Great Northern - Northern City Line to TFL?

[Failed Unit]

If you look at it in terms of stations, one the WGC branch 13 / 18 stations are in the TfL area with WGC the only realistic place to turn around. On the Hertford loop, 16 / 21 are in the TfL area with Hertford the best place to turn around. Granted if Crews Hill is going to be a major development I am sure they could construct at station there with the capability of turning trains around. (The Gordon Hill terminators certainly ending there). However I don't see why TfL would do it any better then GB rail if it was needed.

 

[rmHawk765]

Going to reply to a few posts first:

The fragility of the Stevenage-King's Cross/Moorgate/TL Core services has generated huge discussions in the forum. Surely adding a further operator to the mix with its own ways of working is a terrible idea?

GTR seems to be incapable of employing and managing drivers effectively post COVID - as someone who has raised discussions on the GN inners here before, I can't see how it would worsen things, given TfL generally has a very good track record with these things and will have a dedicated driver pool instead of one shared between a large variety of services.

Because Great Northern isn't, and TfL wants to.

Spot on. Hertford and Welwyn suburban users have had enough of GTR's negligence. Loads of promises and no changes, in fact I'd say the lines were better under First, which is quite the low.

I thought it was the case that GN are planning to do it from December 26?

It is not actually clear what they are planning right now. ETUG stated earlier this year they were preparing a business case for a Hertford Loop frequency increase, but the latest minutes mention this:

SC: Also raised Great Northern to reinstate its former pre-COVID frequency on its metro services

SC: Raised on whether GN Metro services will be spaced in the peak hours to every 10 minutes

DC: Yes, trains will be spaced, and Gordon Hill services will be extended to start from Hertford North instead.

Therefore it is possible GN has already confirmed something, but it's just not very clear. The Gordon Hills becoming Hertfords thing is interesting - this could mean they are planning 6tph for the whole peak period.

All that’s really needed for the Moorgate routes is a return to 4tph off peak, and to be realistic the 2tph service doesn’t seem to have been the end of the world for the most part, especially on the Welwyn side. There don’t seem to be massive tales of overcrowding

Overcrowding is certainly no longer an issue off-peak, but it doesn't change the fact that 2tph is not a suitable service for Zone 4, 5 and 6 stations, purely down to the factor of inconvenience. At peak, running 6tph to Hertford for the whole period would definitely help, as it takes just one cancelled train (which mind you, happens fairly often) to cause crowding issues.

GN inners had 4tph under GTR from May 18.

MOG-AAP may have that, but that then splits into 2+2, and as I said, Zone 4, 5 & 6 stations should get at least a 4tph off peak service.

but providing things run to a clockface timetable

That's where you can forget about relying on GTR. They cannot manage even this. Delays and cancellations during the peak when they always have large knock-on effects are too prominent, and even off-peak the amount of issues is more than desirable.

There is a level of demand to Highbury, but only because it offers convenient interchange especially to the Victoria Line.

A lot of commuters change at Finsbury for the Victoria, the rest stay to Moorgate. You are correct saying Moorgate is not a particularly useful destination, spare for say the Eliz connection - but it is nonetheless very useful to have a dedicated terminus.

TfL are not trying to hide this fact either.

Not necessarily related, but you can actually get charged for walking between Moorgate and Liv St using the Eliz platforms - the gatelines assume you've taken the subsurface lines!

but yesterday (Sunday 3pm) at least 200 people alighted at Moorgate.

2tph lacks in capacity on Hertford during the evenings on weekends - this will need to be considered. Other than cancellations at peak this is the time when you get the most crowds.

Various posters trying to defend a mainline model for what's clearly a metro geography is clear evidence in favour of TfL taking over the Moorgate services.

A lot of the other users of the inners that I know simply refer to it as 'the Overground', despite it technically having nothing to do with the Overground - your point stands correct I'd say.

notice how Hertford gets a somewhat worse London service compared to Welwyn

Hertford gets 2tph at both of its stations, and at Hertford East it doesn't even increase at peak. Same situation at Enfield. It's not good, though Welwyn's services aren't exactly fantastic nowadays either.

