MIG wrote:

On 24 Jan, 16:57, Mizter T wrote:
On 24 Jan, 12:57, Bill Borland wrote:

In article , Peter Masson
writes

Up Catford Loop trains cross to the Atlantic Lines at Crofton
Road Junction, then at Factory Junction take the Low Level route via
Stewarts Lane, joining the Up Slow at Battersea Pier Junction.

Incorrect. Two trains per hour - the stopping service from Faversham -
go "low level". Anything else goes High Level. This was said to be
to avoid conflict with Eurostar trains, but I have used the Faversham
train a couple of times since the end of the Eurostars, and it still
goes the same way.
--
Bill Borland

Eh? I haven't used it much lately, but I think the Up Dartford -
Victoria trains still take the low-level Stewarts Lane route.

They've certainly done that a lot when I've been in them, although
sometimes they seem to play it by ear. It's always a relief when they
don't, because the high route is much quicker.


I haven;t got much recent experience, but the low-level route
certainly used to be the standard path. The high-level route appeared
to be used occasionally when the train was running late.


The fact that they are often (always?) timetabled to take longer from
Denmark Hill going non-stop than the ones that stop at three stations
via Battersea Park implies some reason for sloth, ie the low route.


But that's just plain incorrect! Looking at off-peak times, the SLL
stopping service is timetabled for 13 minutes, whilst the non-stop
Dartford - Victoria takes 11 minutes.

Things are all a bit more complicated at peak times, when both
services taking a bit longer (except for a couple of the non-stop
trains taking a minute less) - however, I can't see any instances of
the non-stop trains taking longer to get to Victoria than the stopping
SLL services.

So, whilst the non-stop trains aren't much quicker than the stoppers,
they still are.


Some afternoon/evening Maidstone line trains (having gone via Catford)
seem to go that way as well.

On 24 Jan, 18:13, Mizter T wrote:
MIG wrote:
On 24 Jan, 16:57, Mizter T wrote:
On 24 Jan, 12:57, Bill Borland wrote:

In article , Peter Masson
writes

Up Catford Loop trains cross to the Atlantic Lines at Crofton
Road Junction, then at Factory Junction take the Low Level route via
Stewarts Lane, joining the Up Slow at Battersea Pier Junction.

Incorrect. Two trains per hour - the stopping service from Faversham -
go "low level". Anything else goes High Level. This was said to be
to avoid conflict with Eurostar trains, but I have used the Faversham
train a couple of times since the end of the Eurostars, and it still
goes the same way.
--
*Bill Borland

Eh? I haven't used it much lately, but I think the Up Dartford -
Victoria trains still take the low-level Stewarts Lane route.

They've certainly done that a lot when I've been in them, although
sometimes they seem to play it by ear. *It's always a relief when they
don't, because the high route is much quicker.

I haven;t got much recent experience, but the low-level route
certainly used to be the standard path. The high-level route appeared
to be used occasionally when the train was running late.



The fact that they are often (always?) timetabled to take longer from
Denmark Hill going non-stop than the ones that stop at three stations
via Battersea Park implies some reason for sloth, ie the low route.

But that's just plain incorrect! Looking at off-peak times, the SLL
stopping service is timetabled for 13 minutes, whilst the non-stop
Dartford - Victoria takes 11 minutes.

Things are all a bit more complicated at peak times, when both
services taking a bit longer (except for a couple of the non-stop
trains taking a minute less) - however, I can't see any instances of
the non-stop trains taking longer to get to Victoria than the stopping
SLL services.

So, whilst the non-stop trains aren't much quicker than the stoppers,
they still are.

Maybe it was the first one I looked at. Not to hand now, but I think
I was comparing the 1623 and 1646 (and wondering why the former was
shown on the PIS as terminating at Battersea Park, as in the
situations where the first train doesn't arrive first, so they show
the stop before as the destination).

On 24 Jan, 18:20, MIG wrote:

On 24 Jan, 18:13, Mizter T wrote:

MIG wrote:
On 24 Jan, 16:57, Mizter T wrote:

The fact that they are often (always?) timetabled to take longer from
Denmark Hill going non-stop than the ones that stop at three stations
via Battersea Park implies some reason for sloth, ie the low route.

But that's just plain incorrect! Looking at off-peak times, the SLL
stopping service is timetabled for 13 minutes, whilst the non-stop
Dartford - Victoria takes 11 minutes.

Things are all a bit more complicated at peak times, when both
services taking a bit longer (except for a couple of the non-stop
trains taking a minute less) - however, I can't see any instances of
the non-stop trains taking longer to get to Victoria than the stopping
SLL services.

So, whilst the non-stop trains aren't much quicker than the stoppers,
they still are.

Maybe it was the first one I looked at. Not to hand now, but I think
I was comparing the 1623 and 1646 (and wondering why the former was
shown on the PIS as terminating at Battersea Park, as in the
situations where the first train doesn't arrive first, so they show
the stop before as the destination).


