"tim....." wrote in message
...


Is there a capacity issue with stopping Southern trains at Clapham
Junction
in the peaks? SWT claim there aren't enough paths on their side, so in
the
peaks everything long-ish distance goes through non-stop. Not much point
having an interchange if most of the commuters can't use it.

AIUI both SWT and Southern don't like stopping longer distance trains at
CJ in the peaks to discourage their use for short hops.

It isn't just at CJ but SWT reduce stops at Surbiton and Wimbledon as
well. I don't know if it is still true but there used to be an hour gap in
the evening peak if you wanted a train from Wimbledon to Surbiton
(something which is about every 10 minutes for most of the day).


There aren't any Southern trains that *don't* stop at CLJ (cue someone to
find one!). Last December 2 (or maybe 3) Brighton services in each direction
transferred to Gatwick Express - who never stop there - much to the
irritation of a significant minority of Brighton commuters. I think the
rolling stock and paths released by this transfer have been used to provide
other services so there hasn't been any net reduction in the number of
services that call.

D A Stocks

On Jul 17, 10:00*am, "David A Stocks" wrote:
"tim....." wrote in message

...







Is there a capacity issue with stopping Southern trains at Clapham
Junction
in the peaks? *SWT claim there aren't enough paths on their side, so in
the
peaks everything long-ish distance goes through non-stop. *Not much point
having an interchange if most of the commuters can't use it.

AIUI both SWT and Southern don't like stopping longer distance trains at
CJ in the peaks to discourage their use for short hops.

It isn't just at CJ but SWT reduce stops at Surbiton and Wimbledon as
well. I don't know if it is still true but there used to be an hour gap in
the evening peak if you wanted a train from Wimbledon to Surbiton
(something which is about every 10 minutes for most of the day).

There aren't any Southern trains that *don't* stop at CLJ (cue someone to
find one!). Last December 2 (or maybe 3) Brighton services in each direction
transferred to Gatwick Express - who never stop there - much to the
irritation of a significant minority of Brighton commuters. I think the
rolling stock and paths released by this transfer have been used to provide
other services so there hasn't been any net reduction in the number of
services that call.

The Southern trains with red and white liveries, drinks trolleys, and
either strange sci-fi noses or surprisingly old traction motors, are
the ones that don't stop at CLJ...

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 03:23:58PM +0100, Theo Markettos wrote:

Is there a capacity issue with stopping Southern trains at Clapham Junction
in the peaks?

I thought that *all* Southern trains to/from Victoria stopped at Clapham
Junction, apart from Gatwick Express and one or two Brighton trains.

--
David Cantrell | A machine for turning tea into grumpiness

The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for
authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place
of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their
households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They
contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties
at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.
-- attributed by Plato to Socrates

On 17 July, 11:50, David Cantrell wrote:
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 03:23:58PM +0100, Theo Markettos wrote:
Is there a capacity issue with stopping Southern trains at Clapham Junction
in the peaks?

I thought that *all* Southern trains to/from Victoria stopped at Clapham
Junction, apart from Gatwick Express and one or two Brighton trains.


Off peak, the xx.21 Victoria - Brighton doesn't stop at Clapham
Junction, this is one of the services that is all stations from
Haywards Heath - Brighton. The corresponding up train, the xx.55
Brighton - Victoria does stop. During the peak, all the non-Gatwick
Express services call at Clapham (as far as I can see).

On Jul 17, 10:06*am, John B wrote:

On Jul 17, 10:00*am, "David A Stocks" wrote:

"tim....." wrote:

Is there a capacity issue with stopping Southern trains at Clapham
Junction in the peaks? *SWT claim there aren't enough paths on
their side, so in the peaks everything long-ish distance goes through
non-stop. Not much point having an interchange if most of the
commuters can't use it.

AIUI both SWT and Southern don't like stopping longer distance trains
at CJ in the peaks to discourage their use for short hops.

It isn't just at CJ but SWT reduce stops at Surbiton and Wimbledon as
well. I don't know if it is still true but there used to be an hour gap in
the evening peak if you wanted a train from Wimbledon to Surbiton
(something which is about every 10 minutes for most of the day).

There aren't any Southern trains that *don't* stop at CLJ (cue someone to
find one!). Last December 2 (or maybe 3) Brighton services in each direction
transferred to Gatwick Express - who never stop there - much to the
irritation of a significant minority of Brighton commuters. I think the
rolling stock and paths released by this transfer have been used to provide
other services so there hasn't been any net reduction in the number of
services that call.

The Southern trains with red and white liveries, drinks trolleys, and
either strange sci-fi noses or surprisingly old traction motors, are
the ones that don't stop at CLJ...

