|
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
Since reading various threads about Gatwick and the ELL, I've started to
wonder - has anyone considered combining them with a service from Gatwick Airport to Liverpool Street (stopping all stations via Forest Hill)? The idea might seem strange at first, but it does appear to have a lot going for it - giving Surrey and South London direct access to Liverpool Street station and E1 would greatly increase connectivity, and for many airport passengers with heavy luggage, the convenience would more than make up for the extra journey time (though obviously those in a hurry would continue to use Thameslink). I think the demand for such a service would be high, but have I overestimated it? And if demand were high, would they be able to run enough trains to accommodate it? The obvious problem with such a route is the infrastructure requirements. But what exactly would such a service require? I can think of the following things: Restoration of the Shoreditch - Liverpool Street connection, providing platform capacity at Liverpool Street (Crossrail could do that), extra platforms at Gatwick and/or grade separation N of Gatwick (since the existing arrangements are clearly inadequate), conversion of the ELL to 3rd rail (as is already planned UIVMM) and probably a signalling upgrade. Can anyone think of anything else that would need to be done? |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
Aidan Stanger wrote:
Since reading various threads about Gatwick and the ELL, I've started to wonder - has anyone considered combining them with a service from Gatwick Airport to Liverpool Street (stopping all stations via Forest Hill)? The idea might seem strange at first, but it does appear to have a lot going for it - giving Surrey and South London direct access to Liverpool Street station and E1 would greatly increase connectivity, and for many airport passengers with heavy luggage, the convenience would more than make up for the extra journey time (though obviously those in a hurry would continue to use Thameslink). I think the demand for such a service would be high, but have I overestimated it? And if demand were high, would they be able to run enough trains to accommodate it? I'd have thought that the easterly connections with Crossrail, linking with the current Thameslink services would provide most of the inner-suburban connectivity for such a route, and the number of people going between far Essex and East Anglia and Sussex, for whom an extra connection is offputting are few in number. Robin |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
In article , Aidan Stanger
writes Restoration of the Shoreditch - Liverpool Street connection, providing platform capacity at Liverpool Street (Crossrail could do that), Neither the connection nor the platform capacity is the issue. The problem with Liverpool Street is that the 6 approach tracks are at capacity in the peaks. -- Clive D.W. Feather | Home: Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work: Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
|
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
"Kevin" wrote in message om... These "wouldn't it be great if we had a train from here to there" arguements never cease to amaze me. Presumabley somebody waves a magic wand and hey presto ther is all the extra capacity for this. Kevin Agree - where the translation of here is 'where I live' and there is 'where I often go'. The facts are that nearly the whole railway was built where the passengers of the mid 1800s wanted to go. Paul |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
Clive D. W. Feather wrote:
writes Restoration of the Shoreditch - Liverpool Street connection, providing platform capacity at Liverpool Street (Crossrail could do that), Neither the connection nor the platform capacity is the issue. The problem with Liverpool Street is that the 6 approach tracks are at capacity in the peaks. OK, the approach capacity not the platform capacity. Crossrail could still solve it. As for the connection, it could be a problem depending on how they construct the ELL-NLL link. |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
"R.C. Payne" wrote in message ...
