Great Northern - Northern City Line to TFL?

[Failed Unit]

Don’t want to drag this thread off topic. But the Sevenoaks services are more popular on the Welwyn loop. That could be because they are only half hourly. However in terms of passengers on board they have the most upon arrival at Finsbury Park (even loading better the Letchworth - Kings Cross).

 

[Snow1964]

TfL has uploaded papers for next weeks TfL Board meeting

https://content.tfl.gov.uk/board-20260204-agenda-papers-public.pdf

page 140 of the pack, which is part of draft updated Business Plan for next financial year (April - March 2027)

There is a section on devolving Great Northern Inner services (TfLs choice of title, not me) to Welwyn Garden City and Stevenage via Hertford, says ready to work with Government to bring it within London Overground.

Not sure what to make of this, but to me the very fact the TfL Board are discussing it suggests it is rather advanced, and not just some fantasy idea.

 

[wanderingriver]

TfL has uploaded papers for next weeks TfL Board meeting

https://content.tfl.gov.uk/board-20260204-agenda-papers-public.pdf

page 140 of the pack, which is part of draft updated Business Plan for next financial year (April - March 2027)

There is a section on devolving Great Northern Inner services (TfLs choice of title, not me) to Welwyn Garden City and Stevenage via Hertford, says ready to work with Government to bring it within London Overground.

Not sure what to make of this, but to me the very fact the TfL Board are discussing it suggests it is rather advanced, and not just some fantasy idea.

Its a little confusing because in the document in the post I've quoted below TfL said that it would be a separate operator than the Overground. Hmmm...

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.

 

[NCT]

Its a little confusing because in the document in the post I've quoted below TfL said that it would be a separate operator than the Overground. Hmmm...

I read it as the potential devolved GN Inner services having its own operator procured, rather than simply absorbed into First Rail London. Both operators would be under the Overground brand. Think of it as Tubelines and Metronet.

 

[wanderingriver]

I read it as the potential devolved GN Inner services having its own operator procured, rather than simply absorbed into First Rail London. Both operators would be under the Overground brand. Think of it as Tubelines and Metronet.

Oh I see, that makes sense. I guess we just have to wait and see

 

[Mattplans]

The Sevenoaks service is probably the most reliable Thameslink service.

 

[Feathers44]

I read it as the potential devolved GN Inner services having its own operator procured, rather than simply absorbed into First Rail London. Both operators would be under the Overground brand. Think of it as Tubelines and Metronet.

Agreed. Don’t confuse “operator” and “brand” here. interestingly, by then (assuming many things), this could be spun as some sort of partial “re-privatisation“ which could make for an interesting press event.

 

[JonathanH]

I read it as the potential devolved GN Inner services having its own operator procured, rather than simply absorbed into First Rail London. Both operators would be under the Overground brand. Think of it as Tubelines and Metronet.

If it is just branding, is there any reason that it couldn't just be operated by GBR for the London Overground brand with a different paint scheme and TfL specifying the timetable?

What is the actual gain from contracting out to a private operator?

 

[greatkingrat]

I read it as the potential devolved GN Inner services having its own operator procured, rather than simply absorbed into First Rail London. Both operators would be under the Overground brand. Think of it as Tubelines and Metronet.

GN Inners on their own would be very small as a standalone organisation. Trying to provide the full range of necessary functions (control, training, HR, finance etc) would be rather inefficient without the economies of scale of being part of a larger concession/franchise.

 

[NCT]

If it is just branding, is there any reason that it couldn't just be operated by GBR for the London Overground brand with a different paint scheme and TfL specifying the timetable?

What is the actual gain from contracting out to a private operator?

Political and financial accountability. It needs to be a contractual relationship where the operator agrees to provide a service level set by TfL at an agreed cost. In theory GBR could do it, with a separate ring-fenced commercial unit with clear reporting lines (essentially TfL being the client to an arm of the DfT), but it should be TfL's decision which commercial model to go for.

 

[Royston Vasey]

I read it as the potential devolved GN Inner services having its own operator procured, rather than simply absorbed into First Rail London. Both operators would be under the Overground brand. Think of it as Tubelines and Metronet.

