Regular Thameslink disruption: what could be done to improve performance and resilience?

[Jan Mayen]

Moderator note: Split from

Regular Thameslink disruptions over a week

Hi, My apologies if there’s already a thread for this, I couldn’t find one. There have been disruptions on the Thameslink core section “due to a signal failure between City Thameslink and London Blackfriars” at least for two days last week as well as today. Does anyone know what’s going on...

www.railforums.co.uk

I can assure you they are very well used on the north side!

What do you suggest as an alternative in a contingency plan?

How about not having so many through services in the first place? Horsham to Peterborough could be one an hour, the other replaced by Horsham to London Bridge, for example.

 

[Bald Rick]

How about not having so many through services in the first place? Horsham to Peterborough could be one an hour, the other replaced by Horsham to London Bridge, for example.

Amd what do the good folk of Arlesey - Huntingdon do?

 

[Jan Mayen]

Get the through train, or the half hourly that terminates the North side of the core, perhaps? What did they do before Thameslink?
I'm sure there are better solutions than the one I suggested. I just wish someone would impliment them.
Meanwhile, I see my Thameslink train from Gatwick is delayed due to signal failure. Anyone know where this time?

 

[Bald Rick]

Get the through train, or the half hourly that terminates the North side of the core, perhaps? What did they do before Thameslink?
I'm sure there are better solutions than the one I suggested. I just wish someone would impliment them.
Meanwhile, I see my Thameslink train from Gatwick is delayed due to signal failure. Anyone know where this time?

No space at Kings Cross to terminate any more trains.

Signal failure tonight is at Herne Hill

 

[jon0844]

How about not having so many through services in the first place? Horsham to Peterborough could be one an hour, the other replaced by Horsham to London Bridge, for example.

I am not sure the solution is to run fewer trains, although it is often said that the railway would run better with no customers.. Maybe you're on to something, but I think people actually want more frequent services so they can just turn up and go when things are running okay.

 

[johncrossley]

There is no doubt that the last couple of weeks on Thameslink have been awful, and please be assurred that no one is at all happy with it, and it is being monitored at the very highest levels. Very little this week has been down to the train operator, it has been Network Rail or ‘externals’ (two trespassers in the core on successive evenings, for example). I can assure you that Thameslink haven’t ‘given up’ since the announcement on transfer to DfTO; quite the opposite, as those further up the organisation want to keep ther jobs.


The biggest single issue for cancellations is traincrew. Two things have happened there. Firstly the rate of absence shot up during Covid and has never really recovered; to be fair to Thameslink this affected many other operators too. Unfortunately for Thameslink that landed concurrent with the training for ETCS and ATO in the core which required more drivers off the footplate too. To counter that, last year Thameslink revised how they calculate the number of drivers they need to cover the service, upwards, and by a big number. Those have all now been recruited and in training, many are now fully productive. Also the ETCS / ATO training should (at last) be complete next year which will free up more drivers. The number of cancellations due to crew is falling now (on an annulaised basis), and the full benefit will be felt next year.

So everybody knows the current timetable isn't working, so why not put in an emergency timetable in the meantime? A timetable that is actually viable given the number of drivers actually available. Add Littlehaven and Ifield to the Southern service and truncate the Horsham service at Gatwick. Or maybe even further north and add extra stops into other services.

They also need to publicly apologise for the current fiasco.

 

[Mattplans]

So everybody knows the current timetable isn't working, so why not put in an emergency timetable in the meantime? A timetable that is actually viable given the number of drivers actually available.

Is it at the stage where an emergency timetable is necessary? I feel the situation with lack of train crew is definitely less of an issue compared to a couple months back. There is still a lack of drivers overall, but that's down to GTR's model of expecting drivers to work overtime?

