Is SE London getting a raw deal?

[otomous]

Inspired by the Crosslinks idea which missed out SE London, as well as the 'is the north getting a poor deal' I was inspired to create this thread. Is SE London the north of the south even?

The evidence for the prosecution:

No tube

Diversion of the Fleet Line away to become the Jubilee line into Docklands - including the removal of the Charing X branch which made interchange marginally trickier from SE trains.

Loss of the South London Line

The theft of the replacement Vic-Bellingham service

A gradual removal of SE services from the Thameslink spec leaving the Catford Loop still with a miserable 2tph off peak

Crossrail missing most of this corner

Crossrail 2 and 3 not coming near

So I throw the floor open. Probably area wise I regard the New Cross Gate to Norwood Junction line the border of the area under discussion - and that admittedly does have a very good service but it's little use east of that.

:roll:

 

[ScotGG]

The case for the defence will say what about DLR and Crossrail?

Though as many with knowledge of the wider SE London and NW Kent area know, those two (as good as they are) only really just scrap into small parts of the SE area. The Lewisham branch caters for a small amount of inner-most SE London and the Woolwich branch just dips over the Thames for one stop. The same with crossrail, it's north of the river for 95% of its length before crossing over to serve a very small part of SE London at Woolwich and Abbey Wood. It's good for people coming in by train to then change, but that's not that great compared to direct links we'll see for those in East London to Shenfield, West London to Reading, and north/north west to Wembley.

Other things it lacks -

Crossings at Thamesmead continuously cancelled for 50 years, which may have had good public transport links on such as a possible DLR.

The LO extension to Barking Riverside currently only has vague suggestions of crossing to Thamesmead & Abbey Wood.

A lack of additional rolling stock for metro routes unlike many other parts of London which have received more stock in recent years or will do very soon. At the moment it is looking like 2018 for more trains. A long time to wait after millions of pounds have been spent over many years to finally get a 12 car network ready (completed this year) but few stock to use it. 2018 is also too long with current levels of crowding, and the London Bridge rebuild offering the potential of major problems with crowding and altered demand.

A big lack of staffing at SE stations.

So yep, for much of Greenwich, Bexley, Bromley, and Dartford (this should be included with the other London areas) the transport is poorer than the majority of London. Quite a bit of Lewisham too, but as that's the closest to South London which does better then it's not as bad.

 

[Busaholic]

Add to this the refusal to contemplate a Brixton or even East Brixton stop for the Clapham Junction Overground extension, the whole Camberwell/Walworth non-rail experience and the passenger watchdog group's list of the most complained-about bus routes in London, 9 out of 10 of which run predominately or exclusively in S.E. London, a surefire sign that new rail routes are needed. Yes, there have been some improvements in certain areas, but almost all are geared to Canary Wharf/Stratford or to the City periphery. Most southeastern rail routes have fewer trains running on them than in the 1950s, as do a lot of the southcentral ones which encroach into the area.

The loss of the Jubilee at Charing Cross was stupid and shortsighted but I don't believe it is irrevocable. If TfL are seriously thinking about extending the DLR westwards, then surely it would be a much wiser move to extend the Jubilee (Fleet?) eastwards from Charing Cross. DLR couldn't begin to cope with the passenger numbers, nor the extra people using it from the eastern end as a through service.Besides, where is the room at Bank to extend?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Not forgetting the southeastern trains which wave hello to Lewisham from the avoiding lines and so don't provide the DLR connection.

 

[John Webb]

.......Other things it lacks -

Crossings at Thamesmead continuously cancelled for 50 years, which may have had good public transport links on such as a possible DLR......

It's far more than 50 years! I was born in 1946, and when walking as a young child past the end of the Royal Artillery parade ground, my parents would point at a stretch of road just outside the barracks and tell me that it was to have been the start of a bridge across the river to link up the North and South circular roads and replace the Free Ferry. It was laid down in the 1930s, but the whole idea was scuppered by WW2 coming along before any more work was done.......

John Webb
(Resident of SE London 1946-77)

 

[cle]

Absolute agreement. All of the past and future improvements are focused along the Thames - JLR, Crossrail or as outposts of Docklands development.

Look at key stations such as Lewisham, Denmark Hill, Peckham Rye - a mess for the user.
Look at the Herne Hill layout, that would be sorted if in SW London.
Or the Elephant to Camberwell line - a fast, four tracked access which is massively underused, and needs at least one station on it as it whizzes insultingly through inner London.

