|
Post by snoggle on Jan 14, 2016 22:00:07 GMT
|
|
|
Post by ServerKing on Jan 15, 2016 6:38:59 GMT
The Future's Bright, but I doubt it will be Orange I can't see Southern, Southeastern and SWT giving away so much inner London work as Abellio Greater Anglia did... AGA did it because they were awful and it took some pressure off them, and they were going to lose some anyway to Crossrail. But in general, the trains I travel on from my local SWT station in Brentford are fairly well looked after 450's, and the occasional older train, but still in fairly good nick. Let's see what the next Mayor does come May...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2016 11:34:14 GMT
South London already is orange. Well the women are at least, especially in Bexley. British Rail supposedly did a terrible job running the Southeastern Railway, and so have three private operators, apparently. So British Rail in disguise as TfL want another crack. I'm not sure the grass is as green as they think it is. There has to be an underlying problem somewhere. Plus I'm not a fan of their orange livery and interior. I don't think it would flatter the Networkers.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 15, 2016 11:54:06 GMT
South London already is orange. Well the women are at least, especially in Bexley. British Rail supposedly did a terrible job running the Southeastern Railway, and so have three private operators, apparently. So British Rail in disguise as TfL want another crack. I'm not sure the grass is as green as they think it is. There has to be an underlying problem somewhere. Plus I'm not a fan of their orange livery and interior. I don't think it would flatter the Networkers. On the other hand, the current Overground network works (by & large) and IIRC, was the most reliable operator in London in terms of trains on time and least complaints at one point. Besides, Brixton High Level Station needs to look less like a prison with no roof lol.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2016 12:06:14 GMT
South London already is orange. Well the women are at least, especially in Bexley. British Rail supposedly did a terrible job running the Southeastern Railway, and so have three private operators, apparently. So British Rail in disguise as TfL want another crack. I'm not sure the grass is as green as they think it is. There has to be an underlying problem somewhere. Plus I'm not a fan of their orange livery and interior. I don't think it would flatter the Networkers. On the other hand, the current Overground network works (by & large) and IIRC, was the most reliable operator in London in terms of trains on time and least complaints at one point. Besides, Brixton High Level Station needs to look less like a prison with no roof lol. That's a point. If they achieve that level of service by painting the Southeastern Railway orange, I will be totally shocked. Brixton Station does look like a prison, lol. Usually they paint old prisons bright colours on the inside, like sky blue and pure white, similar to Southeastern's lilac. I don't think a prison interior has ever been orange before.
|
|
|
Post by thewintersoldier on Jan 15, 2016 12:14:20 GMT
I can't see a section of SWT ever going to overground. The timetable would have to be completely redesigned. There are rumours that they would take the Hampton Court, Kingston rounders, Hounslow rounders, Windsors etc, but services are all inter worked to maximise pathways and platforms, for example, a train that does a Hampton court arrives back to Waterloo and then forms a Guildford via Epsom, returns via Cobham, then does a Chessington, then does a Dorking, then back to Hampton court. Hounslow rounders then do the dreaded Weybridge via Hounslow (a service I can regularly be found instructing on, cheap plug I know!) so if they separate this, they it would need extreme work, a complete timetable change, and more importantly from a selfish point of view, drivers who are willing to simply be "suburban drivers only" as I'm a few years away from learning Woking to Poole via Southampton, and Woking to Alton, and even perhaps Guildford to Portsmouth via Haslemere. I would straight up leave if overground came in and nicked the suburban services. There would be no more link progression (a lot like GWR at Paddington, IIRC the suburban drivers don't sign HST and vice Versa) there's only so much time I can drive pass the little bus station at Mortlake a day before it drives me up the wall
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Mar 26, 2019 12:09:16 GMT
Sounds like the mayor is pushing again for taking over London suburban rail services Mayor Press ReleaseMetroisation Report (yes that is the term that is being used)Looking at the map on page 9, appears that Belmont is proposed for 6 trains an hour, was this part of the Epsom Downs branch kept as double track. Locally for me Kingston appears to be getting 8 trains an hour under the proposal (it would have if Crossrail 2 had been built), but now appears to be 8 an hour to Waterloo via Wimbledon Trying to get my head around figure 22 on page 31. This is basically about people using the bus to get to Northern line stations on Morden line. I think it is indicating if there was better rail services, then fewer people using bus as feeder. Not sure if this is new TfL reason to justify reducing bus feeder (to stations) services.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 26, 2019 14:23:32 GMT
Sounds like the mayor is pushing again for taking over London suburban rail services Mayor Press ReleaseMetroisation Report (yes that is the term that is being used)Looking at the map on page 9, appears that Belmont is proposed for 6 trains an hour, was this part of the Epsom Downs branch kept as double track. Locally for me Kingston appears to be getting 8 trains an hour under the proposal (it would have if Crossrail 2 had been built), but now appears to be 8 an hour to Waterloo via Wimbledon Trying to get my head around figure 22 on page 31. This is basically about people using the bus to get to Northern line stations on Morden line. I think it is indicating if there was better rail services, then fewer people using bus as feeder. Not sure if this is new TfL reason to justify reducing bus feeder (to stations) services. Sounds like that they’re using it as an excuse to exercise further cuts to Northern Line feeder routes and to routes running on the A23 into Brixton which would be moronic as there is high demand during the peaks for buses running beyond Brixton Station in both directions.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Mar 26, 2019 15:21:42 GMT