For a railway as complicated as Thameslink, I think we should stop hoping for trains to be on-time. I commute regularly into London Bridge on a Southeastern service then change to Thameslink. The trains are rarely on-time. I am genuinely more surprised if the trains are running to the right time - this honestly impresses me as it feels like there's so much that can go wrong. It doesn't affect me as I'm only going to another core station, and the frequencies are reasonable. There's one particular peak service that stands out to me as it runs to Bedford and doesn't call at Luton Airport parkway (it might originate from East Grinstead, not sure) but this one is always late. Because the network is so complicated, any issue any where can cause these delays. TL has proven it won't be a network that runs to on/right time. I think we must be happy with a delay less than 15 minutes really. Even the Elizabeth Line isn't always on/right time, perhaps it would perform better if without the GWML but that's a discussion for another day.

The last two weeks of issues at Blackfriars are definitely standalone, but they haven't been great. The core works more than it doesn't If they do extend into the upcoming week, I wonder if the news will start picking up on it.

 

[johncrossley]

Is it at the stage where an emergency timetable is necessary? I feel the situation with lack of train crew is definitely less of an issue compared to a couple months back. There is still a lack of drivers overall, but that's down to GTR's model of expecting drivers to work overtime?

We can clearly see that things aren't working and haven't done for some time. The emergency timetable should have been in operation for the last year at least.

For a railway as complicated as Thameslink, I think we should stop hoping for trains to be on-time.

This is not a metro 'turn up and ride' service for all Thameslink stations. Many stations only have a half hourly service. Why are they less deserving of a punctual service than stations off the Thameslink network?

 

[Mattplans]

We can clearly see that things aren't working and haven't done for some time. The emergency timetable should have been in operation for the last year at least.

In operation until when? GTR are in no hurry to fix these issues. Unless this emergency timetable involves implementing some Southern services to pick up the slack where GTR consistenly fails south of Gatwick Airport, what does it really solve for the end passenger? The end user prefers to have the option of 2 thameslink per hour (even if 1 is regularly cancelled, at least sometimes they'll be able to use it? than having one per hour and no option of the other ever running.
But I can understand that the emrgency timetable is the first step towards acknowledging the issues facing Thameslink and the first step to resolving them. Knowing GTR they would take such a timetable as an excuse to cut the services on some routes or make them peak-only, even after returning to normal operation.

This is not a metro 'turn up and ride' service for all Thameslink stations. Many stations only have a half hourly service. Why are they less deserving of a punctual service than stations off the Thameslink network?

I agree with you. It's not great. But was it ever realistic to expect trains to travel such long distances, across many different lines, routes & depots without having issues?

 

[bramling]

Amd what do the good folk of Arlesey - Huntingdon do?

No worse than what happens at present on a significant number of occasions when they attempt to travel by train - they either end up standing on the platform for a couple of hours, or end up having to make their journey by other means.

An alternative solution needs to be found for Peterborough-Horsham. The service is dysfunctional as it currently is, and shows no signs of improving.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Dec 2025 ==

Is it at the stage where an emergency timetable is necessary? I feel the situation with lack of train crew is definitely less of an issue compared to a couple months back. There is still a lack of drivers overall, but that's down to GTR's model of expecting drivers to work overtime?

For a railway as complicated as Thameslink, I think we should stop hoping for trains to be on-time. I commute regularly into London Bridge on a Southeastern service then change to Thameslink. The trains are rarely on-time. I am genuinely more surprised if the trains are running to the right time - this honestly impresses me as it feels like there's so much that can go wrong. It doesn't affect me as I'm only going to another core station, and the frequencies are reasonable. There's one particular peak service that stands out to me as it runs to Bedford and doesn't call at Luton Airport parkway (it might originate from East Grinstead, not sure) but this one is always late. Because the network is so complicated, any issue any where can cause these delays. TL has proven it won't be a network that runs to on/right time. I think we must be happy with a delay less than 15 minutes really. Even the Elizabeth Line isn't always on/right time, perhaps it would perform better if without the GWML but that's a discussion for another day.

This is just about reasonable on routes where there's 4tph, though it can still lead to long gaps between trains. However on 2tph routes this just isn't satisfactory. If we're saying that Thameslink *cannot* be reasonably expected to run with a decent level of performance then it needs to be abolished in its current form.

