How could rail capacity to Gatwick Airport be increased?

[DelW]

They can surely use selective door opening if they do not want to spend money to lengthen platforms.

The 165s don't have it though. If a train does run with two units, the second one has to be locked out of use.

 

[Bald Rick]

Could a Tonbridge - Gatwick link provided 3 things:
1. Resilience if the main East Croydon - Gatwick route is blocked for any reason, particularly if Thameslink trains from north of the river could travel down the SE lines to Tonbridge before turning off? (Is the track work suitable at Tonbridge?)
2. Similarly, could Thameslink provide new links from other parts of NE London with Gatwick as a transport objective going via SE lines and Tonbridge? Again, do the SE lines have any spare capacity?
3. Links from deepest Kent to Gatwick.

1) the trackwork at Tonbridge isn’t suitable. Besides providing a Tonbridge to Gatwick service doesn’t help that.

2) I cant think of other parts of NE London where such a service could be provided to Gatwick, save for the stations currently served by Moorgate trains, for which a cross platfrom interchange at Finsbury Park is already provided. Going via Tonbridge would just add the best part of an hour and make it deeply unattractive.

3) Yes, but there’s not much demand, and the M25 / M20 will always beat it for timing (unlike onthe North Downs).

 

[joncombe]

I think the obvious thing (that will probably never happen) is to increase the Gatwick Express to 4pth as proposed BUT to remove the premium fares for using it. It seems crazy to me we have the existing Gatwick Express trains running mostly empty whilst people cram onto the Southern branded services instead, which are much cheaper and take a similar amount of time. (Yes I know technically, if you don't mind an argument and being out of pocket, use the Gatwick Express trains and then try to get the extra cost refunded because restrictions are supposed to be by TOC not brand).

That would put far more of the Gatwick passengers onto the dedicated trains and fewer on the Southern ones. In addition if the trains start from Gatwick I think it would be helpful to passengers that there will usually be a train waiting they can get on, rather than wait on the platform. If you wanted to take it further (and I am personally not keen on this), you could even start advertising the Southern services as to (for example, Clapham Junction) which would mean those not familiar with them (most tourists) would not even realise those trains go to London.

That brings me onto the second issues, the platform width. Given such a high % of passengers have luggage some parts of the platforms are far too narrow. When passengers all stand with cases you can come down the escalators and find it is impossible to spread down the platform (most Southern and Thameslink trains are now 10 or 12 carriages so use most of the platform length) without going in front of the yellow line. And if you go in front of the yellow line there are often staff with megaphones ready to shout out you for going in front of the yellow line (even if you check no trains are coming first). I appreciate that is going to be hard because the narrowest parts are usually where the lifts or escalators come down from the terminal, but that is why having a waiting train to London would help as fewer passengers would have to wait on the platform in the first place. I was disappointed with the re-build that the platforms are still so narrow in places.

 

[Trainlog]

The proposal would significantly speed journeys from the West of England and South Wales to Gatwick, and create a market for Tonbridge/Tunbridge Wells, Ashford and East Kent (possibly even Medway) direct to Gatwick, who currently have to travel by car (there is no longer even a direct coach service). Any improvements to more local movements would be collateral.

I would definitely welcome this kind of solution. The links to Gatwick from Kent are frustrating when it comes to dealing with the slow nature of the Tonbridge to Redhill line and the changes involved at Redhill itself. What makes it worse is that you can see the planes starting to descend at Tonbridge station for the approach to Gatwick airport.

But you are right, there is no coach links, and there is no rail links to Gatwick. The closest thing they have done is added on the announcements on trains coming into Tonbridge that say 'change here for services to Redhill which you can use for Gatwick airport' but many just see that many connections and slow trains as more hassle than it is worth than driving to Gatwick instead.

The catchment is way too small and disparate for any enhancement of journeys from Kent to Gatwick using the existing lines to be funded. Not all the traffic arriving at Gatwick from the eastern side of the M25 is coming from Tonbridge, Tunbridge Wells, Medway and Ashford, but instead the more populous places further round the M25 which enhancing Tonbridge to Redhill services simply doesn't address.

