Ideas for Marshlink Line in the Next South Eastern Franchise

[Doomotron]

Part of the requirements of the next SE franchise is services to Hastings and Bexhill via HS1. This will, naturally, require the rebuilding of parts of Ashford International but what about the Marshlink Line, the ugly duckling of the south east's railway network? I've come up with a few ideas:

SERVICES
The services right now (the hourly Ashford-Hastings/Bexhill services) are inadequate. I think that the Marshlink Line would benefit from all services being transferred back to SE.

ELECTRIFICATION AND REDOUBLING
The line in its current state is simply useless for the service it's going to get. The platforms are too short and the lack of two tracks limit how many services can run. The second track will need to be re-added (which shouldn't be that hard, because you can literally see where the track was out of the window, including old bridges, platforms and ballast) and the platforms, at minimum, will need to be extended to 4 coaches - albeit preferable for 6 or 8 coaches.

As for electrification, third rail would be preferable. The line speeds are too low to need OHE and it would allow 375s and 377s to use the route easily. However, if OHE is necessary, the type used on HS1 is the only sensible option - 395s won't have to change power sources or - if you're being really stupid - change pantograph height to the British standard (which is probably not possible or at least very complicated and expensive - feel free to correct me).

STATIONS
Platforms, as said earlier, will need to be extended at least at Ham Street and Rye - Appledore could need it but Winchelsea, Three Oaks and definitely Doleham probably won't. Stations themselves will need improvement as well.

TRAI- I MEAN ROLLING STOCK
The 2-coach 171s that are usually used on the line are simply too short. Trains are full and standing throughout the day. Replacing them with 375s (or if the route isn't transferred, 377s) for local services will be a good idea. More importantly, the 395s: there aren't enough of them. I have two solutions for this:

1: Order more, if Hitachi offers the same train anymore (unlikely).
2: Order AT300s with shorter coach lengths to make them similar enough to 395s. Multiple working with 395s might be a good idea, too. If Stagecoach wins the franchise, Alstom Avelia/Siemens Velaro trains will be ordered because of Stagecoach teaming up with Alstom, which is merging with Siemens.

In the event the route is not electrified, bi-mode trains will be necessary for HS1 services.

 

[yorksrob]

The line definitely needs to be electrified (my preference would be third rail, but overhead would work). This would enable longer trains and allow the popular through service to Brighton to be resumed.

Rye could probably do with being extended, but the rest could survive with SDO.

Enough redoubling to allow a half hourly service (Brighton's and London's), certainly an extended loop between Rye and Winchelsea.

 

[JB_B]

Part of the requirements of the next SE franchise is services to Hastings and Bexhill via HS1.

Could you provide a reference for this?

 

[Surreytraveller]

Doesn't need electrifying. They could order some of those hybrid things Great Western have got that can run on electricity or diesel

 

[yorksrob]

Doesn't need electrifying. They could order some of those hybrid things Great Western have got that can run on electricity or diesel

I fear that micro-fleets are out of fashion !

 

[swt_passenger]

Could you provide a reference for this?

Just looked it up. It is written as a suggestion for how to exceed ITT requirements, NOT as a specific requirement. Given the difficulties SWR have with infrastructure not being capable, why would anyone bother with this?

 

[Surreytraveller]

I fear that micro-fleets are out of fashion !

It would be no more micro than the existing fleet on the line. I don't know how much in common those hybrids would have with the existing high-speed fleet - probably more in common than the existing 171/377 mix

 

[yorksrob]

It would be no more micro than the existing fleet on the line. I don't know how much in common those hybrids would have with the existing high-speed fleet - probably more in common than the existing 171/377 mix

It wouldn't indeed, however the current situation is far from ideal, particularly when there are plenty of third rail and dual voltage vehicles available within the existing fleets.

 

[Robsignals]

Doesn't need electrifying. They could order some of those hybrid things Great Western have got that can run on electricity or diesel

I doubt diesels are permitted on HS1 due to ventilation issues in the London tunnels. The Hastings service may be portion worked so units will have to multiple with 395s.

There's been a large housing development south of Ashford station plus the outlet village so could a new station be justified? Extending third rail that short distance or better to Ham Street would allow the one train per hour that terminates at Ashford to be extended possibly with one line reversibly signalled to save the cost of a new crossover.