 

[johncrossley]

In operation until when? GTR are in no hurry to fix these issues. Unless this emergency timetable involves implementing some Southern services to pick up the slack where GTR consistenly fails south of Gatwick Airport, what does it really solve for the end passenger? The end user prefers to have the option of 2 thameslink per hour (even if 1 is regularly cancelled, at least sometimes they'll be able to use it? than having one per hour and no option of the other ever running.

They should be able to serve all stations between Horley and Purley half hourly without regular cancellations by rationalising the service. That is better than pretending to run 4 trains per hour at some stations but with frequent and random cancellations.

I agree with you. It's not great. But was it ever realistic to expect trains to travel such long distances, across many different lines, routes & depots without having issues?

Long distance S-Bahn/RER type services combining to make a frequent service in an urban core has been a feature of urban railways in other countries for many years so how do they do it?

 

[GordonT]

An alternative solution needs to be found for Peterborough-Horsham. The service is dysfunctional as it currently is, and shows no signs of improving.

Is Cambridge-Brighton not pretty much in the same league?

 

[johncrossley]

Is Cambridge-Brighton not pretty much in the same league?

Cambridge to Hitchin stations still have the Kings Cross service. Obviously Brighton to Gatwick is very frequent.

 

[Hadders]

Is Cambridge-Brighton not pretty much in the same league?

There are generally alternatives as there are the non-stop Cambridge Cruiser services, and the Cambridge to Kings Cross stopping service.

 

[MrJeeves]

There are generally alternatives as there are the non-stop Cambridge Cruiser services, and the Cambridge to Kings Cross stopping service.

From the other end of the line, it does get rather frustrating as I lose half my Thameslink services when these get cancelled or turned back early.

Normally my clockface Thameslink timetable into London would be an almost perfectly-spread :12, :25, :42, :55, and you really notice the increased loads on the Bedford services south of London when the Cambridge ones are cancelled.

 

[Hadders]

From the other end of the line, it does get rather frustrating as I lose half my Thameslink services when these get cancelled or turned back early.

Normally my clockface Thameslink timetable into London would be an almost perfectly-spread :12, :25, :42, :55, and you really notice the increased loads on the Bedford services south of London when the Cambridge ones are cancelled.

North of the river it's not unusual for GTR to 'throw in the towel' and not run any services fro the core onto the GN.

This then leaves stations between Arlesey and Huntingdon stranded, a shuttle service is supposed to run but this seems sporadic at times.
Everyone else then tries to get on the 8-car two an hour Kings Cross to Cambridge stoppers. That doesn't end well.
LNER can shift some people between Kings Cross and Stevenage... There's a part of me that would quite like some disruption one evening this week to see what LNER actually do given the new pick-up/set down restrictions at Stevenage.

 

[GordonT]

LNER can shift some people between Kings Cross and Stevenage... There's a part of me that would quite like some disruption one evening this week to see what LNER actually do given the new pick-up/set down restrictions at Stevenage.

On recent form you'll not have to wait too long for that to happen.

 

[bramling]

Is Cambridge-Brighton not pretty much in the same league?

Yes absolutely, in some ways it’s worse as it gets pulled at the first sign of trouble. However it does have the alternative King’s Cross service, albeit this has its now own resilience issues for various reasons.

 

[GordonT]

Yes absolutely, in some ways it’s worse as it gets pulled at the first sign of trouble. However it does have the alternative King’s Cross service, albeit this has its now own resilience issues for various reasons.

I suppose it comes down to how well the alternatives cope in terms of capacity and convenience. On recent performance there is a danger of what should perhaps be a last resort becoming acceptable practice on a regular basis.

 

[Class15]

An alternative solution needs to be found for Peterborough-Horsham. The service is dysfunctional as it currently is, and shows no signs of improving.

Agreed, something needs to be done. I think closing a platform at Kings Cross was ridiculous in my opinion as there is now obviously a shortage, but maybe reducing LNER dwells would allow the Peterborough service to terminate at Kings Cross.

Now, where does the Horsham train go? Either terminate at London Bridge, or, if you really need the extra train through the core, Kentish Town, as I don’t believe there are paths beyond there.