No they aren't... yes they are... etc etc

On 17 July, 00:35, John B wrote:
On Jul 16, 10:40*pm, Theo Markettos theom

wrote:
That would be served by making them set-down/pick-up only, though, and not
advertise them as calling at CJ? *At CJ with trains to Waterloo from many
platforms, there's not much to be gained by standing on the fast Woking
lines platform on the chance of picking up a train to Waterloo, when there
are the slow lines plus the Windsor lines too with advertised trains. *Is it
really worth the commuter picking a packed 444 over a packed 455? *Does the
455's extra stops at Vauxhall (and maybe Queenstown Road) make such a
difference?

A 444 at Woking will be less packed than a 455 at Clapham, IMX. And
given the regularity of many Southern Region commuters' commutes, I
don't think advertised vs unadvertised makes much difference.

I've seen an article in the SWT magazine that described why they don't stop
in the up direction... IIRC a call takes about 1.5 mins which eats a path.
To switch to the slow lines to call eats even more paths.

Surely if the train behind is also stopping at CJ, then the net eating-
of-paths is 0?


No, because you can get less trains through the station per hour. If
trains take 3 mins (20 trains per hour) to pass though a piece of line
without stopping and you add 1 1/2 mins to that (4 1/2 mins total),
you will get less trains per hour though that section (13 1/3 trains
per hour). Signalling alterations will change the calculations, but if
the line is signalled for non-stop services then stopping will always
mean less paths available.

In article
,
(Andy) wrote:

No, because you can get less trains through the station per hour. If
trains take 3 mins (20 trains per hour) to pass though a piece of line
without stopping and you add 1 1/2 mins to that (4 1/2 mins total),
you will get less trains per hour though that section (13 1/3 trains
per hour). Signalling alterations will change the calculations, but if
the line is signalled for non-stop services then stopping will always
mean less paths available.

Fewer paths anyway. The paths will still be the same size.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Jul 17, 9:56*pm, wrote:
In article
,

(Andy) wrote:
No, because you can get less trains through the station per hour. If
trains take 3 mins (20 trains per hour) to pass though a piece of line
without stopping and you add 1 1/2 mins to that (4 1/2 mins total),
you will get less trains per hour though that section (13 1/3 trains
per hour). Signalling alterations will change the calculations, but if
the line is signalled for non-stop services then stopping will always
mean less paths available.

Fewer paths anyway. The paths will still be the same size.


Actually, fewer paths available, because the stopping trains will take
1 1/2 or 2 of the fast paths. The same is seen in the Channel Tunnel,
where the base path is timed for a shuttle trains, but the Eurostars
take 2 paths; when they enter the tunnel there is a spare slot ahead
of them, when they leave the tunnel the spare slot is now behind them.
Freight through the tunnel is the other way around when they enter the
tunnel there is a spare slot behind then, but their slower speed means
a gap appears ahead of them and the gap behind disappears by the time
they leave the tunnel.

A stopping train in a section signalled for fast traffic is similar to
the freight train in the tunnel, it will run close to the preceeding
train until it makes the stop, then it will run just in front of the
next service. Unless all the trains have the same stopping pattern of
course.

Flighting of trains regains some of the last capacity, running two
trains with similar characteristics one after the other means that you
only 'spend' one lost path for the pair of trains rather than two lost
paths if they run separately with a different service inbetween.

On 16 July, 13:52, wrote:
We were shown options, certainly for a station at Vauxhall and I think one
at Oval, in Parsons Brinkerhof's presentation at Rail 2009. I have the
notes on why they preferred a station at Nine Elms but not with me.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Who is the "they" in "they preferred"? Wouldn't/shouldn't the choice
be up to TfL rather than the developer? Imagine you're at Green Park
and want to go to Battersea, without a station at Vauxhall your route
would have to be either:
-via Waterloo (Jubilee Line), a route that on the map is a 270 degree
turn.
-via Stockwell and Kennington (Victoria and the other Northern Line),
a route that involves a 450 degree turn (looping back on yourself) and
two changes

If you're at Brixton, the route is also via stockwell and kennington -
two interchanges instead of one, and a daft detour, even though
Battersea is physically quite close.

That's just peverse.

"nospam_lonelytraveller_nospam"
wrote in message
...
On 16 July, 13:52, wrote:
We were shown options, certainly for a station at Vauxhall and I think
one
at Oval, in Parsons Brinkerhof's presentation at Rail 2009. I have the
notes on why they preferred a station at Nine Elms but not with me.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Who is the "they" in "they preferred"? Wouldn't/shouldn't the choice
be up to TfL rather than the developer?

Not if it's the developer who's paying.

Building an interchange station is going to cost tens of millions more than
a stand alone station

tim