Is the capacity freed up by reducing the Gatwick Express to 2tph from 4tph just left free, or has it been taken by other services?
Not really, as the same article says a 15% increase could happen before the runway opens, and 25% once it does. The late 2030s increase is 39%.
I believe an Ashford - Redhill - Guildford - Reading service was part of a SouthEastern franchise spec pre-Covid? Confirmation welcome. It would certainly make use of underutilised rail infrastructure in the east. Doubt 100% electric SE would want to operate it though. And Redhill would probably need remodelling to cope with interchange to/from Gatwick.
An understatement!
I believe the ambition was Ashford to Redhill via Tonbridge, possibly extending to Gatwick, however I don't ever recall this ambition including going any further west over the non-electrified stretches. I certainly think a service like this would have potential now, but certainly with an expanded Gatwick.
Yes there was a recent Network Rail report that examined various options for improving Kent - Gatwick links, the conclusion being basically that the only viable option was to just extend the existing Tonbridge to Redhill 1tph shuttle to Gatwick. Minimum cost, minimum traffic generation. There are memories of the Connex Strood/Maidstone to Horsham service (via Gatwick) of around 25 years ago, a brave idea but hardly an attractive offer (class 508s, all stations) for anything other than short-distance trips.
GWR could operate it, but it doesn't really compare with the appeal of Reading to Gatwick.
Hopefully it does happen, it makes the most sense (especially if you can periodically extend to Gatwick if paths allow).
Sadly I can't see that being constructed pre-2050, the territory is too thin and the terrain would make construction very expensive Dorking to Gatwick.
Definitely yes to making all the trains 12 coaches long but definitely no to skipping Clapham Junction. They all need to call at Clapham Junction as Clapham Junction is the interchange for journeys between SWR stations and Gatwick Airport in addition to being an important interchange for many journeys to and from Southern stations.
Agreed theres no benefit to skipping Clapham Junction other than from the airports perspective selling a premium service. Hopefully this is less of an incentive when GTR is nationalised
Bypassing Redhill via Gatwick would be quite some detour and add several additional miles for Dorking - Edenbridge journeys. While it would improve connectivity to Gatwick from Dorking and Edenbridge, it might make some cross-Redhill journeys less attractive.
Completely disagree on this. Both East Croydon and Clapham Junction are hugely important for interchange. For many journeys this is turning 1 change into 2 changes, not no changes into 1 change.
I have a more radical solution, which is to run the 2tph Brighton-Victoria as part of Thameslink with class 700s. It would only require 5 units and ought to be possible with the existing fleet given that the core peak hour service has never got to 24 tph, and the number of units used on GN services. It might require a bit of fiddling to get those 5 units to be 12 cars not 8 cars.
So are you suggesting that Brighton loses all of its direct trains to London Victoria? It might be better from an operational perspective, but likely wouldn’t go down well with the travelling public.
Running a service branding as "Thameslink" that does not go through the Thameslink Core would not make sense. So i would not classify it as "Thameslink" just because 700s were to be used. But i suppose you could use 700s on Brighton to London Victoria and operate it as a Southern service. The 700s already run Great Northern services. Not much difference to the current GX 387s running SN services and the SN 387s running GX services.
I think it’s far more likely that Gatwick will pay for a fleet of new battery trains for the North Downs Line.
Birmingham - Gatwick will still be quicker via London. If you want to avoid the tube completely, just walk from Euston to St Pancras where you can catch a Thameslink train to Gatwick.
Some time ago Southern hit on the idea of splitting a peak Victoria - Bognor/Portsmouth service at Three Bridges so that the Bognor portion could cover the local stations to Horsham. Three Bridges has multiple platforms and more staffing, so better than Crawley.
Making it 4tph (two fast, two stoppers) would be a start; not that there are enough 165s to do so - but most of the intermediate stations cannot take more than the 3-car 165s
No, 2tph Brighton-Victoria as now.
The station to station flows have 11k one way journeys Peterborough-Gatwick and 4k one way journeys Peterborough-East Croydon. There are also 3k one way journeys Peterborough-Brighton.
No signalling or traincrew facilities at Crawley for this, though it could be done at Three Bridges.
Quicker, yes, but appealing with suitcases? Unlikely, Reading by comparison is quite a modern station that is a comparatively easy change. Thameslink is not all that well-advertised to the general public, and neither is the relatively close proximity of Euston and King's Cross/St Pancras.
Indeed - the utter farce of the 769s will surely never progress to such a sensible next stage! Meanwhile the NDL will remain a vastly under-used route resource.As much as I would like the 769s to come back, I fear the DfT won't allow it!
Wow - the infrastructure works necessary to allow that would be big, given that platforms on the route were just lengthened, where required, to accommodate four car trains! As the 769s were pretty much ready to go just before being axed, I can't see the expenditure on 8-car new (technically complex) trains being approved.
Sorry, I assumed "part of Thameslink" meant that you intended to divert them through the core.
Apart from the stations between Crawley and Horsham, I dont think there are any stations south of London Bridge served exclusively by the Peterborough - Horsham trains (Horley also has the Three Bridges - Bedford trains while Merstham and Coulsdon South also have the Reigate - Victoria trains), so they could be curtailed at Blackfriars or London Bridge to improve reliability of the ECML leg.
In an ideal world, the Brighton Main Line would be four tracked all the way from Victoria to Brighton. Fast tracks should be dedicated to Victoria - Clapham Junction - Gatwick - Brighton expresses (maintaning Intercity or GatEx branding), while the slow tracks are for commuter services with more stops.
But you are cutting out trains to London Bridge and the Thameslink core currently served by the Horsham trains.
How are you going to do that?
Balcombe Tunnel, Ouse Viaduct, Clayton Tunnel - good luck with that one.
The funny thing is that there is already a Southern service that is cross-London. Watford Junction-East Croydon. The route also used to use former Thameslink 319 stock.
The Rainham runs directly between the two Thameslink services which currently go via Redhill which would cause a more imbalanced timetable.
Thameslink already has 8tph at Gatwick Airport, though currently 4tph are via Quarry and 4tph via Redhill. I doubt it would be possible to move 4tph onto the Quarry line.
I am in favour of pulling Thameslink out of Rainham, especially since the Elizabeth Line opened. But where is the path for them through East Croydon and Gatwick?
Going north the Rainham passes through the core nicely between the Bedford and Cambridge via Quarry trains, but going south it is next train behind the Cambridge-Brighton.
Agree on both counts (plus the cost of underground E-W platforms at Gatwick), but this announcement is the only opportunity to "dare to think big".
But what Dorking - Edenbridge journeys? This movement must be minimal bordering on zero. And anyway, it would actually be facilitated, by having a through service instead of an enforced change.
Almost certainly not, as it doesn't help people get to Gatwick, and isn't going to get funding.