 

[Bald Rick]

but maybe reducing LNER dwells would allow the Peterborough service to terminate at Kings Cross.

there y making LNER less reliable

Now, where does the Horsham train go? Either terminate at London Bridge, or, if you really need the extra train through the core, Kentish Town, as I don’t believe there are paths beyond there.

platforms not long enough at Kentish town for the 12 coach Horshams.

 

[bramling]

there y making LNER less reliable

I suspect the local reaction to that would either include a couple of words containing the letter f, or be along the lines of “so what?”.

Why should the Peterborough route suffer chronic unreliability at the expense of other services? All five stations between Hitchin and Peterborough are well used, and all these towns as well as their surrounding area have seen massive housing development over the last couple of decades. On top of that, these services also provide a significant proportion of the London service at Hitchin and Stevenage (especially with LNER now being pick up / set down only), both of which are also very busy stations.

Frankly, this route deserves better than the erratic Thameslink service that just can’t be relied upon. Seven years in and it still isn’t working reliably, and there’s more to that than just the perennial shortage of drivers.

 

[Class15]

there y making LNER less reliable

Point taken. But @bramling makes some good points.

platforms not long enough at Kentish town for the 12 coach Horshams.

Okay, then how about sending it to Luton in lieu of the Rainham and terminating the Rainham at Kentish Town?

 

[Bald Rick]

Okay, then how about sending it to Luton in lieu of the Rainham and terminating the Rainham at Kentish Town?

Not enough 12 cars for that!

 

[MrJeeves]

Not enough 12 cars for that!

Buy some more coaches and slot them in the middle!

 

[Class15]

Not enough 12 cars for that!

Surely running the service to Luton rather than Peterborough takes less time?

The Peterborough services would be 12 cars by using 379s or 387s being released by using spare 8-car 700s on Cambridge stoppers.

 

[London Trains]

How long is Platform 4 at Beckenham Junction? If an 8 coach 700 can fit there, then one suggestion I have would be to bin off the Rainham service (replaced by a Southeastern service to Cannon Street), extend the Orpington services to Luton all day and run Luton to Beckenham Junction services at peak times, replacing the Blackfriars to Beckenham Junction peak services (coincidently saving a few units for Southeastern, which can go towards the aforementioned Rainham service).

 

[Jaydubya]

How long is Platform 4 at Beckenham Junction? If an 8 coach 700 can fit there, then one suggestion I have would be to bin off the Rainham service (replaced by a Southeastern service to Cannon Street), extend the Orpington services to Luton all day and run Luton to Beckenham Junction services at peak times, replacing the Blackfriars to Beckenham Junction peak services (coincidently saving a few units for Southeastern, which can go towards the aforementioned Rainham service).

Beckenham Junction platform 4 can hold 8 car trains and used to be a terminus for Thameslink until 2018. Whether that was with Electrostars or Class 700 I can’t remember. However the Southeastern only peak service is a useful way of maintaining driver route knowledge to Blackfriars when Victoria is closed.

 

[bramling]

Just been a 75-minute gap on the Peterborough-Horsham service, with three trains missing for the intermediate stations north of Hitchin. First train cancelled, following two amended to run non-stop. Just at the time many shift workers use these services to reach London in time for afternoon shifts.

I know this is like a stuck record, but Peterborough-Horsham is a dysfunctional service, it just can’t be relied upon. It needs to go, or there needs to be something like an hourly Peterborough-KX extra to act as a fallback.

 

[NCT]

Fallbacks and alternatives are a fool's errand. The infrastructure and capacity utilisation are effectively fixed and there are a multitude of user groups whose interests are finely balanced. Where problems are identified they should be addressed at source - there aren't workarounds.

The core should be able to operate reliably. If it isn't address the problem at source. Once the core is sorted, there's no inherent reason why Thameslink can't operate as a metro with branches - there is still substantial scope for simplifying north-south service pairings that would help contains any delays to just the services primarily affected (say if all Quarry line services go to ECML, and all Redhill go to Bedford rather than the current mix).