As mentioned, Brixton's lack of an Overground stop is ridiculous.
The Catford Loop is totally neglected and underused.

Frequencies overall are rubbish. Stations crap. Buses jam-packed, but if it's not part of a huge office, commercial or residential development, nobody is interested in improving transport for incumbent communities.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

But, but... it's only us up North who have a bad deal :cry:

In all seriousness though some very good points raised on here - Brixton and the new SLL being probably the main one. Victoria line and NR interchange and it just meanders by. In fairness though I do seem to recall the viaduct is quite lofty around that area, and the modern access requirements and general lack of space are probably the biggest stumbling points. Is there any scope for improved services at all on the Catford loop? Why were the Victoria-Bellingham ideas binned?

(Speaking of SE London and Victoria, at least the Victoria-Lewisham and beyond trains now don't end stupidly early.)

 

[NathanPrior]

It would be nice to have a Dartford to Victoria via Sidcup train run, rather than having to change at Lewisham, with only 2tph via Eltham who knows how long you'll have to wait.

 

[D6975]

Diversion of the Fleet Line away to become the Jubilee line into Docklands - including the removal of the Charing X branch which made interchange marginally trickier from SE trains.

This is nit-picking surely.
You change at Wloo E instead of Charing X, which involves a slightly longer interchange walk, but have the benefit of being able to proceed E or NW on the Jubilee rather than just NW.

It has always seemed a bit strange to me the way that the underground network seems to deny the existance of SE London though..
There are some places in the NW suburbs that are within walking distance of 3, 4 even 5 different tube lines.

 

[JamesRowden]

Would extending the Bakerloo line via the Hayes line to Hayes and Beckenham Junction be the solution to this issue?

Positive Outputs

• More Frequent service on the Hayes branch with through services to North West London.
• 6tph worth of peak paths freed up to/from South East London through London Bridge

Obviously, the conversion works would cause disruption.

 

[otomous]

It would be nice to have a Dartford to Victoria via Sidcup train run, rather than having to change at Lewisham, with only 2tph via Eltham who knows how long you'll have to wait.

I wonder if we would be better off with Lewisham as an interchange for the three major terminals, the cost of which would be losing direct trains to one terminal from the routes feeding in to it, which assuming it's feasible might look like this:

4tph Dartford-Blackheath-Victoria
4tph Dartford-Sidcup-Charing Cross
4tph Hayes-Cannon Street
2tph Gillingham all stops to Dartford then Abbey Wood (for Xrail) Lewisham (for DLR) LBridge WaterlooE Charing Cross

In theory there is almost a turn up and go to London with one change for one of the other termini with all these routes getting a more frequent DLR and ELL at NX interchange. Not sure there's any more room at Lewisham so the losers would be stoppers from Orpington/Sevenoaks - though they could still change at Hither Green or London Bridge - not as tricky if that can be 4tph too.

 

[cle]

I wonder if we would be better off with Lewisham as an interchange for the three major terminals, the cost of which would be losing direct trains to one terminal from the routes feeding in to it, which assuming it's feasible might look like this:

4tph Dartford-Blackheath-Victoria
4tph Dartford-Sidcup-Charing Cross
4tph Hayes-Cannon Street
2tph Gillingham all stops to Dartford then Abbey Wood (for Xrail) Lewisham (for DLR) LBridge WaterlooE Charing Cross

In theory there is almost a turn up and go to London with one change for one of the other termini with all these routes getting a more frequent DLR and ELL at NX interchange. Not sure there's any more room at Lewisham so the losers would be stoppers from Orpington/Sevenoaks - though they could still change at Hither Green or London Bridge - not as tricky if that can be 4tph too.

I'm a lot in favour for something like this.

The issue currently are the circulars which serve two lines, rather than go to Dartford. Otherwise you could have 8-12tph Cannon St to Dartford via Greenwich pretty much isolated.

The Victoria to Dartford line is booming I've witnessed, and from Jan when it goes to midnight Mon-Sun (and becomes the only Bexleyheath line Sunday service, interestingly) use will increase a lot more. Connections at Denmark Hill for Clapham (avoiding zone 1!) and Peckham for the ELL core have no doubt helped this too.

If not 4tph via Bexleyheath, then the Sidcup line could easily feature from Victoria. It's slightly easier on the conflicts at Lewisham Junction too!

