Southern Timetable Consultation

[Likelife]

Hi all, its been a long time since I've posted, however thought this is too important to ignore.

Govia Thameslink Railway (Southern, Thameslink etc) have just published their timetable plans for the entire network, and it doesn't seem particularly good for us in Sydenham.

For the "Sydenham route" as they put it, GTR plan to continue the London Bridge to London Victoria service (with Sunday services), however the Caterham service is proposed to be diverted to West Croydon, meaning losing the direct link to East Croydon and even more trains to West. GTR say that this will mean 1,600 people will have to change at Norwood Junction. Caterham trains will join/split the Tattenham Corner trains at Purley, making them fast between Norwood and London Bridge.

GTR admit Thameslink services for the Sydenham route would be very popular but, Thameslink services calling at Sydenham they say is too difficult, mainly because of the number of LO trains and direct services to Charing Cross can't be re-instated because of too many Southeastern services:

Analysis has also revealed that passengers travelling from stations between Norwood
Junction and New Cross Gate (shown as the Sydenham route on the graph), in many cases
travel beyond London Bridge to stations such as London Charing Cross, London Blackfriars,
City Thameslink, Farringdon, London St Pancras International and beyond. Whilst this route
ranked third in terms of passengers travelling to Thameslink stations London Overground are
expected to operate additional services to meet this demand. Introducing Thameslink trains
on this route is not appropriate due to the direct interaction with other high frequency trains on
the East London Line and a lack of suitable turnaround facilities. Equally there is insufficient
track capacity between London Bridge and Charing Cross due to the intensity of
Southeastern Kent services so these options are not proposed in this consultation as there is
no scope to introduce a direct service. Alternative high frequency Thameslink and
Southeastern trains will be available at London Bridge where passengers will be able to easily
interchange, for onward destinations, between trains using step-free access.

(page 11 of timetable consultation pdf)

There seems to be no proposals for the 24hr Thameslink services (yes, they have been 24hrs years before the night tube) to call at Sydenham either, while the Thameslink services which call at Penge East and Sydenham Hill at peaks is still planned to be withdrawn.

Personally I don't believe this is good enough. Whilst the planned extra London Overground trains are welcome, 10 trains per hour to Highbury and 6 to West Croydon and 8 to Palace, at the expense of any Thameslink service doesn't seem like a very good deal.

You can see the whole consultation at the Southern website: http://www.southernrailway.com/your-jou ... nsultation. Please get involved and give your opinions!

[Robin Orton]

Does this mean that there will no longer be any direct trains from Sydenham to East Croydon, and if we want to go to Gatwick we shall always need to change at Norwood Junction as well as at East Croydon?

[Likelife]

No East Croydon to Sydenham at all. Its planned that along with the current Southern Horsham service, Thameslink trains will call at Norwood Jun every half hour to Gatwick. However, these services will be using the slow lines, meaning it would be faster to change at Norwood, then at East Croydon, to get to Gatwick. We would absolutely have to change twice to go beyond Gatwick to get to places like Haywards Heath and Brighton.

[butters]

whoah whoah whoah.

WHAT IS THIS

[oluwababe]

what happened to that peak hour Caterham to Finsbury Park service via Sydenham?

[Likelife]

what happened to that peak hour Caterham to Finsbury Park service via Sydenham?

That idea was scrapped earlier this year I believe for this new timetable proposal. Even so, it wasn't clear whether that would have been fast between London Bridge and Norwood Junction or be a stopping service.

[Sydenham Syd]

So, basically the significant change here is that if one wants to go to Gatwick it is two changes rather than the one and on top of that seems like there are less trains?

I haven't got the energy to read through the document, so I'm guessing that is a fair précis of the proposal?

Just want to make sure I've got my facts straight before we make a challenge.

It does seem a little weird that they need to change it and that the southern trains are going to the same place as the east London line trains, when they mention that the east London line is a replacement for trains going north.

Also, 1500 people or whatever the number quoted as affected seems quite a lot to me...or am I underestimating it?

[alywin]

If I've understood this correctly, it won't only be Sydenham which is affected, but also stations south, namely Penge West and Anerley (but possibly more so as they don't have as many trains?), and possibly also the ones to the north as well, if you want to take that into consideration in any objection.

[stuart]

So, basically the significant change here is that if one wants to go to Gatwick it is two changes rather than the one and on top of that seems like there are less trains?

