Not to mention a consistent structure to timetables and frequency uplifts, which TfL have been happy to lay on since Covid while the National network lags behind. In my turf, we lie in wait to see what crumbs Southeastern will share in December and enjoy what commuters in every other corner of the city have enjoyed since the pandemic ended.
For most of South London, commuters pay more for their services and wait longer, and they have longer journey times overall. They start later and end earlier. Stations are generally unstaffed, routes have lopsided timetables, and these services which are supposedly so low in demand that they don’t warrant frequency uplifts, tend to cover the running costs of the lesser used services on the network.
The benefits of transferring some South London metro lines to LO clearly outweigh the negatives, and this is not a reason undermining that argument, especially when one consider’s most S London metro routes are more comparable in nature to the Weaver line which was not heavily affected by the disruption faced by other lines on the network.
The idea being posed is that transferring lines to LO would replicate the issues faced this BH to other parts of London’s rail network, but when one considers this, even if it was the case, against fare reductions & integration with the rest of the capital’s payment system, frequency uplifts, a rigid/predictable service (ie: one line, one terminal), having stations properly staffed, I reckon the scale still tips in favour of LO.
Additionally, some of the issues faced by LO depots were not issues South of the river. When creating depot structures and contracts etc, I fail to see why these would not be amended to provide a better BH service going forward. That’s if current depot arrangements (which evidently are
not as problematic for BH working) wouldn’t be brought forward anyway?