There are 4 things in Kent that I think would be a classic 'built it and they will come' for the residents of the county, but seem unlikely to happen because of this argument being used by everyone.

• Restored international rail links at Ashford or Ebbsfleet (explained in another thread but tastes have changed and more people have heard of interrail passes now).
• A rail link to an airport we would rather use such as Gatwick, and maybe for the Elizabeth line to extend to Ebbsfleet so that those with lugguage could board at the terminus parts of the line as opposed to the busy core, which is more appealing of an idea.
• A cross-country service
• An IKEA, especially somewhere like Ashford, where it's easy to drive to and doesn't involve a toll or heavily congested city roads like London's or Brighton's.

Its fair to say there would be plenty in Kent who would jump at the opportunity of being able to leave the car at home and take the train to Gatwick airport if it were more direct and took less time, and especially if it bypassed London and having to drag a suitcase/excess lugguage around on the London Underground.

The problem is because we dont have a link, such demand cant be proven. The only rail/airlink we have is the Luton Thameslink, and with it being a Thameslink, it isn't exactly a quick rail trip over there.

One problem with Thameslink not going to Rainham is Southeastern would need to take over the service, but they may not have the rolling stock to do so prior to a new fleet order.

Yes agreed. Any loss of the Thameslink route should have a plan in place to replace the NKML with additional non-high-speed services, should this happen. Strood is bad enough to change at without needing to lose the Thameslink service with no replacement .

 

[cle]

Yes agreed. Any loss of the Thameslink route should have a plan in place to replace the NKML with additional non-high-speed services, should this happen. Strood is bad enough to change at without needing to lose the Thameslink service with no replacement .

This is a no-brainer to just do, regardless of the debate on the TL paths. Epsom seems to be the front-runner there.

But Southeastern should run all of the services that go through Dartford (and all services via Greenwich should start at Cannon St)

 

[Class 317]

In a universe where further 3rd rail fill-in schemes were likely to get approved, I would be tempted to get Gatwick Airport to pay for the electrification of the remaining parts of the North Downs line. Additionally, this, coupled with longer electric trains (possibly the 350/2s), would probably provide a more significant capacity boost than from London, which is already well served by Southern, Thameslink, and GatEX services.
That would make getting to Gatwick much more straightforward by train for those from Birmingham (and other places on the Cross Country network), Wales, and the West Country, while avoiding the Tube and Elizabeth Line completely.

No need to get 3rd rail electrification. Upgrade power supplies on existing 3rd rail sections of the north downs line and use BEMU'S. Save the funding for other schemes.

 

[WAO]

No need to get 3rd rail electrification. Upgrade power supplies on existing 3rd rail sections of the north downs line and use BEMU'S. Save the funding for other schemes.

Yes.

Battery driven Tadpoles.

Better by taxi.

WAO

 

[BrianW]

The earlier part of this thread reflected the view of 'the authorities' at Gatwick, and that in the Secretary of State's 'minded to' letter of a return of Gatwick Express to its previous 4tph. I heard on the radio (sorry I can't trac k it down') of a plan to increase trains between Gatwick and London from a current every 4 mins to every 3 mins. It will take some time to procure additional stock (and crews) but 20tph is not going to happen or be needed overnight, if at all. Network Rail have hedged their response regarding funding (no plans at present). There has long been an expectation in Planning that an applicant benefiting from development approval should 'stump up' for costs to the local neghbourhood via Section 106 or Community Infrastructure Levy. I dare say an 'undrerstanding' will be reached after some negotiation. It is good, and fun, to speculate in this thread on how rail services to Gatwick might best be improved! I think it will take some considerable expendituere of energy to get beyond the proposed/ discussed/ 'agreed' restoration of Gatwick Express to 4tph. And if the 54% 'market share' of land travel to/from Gatwick is not achieved ... that's a lot of long grass/ 'facts on the ground' will have grown in the meantime.

 

[izvor]

This is certainly not an opportunity to think big.