I'd have thought that the easterly connections with Crossrail, linking with the current Thameslink services would provide most of the inner-suburban connectivity for such a route, and the number of people going between far Essex and East Anglia and Sussex, for whom an extra connection is offputting are few in number. To build on the last-mentioned point, surely a lot of air travellers from Essex & East Anglia would be better off going from Stansted rather than Gatwick? David E. Belcher |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
David E. Belcher wrote:
To build on the last-mentioned point, surely a lot of air travellers from Essex & East Anglia would be better off going from Stansted rather than Gatwick? David E. Belcher Good point.... Extend the Braintree line to Stansted, and build a second spur onto the line from the Kelvedon direction. -- Darren http://photos.darrenjohnson.co.uk/ http://www.darrenjohnson.co.uk/ |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
Paul Scott wrote to uk.transport.london on Tue, 30 Nov 2004:
"Kevin" wrote in message . com... These "wouldn't it be great if we had a train from here to there" arguements never cease to amaze me. Presumabley somebody waves a magic wand and hey presto ther is all the extra capacity for this. Kevin Agree - where the translation of here is 'where I live' and there is 'where I often go'. The facts are that nearly the whole railway was built where the passengers of the mid 1800s wanted to go. Paul All the same, it is maddening when a definite physical railway-line exists between the two places that you want to go, but "it is not a route" so that you have to change trains. I'm thinking, particularly, of the journey between Brixton and Streatham which would be physically possible to do on one train, but as "it is not a route" you have to change at Herne Hill, which makes the journey uneconomic in terms of time, and better done by bus. -- "Mrs Redboots" http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/ Website updated 28 November 2004 |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
"Kevin" wrote in message
om... These "wouldn't it be great if we had a train from here to there" arguements never cease to amaze me. Presumabley somebody waves a magic wand and hey presto ther is all the extra capacity for this. Aren't doing away with the dedicated Gatwick Express for the reason of overcrowding on the Brighton line. I am not sure how many people from Sussex would want to end up in Liverpool St. Those who do usually take Thameslink to Farringdon and change onto the Circle/Metropolitan/H&C line there. Just a walk over the bridge required. Coming back is even easier. I can't see this proposal being an advance on that. -- Terry Harper, Web Co-ordinator, The Omnibus Society 75th Anniversary 2004, see http://www.omnibussoc.org/75th.htm E-mail: URL: http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/ |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
"David E. Belcher" wrote in message
om... To build on the last-mentioned point, surely a lot of air travellers from Essex & East Anglia would be better off going from Stansted rather than Gatwick? Provided they can get a flight to their destination of choice, yes. Likewise, those from Sussex and Kent would prefer to fly from Gatwick, although Southampton can be an alternative. Heathrow is undesirable, and Luton and Stansted are last resorts. -- Terry Harper, Web Co-ordinator, The Omnibus Society 75th Anniversary 2004, see http://www.omnibussoc.org/75th.htm E-mail: URL: http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/ |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
On 30 Nov 2004, David E. Belcher wrote:
"R.C. Payne" wrote in message ... I'd have thought that the easterly connections with Crossrail, linking with the current Thameslink services would provide most of the inner-suburban connectivity for such a route, and the number of people going between far Essex and East Anglia and Sussex, for whom an extra connection is offputting are few in number. To build on the last-mentioned point, surely a lot of air travellers from Essex & East Anglia would be better off going from Stansted rather than Gatwick? Depends where their flight goes from! tom -- It's almost over now. |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
"Kevin" wrote in message om... (Aidan Stanger) wrote in message ... I am not sure how many people from Sussex would want to end up in Liverpool St. Kevin It *might* be a popular commuter destination if the journey time were to be roughly the same as current services into London Bridge. I used to commute from the Sussex Coast to offices near Liverpool Station, and I can think of a number of folk (both in and out of the same office) who did (and still do) a similar journey. Also, with connections off the ELL, such a service could be to the advantage of people working in Docklands. D A Stocks |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
Tom Anderson wrote in message ...