GTR, perhaps?

 

[NCT]

GTR, perhaps?

If going down the non-GBR route, it would have to be an open competition.

 

[SE%Traveller]

The performance of these lines piqued my interests so I took the latest ORR figures and dumped into Excel. I then picked stations that would best reflect individual routes so St Mary Cray/ Petts on the Chatham lines to separate out the Sevenoaks/ Orpingtons.

Cancellations:

• The Sevenoaks Service is the best performer at 3.3% and the only one below the National Average for cancellations
• Rainham Bottoms for cancellations at9%
• Much wider spread in the South a variation of 5.6 as opposed to .79 North(*discounting Welwyn)

On Time

• Sevenoaks Service is best here, 20 & 25 minute turnarounds can probably help here
• All Elephant & Castle Route out perform the other branches and are above the national average

Note they’re reported as the Umbrella group GTR rather than components. This means in SE territory the figures only represent the Thameslink Service, Elsewhere Southern/ Great Northern are included. Station selection can help but not always, perhaps most obviously on the Sutton By Mitcham Junction route (also served by Southern) and the Wimbledon route (Thameslink only).

*Welwyn Thameslink I Peak only, os this figure could largely be based on the all day stopper)

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Jan 2026 ==


and the performance:

 

[wanderingriver]

The performance of these lines piqued my interests so I took the latest ORR figures and dumped into Excel. I then picked stations that would best reflect individual routes so St Mary Cray/ Petts on the Chatham lines to separate out the Sevenoaks/ Orpingtons.

Cancellations:

• The Sevenoaks Service is the best performer at 3.3% and the only one below the National Average for cancellations
• Rainham Bottoms for cancellations at9%
• Much wider spread in the South a variation of 5.6 as opposed to .79 North(*discounting Welwyn)

On Time

• Sevenoaks Service is best here, 20 & 25 minute turnarounds can probably help here
• All Elephant & Castle Route out perform the other branches and are above the national average

Note they’re reported as the Umbrella group GTR rather than components. This means in SE territory the figures only represent the Thameslink Service, Elsewhere Southern/ Great Northern are included. Station selection can help but not always, perhaps most obviously on the Sutton By Mitcham Junction route (also served by Southern) and the Wimbledon route (Thameslink only).

*Welwyn Thameslink I Peak only, os this figure could largely be based on the all day stopper)View attachment 196913

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Jan 2026 ==


and the performance:
View attachment 196914

Do you think TfL will improve these stats? Not sure how stats changed when TfL took over Silverlink but that may be a good predictive representation of what could happen

 

[SE%Traveller]

Do you think TfL will improve these stats? Not sure how stats changed when TfL took over Silverlink but that may be a good predictive representation of what could happen

I didn't think TFL had designs on running services through the core, just an interest in running a more intensive service out of Blackfriars Bays (South) and Moorgate (North) leaving the St Albans going to Bromley South with Thameslink.

Besides it's the E&C services that are of most interest to TFL and they're the better performers. Sutton would improve if depoted in the South, any disruption North affects that line disproportionally. Orpington suffers there too as it's pulled early on in disruption particularly galling in the evening peak when all of one solitary train goes north of Kentish Town...

 

[jon0844]

Just like the NCL/GN Inners, if the DfT/GBR wants to work with TfL to better promote services that run into London (barring Intercity services) then by all means consider not only having GBR brand the GN Inners for a TfL line (Overground or whatever else they might want) but also re-brand Thameslink.

If they want to create something akin to the Elizabeth Line (i.e. TfL roundel and a new name) then why not? As I've said before, the existing operator could run it on their behalf and the rebranding is merely to incorporate it within the TfL 'eco-system'.

When Oyster is upgraded to work more like contactless and there are no issues with the zones, Oyster can then go out to Bedford, Peterborough, Horsham, Brighton etc..

They'll still be run as national rail lines, and TfL doesn't need to take over stations or get their own drivers.