The airport are proposing to spend £2.2bn in total, that doesn't buy much new railway.

Indeed, and that's the shame. If, as the reports suggest (and @Bald Rick confirms) that £2.2bn is entirely for the "new" runway and associated terminal expansion, and does not involve transport improvements, then any rail upgrades will have to be funded from within the industry, or by the Government (which will probably be the same thing by then). Despite changing the Green Book rules, the Treasury still seems to regard rail expenditure as cost, not investment. HS2 hasn't exactly helped that.

IMHO there is zero chance of trains from the Tonbridge direction to Gatwick. These have been suggested / proposed multiple times over the decades, and once even came to fruition. The inconvenient truth is that not enough people will use them, and they are also difficult operationally.

I would have said that could depend on how much local pressure is applied - but Reform in Kent are anyway unlikely to be interested in public transport projects.

Even before the 769s were ditched, there was strong opposition to the then 3tph plan because of the effect of more frequent level crossing closures, particularly at the A217 adjacent to Reigate station, but at others too.

This is very true, and still applies, and will, imho, kybosh any plans for 3tph on the North Downs line.

Its fair to say there would be plenty in Kent who would jump at the opportunity of being able to leave the car at home and take the train to Gatwick airport if it were more direct and took less time, and especially if it bypassed London and having to drag a suitcase/excess luggage around on the London Underground.

Absolutely! But, as pointed out above, the population is dispersed and, even with planned expansions, not likely to justify significant expenditure. I'd still love to see a 1tph Ashford - Tonbridge - Redhill - Gatwick semi-fast on the back of this but I'm not optimistic now. Flows from London and beyond will take priority.

 

[Brubulus]

This is very true, and still applies, and will, imho, kybosh any plans for 3tph on the North Downs line.

The A10 has to deal with 6tph at Foxton. 3tph really isn't that bad, and would make using public transport to reach Gatwick substantially more attractive from the west.

 

[izvor]

I heard on the radio (sorry I can't trac k it down') of a plan to increase trains between Gatwick and London from a current every 4 mins to every 3 mins. It will take some time to procure additional stock (and crews) but 20tph is not going to happen or be needed overnight, if at all. Network Rail have hedged their response regarding funding (no plans at present). There has long been an expectation in Planning that an applicant benefiting from development approval should 'stump up' for costs to the local neghbourhood via Section 106 or Community Infrastructure Levy. I dare say an 'undrerstanding' will be reached after some negotiation.

It was a spokesman for Gatwick Airport suggesting that this would be an ambition. I would add here that Gatwick Airport has a good record of supporting public transport initiatives, including enhancing bus services and promoting discounted tickets for airport employees.

 

[Magdalia]

I heard on the radio (sorry I can't trac k it down') of a plan to increase trains between Gatwick and London from a current every 4 mins to every 3 mins.

I heard this too. It was on PM on Radio 4 yesterday afternoon.

It wasn't a plan for a train every 3 minutes, the Gatwick spokesperson being interviewed claimed it was a train every 3 minutes before the pandemic, is that right?

The implication was that it was for the government and the railway to get back to the train every 3 minutes pre pandemic timetable.

 

[NSE]

What i would do is simply change the Gatwick Express to operate like the Luton Express service. So basically a Southern service that shares Gatwick Express branding. So there would no longer be a dedicated Gatwick Express train but instead all of the fast trains would share Gatwick Express branding.

What i would then do is change all of the London Victoria to Bognor Regis / Brighton / Chichester / Eastbourne / Hastings / Littlehampton / Ore / Portsmouth And Southsea / Portsmouth Harbour / Southampton Central / Worthing services to run non stop between London Victoria and Gatwick Airport and vice versa. This would instantly increase Gatwick Express from 2tph to 8tph without having to change the timetable.

It would also benefit non airport passengers as the trains would be quieter and no longer get filled up at East Croydon and Clapham Junction with local London passengers. One of the major problems with these Sussex trains is that they can get full and standing at East Croydon and Clapham Junction just with local London passengers.