--
There is a lot of talk about sending some form of extra Thameslink trains down to Hertford or Welwyn. I think it objectively makes sense to first make full use of the 717s and existing infrastructure. The NCL and therefore almost all of the ECML suburban platforms are built to 6 coaches. Extending them is a lengthy and expensive process, and SDO will not be suitable at peak hours for busy stations like Enfield and Hertford. The 717s are horrendously underutilised, why not actually use them first, and then discuss TL options?

Hertford fasts, another thing I'm seeing mentioned here, do not make much sense and is likely not something TfL will be interested in. It saves little more than 10 minutes off the total journey, and just makes timetabling more complex.

Finally, many seem to misunderstand that the benefits from a TfL takeover extend beyond branding and recognition. GN timetables are already poor post COVID, and even so the service is unreliable. Trust me, as a regular user of the inners at peak, it is an extremely fragile service - one train is cancelled (happens a fair bit) and you start having overcrowding issues. And the 2tph off peak actually does cause crowding issues during the evenings on weekends - it's fine generally capacity-wise but is nonetheless a great inconvenience to users well within London as I've mentioned.

 

[jon0844]

I'd say that weekends should probably get the increased frequency before the weekdays, given the rise in leisure travel.

With Sunday also seeing the ECML stoppers only running once per hour (bar the morning and evening windows with 2tph), there's a pretty woeful service frequency at stations south of Stevenage that day - especially when you compare the service frequency on the MML.

I wonder if TfL has any view on taking over the Sutton loop and stoppers up to St Albans City? Has this ever been discussed? I'd expect the exact same logistical issues there of course.

 

[Recessio]

I wonder if TfL has any view on taking over the Sutton loop and stoppers up to St Albans City? Has this ever been discussed? I'd expect the exact same logistical issues there of course.

In the 2016 TfL report on Metroisation (https://content.tfl.gov.uk/strategic-case-for-metroisation.pdf) my interpretation is that TfL wanted to add an additional Sutton/Wimbledon loop service that terminated at Blackfriars bay - I might have misunderstood that though, it's not very clear to me to be honest. I think that if TfL wanted to make a play for the existing half-hourly St Albans services, then that would be much harder to justify than Blackfriars terminators (or indeed the GN inners), but the report doesn't discuss that so not much to be gleaned there unfortunately.

The metroisation report is an interetesting read and I think shows a lot of what TfL could bring to the GN Inners (and other metro services) that isn't being done or considered by the existing ToCs - although this report focuses on south of the river services so doesn't cover the GN inners or Thameslink north of Blackfriars directly.

 

[Magdalia]

A lot of commuters change at Finsbury for the Victoria, the rest stay to Moorgate.

This is incorrect. There is a lot of interchange between the GN inners and Thameslink at Finsbury Park.

When I come home on a Brighton-Cambridge in the evening peak there is a huge exodus of passengers at Finsbury Park who then wait on the platform for GN inners. In the morning I travel after the peak, where a Cambridge-Brighton will pick up many more passengers than it sets down at Finsbury Park. The Stevenage-Moorgate and Cambridge-Brighton trains are usually at Finsbury Park at the same time, and I see the people dashing across from the former to get the latter.

The NCL and therefore almost all of the ECML suburban platforms are built to 6 coaches. Extending them is a lengthy and expensive process, and SDO will not be suitable at peak hours for busy stations like Enfield and Hertford.

You are right, but running Thameslink to a new station at Crews Hill New Town doesn't require a lot of platform lengthening, probably just Palmers Green, Winchmore Hill, Enfield Chase and Gordon Hill.

 

[Failed Unit]

I think the bigger transfer to the Victoria takes place at Highbury and Islington. Nice easy cross-platform interchange. However when you are sat on the train you have no idea how many are heading to other TfL rail services.