 

[DarloRich]

Is SE London getting a raw deal? No. Trains are frequent. modern (ish) and longer than many other areas.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

I'm surprised that they've yet to put a couple of tube lines through Clapham Junction,to make it the complete transport hub.

 

[yorksrob]

I'm a lot in favour for something like this.

The issue currently are the circulars which serve two lines, rather than go to Dartford. Otherwise you could have 8-12tph Cannon St to Dartford via Greenwich pretty much isolated.

The Victoria to Dartford line is booming I've witnessed, and from Jan when it goes to midnight Mon-Sun (and becomes the only Bexleyheath line Sunday service, interestingly) use will increase a lot more. Connections at Denmark Hill for Clapham (avoiding zone 1!) and Peckham for the ELL core have no doubt helped this too.

If not 4tph via Bexleyheath, then the Sidcup line could easily feature from Victoria. It's slightly easier on the conflicts at Lewisham Junction too!

There might be a point for distributing services between Charing X and Vic, but isn't Cannon Street a bit out of the way for travellers from the Hayes Branch to the West End (I have relatives in Catford and we've always found Catford Bridge - Charing Cross to be the most useful service in the area).

Other than that, get the 12 car train scheme finished !

 

[AM9]

This is nit-picking surely.
You change at Wloo E instead of Charing X, which involves a slightly longer interchange walk, but have the benefit of being able to proceed E or NW on the Jubilee rather than just NW.

It has always seemed a bit strange to me the way that the underground network seems to deny the existance of SE London though..
There are some places in the NW suburbs that are within walking distance of 3, 4 even 5 different tube lines.

There had been no tube incursion into SE London/Suburban Kent because of the subsoil conditions. The ground is mainly sandy which until recently was a no-no for shield tunneling. So in the period between the wars when the original tube lines were extended into the suburbs, rail service took place on the surface in the form of the Southern electric lines.
The JLE was the pioneer in the UK using the 'New Austrian Tunneling Method', - remember that. This is where the tunnel is bored and sprayed straight away with quick-drying concrete.
It hit the news in the early '90s during construction of the JLE as it was also being used (for cost reasons) on the Heathrow Link work. During construction there, there was a major collapse creating a sink hole into which a couple of central area buildings collapsed. The Piccadilly line tunnels and some of Heathrow runway structure narrowly avoided potentially disastrous collapses with all the life threatening implications. The JLE works was halted during the ensuing investigation but the method was eventually cleared for use. Several of the Heathrow line contractors were heavily fined by the courts.
Now that has been fixed, there are not the historical engineering issues preventing further tunneling in SE London, just cash ones.

 

[yorksrob]

One of the benefits of the railway in the South East is that for the greater part, passengers have been able to catch their train direct to the heart of the City or the West End, courtesy of the bickering South Eastern and London Chatham and Dover Railways. That's not something all passengers into London enjoy.

 

[swt_passenger]

There had been no tube incursion into SE London/Suburban Kent because of the subsoil conditions. The ground is mainly sandy which until recently was a no-no for shield tunneling. So in the period between the wars when the original tube lines were extended into the suburbs, rail service took place on the surface in the form of the Southern electric lines..

As I added in a similar recent thread, the surface railways south of the river had at least a 60 year head start on the development of tube lines. Notwithstanding ground conditions there was no point in mass tube building, because the three mainline company's networks were already in place.

I am fairly convinced that ground conditions were not the main or the only concern.

 

[Busaholic]

But, but... it's only us up North who have a bad deal :cry:

In all seriousness though some very good points raised on here - Brixton and the new SLL being probably the main one. Victoria line and NR interchange and it just meanders by. In fairness though I do seem to recall the viaduct is quite lofty around that area, and the modern access requirements and general lack of space are probably the biggest stumbling points. Is there any scope for improved services at all on the Catford loop? Why were the Victoria-Bellingham ideas binned?

(Speaking of SE London and Victoria, at least the Victoria-Lewisham and beyond trains now don't end stupidly early.)

Victoria to Bellingham binned on cost grounds alone.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

One of the benefits of the railway in the South East is that for the greater part, passengers have been able to catch their train direct to the heart of the City or the West End, courtesy of the bickering South Eastern and London Chatham and Dover Railways. That's not something all passengers into London enjoy.