Sorry, you're absolutely right in the case of those specific trains -
from Denmark Hill the 1623 SLL stopper takes 15 mins, the 1646 non-
stopper takes 17 mins.

However as far as I can see that really is the (somewhat bizarre) sole
exception to the rule that the non-stoppers are quicker.

Incidentally lately I've really taken to using the clutter free
http://traintimes.org.uk/ to, er, get train times!

It sources its results directly from the National Rail journey planner
database, so unlike with other journey planners there aren't going to
be any discrepancies in the results between what it gives and what you
get from the 'official' NR Journey Planner.

On Jan 24, 7:46*pm, Mizter T wrote:
On 24 Jan, 18:20, MIG wrote:







On 24 Jan, 18:13, Mizter T wrote:

MIG wrote:
On 24 Jan, 16:57, Mizter T wrote:

The fact that they are often (always?) timetabled to take longer from
Denmark Hill going non-stop than the ones that stop at three stations
via Battersea Park implies some reason for sloth, ie the low route.

But that's just plain incorrect! Looking at off-peak times, the SLL
stopping service is timetabled for 13 minutes, whilst the non-stop
Dartford - Victoria takes 11 minutes.

Things are all a bit more complicated at peak times, when both
services taking a bit longer (except for a couple of the non-stop
trains taking a minute less) - however, I can't see any instances of
the non-stop trains taking longer to get to Victoria than the stopping
SLL services.

So, whilst the non-stop trains aren't much quicker than the stoppers,
they still are.

Maybe it was the first one I looked at. *Not to hand now, but I think
I was comparing the 1623 and 1646 (and wondering why the former was
shown on the PIS as terminating at Battersea Park, as in the
situations where the first train doesn't arrive first, so they show
the stop before as the destination).

Sorry, you're absolutely right in the case of those specific trains -
from Denmark Hill the 1623 SLL stopper takes 15 mins, the 1646 non-
stopper takes 17 mins.

However as far as I can see that really is the (somewhat bizarre) sole
exception to the rule that the non-stoppers are quicker.

It was a strange fluke that I happened to have looked up those
particular trains this week and remembered them (because of the
bizarre "Battersea Park" PIS) and assumed it was part of the standard
pattern.


Incidentally lately I've really taken to using the clutter free
http://traintimes.org.uk/ to, er, get train times!

It sources its results directly from the National Rail journey planner
database, so unlike with other journey planners there aren't going to
be any discrepancies in the results between what it gives and what you
get from the 'official' NR Journey Planner.


Thanks; that saves a few clicks. I can never remember the proper URL
and still keep putting in www.railtrack.co.uk and waiting for it to
redirect.

On 22 Jan, 11:44, "Paul Scott" wrote:
"Mizter T" wrote:


On 22 Jan, 11:02, "Paul Scott" wrote:
Much of the above will change from December this year when the
Southeastern Sevenoaks service becomes a joint operation with
FCC and runs through to at least Kentish Town as part of
Thameslink Key Output 0, which closes the bay platforms at
Blackfriars...

Paul

True - but my understanding is that's a temporary measure (albeit a
long-term one) whilst construction at Blackfriars goes ahead. I was
under the impression that eventually Blackfriars would get new bay
platforms for terminating services. Of course after a few years of
through running to Kentish Town, I think there'll be a lot of
passengers who will have grown quite accustomed/keen on this temporary
arrangement, and will be displeased to see it finish!

From what I've read over the last couple of years I believe the new
Blackfriars bay platforms will not necessarily be for the same services as
use them now, partly because they'll be on the east side of the through
platforms, but OTOH we keep being told the eventual services are not
confirmed yet, so anything might happen really...


Interesting stuff. First off I presume you mean that the new bay
platforms at Blackfriars will be to the *west* of the through
Thameslink lines (i.e. the other side to where they are now) - in the
not so distant past someone (possibly you) provided a link to the
blueprints, which show how the through Thameslink line will be slewed
at an angle through Blackfriars so as to make this all possible within
the space available.

But you make a very good point about what might happen to the
Blackfriars (and soon to be Kentish Town) to Sevenoaks services -
they'll be approaching on the wrong tracks to use the bay platform
(they could presumably get in there but they'd block the everything up
by so doing). So it seems possible that this Sevenoaks service might
permanently turn into a Thameslink service from December onwards -
which is exactly what happened in the early years of Thameslink. If
that does turn out to be the case it would be welcomed by many
passengers.

There was just something in the back of my mind that suggested any
major rejig of service would have to wait until the SPILL to Great
Northern connection was put in place - which I thought (and I may have
got this very wrong) wasn't going to happen until much later.

Do you know what the story is about Thameslink and the Wimbledon -
Sutton loop - are there proposals for change here as well? And is
there any chance of a restored (off-peak) Sutton via Mitcham Junction
to London Bridge service I wonder?


