Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
I don't think the idea of a fast service to Hastings is necessarily tripe, if it could actually be done. Hastings is a quite depressed town with poor road and rail links to London in terms of journey time, so *if* a way could be found to provide a genuinely fast service to London then I don't think that's a bad aspiration in itself.
The difficulty is that the current typical limited-stop London services seem to take about 1hr 35 mins, whilst an HS1 journey from Ashford to London is typically around 40 mins. The current Ashford to Hastings stopping service takes just under 45 mins, so this in itself gives a saving of just 10 minutes.
I think it only becomes a realistic prospect if a way can be found of getting the Ashford to Hastings part down to around 30 minutes to offer an overall journey time of no more than 1hr 15 mins, which requires an average speed of approaching 60 mph between Hastings and Ashford. I don't think this is viable with a Rye stop without a fair bit of infrastructure work.
Obviously things would be slightly more beneficial for Bexhill, but I can't see a case being made on Bexhill given the demographic there is biased towards old people, though of course a fast rail service could form part of a strategy for addressing that.
Good idea not tripe - except better to link up the "Strood - Paddock Wood" to "Tonbridge - Redhill" and to local "Redhill to Reading" to create a service that parallel's the M25 southern section.
Lines/Routes already there but probably could do with some speeding up that could give an alternative public transport other than via London to M25 Which of course is very congested normally.
I don't think the idea of a fast service to Hastings is necessarily tripe, if it could actually be done. Hastings is a quite depressed town with poor road and rail links to London in terms of journey time, so *if* a way could be found to provide a genuinely fast service to London then I don't think that's a bad aspiration in itself.
The difficulty is that the current typical limited-stop London services seem to take about 1hr 35 mins, whilst an HS1 journey from Ashford to London is typically around 40 mins. The current Ashford to Hastings stopping service takes just under 45 mins, so this in itself gives a saving of just 10 minutes.
I think it only becomes a realistic prospect if a way can be found of getting the Ashford to Hastings part down to around 30 minutes to offer an overall journey time of no more than 1hr 15 mins, which requires an average speed of approaching 60 mph between Hastings and Ashford. I don't think this is viable with a Rye stop without a fair bit of infrastructure work.
Obviously things would be slightly more beneficial for Bexhill, but I can't see a case being made on Bexhill given the demographic there is biased towards old people, though of course a fast rail service could form part of a strategy for addressing that.
The very reality is that you need to effectively bomb Ashford and start it again in order to enable it all; and that is so massive an undertaking it makes the idea of a token hourly service from St Pancras to Hastings / Bexhill ridiculous.
On the flip side, in the new franchise there had been plans for a half-hourly off-peak non-stop service between London Bridge and Tonbridge, extending to Hastings. In theory, you're looking at 79 minutes from London Bridge to Hastings every hour - that's not awful.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Good idea not tripe - except better to link up the "Strood - Paddock Wood" to "Tonbridge - Redhill" and to local "Redhill to Reading" to create a service that parallel's the M25 southern section.
Lines/Routes already there but probably could do with some speeding up that could give an alternative public transport other than via London to M25 Which of course is very congested normally.
The very reality is that you need to effectively bomb Ashford and start it again in order to enable it all; and that is so massive an undertaking it makes the idea of a token hourly service from St Pancras to Hastings / Bexhill ridiculous.
On the flip side, in the new franchise there had been plans for a half-hourly off-peak non-stop service between London Bridge and Tonbridge, extending to Hastings. In theory, you're looking at 79 minutes from London Bridge to Hastings every hour - that's not awful.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Reading to Canterbury West, Maidstone West or Strood are terribly impractical ideas...
I mean, all you really got to do is somehow squeeze a flyover/flyunder (between the Maidstone and Tonbridge lines) at the western approaches of Ashford and your already halfway there to a faster service.
As for a Strood-Reading through service, sign me up!
I mean, all you really got to do is somehow squeeze a flyover/flyunder (between the Maidstone and Tonbridge lines) at the western approaches of Ashford and your already halfway there to a faster service.
As for a Strood-Reading through service, sign me up!
With a fastest journey time between Strood and Reading of some 2h31 (using my best guess and very little recovery time at all...), and a comparable likely journey time of some 1h35 (or slightly more) with two changes in London, it's simply unfeasible. Canterbury West to Reading would be at least 2h25, assuming non-stop Ashford to Tonbridge. Again, via London on HS1 it's under 2 hours.
Seems like very dodgy ideas from people who should stick to working for a Council and not meddling in transportation.