Local TV reported recently that it's 5 years since the 395 special ran from Hastings to Eastbourne so what's happening, the MP for Hastings & Rye is Amber Rudd who isn't Home Secretary anymore, she promoted the idea but can't do much now. The MP for Bexhill is Huw Merriman a prominent pro rail member of the Transport Select Committee which may or may not help. NR said they are finalising the design for the layout change at Ashford, it's not that difficult but not clear if it includes access to P1 which will be needed for portion working, possibly most High Speed services will transfer to 1 & 2.

Electrification will probably have to be OHL, continental standard would be expensive due to the high clearance needed, hopefully the pantograph automatically adjusts.

Southeastern won't want the current service as they are all electric while Southern have diesels on the Uckfield line. The latest timetable cutting the route back to Eastbourne should solve overcrowding as a new EMU service runs Brighton to Hastings, bizarrely the Ashford service is now all stations. For me travelling from Worthing means arriving in Kent an hour later and via Redhill - Tonbridge is no better, cynically one might think it's intended to force us off the very reasonable Not London fare and pay 3 times as much for the privilege of changing trains at Victoria or London Bridge!

I'd like a new Kent Link service from Bournemouth to Margate via Southampton, Worthing, Brighton, Gatwick, Redhill, Ashford and Canterbury which would be EMU operated and should be faster between Brighton and Ashford than the old via Eastbourne one and take people to where most want to go, I'll do a separate post on it.

As for Hastings HS there may be enough 395s with the loss of a few peak Ebbsfleet short workings, paying for new trains would certainly sink the project. Also what happens to the existing service via Battle, reduced to hourly south of Tunbridge Wells?

 

[yorksrob]

As for Hastings HS there may be enough 395s with the loss of a few peak Ebbsfleet short workings, paying for new trains would certainly sink the project. Also what happens to the existing service via Battle, reduced to hourly south of Tunbridge Wells?

Half hourly stopper, if the classic route from Ashford to Charing Cross is anything to go by.

I agree with your point - if the route is to be the new high speed London - Hastings route (personally, I find this a big "if"), we shouldn't forget the importance of the route as a link between Kent and Sussex.

 

[Surreytraveller]

They'd be on electric while on HS1. That's the whole point of them. Same as on the Great Western

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Last time I checked it was not in the ITT.

As it stands, it would be something no doubt ‘fiddled’ into the franchise as it goes along (if it’s even ready in the next 8 years).

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Another thing worth mentioning is that I believe from what I’ve read and speaking to people ‘in the area’ that the new franchise will likely already be ordering more High Speed stock as they will probably run more trains and more peak 12 cars.

 

[JamesRowden]

I think we need to put some numbers from real life into this thread.

The benefit of a service HS1 service running through to Bexhill/Eastbourne would be quicker journeys between Bexhill/Hastings/Rye and Ebbsfleet/Stratford/London and quicker cross London journeys from Bexhill/Hastings/Rye.

The existing journey times on the services between Hastings and London are (I used journeys times which did not end at a terminus to remove the additional time that TOCs add so that they can show the train as on time when in reality it is slightly late at its destination):

• Hastings to London Bridge
  • XX:31 takes 82m (Probably 77m in 2022 when Orpington/Sevenoaks stops are removed)
  • XX:50 takes 93m (Probably 88m in 2022 when Orpington/Sevenoaks stops are removed)
  • Average start to end journey of 102.5m if one needs to be in London at a random point in the hour (Probably 97.5m in 2022 when Orpington/Sevenoaks stops are removed)
• Hastings to St Pancras via Ashford
  • Ashford to Hastings
    • XX:24 takes 42m
  • St Pancras to Ashford
    • XX:37 takes 37m
  • 89m if a 10 minute connection is provided at Ashford
  • Average start to end journey of 119m if on needs to be in London at a random point in the hour

Running a HS1 through service would knock 9 minutes off the Bexhill/Hastings/Rye via Ashford journey times (assuming that the train would spend 1 minute stopped at Ashford, compared to the 10 minute connection which could theoretically be provided with existing infrastructure). So a HS1 through service to Hastings would not be a large improvement to Hastings-London journeys without extensive improvements to the line between Hastings and Ashford. The service would however be the fastest route to North/East London and locations North/East of London.