 

[Recessio]

I didn't think TFL had designs on running services through the core, just an interest in running a more intensive service out of Blackfriars Bays (South) and Moorgate (North) leaving the St Albans going to Bromley South with Thameslink.

Besides it's the E&C services that are of most interest to TFL and they're the better performers. Sutton would improve if depoted in the South, any disruption North affects that line disproportionally. Orpington suffers there too as it's pulled early on in disruption particularly galling in the evening peak when all of one solitary train goes north of Kentish Town...

Indeed, in TfL's 2016 South London Metroisarion report, the only part of Thameslink they wanted to touch was the Sutton Loop terminating at Blackfriars. I think at the time there was also a quote from TfL or the GLA along the lines of "we have no business running trains to Bedford or Brighton" .

https://content.tfl.gov.uk/strategic-case-for-metroisation.pdf

Do you think TfL will improve these stats? Not sure how stats changed when TfL took over Silverlink but that may be a good predictive representation of what could happen

Even as someone who is a proponent of devolving more rail services to TfL, I have to acknowledge that the Silverlink services were absolutely desperate for investment (new rolling stock, refurbed and fully staffed stations, Oyster support). The GN Inners are in nowhere as near a state as Silverlink was pre-2007, so any improvement would be less than the complete transformation the North London and Watford DC lines received.

That being said, it does show that TfL can and are willing to invest in improving the services, far more than has ever been demonstrated by Great Northern (or arguably any other TOC's metro services).

 

[NCT]

Just like the NCL/GN Inners, if the DfT/GBR wants to work with TfL to better promote services that run into London (barring Intercity services) then by all means consider not only having GBR brand the GN Inners for a TfL line (Overground or whatever else they might want) but also re-brand Thameslink.

If they want to create something akin to the Elizabeth Line (i.e. TfL roundel and a new name) then why not? As I've said before, the existing operator could run it on their behalf and the rebranding is merely to incorporate it within the TfL 'eco-system'.

When Oyster is upgraded to work more like contactless and there are no issues with the zones, Oyster can then go out to Bedford, Peterborough, Horsham, Brighton etc..

They'll still be run as national rail lines, and TfL doesn't need to take over stations or get their own drivers.

It's not about the paintwork or logo, it's about political accountability and funding. With a DfT/GBR operation, the political accountability is through MPs and Central Government, and the fiscal risk sits with Treasury. With TfL, the political accountability is through the London Assembly / the Mayor and the fiscal risk sits with the GLA. For a service group overwhelmingly within London, the latter system of accountability is preferable.

 

[whoosh]

One thing TfL might be able to do is to have more  any standby drivers at times of heavy disruption any time to minimise the effects.

Fixed that for you!

 

[Minstral25]

The performance of these lines piqued my interests so I took the latest ORR figures and dumped into Excel. I then picked stations that would best reflect individual routes so St Mary Cray/ Petts on the Chatham lines to separate out the Sevenoaks/ Orpingtons.

Cancellations:

• The Sevenoaks Service is the best performer at 3.3% and the only one below the National Average for cancellations
• Rainham Bottoms for cancellations at9%
• Much wider spread in the South a variation of 5.6 as opposed to .79 North(*discounting Welwyn)

On Time

• Sevenoaks Service is best here, 20 & 25 minute turnarounds can probably help here
• All Elephant & Castle Route out perform the other branches and are above the national average

Note they’re reported as the Umbrella group GTR rather than components. This means in SE territory the figures only represent the Thameslink Service, Elsewhere Southern/ Great Northern are included. Station selection can help but not always, perhaps most obviously on the Sutton By Mitcham Junction route (also served by Southern) and the Wimbledon route (Thameslink only).

*Welwyn Thameslink I Peak only, os this figure could largely be based on the all day stopper)View attachment 196913

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Jan 2026 ==


and the performance:
View attachment 196914

Shame you didn't include TL02 services from Bedford to Earlswood or Salfords in those schedules - would have probably made the Rainham services look very reliable.

 

[rmHawk765]

Fixed that for you!