The very reality is that you need to effectively bomb Ashford and start it again in order to enable it all; and that is so massive an undertaking it makes the idea of a token hourly service from St Pancras to Hastings / Bexhill ridiculous.
On the flip side, in the new franchise there had been plans for a half-hourly off-peak non-stop service between London Bridge and Tonbridge, extending to Hastings. In theory, you're looking at 79 minutes from London Bridge to Hastings every hour - that's not awful.
This would be good, although perhaps not as politically compelling as more expensive pointy-ended trains at Hastings that go a long way round to save a further 10 minutes!
I agree. I wouldn't run anything extra right across the busy layout at Redhill. Better to run the such Kent trains to Croydon and London or Gatwick, and offer good connections at Redhill to Guildford and Reading.
Mods/Admins, sorry I couldn't find a 'Not a chance in hell' sub-forum.... https://www.kentonline.co.uk/kent/news/gatwick-to-kent-rail-service-plans-233849/ ByCiaran Duggan, local democracy reporter cduggan@thekmgroup.co.uk Published: 09:19, 16 September 2020 A rail service linking Gatwick to...
With a fastest journey time between Strood and Reading of some 2h31 (using my best guess and very little recovery time at all...), and a comparable likely journey time of some 1h35 (or slightly more) with two changes in London, it's simply unfeasible. Canterbury West to Reading would be at least 2h25, assuming non-stop Ashford to Tonbridge. Again, via London on HS1 it's under 2 hours.
Seems like very dodgy ideas from people who should stick to working for a Council and not meddling in transportation.
OK Fair enough.
I still think connections could be timed better in the Reading to Kent direction. The Reading train arrives 1 minute after the Redhill train leaves meaning an hours wait with nothing to do in the cold. Then there is a half an hour wait at Tonbridge (admittedly not as bad) for onward connection to the Medway Valley.
Make the whole of the Medway Valley half hourly and the Redhill likewise at least, if junction pathing is the problem
This would be good, although perhaps not as politically compelling as more expensive pointy-ended trains at Hastings that go a long way round to save a further 10 minutes!
I agree. I wouldn't run anything extra right across the busy layout at Redhill. Better to run the such Kent trains to Croydon and London or Gatwick, and offer good connections at Redhill to Guildford and Reading.
Ashford will be far, far too busy to have reliable conflicting movements at this level. All you need is a couple of minutes of delay off the Marshlink in the high-peak and you've got big trouble.
The best option is a minimum half-hourly service on the Marsh, where an hourly service is "Express", and the other is stopping.
Mods/Admins, sorry I couldn't find a 'Not a chance in hell' sub-forum.... https://www.kentonline.co.uk/kent/news/gatwick-to-kent-rail-service-plans-233849/ ByCiaran Duggan, local democracy reporter cduggan@thekmgroup.co.uk Published: 09:19, 16 September 2020 A rail service linking Gatwick to...
However TfSE were very interested before lockdown (obviously as Kent CC are one of their members) but there is an appreciation that a lot of work would be needed to make it happen. It is a key road traffic corridor that needs a decent public transport alternative and identified by TfSE as needing relief (not necessary by Rail).
They have a memorandum of understanding with Network Rail (from July 2020) to facilitate modal shift to rail and investigate improvement of a number cross-regional railways including Ashford - Gatwick - Reading. as part of the "inner-orbital" review.
However, I suspect a lot of it is in embryo stage and unlikely to happen in near future, especially now following Covid, the Williams Review, and that TfSE did not get statutory powers and remains a shadow authority.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
With a fastest journey time between Strood and Reading of some 2h31 (using my best guess and very little recovery time at all...), and a comparable likely journey time of some 1h35 (or slightly more) with two changes in London, it's simply unfeasible. Canterbury West to Reading would be at least 2h25, assuming non-stop Ashford to Tonbridge. Again, via London on HS1 it's under 2 hours.
Seems like very dodgy ideas from people who should stick to working for a Council and not meddling in transportation.
Currently the journey times are horrendous because of the all stations pattern of the services but that just means if it is looked at the service pattern would need to be changed to have a mixture of fast and stopping trains. In any case if it is 2+ hours from Strood to Reading that is irrelevant as most passengers won't travel full length, it is the amount of intermediate journeys that could be picked up that counts.
There are transport experts both at TfSE and in the councils working with Network Rail who understand more than just Rail.
Councils are elected by their residents to get them the best deal possible. If the railway wants to continue receiving public subsidy, it needs to listen to government both local and national.
Ashford will be far, far too busy to have reliable conflicting movements at this level. All you need is a couple of minutes of delay off the Marshlink in the high-peak and you've got big trouble.
