run 24tph from
Paddington to Liverpool Street, and the extensions into the suburbs are
less important. But with Thameslink the branches are everything and the
tunnel through the middle is just a way of not having to build loads of
platforms at Blackfriars and St Pancras.

But I think the 12 southern branches on Thameslink is a mistake, and
will cause so many people to wait around on the Zone 1 southbound
platforms for up to half an hour for their train home that the stations
will be regularly closed for crowding. This will be resolved about 6
months after the project opens by ditching about half of the southern
branches and running the other ones quarter-hourly.

I meant to ask, is there any platform in the world which has 12
different half-hourly services?

Waterloo East?
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 14:36:22 on Mon, 14 Dec
2015, Basil Jet remarked:
But I think the 12 southern branches on Thameslink is a mistake, and
will cause so many people to wait around on the Zone 1 southbound
platforms for up to half an hour for their train home that the stations
will be regularly closed for crowding. This will be resolved about 6
months after the project opens by ditching about half of the southern
branches and running the other ones quarter-hourly.

When you say "ditching", do you mean no trains at all to somewhere like
Tattenham Corner? Which six branches would you keep (Sutton x 2 and
Brighton seem no-brainers, so what are the other three)?

How many of the twelve go in parallel to East Croydon, or Gatwick...
--
Roland Perry

On 2015\12\14 15:34, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 14:36:22 on Mon, 14 Dec
2015, Basil Jet remarked:
But I think the 12 southern branches on Thameslink is a mistake, and
will cause so many people to wait around on the Zone 1 southbound
platforms for up to half an hour for their train home that the
stations will be regularly closed for crowding. This will be resolved
about 6 months after the project opens by ditching about half of the
southern branches and running the other ones quarter-hourly.

When you say "ditching", do you mean no trains at all to somewhere like
Tattenham Corner?

I would not be surprised if TfL makes a land grab for the Thameslink
core and it becomes Crossrail 0, with very little penetration outside
the M25 apart from airports, so Tattenham would be in but Brighton would
be out. My sister lives in Brighton and works near Kings Cross and
changes at Victoria every morning because she says the Thameslink route
is slower, so I'm not sure how much Brighton would care about losing
Thameslink services.

Actually crowding will only be a problem in the peak, so maybe all
twelve branches would still have off-peak service. But the desire to
keep the branches down on the Crossrails, even turning half the trains
at Paddington or Wimbledon just so that they won't have too many
branches, is in marked contrast to the Thameslink Programme where every
train heads in a different direction until it hits buffers or the sea.
Does no-one else think that's odd?

In message , at 17:00:20 on Mon, 14 Dec
2015, Basil Jet remarked:
But I think the 12 southern branches on Thameslink is a mistake, and
will cause so many people to wait around on the Zone 1 southbound
platforms for up to half an hour for their train home that the
stations will be regularly closed for crowding. This will be resolved
about 6 months after the project opens by ditching about half of the
southern branches and running the other ones quarter-hourly.

When you say "ditching", do you mean no trains at all to somewhere like
Tattenham Corner?

I would not be surprised if TfL makes a land grab for the Thameslink
core and it becomes Crossrail 0, with very little penetration outside
the M25 apart from airports,

Where would you turn the trains instead? Bedford ones would be
particularly challenging, closely followed by GN.

so Tattenham would be in but Brighton would be out. My sister lives in
Brighton and works near Kings Cross and changes at Victoria every
morning because she says the Thameslink route is slower, so I'm not
sure how much Brighton would care about losing Thameslink services.

I tend to agree that commuters probably want to head for places more on
their side of London than the other. But what of the commuters south of
Croydon working in the City. Is there enough extra capacity to turn all
those trains at Blackfriars, and won't many passengers be heading for
Farringdon area? I used to travel quite frequently between Cambridge and
City Thameslink in the peaks.

Actually crowding will only be a problem in the peak, so maybe all
twelve branches would still have off-peak service. But the desire to
keep the branches down on the Crossrails, even turning half the trains
at Paddington or Wimbledon just so that they won't have too many
branches, is in marked contrast to the Thameslink Programme where every
train heads in a different direction until it hits buffers or the sea.

