Southeastern to become "the first regional integrated railway"?

[Class 466]

The operator will be GBR.

Aware of that funnily enough. I mean in terms of operating sectors under GBR it makes sense for c2c & GAs ops to merge given how small c2c is and then would align both operators with the current NR operating region into a single Anglia operation.

 

[NorthKent1989]

We are both forgetting Elmers End's BIG TESCO!

Also would running Hayes to Victoria work as well? I always assumed they used to go to Cannon Street instead because Beckenham Junction went there, and the two lines are close by. Actually, they are linked at New Beckenham.

Yes I forgot Elmer’s End’s Tesco’s and also the tram interchange to Croydon.

VIC to Hayes I think would work well, this was proposed a while back that the CST Hayes service would become a VIC service, sure it would parallel with the neighbouring Penge East line in some sections but the Hayes line will most likely become Bakerloo in the next couple of decades

 

[NorthKent1989]

Aware of that funnily enough. I mean in terms of operating sectors under GBR it makes sense for c2c & GAs ops to merge given how small c2c is and then would align both operators with the current NR operating region into a single Anglia operation.

I’m amazed that they never merged the LTS with the GA franchises long before now,

 

[frankmoh]

Yes I forgot Elmer’s End’s Tesco’s and also the tram interchange to Croydon.

VIC to Hayes I think would work well, this was proposed a while back that the CST Hayes service would become a VIC service, sure it would parallel with the neighbouring Penge East line in some sections but the Hayes line will most likely become Bakerloo in the next couple of decades

It can, and has been done. Usually when there are works on the way to Waterloo or CHX. I guess SE doesn't run it much because it would make the Beckenham Junction route redundant.

 

[cle]

Also would running Hayes to Victoria work as well? I always assumed they used to go to Cannon Street instead because Beckenham Junction went there, and the two lines are close by. Actually, they are linked at New Beckenham.

I had heard that another Victoria-Dartford service but via Sidcup might happen too, to get it to 4tph.

Victoria-Hayes could also work well in a future where Victoria Eastern only runs metro services, and the need to increase Vic - DH/PR - Lewisham core frequency. It'd be pretty slow though - most people would go for the Charing Cross! This is assuming no/not yet re Bakerloo.

They definitely want to do some investment / subsidy from developers on the route. I know the Old Kent Road is earmarked, and Lewisham of course, but other places on the line should definitely seem some intensification/lighter TOD closer to the stations. Doesn't have to be Blade Runner - but a few mid sized developments. Beckenham centre itself could see a bit of a building boom, if that has the tube it'll be very well connected: Bakerloo, Southeastern Vic/Orpington, Southern locals via Crystal Palace, and the tram into Croydon. Might become a much bigger interchange, even see some semi/fast calls?

 

[WAO]

The operator will be GBR.

How do you see the development of the relationship between GBR as operator and the present Operator of Last Resort?

Will the OLR be merged with infrastructure?

Thanks,

WAO

 

[Clarence Yard]

OLR is now called DOHL and the relationship will be quite simple - all of DOHL will transfer to GBR.

GBR will have also taken over NR so it will all be one organisation - infrastructure and operations together.

 

[Bald Rick]

OLR is now called DOHL and the relationship will be quite simple - all of DOHL will transfer to GBR.

GBR will have also taken over NR so it will all be one organisation - infrastructure and operations together.

I think you mean DFTO !

There won’t be a ‘take over’ as such, but the management structures will be merged. The new structure for Southeastern is almost settled, that for the South West is in development.

There will still need to be some separation of some activity, but it’s likely to be dealt with by one team (accounting for example, where the funding provided will still be separate, at least initially).

 

[brad465]

I had heard that another Victoria-Dartford service but via Sidcup might happen too, to get it to 4tph.

Victoria-Hayes could also work well in a future where Victoria Eastern only runs metro services, and the need to increase Vic - DH/PR - Lewisham core frequency. It'd be pretty slow though - most people would go for the Charing Cross! This is assuming no/not yet re Bakerloo.

They definitely want to do some investment / subsidy from developers on the route. I know the Old Kent Road is earmarked, and Lewisham of course, but other places on the line should definitely seem some intensification/lighter TOD closer to the stations. Doesn't have to be Blade Runner - but a few mid sized developments. Beckenham centre itself could see a bit of a building boom, if that has the tube it'll be very well connected: Bakerloo, Southeastern Vic/Orpington, Southern locals via Crystal Palace, and the tram into Croydon. Might become a much bigger interchange, even see some semi/fast calls?

Hayes-Victoria makes no sense given the passage through Beckenham/Penge East. Also, would there be line capacity for extra services through the Nunhead-Denmark Hill corridor?

 

[Clarence Yard]

I think you mean DFTO !

There won’t be a ‘take over’ as such, but the management structures will be merged. The new structure for Southeastern is almost settled, that for the South West is in development.

There will still need to be some separation of some activity, but it’s likely to be dealt with by one team (accounting for example, where the funding provided will still be separate, at least initially).

Absolutely OLR (DOHL) now DFTO. Brain fade when I posted, many thanks for the correction.