Incidentally you say it's going to be a joint Southeastern and FCC
operation - how's this thing actually going to work, and what stock is
going to be used?

The joint working bit is based on a 'webchat' reply on the FCC website,
where it was stated that FCC drivers will hand over to Southeastern for the
part of the route south of Blackfriars. The stock is apparently going to be
the recently ordered 'Southern' 377s that were supposed to allow for the
final 319s to be transferred to FCC - its all tied up with the Watford
Junction - Gatwick 'lack of stock' debate thats going on elsewhere at the
moment...

Paul S

Sounds intriguing. I wonder if the driver changeover at Blackfriars
will cause delays. Any idea which TOC will actually "own" the trains?
(Obviously a Rosco will own them, but you know what I mean.)

In article
..com, Mizter T writes

Eh? I haven't used it much lately, but I think the Up Dartford -
Victoria trains still take the low-level Stewarts Lane route.

Sorry - my mistake - I was thinking only of the trains that actually
come up through Catford.

As a matter of interest, has anyone used Brixton Jn - Canterbury Rd
Jn - Cambria Jn recently? That used to be the usual route before
Eurostar; perhaps it will come back into use now.
--
Bill Borland

"Mizter T" wrote in message
...
On 22 Jan, 11:44, "Paul Scott" wrote:

From what I've read over the last couple of years I believe the new
Blackfriars bay platforms will not necessarily be for the same services
as
use them now, partly because they'll be on the east side of the through
platforms, but OTOH we keep being told the eventual services are not
confirmed yet, so anything might happen really...


Interesting stuff. First off I presume you mean that the new bay
platforms at Blackfriars will be to the *west* of the through
Thameslink lines (i.e. the other side to where they are now) -

Yes - my mistake - sorry if I've confused anyone...

Paul S

"Mizter T" wrote

But you make a very good point about what might happen to the
Blackfriars (and soon to be Kentish Town) to Sevenoaks services -
they'll be approaching on the wrong tracks to use the bay platform
(they could presumably get in there but they'd block the everything up
by so doing). So it seems possible that this Sevenoaks service might
permanently turn into a Thameslink service from December onwards -
which is exactly what happened in the early years of Thameslink. If
that does turn out to be the case it would be welcomed by many
passengers.

It's too early to be sure of service patterns when the all-singing
all-dancing Thameslink eventually happens. But current thinking is that the
new Blackfriars bays on the west (upstream) side of the layout will enable
Southeastern trains via Denmark Hill to terminate without conflicting with
Thameslink trains via London Bridge. They will of course conflict with
Thameslink trains via Herne Hill, but the idea is to upgrade crossovers on
the London side of Elephant so that Southeastern and Thameslink trains will
swap tracks there. With 6 Thameslink tph (in the peaks) via Herne Hill (18
via London Bridge) and 4 Southeastern Catford Loop plus a couple of fasts
(Gillingham or Maidstone) this should not be too difficult.

Peter

On 24 Jan, 21:26, "Peter Masson" wrote:
"Mizter T" wrote

But you make a very good point about what might happen to the
Blackfriars (and soon to be Kentish Town) to Sevenoaks services -
they'll be approaching on the wrong tracks to use the bay platform
(they could presumably get in there but they'd block the everything up
by so doing). So it seems possible that this Sevenoaks service might
permanently turn into a Thameslink service from December onwards -
which is exactly what happened in the early years of Thameslink. If
that does turn out to be the case it would be welcomed by many
passengers.

It's too early to be sure of service patterns when the all-singing
all-dancing Thameslink eventually happens. But current thinking is that the
new Blackfriars bays on the west (upstream) side of the layout will enable
Southeastern trains via Denmark Hill to terminate without conflicting with
Thameslink trains via London Bridge. They will of course conflict with
Thameslink trains via Herne Hill, but the idea is to upgrade crossovers on
the London side of Elephant so that Southeastern and Thameslink trains will
swap tracks there. With 6 Thameslink tph (in the peaks) via Herne Hill (18
via London Bridge) and 4 Southeastern Catford Loop plus a couple of fasts
(Gillingham or Maidstone) this should not be too difficult.

Peter


Thanks Peter, I think was suffering from a failure to conceptualise
this all and critically hadn't taken into account the massively
increased throughput of Thameslink trains to/from London Bridge.

I guess the track-swapping antics between Blackfriars and the Elephant
could be avoided if the Sutton - Wimbledon loop via Herne Hill service
became the one that terminated at Blackfriars, whilst the Thameslink
trains were re-routed to Sevenoaks via the Catford Loop. That would of
course displease a large number of people who had arranged their lives
around how things are set up now.

On 24 Jan, 15:36, wrote:
(say, Edgware to Dalston).

Hmm. The TfL journey planner suggests it without tweaking any
settings, which isn't the case for most walking changes since it can
usually find an almost-as-fast alternative. Maybe you have a point.

U

--
http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/
A blog about transport projects in London