Cynical but true

 

[jon0844]

Cynical but true

GTR now has a lot of spare drivers so train cancellations due to a lack of crew seems to be markedly reduced - but unfortunately the ECML seems to have regular daily issues - often multiple issues in the same day. Infrastructure problems are somewhat harder to fix, although I hope the regular weekend shutdowns we've had to endure since the end of 2025 are going to fix some of the problems (it isn't all digital signalling work).

 

[rmHawk765]

GTR now has a lot of spare drivers so train cancellations due to a lack of crew seems to be markedly reduced - but unfortunately the ECML seems to have regular daily issues - often multiple issues in the same day. Infrastructure problems are somewhat harder to fix, although I hope the regular weekend shutdowns we've had to endure since the end of 2025 are going to fix some of the problems (it isn't all digital signalling work).

I do agree with that first part, driver availability has actually improved for once. But as you say, any hint of delay often seems to cause knock-on effects, and it happens almost every day.

 

[Failed Unit]

We have a whole thread about this and moving to TfL probably won’t fix it. I have lost count of the frequency Moorgate - WGC / Stevenage collapses because of issues further north. Trains back up. Platforms blocked as train going further north are stuck on the slow.

Agree set failures and infrastructure seem to be the most likely cancellation reason. Both of which a change of operator won’t help (unless the can force GTR to turn the 2Cs at Welwyn Garden City when the ECML collapses at knebworth. )

 

[rmHawk765]

We have a whole thread about this and moving to TfL probably won’t fix it. I have lost count of the frequency Moorgate - WGC / Stevenage collapses because of issues further north. Trains back up. Platforms blocked as train going further north are stuck on the slow.

Of course not helped by the Welwyn viaduct situation. If there's any infrastructure needing immediate attention it's that, because we literally cannot send more trains via Welwyn.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Feb 2026 ==

moving to TfL probably won’t fix it

As I mentioned earlier, TfL's proposal is honestly becoming weaker. Their main strength of driver availability still stands but can be argued to be diminishing, and other than that they promise little immediate improvement over what GTR will implement from Dec 2026. Comparing Enfield Chase statistics to Enfield Town (Recent Train Times), Enfield Town is the considerably better station, but this is spread over only a 2tph service, versus up to 6tph at Chase. As you say, they won't work magic around the ECML's constant failures, it's a wider issue which seriously needs to be looked at.

 

[TransportHub]

I've just seen this video which seems to be suggesting the Moorgate lines will transfer in 2027! I assume this is bs, unless I've missed a big announcement?

 

[rmHawk765]

I've just seen this video which seems to be suggesting the Moorgate lines will transfer in 2027! I assume this is bs, unless I've missed a big announcement?

They could. The Transport Secretary is due to make a decision by December this year, and if it is a yes, the takeover should be complete by May 2027. Whether that'll actually happen is a different story...

See Rail Future and ETUG for further information.

 

[aron2smith]

They could. The Transport Secretary is due to make a decision by December this year, and if it is a yes, the takeover should be complete by May 2027. Whether that'll actually happen is a different story...

See Rail Future and ETUG for further information.

Why is the decision time so much longer than the time it takes for TFL to takeover? I don't get that. 9 months to December and yet somehow TFL could fully take over just 5 months later. Given the size of this section, it shouldn't be that much to consider, especially as GTR is nationalised in a couple months anyway. Surely that's the main barrier.

 

[rmHawk765]

Why is the decision time so much longer than the time it takes for TFL to takeover? I don't get that. 9 months to December and yet somehow TFL could fully take over just 5 months later. Given the size of this section, it shouldn't be that much to consider, especially as GTR is nationalised in a couple months anyway. Surely that's the main barrier.

Correction. I was wrong on this.

There does not appear to currently be a set date for a Transport Secretary confirmation, and all the info I have is that the takeover will take 2 years if approved.

 

[aron2smith]

Correction. I was wrong on this.

There does not appear to currently be a set date for a Transport Secretary confirmation, and all the info I have is that the takeover will take 2 years if approved.

Oh ok. Seems like a long time in any case.