And that's the real reason for the lack of tubes since, powerful main-line railway companies not wanting competition, geological conditions a smokescreen, to mix metaphors. How did the original Thames Tunnel and East London Line get built then?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm surprised that they've yet to put a couple of tube lines through Clapham Junction,to make it the complete transport hub.

If the Northern Line bifurcation to Battersea ever goes ahead, there will be inexorable clamour for it to be extended to Clapham Junction. Crossrail 2 might also sneak in

 

[30907]

And that's the real reason for the lack of tubes since, powerful main-line railway companies not wanting competition, geological conditions a smokescreen, to mix metaphors. How did the original Thames Tunnel and East London Line get built then?

The private tube companies never AFAIK wanted to go to SE London, the Bakerloo Extension plans are LPTB era and later. The only example I can recall of main line opposition to tubes was the SR versus District, which led to the Wimbledon and Sutton, and that's SW London. Trams and buses were the real competition which produced the Southern Electric.

 

[theageofthetra]

Don't forget the very extensive tramway systems in South London that existed up to the 50's. These lead to quite a few intermediate railway stations closing in the early 20th century as the railway couldn't compete against the much more frequent (& cheaper) trams

 

[fusionblue]

Won't the junction at Lewisham have to be tidied up before anything more is pushed through there?

Or will it have to do a "mini thameslink" and send all services from Hither Green/Ladywell fast to London Bridge or via Nunhead and everything from Blackheath to Cannon Street?

 

[cle]

Won't the junction at Lewisham have to be tidied up before anything more is pushed through there?

Or will it have to do a "mini thameslink" and send all services from Hither Green/Ladywell fast to London Bridge or via Nunhead and everything from Blackheath to Cannon Street?

They could tidy it up, but there is still a lot of demand for routes which clash there.

All Hayes trains fast would be one solution, but maybe unpopular and removes DLR access.

Hither Green trains via Nunhead would make sense in terms of Lewisham and the conflicts, but not where those folk want to go, currently.

Still, as mentioned above, Lewisham could become a big interchange point - but only if all services were 10tph at least and arrived at exact '50:50 intervals' if you see what I mean, meaning 3 minute connections.

Denmark Hill could be another mini-hub, changing for the Thameslink core (if that was improved through there). Also the London-bound trains at Denmark Hill seem to have some sort of PSR/TSR until the Loughborough curve which isn't the same on the down route.

 

[otomous]

I'm a lot in favour for something like this.

The issue currently are the circulars which serve two lines, rather than go to Dartford. Otherwise you could have 8-12tph Cannon St to Dartford via Greenwich pretty much isolated.

The Victoria to Dartford line is booming I've witnessed, and from Jan when it goes to midnight Mon-Sun (and becomes the only Bexleyheath line Sunday service, interestingly) use will increase a lot more. Connections at Denmark Hill for Clapham (avoiding zone 1!) and Peckham for the ELL core have no doubt helped this too.

If not 4tph via Bexleyheath, then the Sidcup line could easily feature from Victoria. It's slightly easier on the conflicts at Lewisham Junction too!

Anything that helps iron out conflicts is good. I think my thinking was to ease the number of changes that passengers from Hither Green to Sevenoaks would have to make to get to Charing Cross. Showing what a balancing act it is running SE!

Largely my thinking was based on pragatism, ie, what is possible given the context:

- no large scale tube extensions likely as these seem to have fallen from favour towards Crossrail type links.

- Further DLR extensions not that helpful as if they extend over a much greater distance there must be issues of distance versus speed/frequency of stops

- stuck with flat junctions and the nightmare layouts at Lewisham/Herne Hill - can't see how more lines or grade separation could be done with them both on viaducts and Lewisham increasingly surrounded by development

So with what we have I'd suggest:

- Short tube extensions to strategic hubs such as Peckham, Herne Hill, Lewisham, Tulse Hill to take pressure off the termini

- to interchange with a minimum of 4tph all day all week all routes (Vic-Orpington and Blackfriars-Catford Loop in addition to the routes into London Bridge). The routes have to be terminal specific or we lose the advantage of the frequency. For example, at present nice though it is for me to get to Charing X quickly, I have to plan to get that train because they're 30m apart, so if it's cancelled that's a proper pain. And it's non stop from Ladywell to London Bridge so if I want to get the DLR or LOROL at New Cross, I'm back to a 30 min spacing for the interchange stations. Turn up and go to interchange for other services that are also turn up and go seems far more useful.