Anyone to or from Gatwick Airport who requires East Croydon could instead take the frequent Thameslink trains which have a very frequent 8tph frequency. Any passengers for Clapham Junction could simply change at East Croydon which would still have the frequent East Grinstead and Caterham and Tattenham Corner trains. Potentially the two disused Gatwick Express paths per hour could also be used to provide an additional two trains per hour local London Victoria to Clapham Junction and East Croydon stopping service.

I think this would be the simplest way to do things and would keep the current timetable but provide extra fast trains. It would overall be a benefit for passengers too.

I think there is plenty of capacity to or from Gatwick Airport as it is so no actual extra trains are needed. But what i would do is make all trains 12 coaches long.

Aside from the fact that 4tph (two East Grinstead and two Reigate) to Victoria is not enough for East Croydon, many of the mainline services (Portsmouth, Eastbourne etc) change crew at East Croydon as it’s a crew break location, so it would cause a massive change up in terms of diagrams and not even be possible.

You’ve also said it there:

One of the major problems with these Sussex trains is that they can get full and standing at East Croydon and Clapham Junction just with local London passengers.

Yet you’re proposing to remove 6tph. I do appreciate that Croydon passengers do take up space, but there are so many of them, those services are needed. Additionally, plenty of passengers from Sussex use East Croydon to switch to the Tram, Buses, Caterham/Tattenham and East Grinstead line services.

I’ve always wondered if a solution for the Gatwick Express is to make it cheaper. I think many Sussex services get crammed with airport passengers while the GatEx carts fresh air, but there’s little incentive to use it. If you want London Bridge/City destinations, using GatEx inconveniences you and if you want Victoria, Southern is cheaper and, on average, probably the next departing service. I’d keep it nonstop, but make it cheaper, £10 return, something like that, and then give tourists arriving a reason to take it and fill the empty space.

 

[Class 317]

Yes.

Battery driven Tadpoles.

Better by taxi.

WAO

The gaps are well within BEMU range and train length can be whatever is decided. Platform lengths would be the deciding factor.

 

[weeklycommuter]

They can surely use selective door opening if they do not want to spend money to lengthen platforms.

Within reason.
But, as an example, if all trains were 8 car and only a handful of the stations the trains serve can take them, then it won‘t be used.

Looking at the Network Rail documentation on station platform lengths it appears that of the stations regularly served by the two trains an hour GWR service between Reading and Gatwick Airport only Reading, Wokingham, Guildford, Redhill and Gatwick Airport definitely at present have platforms in both directions long enough for 8 car trains without selective door opening so without some platform extensions the service could be operated by BEMU trains but only 4 cars long.

A 4 car BEMU similar to a Class 387 with luggage racks and two plus two seating would be better than the Class 165 diesels but would not provide any more useable seats overall. 8 car trains would be needed for needed to provide the big increase in the number of seats needed to make this service add useful additional capacity for rail travel to and from Gatwick Airport.

The North Downs Line services between Reading and Gatwick Airport have to share tracks with other train services at Reading, Guildford and Gatwick Airport so I doubt it would be possible to find paths to run more than the current two trains an hour on the full North Downs Line route between Reading and Gatwick Airport. The half hourly service is frequent enough but the trains would need more seats to enable this service to usefully add to the number of people travelling to and from Gatwick Airport by train. That almost certainly requires some platform extensions for 8 car trains.

 

[Snow1964]

I think the obvious thing (that will probably never happen) is to increase the Gatwick Express to 4pth as proposed BUT to remove the premium fares for using it. It seems crazy to me we have the existing Gatwick Express trains running mostly empty whilst people cram onto the Southern branded services instead, which are much cheaper and take a similar amount of time. (Yes I know technically, if you don't mind an argument and being out of pocket, use the Gatwick Express trains and then try to get the extra cost refunded because restrictions are supposed to be by TOC not brand).

The original idea of being able to charge a premium has long flown (excuse the pun) which is why the dedicated service is now generally empty.