It will be interesting if the single “Route Management” concept survives past the GBR introduction or will there be some wider consolidation of functions at Regional level, leaving Routes to manage specific functions only? We shall shortly see.

 

[WAB]

Absolutely OLR (DOHL) now DFTO. Brain fade when I posted, many thanks for the correction.

It will be interesting if the single “Route Management” concept survives past the GBR introduction or will there be some wider consolidation of functions at Regional level, leaving Routes to manage specific functions only? We shall shortly see.

So there'd be a management structure of local combined management groups < TOCs < routes < regions < GBR? Sounds very messy.

 

[Bald Rick]

So there'd be a management structure of local combined management groups < TOCs < routes < regions < GBR? Sounds very messy.

The concept of a “TOC” or “Network Rail Route” won’t exist.

It will be a geographically based management structure of GBR, responsible for everything railway.

The messy bit is going to be where exisiting TOCs have large parts of their operation crossing a wide geography. There’s a reason Southeastern and South Western are going first.

 

[Clarence Yard]

Routes, Regions, HQ is the strong possibility with the Regions being the key part of the organisation. TOCs will disappear quite quickly, once GBR is set up.

They don’t seem to have fully worked out how cross border TOCs will be dealt with but BR managed this quite well (Pre sector) with lead regions and jointly run services.

 

[N1]

The concept of a “TOC” or “Network Rail Route” won’t exist.

It will be a geographically based management structure of GBR, responsible for everything railway.

The messy bit is going to be where exisiting TOCs have large parts of their operation crossing a wide geography. There’s a reason Southeastern and South Western are going first.

I don't disagree with the merger of operations and infrastructure, but claiming Southeastern is the 'first' is a bit rich considering Translink had to have a number of exemptions from EU regulations to separate operations and infrastructure at NI Railways, which was only achieved legally in 2016, although in practise I don't think it has every really been implemented.

 

[weeklycommuter]

The concept of a “TOC” or “Network Rail Route” won’t exist.

It will be a geographically based management structure of GBR, responsible for everything railway.

The messy bit is going to be where exisiting TOCs have large parts of their operation crossing a wide geography. There’s a reason Southeastern and South Western are going first.

What will happen in Scotland? The Government of Scotland runs passenger train services through ScotRail. Will the Government of Scotland manage all rail infrastructure in Scotland which is all rail infrastructure in Great Britain North of Carlisle and Berwick upon Tweed? It is not clear that the consequences of devolution have been considered in the development of GBR and the integration of trains and tracks.

 

[Farnborough]

What will happen in Scotland? The Government of Scotland runs passenger train services through ScotRail. Will the Government of Scotland manage all rail infrastructure in Scotland which is all rail infrastructure in Great Britain North of Carlisle and Berwick upon Tweed? It is not clear that the consequences of devolution have been considered in the development of GBR and the integration of trains and tracks.

In pre-privatisation BR, "train operators" operated trains crossing the regional boundaries - including the Scottish Region - without much ado despite being "integrated"...

Likewise, ScotRail still runs routes into England, as does TfW - and "English" operators run into Scotland and Wales - so some some agreements will be in place?!

Whether the (current) Network Rail Scottish Region is devolved (partly or in full) and, arguably more challenging, the Network Rail Wales & West Region restructured to allow similar devolution to Wales is a good question!

 

[Bald Rick]

Will the Government of Scotland manage all rail infrastructure in Scotland which is all rail infrastructure in Great Britain North of Carlisle and Berwick upon Tweed?

They already do.

 

[Minstral25]

The concept of a “TOC” or “Network Rail Route” won’t exist.

It will be a geographically based management structure of GBR, responsible for everything railway.

The messy bit is going to be where exisiting TOCs have large parts of their operation crossing a wide geography. There’s a reason Southeastern and South Western are going first.

I guess Thameslink is going to be a bit of an issue in this respect - crossing at least 4 different regions.

At least Southern can be split our and dropped into a region.

 

[zwk500]

I guess Thameslink is going to be a bit of an issue in this respect - crossing at least 4 different regions.

Only 2 regions (at the moment) - Southern and Eastern. However it covers Kent and Sussex routes within Southern and East Mids, East Coast, and Anglia (just) routes within Eastern.

At least Southern can be split our and dropped into a region.

The 3 Southern Region TOCs all map quite neatly to a NR Route already (Kent/Sussex/Wessex).

Worth pointing out that these lower administrative boundaries haven't changed all that much from the original company boundaries of the 19th century, the main discussion is about how to group them up, and there aren't that many different combinations you can try.

 

[MarkyT]

A service group crossing a company or regional boundary is nothing new of course. There were always running powers agreements going back to private company days, and services can be run jointly where desired. Cross Country is the big one, touching all NR regions I think. For such an operation, I'd suggest a 'TOC-light' organisation reporting directly to GBR board which manages a 'joint stock' fleet, a central heavy maintenance facility, a bottom line, and specifies services etc in full liaison with the regions. It would not have any operational field staff itself though, with all crew provided by the appropriate regions in their areas together with light maintenance and servicing at peripheries. XC is already half way there, not managing any stations of their own for example and contracting out much servicing and maintenance to other local TOCs where expedient.