I can't help think that this is the sort of thing that TfL had in mind ie they knew they couldn't give us a tube network down here but this was the best compromise. Speaking from experience I've watched demand rocket on the Vic-Orpington trains since they went 4tph - but of course it goes back to 2tph after 8pm and on Sundays and demand does not necessarily. Sunday trains can be horrendous - worse than rush hour services!

Thinking about what MIGHT happen:

If the Bakerloo does come to Hayes it should free up paths through Lewisham so maybe the TfL suggested New Cross to Bromley North link might happen. If they can get the cash to untangle the junction at Grove Park. Extend it all the way to Bromley South and you have another interchange.

Crossrail extending to a suitable destination beyond Dartford would be handy to remove further pressure from the termini and reduce journey times from those outer stops like Strood.

The Tonbridge line is suffering like the Brighton line. The only way forward that I can see is a tunnel from London Bridge to Sevenoaks to remove the long distance traffic from the inner areas entirely and that would be a big boost for SE Metro.

Long term I think TfL will get the Metro and then we should see a welcome change - I gather the Dartford and Sevenoaks lobby favours this - so it's a matter of convincing Kent proper that it doesn't affect them ie that the 4tph from London Bridge to Hayes we have now isn't going to make more Tunbridge Wells trains any more or less likely if they happen to run from 5am to 1am!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

They could tidy it up, but there is still a lot of demand for routes which clash there.

All Hayes trains fast would be one solution, but maybe unpopular and removes DLR access.

Hither Green trains via Nunhead would make sense in terms of Lewisham and the conflicts, but not where those folk want to go, currently.

Still, as mentioned above, Lewisham could become a big interchange point - but only if all services were 10tph at least and arrived at exact '50:50 intervals' if you see what I mean, meaning 3 minute connections.

Denmark Hill could be another mini-hub, changing for the Thameslink core (if that was improved through there). Also the London-bound trains at Denmark Hill seem to have some sort of PSR/TSR until the Loughborough curve which isn't the same on the down route.

The slowdown from Denmark Hill to the Loughborough Curve is a product of the signalling/junction speed. The speed falls from 60 to 20 from main line to junction; hence the signalling almost brings the train to a halt to bring its speed down before clearing for that route. Most of the trains from Denmark Hill will be starting from a station stop on a single yellow and as the junction signal is the next one this means they will crawl up to it until it clears. Coming the other way the speed is still 20 but the train will be slowing down from a higher speed as the last stop was some time ago (Elephant) so it won't crawl nearly so much.

 

[cle]

Re: Denmark Hill, it just seems so elongated and deliberately slow - as you say, it's not 20mph but pretty much a standstill. Are there any plans to remedy or increase at all? It's pretty much always a clear run after all!

 

[sprinterguy]

Is SE London the north of the south even?

Nope, South West England is the "north of the south": So overlooked that it is often forgotten in these North/South debates.

However I would be willing to agree that South Eastern is the poor relation in the triumvirate of former NSE operating areas south of the Thames.

 

[Tetchytyke]

South Eastern have, with DafT's full encouragement, basically focussed on HighSpeed to the detriment of everything else.

I'm not sure that they are the poor relation though, they have the newest stock of any of the London commuter operators (with the exception of the self-enclosed c2c). The issue more seems to be what they are doing with the tools they have.

 

[zoneking]

It's going to get worse when St Johns and New Cross trains cease to go to Charing X. Most people do not want to use Cannon St unless they are commuting.

 

[Clip]

You have to remember that any increase in frequencies on the metro routes may have a detrimental effect on longer distance routes who will shout to high heaven about it due to them paying the higher fares.

 

[theageofthetra]

The loss of trains to Charing Cross via New Cross is not known to most passengers. They will think it is just a temp arrangement during the works.

 

[ScotGG]

You have to remember that any increase in frequencies on the metro routes may have a detrimental effect on longer distance routes who will shout to high heaven about it due to them paying the higher fares.

Almost all calls I have heard are for greater off-peak frequency when the paths are available. Things like extending Victoria to Dartford past an 8pm finish, which thankfully is happening. Plus more than 2 trains per hour on some Dartford lines in the evenings from London Bridge up to 4 an hour. These have no impact on long distance, and I don't think I've heard many suggesting more in the peaks as people know there isn't the paths nor the stock.