Over the years just about every UK and London guide book (including those in foreign languages for International travellers), and many travel tip websites say just get the cheaper Southern / Thameslink train. Even googling getting from Gatwick suggests not paying the premium.

Personally I don't know anyone who flies to another country, they have been to before, and hasn't looked up onward travel from airport and connections to city centre.

 

[WAO]

The gaps are well within BEMU range and train length can be whatever is decided. Platform lengths would be the deciding factor.

So not passenger demand then.

The contrast between magnificent 12 car fixed formation trains at Gatwick and the present and possible future NDL trains appalls me.


WAO

 

[JonathanH]

The contrast between magnificent 12 car fixed formation trains at Gatwick and the present and possible future NDL trains appalls me.

Why? There is a clear difference in the level of demand towards London (and destinations beyond London) and towards Surrey and the West.

Even those 12-car fixed formation trains that run from Brighton and Horsham are conveying more passengers for London than for Gatwick Airport.

 

[William3000]

1) the trackwork at Tonbridge isn’t suitable. Besides providing a Tonbridge to Gatwick service doesn’t help that.

2) I cant think of other parts of NE London where such a service could be provided to Gatwick, save for the stations currently served by Moorgate trains, for which a cross platfrom interchange at Finsbury Park is already provided. Going via Tonbridge would just add the best part of an hour and make it deeply unattractive.

3) Yes, but there’s not much demand, and the M25 / M20 will always beat it for timing (unlike onthe North Downs).

The M25 and M20 have no impact on the 40% of us who are unable to drive or don’t drive.

 

[brad465]

I would have said that could depend on how much local pressure is applied - but Reform in Kent are anyway unlikely to be interested in public transport projects.

The MPs however who feel in danger of losing their seats to Reform though could try and lobby for service improvements to Gatwick before the next election as something to sell to improve their chances. An Ashford-Gatwick service would pass through 5 constituencies before Redhill, then another 3 for Redhill-Gatwick itself. Some of the MPs in constituencies not on the route of such a service, but could easily feed into the service (such as East Kent and Medway Valley constituencies), may also try and promote it.

 

[Deepgreen]

So not passenger demand then.

The contrast between magnificent 12 car fixed formation trains at Gatwick and the present and possible future NDL trains appalls me.


WAO

I suspect it will be because demand from London (and its feeds from other areas) will always be hugely higher than elsewhere, but, of course, greater capacity on my (ND) line will be welcome.

The level crossing issue on the NDL has been cited to be a problem, but, with my four local AHBs becoming FBs, and more efficient operations elsewhere, that could be overcome. The busiest by far is Reigate, but that is operated very unhelpfully (especially as the operator is on site!). Westbound NDL trains usually have the crossing closed as they approach the station and often before they are even in sight! All service trains call at Reigate. The crossing is protected by a starting signal, and the crossing should only be closed once the train is at the platform. The argument that safety precludes this is countered by the fact that Southern trains terminating at the same platform do so under a red signal with the crossing open, and the risk of over-run is pretty much identical in both cases. On at least two occasions I have seen emergency vehicles stopped at the crossing because it was closed minutes before it was necessary.

The second-busiest crossing is Betchworth, and there, too, it is common for the crossing to be closed before a stopping train has even entered the platform. Both crossings could have their road closure times reduced greatly by smarter operation.

 

[Mgameing123]

Moderator note: Split from

Airport expansions

I am guessing Emirates does so well in the UK because it does very well serving people visiting friends and family in Australia. Lots of ex-pats in the Emirates and to a lesser extent Qatar as well. There’s also quite a few ex-pats who work in Saudi but live in Dubai or Abu Dhabi with their...

www.railforums.co.uk

Looks like GTR will need some more rolling stock if they are to get a 4tph Gatwick Express service back for this (or pull in existing stock off other routes).

Or we could withdraw Gatwick Express and make them into Southern Services.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Sep 2025 ==

Is it time to dust off the Thameslink 2 proposal?

I think it is. Would be interesting to see another Cross London not heading through Central London.