A significant limitation of the use of the Marshlink for Bexhill/Hastings to/via London via HS1 journeys is the fact that only 1tph (except for an additional train in one direction each hour) can operate due to the 15 min journey time (when stopping at one of the intermediate stations) on the single tracked 10 mile section between Ore and Rye (which is the start of another shorter single track section to Appledore). Therefore raising the particularly low line speed on this section so that trains can be timetabled to cover it in 12 minutes would allow an every 30 minute service to operate in both directions (with the existing 1 minute passing time at Rye and a 5 minute gap between trains entering and leaving the single track section at the Ore end). The reduction to the journey time would be 3 minutes, and a fast service could operate not stopping at Ore/(ThreeOaks/Winchelsea)/Appledore/HamStreet to make the faster service another 6 minutes faster at a guess.

This gives an 80m Hastings to St Pancras HS1 journey time if a 10m connection is provided at Ashford, plus an 86m journey at the other end of the hour. You can subtract 9 minutes off those times for a 2tph through service via HS1, but are the cost/disruption of the upgrades at Ashford and expensive trains worth 9 minutes plus the knowledge that one won't miss a connection at Ashford and face a 30 minute wait?

I would suggest that the way to reduce the connection issue is to increase the HS1 service via Ashford from 2tph to 4tph (every 15 minutes) with 2tph via Canterbury and 2tph via Folkestone.

So I think the best course of action is to:

• Upgrade the line speed between Ore and Rye so that an every 30 minute service can operate in both directions
• Run an every 30 minute diesel / bimode service between Ashford and Eastbourne/Brighton
• Run an every 15 minute service between Ashford and London via HS1
• Review the level of usage of the services for Bexhill/Hastings/Rye via HS1 journeys after 5/10 years since it would be possible to calculate a more accurate (than today) benefit to cost ratio for electrification / redoubling of the Marshlink and/or modification of the junctions at Ashford.

 

[30907]

I'm broadly with you on this, because I fear the traffic isn't there to support a through London service from Bexhill-Hastings and Rye, so the business case won't stack up (whether there is a social policy case is another matter).
However
1. 12min with one stop strikes me as optimistic and would require a 90mph linespeed on the less curved sections.
2. In any case, I would be nervous about a timetable that had so little slack, because of the probability of importing delays from Coastway.
1 and 2 together point to extending the loop at Rye towards Winchelsea.
Once that is done, with Marshlink half hourly, the average time via Ashford is cut to 104min.

 

[JamesRowden]

I'm broadly with you on this, because I fear the traffic isn't there to support a through London service from Bexhill-Hastings and Rye, so the business case won't stack up (whether there is a social policy case is another matter).
However
1. 12min with one stop strikes me as optimistic and would require a 90mph linespeed on the less curved sections.
2. In any case, I would be nervous about a timetable that had so little slack, because of the probability of importing delays from Coastway.
1 and 2 together point to extending the loop at Rye towards Winchelsea.
Once that is done, with Marshlink half hourly, the average time via Ashford is cut to 104min.

I have read on the internet that the linespeed was 85mph before the line was singled.

Just cancel the service or skip stops if it's over 5 minutes late, there'd be another service 24 minutes behind. And additional waiting time could be added at Ore/Rye to increase the robustness of the timetable.

 

[Surreytraveller]

I have read on the internet that the linespeed was 85mph before the line was singled.

Just cancel the service or skip stops if it's over 5 minutes late, there'd be another service 24 minutes behind. And additional waiting time could be added at Ore/Rye to increase the robustness of the timetable.

If you cancel trains for being 5 minutes late, the service will be too unreliable for people to use, and no one will use it

 

[JamesRowden]

If you cancel trains for being 5 minutes late, the service will be too unreliable for people to use, and no one will use it

Just don't operate the trains beyond Ashford and Eastbourne and there is pretty much no opportunity for such a delay to frequently occur if the services are given priority between Eastbourne and Ore.

And I stated cancellation as being an option if a service is over 5 minutes late.

 

[Surreytraveller]

And I stated cancellation as being an option if a service is over 5 minutes late.

Calm down dear.

 

[JamesRowden]

Calm down dear.

Just using text to emphasise key components

 

[30907]

I have read on the internet that the linespeed was 85mph before the line was singled.

For hauled stock, 75 for units (the SR standard), but 40 between Doleham and Ore (this is in double track days, has it changed?). However, I'd be surprised if L1s, Sulzer 2s or Class 33s exceeded 60 in practice.