The trend in travel patterns since Covid seems broadly to be away from purely radial commuting into London and more towards orbital journeys. This is based on anecdotal evidence suggesting - amongst other things - the Overground across North London has remained busy compared with traditional commuter routes into the City. I see no reason why this expectation should not remain to some extent after the pandemic.
Seen in this light, focussing attention in the Southeast onto orbital routes such as the service from Reading to Canterbury makes sense.
The difficulty with these services is striking the balance between being fast enough to function as 1 leg of a multi-stage journey, and stopping often enough to properly serve the communities en-route.
The difficulty with these services is striking the balance between being fast enough to function as 1 leg of a multi-stage journey, and stopping often enough to properly serve the communities en-route.
The trend in travel patterns since Covid seems broadly to be away from purely radial commuting into London and more towards orbital journeys. This is based on anecdotal evidence suggesting - amongst other things - the Overground across North London has remained busy compared with traditional commuter routes into the City. I see no reason why this expectation should not remain to some extent after the pandemic.
Seen in this light, focussing attention in the Southeast onto orbital routes such as the service from Reading to Canterbury makes sense.
There is a vast difference between orbital commuting in an urban area like the Overground, and orbital demand much further outside London (where the M25 is a much stronger competitor against inner London roads and parking)
That doesn’t fit on the ground. Any of the remodelling proposals have significant issues with non-preferred S&C, Equipment that if it fails screws up everything, interfaces with HS1, and operability.
That doesn’t fit on the ground. Any of the remodelling proposals have significant issues with non-preferred S&C, Equipment that if it fails screws up everything, interfaces with HS1, and operability.
That doesn’t fit on the ground. Any of the remodelling proposals have significant issues with non-preferred S&C, Equipment that if it fails screws up everything, interfaces with HS1, and operability.
Not even the diamond crossing version? I agree it's a low-value scheme though and likely not worth the investment. An improved London service via Tonbridge makes far more sense, with Ashford - Brighton trains formed of battery-equipped 3rd rail electric stock.
Not even the diamond crossing version? I agree it's a low-value scheme though and likely not worth the investment. An improved London services via Tonbridge makes far more sense, with Ashford - Brighton trains formed of battery-equipped 3rd rail electric stock.
Whilst I applaud your website and the sheer number of ideas you have, one assumes it is mostly aspirational and not heavily based on real-world experience.
Whilst I applaud your website and the sheer number of ideas you have, one assumes it is mostly aspirational and not heavily based on real-world experience.
That's a somewhat backhanded compliment! I think if you read my recent comments I'm no great supporter of this idea at all. My Ashford sketch was merely a rapid brain dump of some outline ideas I had 5 years ago if it was neccessary to create such a connection. They clearly haven't been passed through any more detailed a design process than that, and were meant primarily to generate discussion. My professional background is signal engineering, and I have worked closely on new layout development with other specialists, both new work schemes and alterations. I'm no PW design engineer, but all ideas start with a single line sketch.
That might just fit, but there was an option that looked at something similar with a double slip, and the turnout speeds were 15mph I think and it was all non-standard.
The main problem with your proposal, though, is getting from Tonbridge to the Canterbury line...
Whilst I applaud your website and the sheer number of ideas you have, one assumes it is mostly aspirational and not heavily based on real-world experience.
To be fair to Mark, it is based on real world experience. Another of the big challenges on this is breaking into the CTRL interlocking to permit a train off HS1 to be given a route into Ashford Plat 1/2
That might just fit, but there was an option that looked at something similar with a double slip, and the turnout speeds were 15mph I think and it was all non-standard.
Such trains would all have to cross the layout at the east end in both directions via the long single lead junction, using platforms #1 and #2, which they would have to share with Marshlinks and Tonbridge Dover traffic.
That's very slow, not ideal for clearing the junction quickly!
Such trains would all have to cross the layout at the east end in both directions via the long single lead junction, using platforms #1 and #2, which they would have to share with Marshlinks and Tonbridge Dover traffic.
Possibly the most useful intervention at Ashford might be an east end bay for the Marshlink service to terminate in, so it wouldn't interact at all with other services. Would have to lose the carriage sidings there to make room I expect.
Possibly the most useful intervention at Ashford might be an east end bay for the Marshlink service to terminate in, so it wouldn't interact at all with other services. Would have to lose the carriage sidings there to make room I expect.
I’d argue that the most useful intervention would be to kick out the Eurostars - there’s a lot of infrastructure there that can only be used for a handful of trains per day. It could be put to much better use, and speed up the Eurostars.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