The trains in the peak are still reasonably full (often every seat taken) upon arrival into Old Street. Many people I know (and myself when working in the city) walk to the final destination from Moorgate. As Magdalia states, a lot of people get off services from the North at Finsbury Park and cross the platform for NCL. (These are often trains heading to Horsham / Brighton so they could change at Farringdon if they want to)

 

[Magdalia]

As Magdalia states, a lot of people get off services from the North at Finsbury Park and cross the platform for NCL. (These are often trains heading to Horsham / Brighton so they could change at Farringdon if they want to)

People coming into London on the GN outers rarely use the NCL since Thameslink opened. It varies depending on the final destination but usually there is an easier option than the NCL into Moorgate, including changing at Farringdon.

 

[jon0844]

People coming into London on the GN outers rarely use the NCL since Thameslink opened. It varies depending on the final destination but usually there is an easier option than the NCL into Moorgate, including changing at Farringdon.

That doesn't match my experience, either in the week or at weekends. As Failed Unit says, a lot of people rush off an incoming train on platform 2 to get a Moorgate service on platform 1 (and likewise, many people who got a Moorgate train from a station on the loop will run over to get a train into King's Cross or the core).

 

[Magdalia]

a lot of people rush off an incoming train on platform 2 to get a Moorgate service on platform 1 (and likewise, many people who got a Moorgate train from a station on the loop will run over to get a train into King's Cross or the core).

That's not what I see, which is much fewer compared to what it used to be like before Thameslink.

If the Moorgate is on platform 1 and the Thameslink on platform 2, then more are going 1 to 2 than 2 to 1.

 

[Class15]

That doesn't match my experience, either in the week or at weekends. As Failed Unit says, a lot of people rush off an incoming train on platform 2 to get a Moorgate service on platform 1 (and likewise, many people who got a Moorgate train from a station on the loop will run over to get a train into King's Cross or the core).

This is my experience as well

 

[rmHawk765]

This is incorrect. There is a lot of interchange between the GN inners and Thameslink at Finsbury Park.

Apologies, I did forget to mention this - a better wording would be that most make some sort of connection at Finsbury, and the rest stay to Moorgate.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Dec 2025 ==

I'd say that weekends should probably get the increased frequency before the weekdays, given the rise in leisure travel.

Correct. The 4+4/6tph at peak does for now provide enough capacity, provided there are absolutely no cancellations - this issue should be worked on this first. However, 2tph during the weekend evenings is genuinely lacking capacity-wise.

You are right, but running Thameslink to a new station at Crews Hill New Town doesn't require a lot of platform lengthening, probably just Palmers Green, Winchmore Hill, Enfield Chase and Gordon Hill.

Crews Hill New Town will, for starters, require a much higher peak frequency - I'd say 8tph for all peak periods will be adequate (and this is what TfL quotes for the 'full' improvement option). I am not sure whether there are actually enough 717s to run a 4+8 service, so it is possible that some sort of Thameslink service will be required to get that extra 2tph of peak services in. But where to run this to is an entirely new discussion. You could make the Sevenoaks to WGC services all day, skipping smaller stops and finally giving extra services to major stations south of WGC, and add 2 extra of those heading to Crews Hill instead. Or, the Cambridge to Maidstone services could be reconsidered, possibly curtailed to Crews Hill.

 

[Failed Unit]

People coming into London on the GN outers rarely use the NCL since Thameslink opened. It varies depending on the final destination but usually there is an easier option than the NCL into Moorgate, including changing at Farringdon.

I do. (watching many people cross the platform to join my train)

Granted I travel from WGC so it is a direct train, but changing at Farringdon saves me a whole 5 mins, not really worth it when I can sit on the same train for 50.

 

[Magdalia]

Granted I travel from WGC so it is a direct train, but changing at Farringdon saves me a whole 5 mins, not really worth it when I can sit on the same train for 50.

In the peaks the WGC side also has direct trains to/from Thameslink, so they will be sitting on the same train too. But the same doesn't apply for Hertford/Stevenage trains.

Or, the Cambridge to Maidstone services could be reconsidered, possibly curtailed to Crews Hill.

The Cambridge stoppers through the core needs to be buried forever in a very deep hole. My preference would be for Crews Hill to take on the Orpingtons giving 4tph Alexandra Palace-Bromley South, comparable with the existing St Albans-Streatham.