 

[BrianW]

Or we could withdraw Gatwick Express and make them into Southern Services.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Sep 2025 ==

By the time Gatwick changes come in, surely (hopefully?) such differentiation will be history, as all are homogenised into Great British Railways. A long time without hearing of how that's going (or is it going, going, gone; nothing to see here- or is Heidi Alexander fighting a rearguard action for a Swindon HQ-her constituency at present?).

 

[JamesT]

By the time Gatwick changes come in, surely (hopefully?) such differentiation will be history, as all are homogenised into Great British Railways. A long time without hearing of how that's going (or is it going, going, gone; nothing to see here- or is Heidi Alexander fighting a rearguard action for a Swindon HQ-her constituency at present?).

I would be immensely surprised if there isn’t any brand differentiation in GBR. There are numerous cases on today’s network where passengers are steered away from express services onto stoppers by the cheaper tickets not being valid on the express. Today that can be done with restrictions by TOC, there’s no way they’re going to throw away the revenue by not being able to do similar when there are no TOCs.

 

[JonathanH]

The MPs however who feel in danger of losing their seats to Reform though could try and lobby for service improvements to Gatwick before the next election as something to sell to improve their chances. An Ashford-Gatwick service would pass through 5 constituencies before Redhill, then another 3 for Redhill-Gatwick itself. Some of the MPs in constituencies not on the route of such a service, but could easily feed into the service (such as East Kent and Medway Valley constituencies), may also try and promote it.

Does anyone really take notice of these sorts of things to the extent that it changes their vote. Railway access from Kent to Gatwick is not at the top of voter concerns.

How many votes have been lost because the Redhill to Tonbridge service was cut back?

 

[Ted633]

The level crossing issue on the NDL has been cited to be a problem, but, with my four local AHBs becoming FBs, and more efficient operations elsewhere, that could be overcome. The busiest by far is Reigate, but that is operated very unhelpfully (especially as the operator is on site!). Westbound NDL trains usually have the crossing closed as they approach the station and often before they are even in sight! All service trains call at Reigate. The crossing is protected by a starting signal, and the crossing should only be closed once the train is at the platform. The argument that safety precludes this is countered by the fact that Southern trains terminating at the same platform do so under a red signal with the crossing open, and the risk of over-run is pretty much identical in both cases. On at least two occasions I have seen emergency vehicles stopped at the crossing because it was closed minutes before it was necessary.

Is this still the case? I have noticed vast improvements in the length of time the barriers are down in recent years. When I was at college in the late 2000s, the barriers for WB trains did used to come down very early as you say.

I don't use the train often now, but regularly drive over the crossing. There have been a number of times I've driven over the crossing with a WB GWR service in the platform.

 

[WAO]

Why? There is a clear difference in the level of demand towards London (and destinations beyond London) and towards Surrey and the West.

Even those 12-car fixed formation trains that run from Brighton and Horsham are conveying more passengers for London than for Gatwick Airport.

We had this same problem with the Establishment over Crossrail; explaining that there was significant intelligent life west of Maidenhead.

I would be happy with a BEMU operation if it had the capacity and frequency of an appropriate EMU service. I remain to be convinced.

Do we want full rail access to Gatwick or not?.

WAO

 

[Bald Rick]

The M25 and M20 have no impact on the 40% of us who are unable to drive or don’t drive.

It does, because a very significant majority of those who don’t / won’t drive still have access to a car. Either through a friend / relative, or a taxi.

 

[brad465]

Does anyone really take notice of these sorts of things to the extent that it changes their vote. Railway access from Kent to Gatwick is not at the top of voter concerns.

How many votes have been lost because the Redhill to Tonbridge service was cut back?

Recently MP Laura Trott was promoting a handful of additional services coming in the December timetable change that serve her constituency. If she thinks this is worthwhile, then an entirely new service pattern improving links to an airport will be worth promoting.

 

[WAO]

It does, because a very significant majority of those who don’t / won’t drive still have access to a car. Either through a friend / relative, or a taxi.

...and we benefit from the goods/services deliveries and logistics that these routes enable. Transport is a general good, even if indirect.

WAO