On 30 Nov 2004, David E. Belcher wrote: "R.C. Payne" wrote in message ... I'd have thought that the easterly connections with Crossrail, linking with the current Thameslink services would provide most of the inner-suburban connectivity for such a route, and the number of people going between far Essex and East Anglia and Sussex, for whom an extra connection is offputting are few in number. To build on the last-mentioned point, surely a lot of air travellers from Essex & East Anglia would be better off going from Stansted rather than Gatwick? Depends where their flight goes from! Very true - as far as I know Stansted doesn't cater much - if at all - for longer-haul inter-continental runs (e.g. Australia or the USA). But for a lot of European destinations it makes sense. David E. Belcher |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
"Terry Harper" wrote in
: "Kevin" wrote in message om... These "wouldn't it be great if we had a train from here to there" arguements never cease to amaze me. Presumabley somebody waves a magic wand and hey presto ther is all the extra capacity for this. Aren't doing away with the dedicated Gatwick Express for the reason of overcrowding on the Brighton line. I am not sure how many people from Sussex would want to end up in Liverpool St. Those who do usually take Thameslink to Farringdon and change onto the Circle/Metropolitan/H&C line there. Just a walk over the bridge required. Coming back is even easier. I can't see this proposal being an advance on that. Or alight at London Bridge and catch the bus! (The route via Farringdon is certainly easy but not exactly quick, ditto Jubilee line to Stratford - if heading East - and Northern to Bank, change for the Central too much like hard work). |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
"David Jackman" wrote in message
52.50... "Terry Harper" wrote in : Those who do usually take Thameslink to Farringdon and change onto the Circle/Metropolitan/H&C line there. Just a walk over the bridge required. Coming back is even easier. Or alight at London Bridge and catch the bus! (The route via Farringdon is certainly easy but not exactly quick, ditto Jubilee line to Stratford - if heading East - and Northern to Bank, change for the Central too much like hard work). All involve a lot of walking, though, and a bit of a trial with any luggage. -- Terry Harper, Web Co-ordinator, The Omnibus Society 75th Anniversary 2004, see http://www.omnibussoc.org/75th.htm E-mail: URL: http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/ |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
Terry Harper wrote:
"David E. Belcher" wrote... To build on the last-mentioned point, surely a lot of air travellers from Essex & East Anglia would be better off going from Stansted rather than Gatwick? Passengers would be better off with a choice of airports. Since those people who live near airports have a higher propensity to fly, improving access to other airports is worthwhile. The alternative is to increase the range of destinations served from the local airport, but that would require more runways, which I strongly oppose. Provided they can get a flight to their destination of choice, yes. Likewise, those from Sussex and Kent would prefer to fly from Gatwick, although Southampton can be an alternative. Heathrow is undesirable, and Luton and Stansted are last resorts. From Sussex maybe, but from Kent Heathrow is still a good option (though not as good as Gatwick), and Southampton isn't. There is Manston, but AFAIK it doesn't have many flights yet. |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
In message
"Terry Harper" wrote: "David E. Belcher" wrote in message om... To build on the last-mentioned point, surely a lot of air travellers from Essex & East Anglia would be better off going from Stansted rather than Gatwick? Provided they can get a flight to their destination of choice, yes. Likewise, those from Sussex and Kent would prefer to fly from Gatwick, although Southampton can be an alternative. Heathrow is undesirable, and Luton and Stansted are last resorts. For parts of Kent I would have thought Stanstead was possibly closer than Southampton, the latter is 120 miles from Maidstone for instance. -- Graeme Wall This address is not read, substitute trains for rail. Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
"Graeme Wall" wrote in message
... In message "Terry Harper" wrote: Provided they can get a flight to their destination of choice, yes. Likewise, those from Sussex and Kent would prefer to fly from Gatwick, although Southampton can be an alternative. Heathrow is undesirable, and Luton and Stansted are last resorts. For parts of Kent I would have thought Stanstead was possibly closer than Southampton, the latter is 120 miles from Maidstone for instance. Yes, I should have qualified it as Southampton for most of Sussex and Manston (or Lydd) for the rest. -- Terry Harper, Web Co-ordinator, The Omnibus Society 75th Anniversary 2004, see http://www.omnibussoc.org/75th.htm E-mail: URL: http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/ |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