 

[Failed Unit]

I don't see it as a fresh air link, in the peak it is very well used including people going from Moorgate - Highbury and Islington. If any operator ran a 15 minute service on both branches I am sure the number of people using the service would increase.

However TfL could return the Moorgate - Finsbury Park branch to the classic tube map tomorrow. Would it make any difference? Who knows?

Thameslink hasn't emptied the route, but granted you no longer need to wait for multiple trians at Finsbury Park because the first one in is too full to physically board.

 

[Mattplans]

"The stations at Harringay and Hornsey only have platforms on certain tracks which limits the service frequencies that can be provided at these locations."

(TfL Business case - https://foi.tfl.gov.uk/FOI-2712-252...n Business Case_v4.0_Redacted(2)_Redacted.pdf)

Not too familiar with this area, and I'm struggling to understand how platforms facing the slow lines only restricts calling? Not like these suburban stations would have services calling on the fast lines anyway?

 

[bramling]

(TfL Business case - https://foi.tfl.gov.uk/FOI-2712-2526/250930 GNI Devolution Business Case_v4.0_Redacted(2)_Redacted.pdf)

Not too familiar with this area, and I'm struggling to understand how platforms facing the slow lines only restricts calling? Not like these suburban stations would have services calling on the fast lines anyway?

There are nowadays two slow lines in each direction between Alexandra Palace and Finsbury Park (and in fact to Holloway on the up side). However there are only platforms at Harringay and Hornsey on the US1 and DS1, hence there are limitations on what can call. It’s also a limitation during disruption.

 

[wanderingriver]

Didn’t see anyone post it here but Rail Future submitted 10 questions to TfL about the transfer and got a response. The answers are found in their 2025 December newsletter on page 2 to page 3.

Here is the link: https://www.railfuture.org.uk/display4225

I have also attached the PDF.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Why will it be a different brand to London Overground?

That, after all, is their name for their National Rail services.

 

[wanderingriver]

Why will it be a different brand to London Overground?

Something to do with TfL’s “metronisation” idea from 2016 (think it was then) maybe

 

[Recessio]

Why will it be a different brand to London Overground?

That, after all, is their name for their National Rail services.

Something to do with TfL’s “metronisation” idea from 2016 (think it was then) maybe

I didn't interpret that as different brand, I interpreted that as a different operating company/contractor - I'm assuming (but may be wrong) that the newly signed contract/tender with First group for London Overground doesn't have a clause to magically take over the GN Inners if they are transferred to TfL control, therefore another operating company would need to be found to run the LO services until the next full re-tender?

 

[wanderingriver]

therefore another operating company would need to be found to run the LO services until the next full re-tender?

Maybe something like “TfL Rail” like TfL had for before the Elizabeth Line core was finished

 

[jon0844]

Didn’t see anyone post it here but Rail Future submitted 10 questions to TfL about the transfer and got a response. The answers are found in their 2025 December newsletter on page 2 to page 3.

Here is the link: https://www.railfuture.org.uk/display4225

I have also attached the PDF.

While HCC is getting a little better on public transport, it still fills me with dread to think that if we had a problem with TfL's operation outside of London, we would be expected to go to our local councillor to raise concerns and expect any level of resolution.

 

[Recessio]

While HCC is getting a little better on public transport, it still fills me with dread to think that if we had a problem with TfL's operation outside of London, we would be expected to go to our local councillor to raise concerns and expect any level of resolution.

So what currently happens for the residents of Moor Park, Rickmansworth, Chorleywood, Croxley, Carpenders Park, Bushey and Watford if they are unhappy with their TfL operated services?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Jan 2026 ==

Maybe something like “TfL Rail” like TfL had for before the Elizabeth Line core was finished

Perhaps but I don't think it would necessarily even need to be branded differently from Overground, it would just behind-the-scenes be a different contractor. I guess a bit like when Metronet and Tube Lines were running the London Underground, but it was all still branded as Underground in the same as before PPP took place.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Maybe something like “TfL Rail” like TfL had for before the Elizabeth Line core was finished

The only reason TfL Rail was created was as a holding tool. It didn’t make sense to establish new parts of the London Overground network just to remove them later, and it would have looked poor to instantly call it the Elizabeth line with the actual main core years from opening.