Worse still and hopefully the killer objection is that the whole of the Southern network south of East Croydon would be made inaccessible to mobility disabled people because there is no lift or ramp for changing platforms at Norwood Junction. Also very difficult and dangerous for the frail carrying luggage.

This would effect ALL route connections to the 'slow' northern line (Anerley/PengeW/Sydenham etc) and some going south.

Stuart

[perryman]

The 2 main local train hubs are East Croydon and Lewisham.
Both Forest Hill and Sydenham are busy stations and they should have a direct service to both these points.
That's how a network should work.

Forcing passengers to change at London bridge for Lewisham connections, and now making LB an attractive alternative hub for East Croydon and beyond is a poor use of our busy London stations.

[Pally]

So, basically the significant change here is that if one wants to go to Gatwick it is two changes rather than the one and on top of that seems like there are less trains?

Worse still and hopefully the killer objection is that the whole of the Southern network south of East Croydon would be made inaccessible to mobility disabled people because there is no lift or ramp for changing platforms at Norwood Junction. Also very difficult and dangerous for the frail carrying luggage.

This would effect ALL route connections to the 'slow' northern line (Anerley/PengeW/Sydenham etc) and some going south.

Stuart

I'd say that is a very strong reason for a challenge!

[Likelife]

So, basically the significant change here is that if one wants to go to Gatwick it is two changes rather than the one and on top of that seems like there are less trains?

I haven't got the energy to read through the document, so I'm guessing that is a fair précis of the proposal?

Just want to make sure I've got my facts straight before we make a challenge.

It does seem a little weird that they need to change it and that the southern trains are going to the same place as the east London line trains, when they mention that the east London line is a replacement for trains going north.

Also, 1500 people or whatever the number quoted as affected seems quite a lot to me...or am I underestimating it?

There wont be less trains overall, its just Caterham services will become West Croydon. As for 1600 people daily, that is a lot of people; adding up to slightly more than half a million interchanges annually.

[Likelife]

So, basically the significant change here is that if one wants to go to Gatwick it is two changes rather than the one and on top of that seems like there are less trains?

Worse still and hopefully the killer objection is that the whole of the Southern network south of East Croydon would be made inaccessible to mobility disabled people because there is no lift or ramp for changing platforms at Norwood Junction. Also very difficult and dangerous for the frail carrying luggage.

This would effect ALL route connections to the 'slow' northern line (Anerley/PengeW/Sydenham etc) and some going south.

Stuart

Indeed. To make it worse, GTR are proposing to stop having fast Horsham trains calling at New Cross Gate, meaning disabled people would have to go all the way to London Bridge to change trains, just to go back south. Network Rail say Norwood Junction hasn't been included in the national Access For All Programme because the platforms are too narrow.

[Likelife]

If I've understood this correctly, it won't only be Sydenham which is affected, but also stations south, namely Penge West and Anerley (but possibly more so as they don't have as many trains?), and possibly also the ones to the north as well, if you want to take that into consideration in any objection.

Yes, every station from New Cross Gate to Anerley will be affected.

[Pally]

If Norwood not accessible because platforms too narrow, they have to take that into account in their planning of changes, I suspect the impact on disabled passengers could be legally challenged ?

[parker]

Having the Overground really has meant we've lost out on so much. Why is it we're lumbered with so many trains to Highbury & Islington and West Croydon that have hardly any seats and are slow as f***? We've lost trains to Charing Cross and now possibly losing trains to EAST CROYDON!

Additionally, our services to London Bridge are more important than Highbury & Islington and Canada Water. Losing the London Bridge to London Victoria loop could be the one last best thing they could take away.

It is no wonder Bromley Council have been against the Bakerloo line for Hayes, scrapping Southeastern services like they've done with our Southern services to Charing Cross.

What a mess we could lose East Croydon trains. Never come across such a balls up.

[stuart]

H Why is it we're lumbered with so many trains to Highbury & Islington and West Croydon that have hardly any seats and are slow as f***? We've lost trains to Charing Cross and now possibly losing trains to EAST CROYDON!

Additionally, our services to London Bridge are more important than Highbury & Islington and Canada Water.

Do you have any evidence for your assertions?