 

[JamesRowden]

For hauled stock, 75 for units (the SR standard), but 40 between Doleham and Ore (this is in double track days, has it changed?). However, I'd be surprised if L1s, Sulzer 2s or Class 33s exceeded 60 in practice.

There's a 25 mph or lower section in there presently (unless it's been removed recently).

The Route Specification document expected the line speed to be increased to 70-80 mph in the next few years. Ashford-Hastings journey times dropping by 7 minutes.

 

[Robsignals]

Half hourly stopper, if the classic route from Ashford to Charing Cross is anything to go by.

I agree with your point - if the route is to be the new high speed London - Hastings route (personally, I find this a big "if"), we shouldn't forget the importance of the route as a link between Kent and Sussex.

Yes, crazy that Marden and Pluckley get a half hourly service it's all about slowing the classic trains to make the HS look better. With St Leonards and Hastings the only significant traffic generators south of un Wells I think it will revert to hourly stopper as I think it was before electrification.

It's incredible there's no Kent - Gatwick service, now Redhill has P0 there's enough spare time in the off peak service to get there or Three Bridges. There are currently only 3 tph to Gatwick, northbound arrive Redhill 08, 29 and 59 but the Tonbridge train leaves on the hour so even though it's cross platform the 59 can't be a connection that's another 25 minutes on the journey. From Worthing the first cheap day train is 0905 to Victoria, Gatwick 0956 likely to get the Reading cross platform at 1000 Redhill 1008, official connection is 1016 arr 1029 (could start 10 min later if the ticket is valid on GX Brighton to Gatwick but with 2 tight connections not worth the hassle) so a long wait at Redhill for 1100, Tonbridge 1131, Ashford 1230 (which is the connection from the 1209 Marshlink arrival, dep Worthing 0926) Canterbury 1254, Ramsgate 1316 and with another change Margate 1339.

Other way is better, Margate 1053, change Ramsgate 1119, Canterbury West 1142, Ashford 1202 (Marshlink 1224, Worthing 1454) Tonbridge 1301, Redhill 1336 the Reading to Gatwick comes in behind 1338 dep 1342, Gatwick 1350 which is also when a coastway splitter leaves so another 25 minutes lost Worthing 1508.

What a dismal show, over an hour faster to Margate changing at Victoria, 30 mins to Canterbury East for a longer journey.

 

[yorksrob]

Yes, crazy that Marden and Pluckley get a half hourly service it's all about slowing the classic trains to make the HS look better. With St Leonards and Hastings the only significant traffic generators south of un Wells I think it will revert to hourly stopper as I think it was before electrification.

It's incredible there's no Kent - Gatwick service, now Redhill has P0 there's enough spare time in the off peak service to get there or Three Bridges. There are currently only 3 tph to Gatwick, northbound arrive Redhill 08, 29 and 59 but the Tonbridge train leaves on the hour so even though it's cross platform the 59 can't be a connection that's another 25 minutes on the journey. From Worthing the first cheap day train is 0905 to Victoria, Gatwick 0956 likely to get the Reading cross platform at 1000 Redhill 1008, official connection is 1016 arr 1029 (could start 10 min later if the ticket is valid on GX Brighton to Gatwick but with 2 tight connections not worth the hassle) so a long wait at Redhill for 1100, Tonbridge 1131, Ashford 1230 (which is the connection from the 1209 Marshlink arrival, dep Worthing 0926) Canterbury 1254, Ramsgate 1316 and with another change Margate 1339.

Other way is better, Margate 1053, change Ramsgate 1119, Canterbury West 1142, Ashford 1202 (Marshlink 1224, Worthing 1454) Tonbridge 1301, Redhill 1336 the Reading to Gatwick comes in behind 1338 dep 1342, Gatwick 1350 which is also when a coastway splitter leaves so another 25 minutes lost Worthing 1508.

What a dismal show, over an hour faster to Margate changing at Victoria, 30 mins to Canterbury East for a longer journey.

Yes, I don't mind Marden and Pluckley having a decent service, however I believe there ought to be an express to Charing Cross via the route.

According to V Mitchell and K Smith, the Tunbridge Wells route had an hourly fast and an hourly stopper off-peak in thumper days, until 1981 when the fasts were withdrawn. Thus it remained until the juice arrived.

 

[JamesRowden]

Charing Cross - Tonbridge - Ashford will be at least 4tph off-peak in 2022 (according the new franchise requirements) with only 2tph needing to be stoppers.