London Overground is TfL’s brand for their heavy rail/National Rail operations.

 

[rmHawk765]

There are nowadays two slow lines in each direction between Alexandra Palace and Finsbury Park (and in fact to Holloway on the up side). However there are only platforms at Harringay and Hornsey on the US1 and DS1, hence there are limitations on what can call. It’s also a limitation during disruption.

TfL did recently mention somewhere they have received funding (or something along those lines) for the Harringay area. I am honestly hoping platforms on the US2 and DS2 can be built for Harringay and Hornsey, removing the stupid and unnecessary crossing-over at Ally Pally and Finsbury. It is not uncommon for Down Hertford loop services to end up waiting upwards of 10 minutes behind delayed Sevenoaks-Welwyn trains because those use the DS2 at Finsbury and need to crossover to the DS1 at Ally Pally.

 

[gaillark]

TfL are not Angels and will need to change their 'culture' if they want to take over these routes.

They have the mentaility that Overground, TfL rail or what ever they want to call themselves have aboslutely nothing to do with being part of National Rail. They are part of National Rail but brainwash passengers and staff to this day that they are separate and always were separate. This culture is driven from the top of the organisation. Even the recognised double arrow logo has been removed at almost all stations totems.

They dont abide with NR Conditions of Carriage for example refunds. They do not process refunds at the station. You have to send them in to customer services at your risk by post and even then the back office staff don't really know what to do. If you abandon your journey due to distruption this causes all kinds of problems for a refund.

Delay Repay. They are on the very first original Passenger's Charter which John Major's Government introduced. Remember him? This is shameful. They dont participate in Delay Repay scheme. That needs to change. They also have their own Charter for contactless journeys wholly within Greater London that is also not that great and you have to have an online account.

Timetabling has become a real sore issue on the Chingford line. They have introduced some stupid 13-18 gaps on a 4tph on the Chingford line. It was always a regular even 15 minute interval service before the December timetable change so expect more of this customer unfriendly scheduling.

As for reliability there has been no difference when Greater Anglia operated the route to today although the rolling stock has been replaced with tube style seating.

For anybody driving a car to the station will find that TfL will want to get rid of the station car park and build blocks of flats on the site. They have treated disabled car drivers shamefully by removing complimentary parking in any bay to only designated bays which often get taken up by commuters. This is a backward step.

I would stick with the current operator but it too needs to change things like having better marketing, crewing arrangements, better service recovery and keep things moving during times of disruption. TfL have not published the London Connections map that mapped all National Rail, Overground and tube lines. They conveniently only promote their network.

 

[aron2smith]

While HCC is getting a little better on public transport, it still fills me with dread to think that if we had a problem with TfL's operation outside of London, we would be expected to go to our local councillor to raise concerns and expect any level of resolution.

Yeah it's not really fit for purpose that any complaints and issues have to go through at least 3 people. No wonder nothing improves in the fringes. It's safe to assume TFL will steadily run more and more transport outside the capital in the long run (as its predecessor once did), so really each of the neighbouring counties should get their own board member each and then the 2 current staff represent the more occasional travellers further away from London. If rail devolution goes ahead, bordering areas like Cuffley and Potters Bar will mostly use just TFL services every time they travel despite being outside London. They deserve better representation than the current system!

 

[rmHawk765]

One of the factors I think we need to consider is that GTR is seemingly bringing back 4tph off-peak to Hertford for Dec 2026, and additionally spacing Hertford trains to a rigid every-10-minutes at peak (unlike the current uneven intervals). See below the ETUG minutes (who proposed a business case for this a few months ago):

SC: Also raised Great Northern to reinstate its former pre-COVID frequency on its metro services
SC: Raised on whether GN Metro services will be spaced in the peak hours to every 10 minutes
DC: Yes, trains will be spaced, and Gordon Hill services will be extended to start from Hertford North instead.