That's a slight exaggeration; Horsham and Peterborough are neither, nor
is the Sutton Loop. A few others too.

Does no-one else think that's odd?

--
Roland Perry

In message , at 18:51:18 on
Mon, 14 Dec 2015, Paul Corfield remarked:

It is farcical that the Wimbledon loop timetable constrains the Midland
Main Line, the Brighton Main Line and the East Coast Main Line all the
way to Scotland. Network Rail have to schedule the former first and
slot everything else in around one service. ECML fast services will be
constrained by the Thameslink services once the routes are connected
together.

The Thameslink and EMT trains on the MML are pretty much segregated to
one pair of tracks each. Similarly the GN's that will go through the
core, from East Coast + Kings Lynn fasts which will continue to
terminate at Kings Cross.
--
Roland Perry

Basil Jet wrote:
On 2015\12\14 14:36, Basil Jet wrote:
Modern Railways says that the Crossrail to Tring plan is going cold. I
am surprised. They can't be planning to terminate 60% of the trains at
Paddington / Old Oak indefinitely. After all, they are talking about
extending the Bakerloo southward because Elephant is too near to London
to generate significant flow into London... surely Paddington is even
nearer.

I've been thinking about the different philosophies on the big 3
projects. Thameslink has 12 southern branches, far more than either of
the Crossrails. I think with Crossrail 1, the aim is to run 24tph from
Paddington to Liverpool Street, and the extensions into the suburbs are
less important. But with Thameslink the branches are everything and the
tunnel through the middle is just a way of not having to build loads of
platforms at Blackfriars and St Pancras.

But I think the 12 southern branches on Thameslink is a mistake, and
will cause so many people to wait around on the Zone 1 southbound
platforms for up to half an hour for their train home that the stations
will be regularly closed for crowding. This will be resolved about 6
months after the project opens by ditching about half of the southern
branches and running the other ones quarter-hourly.

I meant to ask, is there any platform in the world which has 12
different half-hourly services?


There are a lot of different routes taken by trains from Manchester
Piccadilly platform 14, but some of those are hourly or less frequent.
--
Jeremy Double

In article , (Basil Jet)
wrote:

On 2015\12\14 15:34, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 14:36:22 on Mon, 14 Dec
2015, Basil Jet remarked:
But I think the 12 southern branches on Thameslink is a mistake, and
will cause so many people to wait around on the Zone 1 southbound
platforms for up to half an hour for their train home that the
stations will be regularly closed for crowding. This will be resolved
about 6 months after the project opens by ditching about half of the
southern branches and running the other ones quarter-hourly.

Some will already be quarterly, e.g. Brighton, surely?

When you say "ditching", do you mean no trains at all to somewhere like
Tattenham Corner?

I would not be surprised if TfL makes a land grab for the Thameslink
core and it becomes Crossrail 0, with very little penetration outside
the M25 apart from airports, so Tattenham would be in but Brighton
would be out. My sister lives in Brighton and works near Kings Cross
and changes at Victoria every morning because she says the Thameslink
route is slower, so I'm not sure how much Brighton would care about
losing Thameslink services.

Actually crowding will only be a problem in the peak, so maybe all
twelve branches would still have off-peak service. But the desire to
keep the branches down on the Crossrails, even turning half the
trains at Paddington or Wimbledon just so that they won't have too
many branches, is in marked contrast to the Thameslink Programme
where every train heads in a different direction until it hits
buffers or the sea. Does no-one else think that's odd?

Isn't the problem with the Southern end of Thameslink that none of the
routes can take much more frequent services so diversity is the only answer?
The Brighton main line won't just be served by Thameslink.

After all, isn't that why the Southern survives with no metro frequencies.
It's such a complex and multifarious network.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On 2015\12\15 00:30, wrote:

After all, isn't that why the Southern survives with no metro frequencies.
It's such a complex and multifarious network.

I'd imagine it mostly survives because most of the people who want to
get a train to Central London every morning live in North London.