 

[Minstral25]

The 3 Southern Region TOCs all map quite neatly to a NR Route already (Kent/Sussex/Wessex).

Worth pointing out that these lower administrative boundaries haven't changed all that much from the original company boundaries of the 19th century, the main discussion is about how to group them up, and there aren't that many different combinations you can try.

Probably because they generally follow the routes radiating from London from each London Terminus. Good planning by the Victorians.

Although Redhill is of course SECR built but now in the LBSCR area.

Always surprises me that the North Downs line was historically run by SECR and then SR into the late 1970's. WR/GWR operation only started to fully influence in 1979 as the Class 206 Tadpoles were withdrawn and replaced by DMU's from Reading.

 

[contrex]

the main discussion is about how to group them up, and there aren't that many different combinations you can try.

Wasn't there such an operation around, er, 1923? Continued in 1948 really. Possibly worth studying?

 

[Zomboid]

Neither of those variations were perfect, and a lot had changed since then.

But as a starting point, it's not really a long way from how NR is already organised.

 

[WAO]

Although Redhill is of course SECR built but now in the LBSCR area.

Always surprises me that the North Downs line was historically run by SECR and then SR into the late 1970's. WR/GWR operation only started to fully influence in 1979 as the Class 206 Tadpoles were withdrawn and replaced by DMU's from Reading.

Wokingham to Reading was SER from 1852 with mileages from Tonbridge!

WAO

 

[JonathanH]

Wokingham to Reading was SER from 1852 with mileages from Tonbridge!

WAO

Aren't the mileages between Wokingham Junction and Reading actually from Charing Cross via Redhill, rather than Tonbridge? See below

www.railwaycodes.org.uk/elrs/elrr.shtm
www.railwaycodes.org.uk/elrs/_mileages/r/rdg2.shtm

RDG2

Wokingham Junction to Reading

61.72 - 68.68

Charing Cross via Redhill

Formerly part GRG2

 

[zwk500]

Good planning by the Victorians.

That's the best joke I've heard on here for a good while, including Bald Rick's helicopter sleeper replacement story.

The Victorians rarely planned things in any particularly coherent manner. They had much of same problems as today, with opposition from landowners, a sceptical government/parliament, difficulties raising funding, and wildly optimistic proposals for routes that were unlikely to see any traffic. They also built deliberately poor routes simply to head off competition from rival companies.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Jul 2025 ==

Wasn't there such an operation around, er, 1923? Continued in 1948 really. Possibly worth studying?

as @Zomboid said, the big 4 have never really gone away. And as I've pointed out, some or the original 100+ companies are very traceable in Today's TOCs.

 

[frankmoh]

The big 4 have never really gone away. And as I've pointed out, some or the original 100+ companies are very traceable in Today's TOCs.

Even on just one line (my local), it was built in various sections by the Mid-Kent and North Kent Junction Railway, South Eastern Railway, West Wickham & Hayes Railway, South Eastern and Chatham Railway, the Woodside and South Croydon Joint Railway and the London, Brighton and South Coast Railway.
In fact, all 5 companies were present at some time between just 5 stations, from New Beckenham to Addiscombe. I can only imagine what other parts of London and indeed England are like.

 

[zwk500]

Even on just one line (my local), it was built in various sections by the Mid-Kent and North Kent Junction Railway, South Eastern Railway, West Wickham & Hayes Railway, South Eastern and Chatham Railway, the Woodside and South Croydon Joint Railway and the London, Brighton and South Coast Railway.
In fact, all 5 companies were present at some time between just 5 stations, from New Beckenham to Addiscombe. I can only imagine what other parts of London and indeed England are like.

That's not really what I was meaning. I was more referring to the fact that services branded as 'Southern' are largely the network of the LB&SCR at the time of the grouping, or the fact that you still have a 'Chatham Main Line' and 'South Eastern Main Line', of which the branch networks are those of the building companies. Even after the SECR merger, SR Grouping, BR(S) nationalisation, NSE sectorisation, then Connex and SE privatisation/franchising, the original history is visible in today's service patterns.

But that's probably for a different thread, as it's a history verging into 'what-if' ism.

 

[WAO]

Aren't the mileages between Wokingham Junction and Reading actually from Charing Cross via Redhill, rather than Tonbridge? See below

www.railwaycodes.org.uk/elrs/elrr.shtm
www.railwaycodes.org.uk/elrs/_mileages/r/rdg2.shtm

RDG2

Wokingham Junction to Reading

61.72 - 68.68

Charing Cross via Redhill

Formerly part GRG2

If I find my Tonbridge ref I'll post it.

Looking at the present figures (45m40ch Reading, 22m40ch ChX. Tonbridge 19m56ch, Reading MP 68m68ch), they seem to confirm that you are correct, although Tonbridge would be close.

WAO

 

[OneOfThe48]

Only 2 regions (at the moment) - Southern and Eastern. However it covers Kent and Sussex routes within Southern and East Mids, East Coast, and Anglia (just) routes within Eastern.

Southern also runs on Wessex out beyond Havant and, in a very small way, on the West Coast South route on the way up to Watford Junction.