Sounds like the mayor is pushing again for taking over London suburban rail services Mayor Press ReleaseMetroisation Report (yes that is the term that is being used)Looking at the map on page 9, appears that Belmont is proposed for 6 trains an hour, was this part of the Epsom Downs branch kept as double track. Locally for me Kingston appears to be getting 8 trains an hour under the proposal (it would have if Crossrail 2 had been built), but now appears to be 8 an hour to Waterloo via Wimbledon Trying to get my head around figure 22 on page 31. This is basically about people using the bus to get to Northern line stations on Morden line. I think it is indicating if there was better rail services, then fewer people using bus as feeder. Not sure if this is new TfL reason to justify reducing bus feeder (to stations) services. I think this updated proposal is two things. 1. A land and money grab from Network Rail/DfT to TfL. This is why they are demanding both extra funding AND transfer of monies that currently go to Network Rail for infrastructure maintenance and renewals. 2. A cost cutting exercise by "persuading" (ahem) people to use better rail services thus allowing bus services to be cut where they feed tube stations. Also allows TfL to postpone or descope upgrades to the tube network by shifting demand off the tube network. Some quotes from the report In pure "logic" terms for transport planning then you would certainly want the National Rail network to be used to the best extent possible. It's completely clear that many NR services are infrequent and underused - esp off peak. The tube meanwhile is packed. People will inevitably go where frequency gives you fast journey times. Therefore pushing up NR service frequencies to get close to the tube or even at least match decent bus service frequencies is basically a good idea. Where I think the TfL proposal (which I've yet to read in detail) will fall down is the attempt to "balkanise" bits of Network Rail and the inevitable reaction from the "oh no you can't change the time of MY train to the City" brigade PLUS the counties outside London who will view TfL grabbing the tracks *and* the trains are completely unacceptable for their residents who commute from Kent, Surrey, Sussex etc. I simply can't see Network Rail wanting to cede control of tracks and signals in South London. I also simply don't see the DfT and Treasury agreeing to any of this. Grayling is using the Williams Review to kick a lot of important decisions down the road. He won't want to give the Mayor even more than he refused to give them in the past.
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Mar 26, 2019 15:29:36 GMT
Not buying the bit about people going from Eltham to Southwark via North Greenwich because of the waiting time. You'd get the first train and change at Lewisham or London Bridge. Surely this is more about it being more cost effective to have a zone 1&2 travelcard and use an effectively free bus than paying South Eastern fares from Eltham.
Edited to add - I should say that I have no issue with encouraging use of the rail network in South East London. Southeastern is not great. The focus on North Greenwich is also a political 'thing' in the south of the borough. There is some sense in TfL taking it on but I get slightly tired of the idea that they have 'healing hands'.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Mar 26, 2019 16:20:40 GMT
Not buying the bit about people going from Eltham to Southwark via North Greenwich because of the waiting time. You'd get the first train and change at Lewisham or London Bridge. Surely this is more about it being more cost effective to have a zone 1&2 travelcard and use an effectively free bus than paying South Eastern fares from Eltham. Edited to add - I should say that I have no issue with encouraging use of the rail network in South East London. Southeastern is not great. The focus on North Greenwich is also a political 'thing' in the south of the borough. There is some sense in TfL taking it on but I get slightly tired of the idea that they have 'healing hands'. I think TfL know they have a ridiculous problem looming with the Jubilee Line and East London lines in respect of the development of large areas on the Greenwich and Rotherhithe peninsulas. They will be desperate to get people off the Jubilee Line if they possibly can because the scale of demand uplift from new residential development at NOG and Canada Water / Rotherhithe will utterly overwhelm the stations and tube service. They also, for some ludicrous reason I can't fathom, seem to have taken a decision that extra bus services to / from North Greenwich are a no no for the foreseeable future. Changes have either cut peak services or will keep within an undeclared cap of bus movements. I know the bus station is probably not far from capacity and the road network is hellish but this seems to be a bizarre approach to take. As for the postponement of the Jubilee Line upgrade works and extra trains then that was stupid anyway but simply reflects parlous finances and, I suspect, a massive loss of internal expertise that was necessary to plan and deliver it. I've heard horrific stories about what was happened to the Engineering function since the Mayoral demanded "merging". It's no wonder projects are delayed or being cancelled - there's no skilled internal resource to deliver them properly.
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Mar 29, 2019 14:48:37 GMT
The metroisation report now gives a 404 error. Pity. I’d have been interested in that...
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on Mar 29, 2019 18:01:54 GMT
The metroisation report now gives a 404 error. Pity. I’d have been interested in that... It’s a shame it is down for now it’s quite a good read. I still appear to have access as i opened it earlier this week in my browser. Think i would like to read the last report in order to compare the two.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Mar 29, 2019 20:09:57 GMT
The metroisation report now gives a 404 error. Pity. I’d have been interested in that... It’s a shame it is down for now it’s quite a good read. I still appear to have access as i opened it earlier this week in my browser. Think i would like to read the last report in order to compare the two. The Centre for London report is still accessible from the page below. www.centreforlondon.org/publication/turning-south-london-orange/I have tweeted City Hall asking them to restore access to the more recent report.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Apr 3, 2019 22:48:32 GMT
The metroisation report now gives a 404 error. Pity. I’d have been interested in that... It’s a shame it is down for now it’s quite a good read. I still appear to have access as i opened it earlier this week in my browser. Think i would like to read the last report in order to compare the two. routew15 twobellstogo The full Metroisation report is now accessible again - just checked the link from the Mayor's press release.
|
|