The trains to LBG are good for the Northern Line or Nat Rail connections. However if you are going to use the Jubillee to connect to central and west London it is, on average, faster and cheaper to go via Canada Water. For Canary Wharf and the east it is no contest.

The bottleneck during rush hours on the down escalator at CW is an issue for the next 18 months. Then we get Crossrail at Whitechapel giving even faster ways to go west - and east. That will change the horizons again for London bound Sydenhamites.

I agree on the East Croydon question. I can understand that if you use the Tattenham Corner or Caterham trains then it is dreadfully slow having to stop at every station to LBG is a pain. Making them fast from EC is great. The problem with EC is while it is a great gateway to the south it has no terminal/turning facility for local trains from the north.

It is a dreadful shame they did not use the land now being redeveloped on the west side of the station and the existing West Croydon flyover to cross the through lines and add an extra line and platforms to switch southbound locals to a couple of new terminal platforms on the west side. This would have made a great and better terminus for a shuttle service for both Southern and Overground northwards without impacting through trains.

Putting more terminating trains into West Croydon is also an issue. I've seen bad congestion and delays caused when earlier delays have got trains out of sequence.

Bottom line is Norwood Junction is not a viable interchange station for the frail and mobility challenged. Just think of all the effort they went to make EC step free.

Stuart

[Eagle]

True East Croydon more difficult especially with the revamp of the famous station.

With so many Overground services I suppose likely that rail space would call for some cutbacks.

At least we have the 194 and 75 Bus.

[parker]

H Why is it we're lumbered with so many trains to Highbury & Islington and West Croydon that have hardly any seats and are slow as f***? We've lost trains to Charing Cross and now possibly losing trains to EAST CROYDON!

Additionally, our services to London Bridge are more important than Highbury & Islington and Canada Water.

Do you have any evidence for your assertions?

The trains to LBG are good for the Northern Line or Nat Rail connections. However if you are going to use the Jubillee to connect to central and west London it is, on average, faster and cheaper to go via Canada Water. For Canary Wharf and the east it is no contest.

The bottleneck during rush hours on the down escalator at CW is an issue for the next 18 months. Then we get Crossrail at Whitechapel giving even faster ways to go west - and east. That will change the horizons again for London bound Sydenhamites.

I agree on the East Croydon question. I can understand that if you use the Tattenham Corner or Caterham trains then it is dreadfully slow having to stop at every station to LBG is a pain. Making them fast from EC is great. The problem with EC is while it is a great gateway to the south it has no terminal/turning facility for local trains from the north.

It is a dreadful shame they did not use the land now being redeveloped on the west side of the station and the existing West Croydon flyover to cross the through lines and add an extra line and platforms to switch southbound locals to a couple of new terminal platforms on the west side. This would have made a great and better terminus for a shuttle service for both Southern and Overground northwards without impacting through trains.

Putting more terminating trains into West Croydon is also an issue. I've seen bad congestion and delays caused when earlier delays have got trains out of sequence.

Bottom line is Norwood Junction is not a viable interchange station for the frail and mobility challenged. Just think of all the effort they went to make EC step free.

Stuart

Stuart, I simply don't think it is necessary we have more trains for Overground than LB, I've never seen the necessity for this fixation we're supposed to have had all this time applauding the number of trains heading all the way to Highbury and Islington with menial connections on the route to other tube lines other than Jubilee.

There are far more reasons to want a connection to the West End via Jubilee line or Charing Cross than say needing to go eastbound 2 stops earlier for Canada Water to go as far as bloomin' Westfield Stratford.

The greatest thing about Overground is there are more than enough handle bars above your head to tie a noose when you're at the end of your tether when it's taken nearly 20 minutes to get as far as Brockley of a morning due to the lack of other services into the hub stations we once had better access to, namely LB, Waterloo East and Charing Cross. Common sense should have been Canada Water was also not a viable interchanging station if they were unable to deal with the short platforms and bottleneck at the top of the escalator as the gate way eastbound AND west.

[Sydenham Syd]

Hang on, all the statements on here sound a bit like we are resigned to this change and that it can't be challenged?

I thought there was a consultation, hence the title of the post.

Stuart seems to have a good grasp of it, and forgive me for not, but would it be sensible to stick a white paper of some sort online and get loads of signatures for it, or is that still not going to work?

Surely we can bully the bullies to back down on the basis of some pretty robust arguments?