"Graeme Wall" wrote in message ... For parts of Kent I would have thought Stanstead was possibly closer than Southampton, the latter is 120 miles from Maidstone for instance. From time to time we get lost souls looking for the airport at Stansted, Kent (a village between Meopham and Wrotham). They usually have 10 minutes left to check in, and express disbelief when they're told they're in the wrong county and need to get themselves through the Dartford Tunnel. Peter |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
On Wed, 1 Dec 2004, Peter Masson wrote:
"Graeme Wall" wrote in message ... For parts of Kent I would have thought Stanstead was possibly closer than Southampton, the latter is 120 miles from Maidstone for instance. From time to time we get lost souls looking for the airport at Stansted, Kent (a village between Meopham and Wrotham). Maybe they're confusing it with Stanstead? The nearest one to the action would seem to be in Suffolk, between Long Melford and Bury St. Edmunds, a mere 5.5 miles from (obRail) Sudbury railway station. They usually have 10 minutes left to check in, and express disbelief when they're told they're in the wrong county and need to get themselves through the Dartford Tunnel. Well, I have to admit that I once lost my way to Harwich, and turned up 30 minutes late for checkin: but as the ferry (to Hamburg - anyone remember the Hamlet, popularly nicknamed the Omlette?) was several hours late, they didn't seem to mind. "But I digress". |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
Peter Masson wrote:
From time to time we get lost souls looking for the airport at Stansted, Kent (a village between Meopham and Wrotham). They usually have 10 minutes left to check in, and express disbelief when they're told they're in the wrong county and need to get themselves through the Dartford Tunnel. That reminds me of the people who are alleged to turn up in Yorkshire, looking for Leeds Castle. -- John Ray |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
Terry Harper wrote to uk.transport.london on Wed, 1 Dec 2004:
Yes, I should have qualified it as Southampton for most of Sussex and Manston (or Lydd) for the rest. Honestly, for much of Sussex, except those parts east of Chichester, Gatwick is a lot nearer - it's only about 35 miles from where my parents live, between Worthing & Arundel, but So'ton is at least 50 miles and the traffic can be atrocious around Arundel & Chichester, although a good road between the two. -- "Mrs Redboots" http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/ Website updated 28 November 2004 |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
"Mrs Redboots" wrote in message
... Terry Harper wrote to uk.transport.london on Wed, 1 Dec 2004: Yes, I should have qualified it as Southampton for most of Sussex and Manston (or Lydd) for the rest. Honestly, for much of Sussex, except those parts east of Chichester, Gatwick is a lot nearer - it's only about 35 miles from where my parents live, between Worthing & Arundel, but So'ton is at least 50 miles and the traffic can be atrocious around Arundel & Chichester, although a good road between the two. Very true, but Gatwick involves a lot of time-absorbing actions, unless you have a taxi to the airport. We are about 20 miles from Gatwick and about 70 from Southampton, so given a flight from Gatwick, the choice is obvious. However, we've been to Guernsey from Southampton, and the journey is very easy with very little fuss at the airport. Arundel and Chichester can be avoided from our place, using the A272 and the A3, although at some times of day the A27 is free-flowing. The annoying thing is the lack of Coastway trains without a change in Brighton. -- Terry Harper, Web Co-ordinator, The Omnibus Society 75th Anniversary 2004, see http://www.omnibussoc.org/75th.htm E-mail: URL: http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/ |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
In message
"Terry Harper" wrote: "Graeme Wall" wrote in message ... In message "Terry Harper" wrote: Provided they can get a flight to their destination of choice, yes. Likewise, those from Sussex and Kent would prefer to fly from Gatwick, although Southampton can be an alternative. Heathrow is undesirable, and Luton and Stansted are last resorts. For parts of Kent I would have thought Stanstead was possibly closer than Southampton, the latter is 120 miles from Maidstone for instance. Yes, I should have qualified it as Southampton for most of Sussex and Manston (or Lydd) for the rest. Even for Sussex, Southampton is not the easiest place to get to, by road you've basically got just the congested A27, and by rail it can be quicker to go into London and out again rather than use the coast-line, neatly passing both Gatwick and Heathrow on the way. -- Graeme Wall This address is not read, substitute trains for rail. Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 23:12:29 +1030, (Aidan Stanger)
said: Kevin wrote: Aren't doing away with the dedicated Gatwick Express for the reason of overcrowding on the Brighton line. IIRC they're not actually doing away with it completely, but they are cutting back the service. I thought the reason for cutting it back was that the trains were running empty. -- David Cantrell | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
"David Cantrell" wrote in message