I did read somewhere that on the Welwyn side of things, GTR would prefer to make the Welwyn to Sevenoaks service all day to increase the frequencies at the major stations. I think this is a terrible idea personally, not just because the quieter stations would still be stuck with 2tph, but mainly because this service is unreliable enough at peak. The only thing that could be considered is a Finsbury Park to Welwyn thing, but this would require reversal facilities at Finsbury which is out of the scope of this thread. Therefore the TfL proposition has the edge here in my view.

Nonetheless, my point is that this is similar TfL's only promise for 2027 to frequency improvements. TfL said that the 8tph peak service from 2019 to Gordon Hill will not be returned until at least into the 2030s, and only if Crews Hill New Town goes ahead. I would argue this service is already needed at times, and neither operator promises this to return.

Reliability on the GN inners is not particularly amazing, but this is usually down to things like waiting for delayed Thameslinks at Finsbury and Ally Pally, i.e issues that TfL cannot magically fix. Although most of the issues are delays in the 5-10 minute ballpark, even the odd cancellation at peak does cause overcrowding. One thing TfL might be able to do is to have more standby drivers at times of heavy disruption to minimise the effects - this is something GTR currently struggles with due to their lack of drivers, though if the disruption is very bad the TOC is going to make little difference. The better driver availability should also decrease seemingly random cancellations to a minimum.

Therefore, TfL is really not making a convincing proposition at the minute, because other than improving the frequency there is little they can 'fix', and even their frequency promise is not much better than GTR's. The two arguably trade blows, because GTR promises proper spacing at peak to Gordon Hill, unlike TfL.

 

[Stephen42]

One of the factors I think we need to consider is that GTR is seemingly bringing back 4tph off-peak to Hertford for Dec 2026, and additionally spacing Hertford trains to a rigid every-10-minutes at peak (unlike the current uneven intervals). See below the ETUG minutes (who proposed a business case for this a few months ago):

I wouldn't take that to mean absolutely rigid 10-minutes. More evenly spaced in the evening peak as some of the additions currently arrive within three minutes of the regular services yes.

I did read somewhere that on the Welwyn side of things, GTR would prefer to make the Welwyn to Sevenoaks service all day to increase the frequencies at the major stations. I think this is a terrible idea personally, not just because the quieter stations would still be stuck with 2tph, but mainly because this service is unreliable enough at peak. The only thing that could be considered is a Finsbury Park to Welwyn thing, but this would require reversal facilities at Finsbury which is out of the scope of this thread. Therefore the TfL proposition has the edge here in my view.

That is GTRs preferred option as stated in the document in this post. By my calculations it requires one fewer unit in circulation and might make driver diagrams more productive. Two of three stations left with 2tph only had 2tph off peak in the pre-covid timetable and would expect similar to be needed for TfLs option.

The Sevenoaks end is not inherently unreliable, it's only issues through the core and knock on impacts really. Off peak will be very different to peak levels with fewer slow trains to Welwyn, no Moorgates are likely to skip Harringay or Hornsey with 6tph leaving Sevenoaks the only thing on the slow lines avoiding those platforms.

Nonetheless, my point is that this is similar TfL's only promise for 2027 to frequency improvements. TfL said that the 8tph peak service from 2019 to Gordon Hill will not be returned until at least into the 2030s, and only if Crews Hill New Town goes ahead. I would argue this service is already needed at times, and neither operator promises this to return.

Redistributing load on the existing trains is a sensible first step which running to Hertford North and spacing more evenly should help with. The more trains added the less reliable the service will be. Both operators are likely to periodically review the service provision, the new town being a key source of additional demand. It does appear TfL are wanting the current subsidy to run the service, with forecasted extra demand that they'll bank the cash from when it eventually materialises.

 

[rmHawk765]

I wouldn't take that to mean absolutely rigid 10-minutes. More evenly spaced in the evening peak as some of the additions currently arrive within three minutes of the regular services yes.

Well I take it to mean better spacing than what is present currently, which is around a 10-12 minute wait normally, with some 15 minute waits that I am guessing they will try to sort out, along with the odd unusually short wait or two (under 5 mins).