Medway Valley line to Rochester?

[Jturner98]

Always thought it’s strange that the Medway Valley line has run to Strood instead of Rochester, surely it would be better for it to run to Rochester if they constructed a bit of track to allow this?

 

[zwk500]

The reason is largely historic - the North Kent/Medway Valley lines were built by the SER, while the Chatham Main line was built by the LC&DR.

The Medway valley is a quiet branch line and wouldn't justify the cost of a new chord. The most that could be done is to reverse at Strood but then you get into complications with conflicting moves and platform capacity at Rochester.

 

[JonathanH]

The chord would essentially need to be below the Medway Bridges and wouldn't be particularly long, but I seem to recall a difference in elevation.

For the added convenience of everyone who might want to travel to the Medway towns needs to be considered the inconvenience of those who want to get to Gravesend and Dartford.

 

[A S Leib]

For the added convenience of everyone who might want to travel to the Medway towns needs to be considered the inconvenience of those who want to get to Gravesend and Dartford.

It probably wouldn't add on more than around seven minutes unless trains from Tonbridge / Paddock Wood are able to make connections in Strood that they'd miss at Rochester. (That being said, I think Strood station to Rochester high street's around a fifteen minute walk and with at least three tph between Strood and Rainham, so it isn't massively hard to go east from Strood anyway.)

 

[30907]

The reason is largely historic - the North Kent/Medway Valley lines were built by the SER, while the Chatham Main line was built by the LC&DR.

The Medway valley is a quiet branch line and wouldn't justify the cost of a new chord. The most that could be done is to reverse at Strood but then you get into complications with conflicting moves and platform capacity at Rochester.

There was a second Rochester bridge and a parallel SER line across the Medway to what became Chatham Goods for a good while (heavily oversimplified history).

The Medway Valley line was designed to connect towards London as that was the important destination, and there were all-day through trains from electrification until the 60s or 70s. In steam days there were some through trains crossing the river, reversing at Strood, including a Gillingham-Brighton service via Uckfield

 

[4-SUB 4732]

I believe it was determined that if you ruined / flattened Diggerland, you could build a single track chord from under the M2 / HS1 up to the Chatham Main, to allow direct trains between Tonbridge / Maidstone and Chatham / Gillingham.

In the modern era, there would be little lost by people being asked to change at Rochester vice Strood for your onward connections, and it would open up more connections in any event.

Indeed, you could run a Redhill to Gillingham service (like the really good old days!) every 30 minutes using a 3 car, and you could extend one to Canterbury East, picking up the Newington and Teynham stops off-peak.

You’d also, with a little re-model, get to use the Strood “loop” platform for turning around back towards Gravesend without needing to do the infamous Strood shunt.

Connectivity. It won’t catch on.

 

[telstarbox]

You can walk from Stood to Rochester in not much time - Chatham or Gillingham would be more useful if you were to build a chord.

For me the bigger issue on the Medway Valley is that most trains don't run through to Tonbridge for connections instead of terminating at Paddock Wood, although I'm sure there are good timetabling reasons for this.

 

[Peter Sarf]

To connect the Medway valley line directly to Rochester would require a slightly tighter curve rising by the same amount as the existing Curve from Strood station to the Medway bridge. A three way junction just before the bridge. The disadvantages would be the increased congestion over the river Medway to Gillingham and depriving Strood of its direct connection.

The alternative link would be from almost the river level up to Sole Street bank around where the M2 river crossing is. But the line to Victoria rises quite steeply up Sole Street bank and this would still add to congestion from the Medway river to Gillingham.

Many people commuting to London from the Medway valley drive to Sole Street or Meopham. Its quite a short cut and, if like I found, led to a better car park as my home was too far from Strood or the rest of the Medway valley line anyway. For me a Strood station on the line to Victoria on the Strood side of the river might have been a benefit if i was prepared to drive into Strood or rely on the bus.

Not worth the bother. A Medway Parkway somewhere near Sole Street, but not on the Sole Street bank so Meopham really, would be more use.

 

[PGAT]

The connection time from Strood is a minute towards Rochester. If you miss that there's another train 5 minutes later. In the other direction it doesn't matter as much since you can get on the train whilst it's turning around.

For me the bigger issue on the Medway Valley is that most trains don't run through to Tonbridge for connections instead of terminating at Paddock Wood, although I'm sure there are good timetabling reasons for this.

Yes the Tonbridge connection was withdrawn in December to reduce conflicting movements

 

[4-SUB 4732]

The connection time from Strood is a minute towards Rochester. If you miss that there's another train 5 minutes later. In the other direction it doesn't matter as much since you can get on the train whilst it's turning around.

Yes the Tonbridge connection was withdrawn in December to reduce conflicting movements

The same conflicting movements that didn't apparently exist / cause issues for many years, including during the Covid era.

 

[PGAT]

The same conflicting movements that didn't apparently exist / cause issues for many years, including during the Covid era.

Well, SouthEastern claim it reduces conflicting movements, and I can't see much reason to cut back to Paddock Wood over than to save one unit.

 

[Peter Sarf]

The same conflicting movements that didn't apparently exist / cause issues for many years, including during the Covid era.

It was not always a through service. Back in the early 80s I used have to travel from Strood, change at Paddock Wood and then at Tonbridge for Edenbridge. The connection at Tonbridge either way was awful due to the awful reliability of the service Tonbridge/Redhill (Reading iirc ?). I was on a permanent late report at work and would end up going home when I had done my hours which did not matter because the time table at Edenbridge was meaningless - only problem was often watching my Paddock wood train depart as I arrived at Tonbridge. The connection at Paddock wood was very rarely a problem.

 

[30907]

The same conflicting movements that didn't apparently exist / cause issues for many years, including during the Covid era.

You mean when the service was only hourly?

 

[4-SUB 4732]

You mean when the service was only hourly?

And even if so, that would be fine. The service could hardly have been described as causing "bedlam" when the 4tph via Headcorn proposed for May 2023 didn't come off, nor did the Hastings line improvements. If we assume things stay as they are, which they will for a while, there is no acceptable reason for the service not to go to Tonbridge. The only thing I can think is that their belief is that the half-hourly Paddock Wood compensates for having to change again, and that one train doing Tonbridge and one stopping at Paddock Wood each hour would mess the timetable's efficiency up.

Either way, the Paddock Wood termination is absolutely rubbish.