Should TfL take over and rename Thameslink?

[Davester50]

Better to split Crossrail and Overground from TfL, and get them properly marketed as National Rail than bring Thameslink to TfL

 

[Acton1991]

Better to split Crossrail and Overground from TfL, and get them properly marketed as National Rail than bring Thameslink to TfL

No thanks!

 

[supervc-10]

I think having the ThamesLink core on the tube map makes sense (and probably the Northern City Lines too)- and continue to link it in with all the TfL/CityMapper journey planners etc- but otherwise I'm not sure it needs to be part of TfL. From an end user's point of view- the London sections of TL are all part of the Oyster system, they interchange nicely with the tube etc, it's a metro frequency through the TL core. Definitely a solution looking for a problem!

 

[urbophile]

It doesn't matter who runs it, but as an important link though central London it should be publicised, and appear on the map, as if it were another Tube line.

 

[PTR 444]

Better to split Crossrail and Overground from TfL, and get them properly marketed as National Rail than bring Thameslink to TfL

No way! If anything, the East London Line should really be part of the Underground again with infrastructure under full TfL control as it was before 2008. Could do the same for the North London Line but you’d need to find a way to get freight off it first.

 

[JonathanH]

No way! If anything, the East London Line should really be part of the Underground again with infrastructure under full TfL control as it was before 2008. Could do the same for the North London Line but you’d need to find a way to get freight off it first.

What perceived benefit do you see of making the East London Line 'part of the underground'?

 

[Davester50]

No way! If anything, the East London Line should really be part of the Underground again with infrastructure under full TfL control as it was before 2008. Could do the same for the North London Line but you’d need to find a way to get freight off it first.

Why? It's heavy rail, with many operators on the WLL and NLL. Ripe for NSE Mark 2

 

[Bletchleyite]

It doesn't matter who runs it, but as an important link though central London it should be publicised, and appear on the map, as if it were another Tube line.

I agree with that. It's a very useful link indeed, but most people won't think their ticket/Oyster/contactless is valid on it.

 

[Grumbler]

Probably better for GBR to take over London's rail lines

 

[urbophile]

Why? It's heavy rail, with many operators on the WLL and NLL. Ripe for NSE Mark 2

The Underground is heavy rail too, I believe. It's not a light rail system like the DLR or T&W Metro.

 

[Peregrine 4903]

No way! If anything, the East London Line should really be part of the Underground again with infrastructure under full TfL control as it was before 2008. Could do the same for the North London Line but you’d need to find a way to get freight off it first.

Why?

Honestly, the way some people view freight on this forum is so depressing.

 

[SynthD]

Are freight trains using the NLL instead of the Goblin for a purpose or because they have sacrosanct paths? Tell them they are being moved. I wish there’s room.

 

[Peregrine 4903]

Are freight trains using the NLL instead of the Goblin for a purpose or because they have sacrosanct paths? Tell them they are being moved. I wish there’s room.

Ummm, freight uses the NLL because its the best route to access the GEML.

Accessing it via the Goblin is extremely slow and there is no spare capacity for those paths.

Plus freight using the GOBLIN still has to use the NLL west of Gospel Oak.

 

[Basil Jet]

And freight from the GEML can't access the Goblin without multiple reversals - look again at Forest Gate junction!

 

[NorthKent1989]

If Crossrail is on the map, so should Thameslink be. It’s only a historical accident that it’s not run by TfL; it serves the same function analogous to RER in Paris. More importantly, it is a crucial link and if it were not on the map the Northern line in particular might be even more crowded.

The Thameslink core should be on the map ie West Hampstead/Finsbury Park to London Bridge/E&C but the rest of it should be removed off the map, it’s making the map far too messy having all the extra branches, CrossRail is actually operated by TfL and should be on the map

 

[ashkeba]

Hmmm...TfL all the way out to Cambridge????

Yes please! It makes more sense than trains branded "Southern" or "Gatwick Express" serving Ely and we've had both those! ( Hastily stickered as great northern but still obviously not)

Passengers don't care who good service comes from much

 

[Basil Jet]

Yes please! It makes more sense than trains branded "Southern" or "Gatwick Express" serving Ely and we've had both those! ( Hastily stickered as great northern but still obviously not)

I think Southern at Ely makes more sense than Great Northern!

 

[Flinn Reed]

I think Thameslink should only be taken over by TFL if the network is completely restructured north and south of London, making it more like the Elizabeth Line. Effectively, metro style services, or at least no further than Gatwick/Luton, would run through the core. Then swapping longer distance routes such as Brighton and Peterborough back into London terminals.

This would also solve the problem of Thameslink trying to be too many services at once, particularly the suitability of 700s on a range of different routes. While it may be convenient for passengers from Cambridge etc to travel directly into the centre of London, the metro-style trains aren't ideal for longer distances, especially compared to the 387s that run alongside on faster Great Northern and Gatwick Express services. Plus not everyone wants to go to Farringdon or Blackfriars, so would likely have to change onto the tube anyway.

The Elizabeth Line works as most of the network is segregated from other national rail services, other than some GWR stopping services - and terminates at a more sensible distance at Reading and Shenfield (rather than Newbury/Didcot etc). Thameslink in its current form is best run as a combined franchise with other TSGN routes to better integrate timetables etc.

 

[Basil Jet]

I used Thameslink southward from Finsbury Park for the first time on Tuesday. I was just thinking "Great, we won't have to wait in the Kings Cross throat for a platform" when the train stopped and the driver announced that we were just waiting for a platform at St Pancras.

 

[NorthKent1989]

I think Thameslink should only be taken over by TFL if the network is completely restructured north and south of London, making it more like the Elizabeth Line. Effectively, metro style services, or at least no further than Gatwick/Luton, would run through the core. Then swapping longer distance routes such as Brighton and Peterborough back into London terminals.

This would also solve the problem of Thameslink trying to be too many services at once, particularly the suitability of 700s on a range of different routes. While it may be convenient for passengers from Cambridge etc to travel directly into the centre of London, the metro-style trains aren't ideal for longer distances, especially compared to the 387s that run alongside on faster Great Northern and Gatwick Express services. Plus not everyone wants to go to Farringdon or Blackfriars, so would likely have to change onto the tube anyway.

The Elizabeth Line works as most of the network is segregated from other national rail services, other than some GWR stopping services - and terminates at a more sensible distance at Reading and Shenfield (rather than Newbury/Didcot etc). Thameslink in its current form is best run as a combined franchise with other TSGN routes to better integrate timetables etc.

For this to happen you’d have to strip Thameslink right down to the Sutton Loop and the Catford line to Orpington/Sevenoaks in the south since these routes are the only self contained routes south of the River, the Rainham service shares tracks with the intensive Woolwich line services, and, would truncating more trains an hour at Gatwick would surely cause issues with Southern services.

I’d make the Thameslink an inter-regional service and keep all the outer bits to Brighton, Cambridge, Bedford and truncate the more metro type services to their respective terminals north and south.

 

[geoffk]

In theory I think this is a good idea, but would TfL want to operate services as far out as Brighton? (granted Reading is a fair distance from London too, so maybe!)

Surely if TfL was to take over Thameslink the extremities should be cut back considerably - not just from Brighton but also Peterborough and Cambridge. In those circumstances, where would TL terminate (assuming LNER and Southern took over the outer ends)?

 

[Peregrine 4903]

Yes please! It makes more sense than trains branded "Southern" or "Gatwick Express" serving Ely and we've had both those! ( Hastily stickered as great northern but still obviously not)

Passengers don't care who good service comes from much

It makes no sense whatsoever. And why do people just assume TfL would provide a better service, they wouldn't is the answer. If anything they would screw up the service and it would get worse.

 

[miklcct]

Yes - TfL should take over it.
No - it shouldn't be renamed as Thameslink is a well-known name which serves its purpose well.

Thameslink and Elizabeth line should be brought under TfL Rail control, with Crossrail as the mode within TfL network and the name of the train operating company, which will include the future Crossrail 2 and so on for any National Rail lines which run from the counties through the centre of London to the other side.

 

[SynthD]

It makes no sense whatsoever. And why do people just assume TfL would provide a better service, they wouldn't is the answer. If anything they would screw up the service and it would get worse.

Imaginations are running wild. In this service it’s moot as it’s already running at its peak.

 

[ashkeba]

It makes no sense whatsoever. And why do people just assume TfL would provide a better service, they wouldn't is the answer. If anything they would screw up the service and it would get worse.

Do you think Silverlink Metro was better than London Overground?

 

[Wolfie]

Better to split Crossrail and Overground from TfL, and get them properly marketed as National Rail than bring Thameslink to TfL

Given the success of the Overground and the fact that Crossrail had been majority funded by London that is an even worse idea than the original suggestion. Had l expressed my actual feelings l would have had issues with the moderators.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 May 2022 ==

Do you think Silverlink Metro was better than London Overground?

Spot on

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 May 2022 ==

Probably better for GBR to take over London's rail lines

Absolutely not!

 

[SE%Traveller]

I think that one of the primary reasons why TFL control appeals to passengers using metro services in London is a perception that TOCs and Thameslink in particular, will always favour the longer routes over the metro so by handing control to TFL this bias will be removed and thus service improved.

in respect to Thameslink in times of disruption the Sutton service is frequently dropped entirely. Catford Loop fairs better in that they'll drop 50% of the trains but still run the service from Blackfriars. This despite the fact that South of the River the lines by Catford and Wimbledon are those that rely heavily on Thameslink for all or most of their services.

NB for the record i don't think that splitting up Thameslink or putting it under sole TFL control is a good idea, but i certainly sympathise with those who think it might.

 

[NorthKent1989]

I think that one of the primary reasons why TFL control appeals to passengers using metro services in London is a perception that TOCs and Thameslink in particular, will always favour the longer routes over the metro so by handing control to TFL this bias will be removed and thus service improved.

in respect to Thameslink in times of disruption the Sutton service is frequently dropped entirely. Catford Loop fairs better in that they'll drop 50% of the trains but still run the service from Blackfriars. This despite the fact that South of the River the lines by Catford and Wimbledon are those that rely heavily on Thameslink for all or most of their services.

NB for the record i don't think that splitting up Thameslink or putting it under sole TFL control is a good idea, but i certainly sympathise with those who think it might.

Let’s not forget the Rainham service, whenever Thameslink is disrupted they turn that into a Dartford to Medway shuttle service

 

[JohnRegular]

I suspect that if Thameslink had been able to take over the 'metro-like' branches e.g. Tattenham Corner, Caterham, Epsom Downs, and weren't running any further south than Gatwick, or any further north than (at a guess) Bedford or Stevenage, then we'd be left with something that's much closer to 'Crossrail 0'. Maybe if that had happened, the network would be beter suited to TfL takeover. But we didn't get that, and I've read on these forums that there are good reasons Thameslink didn't take those branches over.

TfL aren't miracle workers, as seems to be a common point of view here; the Overground was a great success, but mostly because there was so much potential for improvement on the old Silverlink services. I'm sure some will argue otherwise, but I don't see any 'quick wins' for Thameslink that would occur if TfL took over.

 

[Basil Jet]

I suspect that if Thameslink had been able to take over the 'metro-like' branches e.g. Tattenham Corner, Caterham, Epsom Downs, and weren't running any further south than Gatwick, or any further north than (at a guess) Bedford or Stevenage, then we'd be left with something that's much closer to 'Crossrail 0'. Maybe if that had happened, the network would be beter suited to TfL takeover. But we didn't get that, and I've read on these forums that there are good reasons Thameslink didn't take those branches over.

TfL aren't miracle workers, as seems to be a common point of view here; the Overground was a great success, but mostly because there was so much potential for improvement on the old Silverlink services. I'm sure some will argue otherwise, but I don't see any 'quick wins' for Thameslink that would occur if TfL took over.

Tattenham Corner, Caterham and Epsom Downs are all 8-carriage branches. Could there ever be demand for 12-carriage trains on any of these lines? If demand on the core increases, TL will have to become all 12-car, so any thoughts about where its branches should go should focus on where an all 12-car TL would make sense, rather than trying to make its extent match the London boundary so that TfL can take it over.