... On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 23:12:29 +1030, (Aidan Stanger) said: Kevin wrote: Aren't doing away with the dedicated Gatwick Express for the reason of overcrowding on the Brighton line. IIRC they're not actually doing away with it completely, but they are cutting back the service. I thought the reason for cutting it back was that the trains were running empty. They are not empty, just not overcrowded, while the other trains are often packed. -- Terry Harper, Web Co-ordinator, The Omnibus Society 75th Anniversary 2004, see http://www.omnibussoc.org/75th.htm E-mail: URL: http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/ |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
David Cantrell wrote to uk.transport.london on Sat, 4 Dec 2004:
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 23:12:29 +1030, (Aidan Stanger) said: I thought the reason for cutting it back was that the trains were running empty. Which is presumably because there is a cheaper alternative, which admittedly stops at least twice en route but, unless you are going to be travelling in the wee small hours, why pay more? -- "Mrs Redboots" http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/ Website updated 28 November 2004 |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
Mrs Redboots wrote:
All the same, it is maddening when a definite physical railway-line exists between the two places that you want to go, but "it is not a route" so that you have to change trains. absolutely.... and London is particularly infuriating for that. I think NR and TfL need to get a handle on cross-London connections. More intelligent use of existing tracks could ease so many terminal-to-terminal interchanges. At present the Circle Line is the usual answer and, frankly, that's never a good thing. For example, Paddington-WCML could be made easier by Silverlink stopping more semi-fast trains at Queens Park or Willesden Junction (would aid NLL too). Chiltern's West Hampstead plans (http://www.chilternrailways.co.uk/pa...roduction.html) are an excellent example of the sort of planning required. The Willesden/Old Oak area would be a superb location for another such interchange - under 1km between the two lines - though I can't see it ever happening. CC |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
Mrs Redboots wrote:
All the same, it is maddening when a definite physical railway-line exists between the two places that you want to go, but "it is not a route" so that you have to change trains. absolutely.... and London is particularly infuriating for that. I think NR and TfL need to get a handle on cross-London connections. More intelligent use of existing tracks could ease so many terminal-to-terminal interchanges. At present the Circle Line is the usual answer and, frankly, that's never a good thing. For example, Paddington-WCML could be made easier by Silverlink stopping more semi-fast trains at Queens Park or Willesden Junction (would aid NLL too). Chiltern's West Hampstead plans (http://www.chilternrailways.co.uk/pa...roduction.html) are an excellent example of the sort of planning required. The Willesden/Old Oak area would be a superb location for another such interchange - under 1km between the two lines - though I can't see it ever happening. CC |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 23:30:16 +0000 (UTC), "Terry Harper"
said: "David Cantrell" wrote in message .. . I thought the reason for cutting it back was that the trains were running empty. They are not empty, just not overcrowded, while the other trains are often packed. OK, not entirely empty, but well under a quarter full, maybe as low as a tenth, at least whenever I see one arriving at or leaving from Victoria. -- David Cantrell | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
"David Cantrell" wrote in message
... On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 23:30:16 +0000 (UTC), "Terry Harper" said: "David Cantrell" wrote in message .. . I thought the reason for cutting it back was that the trains were running empty. They are not empty, just not overcrowded, while the other trains are often packed. OK, not entirely empty, but well under a quarter full, maybe as low as a tenth, at least whenever I see one arriving at or leaving from Victoria. If you believe the SRA, during the rush hours they are about 80% or so loaded. -- Terry Harper, Web Co-ordinator, The Omnibus Society 75th Anniversary 2004, see http://www.omnibussoc.org/75th.htm E-mail: URL: http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/ |
What would a Gatwick to Liverpool Street service require?
On Mon, 6 Dec 2004 09:02:44 +0000 (UTC), "Terry Harper"
said: "David Cantrell" wrote in message .. . On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 23:30:16 +0000 (UTC), "Terry Harper" said: [Gatwick Express] are not empty, just not overcrowded, while the other trains are often packed. OK, not entirely empty, but well under a quarter full, maybe as low as a tenth, at least whenever I see one arriving at or leaving from Victoria. If you believe the SRA, during the rush hours they are about 80% or so loaded. Which, funnily enough, is when I see them most often! -- David Cantrell | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 11:29 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk