GTR Summer Holiday Cancellations

[Stephen42]

Given it's the same DfT ordering these cutbacks, as well as those on AWC, it wouldn't surprise me if Southeastern cancellations follow to be honest.

Southeastern have a slightly reduced (and heavily revised) timetable due to engineering work for much of this period. The operators with cancellations announced are ones historically reliant on rest day working. Much of the saving will be avoiding overtime rates than marginal maintenance or energy costs.

I do wonder if the government policy of reducing attraction costs this summer and various service cutbacks are a cocktail of overcrowding in the making, especially as London will be at the centre of a lot of the attractions impacted. Good job this isn't happening at the same time the Universal theme park has opened alongside Wixams station.

Few of the services mentioned here would be used by leisure travellers. The ones that might are at times when the surrounding services would have capacity.

Hopefully these cutbacks will be the first nail in the Rainham coffin, to be buried next to Maidstone East. All day cuts on both weekdays and Saturdays does not suggest heavy use.

There are two separate cuts here. There are the peak extras where the level of demand doesn't justify the extra cost (likely in staff overtime) in a period with reduced use.

Separately others look to be from a realistic appraisal of staff availability on particular routes. Overtime might partially plug the gap, but regardless of passenger use it's better to take services out in advance than a greater number of on the day cancellations which could impact busier services. The Rainhams are in this camp, from the alterations it's clear the focus is on the weekday peak service as the capacity is needed at the southern end.

Any redistribution of Thameslink routes will significantly increase training backlogs and likely lead to reduced services for a long period of time. The cost and passenger impact is not going to be appreciated in the current climate.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

As someone with a long memory and a background in economics I take a rather different view.

Over my lifetime experience of using the railway, spread over more than half a century, it has become very bad at adjusting supply to match changes in demand. Although I don't remember reductions in services specifically related to school summer holidays, I do remember in the 1970s and 1980s service cutbacks during every economic downturn as the railway tried to reduce costs to match reductions in revenue. In 1981 the new timetable was delayed by 3 weeks to give time to implement a new round of cuts.

Nobody objects when bus companies have services that run on schooldays only, and airlines are continuously adjusting supply to meet changes in demand. In order to reduce the railway's cost to taxpayers, it needs to get much better at not wasting their money carting fresh air about. This has some rough edges, but it is a start.

Given change in commuting habits there nought wrong withdrawing some genuine peak hour extras which historically were inefficient to run resource wise but a necessity to move people. However, Thameslink runs pretty well an even timetable across the whole day with a few extras to likes of E.Grinstead and the WGC-Orpintons. These aren't being targeted but other random services are being pulled which is essential complete diagrams which result in what looks like a bunch of random cancellations across the day.

Given AWC are a premia payer and GTR are on a subsidy we have to assume that DFTO are on the backs of all operators to make some savings so I forecast a trickle out of these cutbacks and that some of them will become permanent. Listen to any Heidi Alexander speech or interview she repeats over and over again "Sustainable Subsidy" - what that means has yet to be defined though but this of evidence of it in action.

 

[NorthKent1989]

What I would personally like to see is Southeastern lose one of the Dartford routes to London Overground. A concentrated and succinct tube-like service is needed instead of the sporadic offering available at the moment.

I guess it wouldn’t be just one Dartford route it’d be all of them, with the exception of the Blackheath/Woolwich route.

 

[ScotGG]

Cutting peak extras makes sense if a frequent service level remains. Cutting trains all day to ensure trains go down to one per hour in places is something else. That drives people away from rail.

 

[hkstudent]

This should surely bring calls to rejig Thameslink? Commuters on the Peterborough end don’t seem to have been happy with it from the start, Maidstone never even materialised and the Rainham service has been a dead duck since its arrival replacing a highly popular semi fast service which in the era of the Elizabeth line would be handy for Medway & Gravesend commuters.



Could it perhaps terminate at Beckenham Junction?

Ideally though it’s best if TL stays away from the SE network except for the slightly more self contained Catford loop service



I remember back the TL Rainham service was announced and I was one of the few people who saw this as a bad idea from the get go.


Hayes line could potentially have 2tph to Victoria via Lewisham with CHX trains fast from Ladywell, or have the restored Gillingham via Woolwich & Blackheath service run into Victoria if paths to Charing Cross aren’t available, the Victoria option would isolate the only remaining Dartford routes that are 2tph in the event of a TfL takeover as it links 2 corridors that are 2tph and aren’t likely to increase their frequency.

I agree that it is too much of a stretch of Thameslink going all the way to Medway.

However, cross London services do benefit well to residents within London.

Operationally, cutting the Luton - Rainham service to a Kentish Town - Gravesend service would provide a good service within densely populated area while no need to run empty beyond.

It’s just getting issues on Higham which sadly would be best to let HS1 to make a call there to substitute. Having 4 tph between Gravesend and Medway is a bit too over served.

 

[NorthKent1989]

I agree that it is too much of a stretch of Thameslink going all the way to Medway.

However, cross London services do benefit well to residents within London.

Operationally, cutting the Luton - Rainham service to a Kentish Town - Gravesend service would provide a good service within densely populated area while no need to run empty beyond.

It’s just getting issues on Higham which sadly would be best to let HS1 to make a call there to substitute. Having 4 tph between Gravesend and Medway is a bit too over served.

Whatever benefits Thameslink on the Greenwich line was supposed to bring hasn’t materialised and should be axed entirely, it’s been 8 years and it’s only ran 2tph for half of those years essentially, at this point it’s like trying to make something which has never worked to work again.

It’s always the first service cancelled whenever there is disruption on the Thameslink network.

The Elizabeth line has been more beneficial to the line than Thameslink ever has and I won’t be sad if it’s axed.

Recast the service into a CST-Gravesend via Greenwich service, all stations, and the Medway service could be CHX or VIC-Medway via Blackheath & Woolwich semi fast as before

 

[Mattplans]

Recast the service into a CST-Gravesend via Greenwich service, all stations, and the Medway service could be CHX or VIC-Medway via Blackheath & Woolwich semi fast as before

One can dream but I doubt it will ever be CHX ever again. The place is simply at capacity. You basically already were even before you sent all services from Hayes, Maidstone East and Tunbridge wells there (which used to go to Cannon St and Blackfriars before). What would you axe/divert just so this service can operate? It's not like Southeastern can now renege on the Maidstone East-London Bridge services. The only way I can see that happening is if it goes to TL.

Additionally, Victoria is probably a poor choice for the service ultimately. It's not like Medway is in any absence of services to Victoria. It's London Bridge they need a connection to.

There has to be a Thameslink service from the Southeastern network (excluding catford), maybe even two routes because the traditional terminals are simply at capacity.. It's just who is the unlucky duck - or where will it be the least disruptive.

 

[NorthKent1989]

One can dream but I doubt it will ever be CHX ever again. The place is simply at capacity. You basically already were even before you sent all services from Hayes, Maidstone East and Tunbridge wells there (which used to go to Cannon St and Blackfriars before). What would you axe/divert just so this service can operate? It's not like Southeastern can now renege on the Maidstone East-London Bridge services. The only way I can see that happening is if it goes to TL.

Additionally, Victoria is probably a poor choice for the service ultimately. It's not like Medway is in any absence of services to Victoria. It's London Bridge they need a connection to.

There has to be a Thameslink service from the Southeastern network (excluding catford), maybe even two routes because the traditional terminals are simply at capacity.. It's just who is the unlucky duck - or where will it be the least disruptive.

Hayes line could 2tph go to Victoria as was planned some time ago, but I suggested Victoria for the Woolwich line Medway service because it would link up two lines/services that at 2tph and wouldn’t likely be taken over by TfL, the Greenwich, Bexleyheath and Sidcup are all 4-6tph, the Woolwich-Blackheath route is the outlier in being 2tph, plus it wouldn’t be yet another Cannon Street or City service

Medway customers from what I can see want a faster and more frequent than now connection to the EL.

 

[hkstudent]

Well we need to have a look at what the plan is for Thameslink. If we're going to scrap the initial service offerings and never meet the frequency through the core that was promised during the Thameslink programme, I don't see why some stock shouldn't be moved to other areas.

What I would personally like to see is Southeastern lose one of the Dartford routes to London Overground. A concentrated and succinct tube-like service is needed instead of the sporadic offering available at the moment.

We can hope for that, but Southeastern metro devolution won't be so soon as just Great Northern devolution is gonna take ages before it's fruition.

Also, there seems to be a tendency of making Dartford metros to utilise more of Cannon Street as it's more underutilised during off peak times, which get more potential for frequency uplift during off peak. If service uplift again, likely both North Kent Line and Bexleyheath line may need to stuck to Cannon Street again.

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

Hayes line could 2tph go to Victoria as was planned some time ago, but I suggested Victoria for the Woolwich line Medway service because it would link up two lines/services that at 2tph and wouldn’t likely be taken over by TfL, the Greenwich, Bexleyheath and Sidcup are all 4-6tph, the Woolwich-Blackheath route is the outlier in being 2tph, plus it wouldn’t be yet another Cannon Street or City service

Medway customers from what I can see want a faster and more frequent than now connection to the EL.

While for Medway, it's gonna be more useful to get the HS1 to Central London then change, as the time is much more saved if to change at St Pancras for LU core, or Stratford Intl - Main for Elizabeth Line change. It's just too slow between Gravesend and Abbey Wood.

Or even Victoria service from Rochester to Victoria is at the same time as HS1 to reach to Stratford. Medway residents may be better off to use Victoria service instead.

It would be better use for areas west of Gravesend to connect to the Elizabeth Line at Abbey Wood, but not much further.

 

[Mattplans]

Hayes line could 2tph go to Victoria as was planned some time ago,

Good reason this did not come to fruition. There was a lot of valid outrage when Hayes lost Cannon St sevices. I can’t imagine it will be popular to reroute it even further from the city. It’s not a good tradeoff. At the moment you cant send anything to Charing X w/o shortchanging another route. I am not particularly convinced there’s any value in CHX-Charlton to warrant that.

 

[hkstudent]

Good reason this did not come to fruition. There was a lot of valid outrage when Hayes lost Cannon St sevices. I can’t imagine it will be popular to reroute it even further from the city. It’s not a good tradeoff. At the moment you cant send anything to Charing X w/o shortchanging another route. I am not particularly convinced there’s any value in CHX-Charlton to warrant that.

I find that most southeastern metro area want access to London Bridge mainly and Victoria is being the less wanted one.
I think a even spaced 4tph across all lines would be the baseline. I am glad that Bexleyheath Line is re-gaining back the even 4tph interval to London Bridge.

While for North Kent Line services, it's likely be a timetable planning nightmare to send them to Charing Cross, with so much of cross movements. Too much conflicts.

 

[Bletchleyite]

This is pretty appalling. Presumably it’s the usual issue of insufficient drivers, however the big concern is that if there isn’t pushback over this then it will become normal practice.

With significantly reduced commuting during school holidays (resulting in very empty trains) I can't see any issue with this at all to be honest. It seems sensible to drop peak extras and the likes at these times and not waste money.

 

[SECR 65]

Will these come with enhancements - such as 2tph daily to East Grinstead?

 

[ScotGG]

With significantly reduced commuting during school holidays (resulting in very empty trains) I can't see any issue with this at all to be honest. It seems sensible to drop peak extras and the likes at these times and not waste money.

Peak time extras going? That's fine.

Cutting routes down to 1 tph in north Kent and SE London? Less so. That has a big impact on the line. For N. Kent it leaves 1 tph at a few stations as no SouthEastern services call to connect directly with the Lizzie line.

Further along it leaves inner london with long gaps between trains eg 30 minutes when a decade ago it was every 10. Every 15 or 20? Doable. Not too bad. Half hour for a metro route in inner London? Not great at all.

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

While for Medway, it's gonna be more useful to get the HS1 to Central London then change, as the time is much more saved if to change at St Pancras for LU core, or Stratford Intl - Main for Elizabeth Line change. It's just too slow between Gravesend and Abbey Wood.

It's not that slow from Gravesend to meet the Liz line at AW - and cheaper than HS1. 25 mins to Abbey Wood then a quick change and Lizzie runs every 5-6 mins. 10 mins to Canary Wharf and not much more to the City and then West End.

Going via HS1 to Canary Wharf, the City or West End means changing onto a boiling tube or a slow change at St Pancras and Stratford for Thameslink or DLR. Slower, more expensive and less pleasant than TL then EL both of which have air con.

 

[Watershed]

With significantly reduced commuting during school holidays (resulting in very empty trains) I can't see any issue with this at all to be honest. It seems sensible to drop peak extras and the likes at these times and not waste money.

If the railway wants to run a reduced service during school holidays it should advertise that as a part of the long-term timetable as soon as that is published, not just at STP planning timescales.

Annual season ticket holders would be quite justified in being aggrieved that they are not receiving the service they expected when buying their ticket. The fact that trains are quieter doesn't make up for the fact that if you need to get into the office for a particular time, you will need to get up earlier if your usual train is cancelled. The same in the evening.

This is yet another manifestation of the unserious nature of the rail industry in Britain, where passenger convenience is just about the last consideration. People simply wouldn't put up with it in any other industry, but you can't exactly switch to a competitor if you're commuting into London.

 

[Class 466]

Some irony in the DFT posting that in the first 100 days of nationalisation that one of the things passengers will see is 'more services'

 

[nw1]

With significantly reduced commuting during school holidays (resulting in very empty trains) I can't see any issue with this at all to be honest. It seems sensible to drop peak extras and the likes at these times and not waste money.

What though if you have to be in the office at a certain time and have to get up significantly earlier as a result to get an earlier train?

It seems to me that the money saved - likely very small in the scheme of things - by cancelling these services for 6 out of 52 weeks is insignificant compared to the personal inconvenience to those commuters - presumably quite a few - who rely on these services for work. But I suppose this brings up my point from the GD thread in that to me, the values and priorities of the 2020s are all wrong. Everything's about saving the pennies and never mind the consequences.

Planned multi-week cancellations of services during the summer holidays is not something I've ever known the railway doing all the way back to 1982 - through good times and less good. So why do it now?

 

[AndrewE]

This is yet another manifestation of the unserious nature of the rail industry in Britain, where passenger convenience is just about the last consideration. People simply wouldn't put up with it in any other industry, but you can't exactly switch to a competitor if you're commuting into London.

...or the short-sightedness of the Treasury. To my mind it illustrates the lack of commitment to public transport by our politicians - completely ignoring what was in their manifestos - and demonstrates that the Treasury's Thatcherite dogma prevails regardless of the evidence of climate change all around us, especially the need to achieve modal shift in transport.

 

[nw1]

...or the short-sightedness of the Treasury. To my mind it illustrates the lack of commitment to public transport by our politicians - completely ignoring what was in their manifestos - and demonstrates that the Treasury's Thatcherite dogma prevails regardless of the evidence of climate change all around us, especially the need to achieve modal shift in transport.

I'd say the Tories and Labour are similar in that respect.

But neither are by any means the worst on offer, which means we have to hold our noses and vote for them again if required for tactical reasons, otherwise things will be a lot worse and we'll all be looking back at 2026 as a golden age.

 

[NorthKent1989]

We can hope for that, but Southeastern metro devolution won't be so soon as just Great Northern devolution is gonna take ages before it's fruition.

Also, there seems to be a tendency of making Dartford metros to utilise more of Cannon Street as it's more underutilised during off peak times, which get more potential for frequency uplift during off peak. If service uplift again, likely both North Kent Line and Bexleyheath line may need to stuck to Cannon Street again.

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


While for Medway, it's gonna be more useful to get the HS1 to Central London then change, as the time is much more saved if to change at St Pancras for LU core, or Stratford Intl - Main for Elizabeth Line change. It's just too slow between Gravesend and Abbey Wood.

Or even Victoria service from Rochester to Victoria is at the same time as HS1 to reach to Stratford. Medway residents may be better off to use Victoria service instead.

It would be better use for areas west of Gravesend to connect to the Elizabeth Line at Abbey Wood, but not much further.

If you sped up Gravesend to Abbey Wood to the old calling pattern it wouldn’t be slow, in this scenario a Greenwich line train would terminate at Gravesend to provide a stopping service.

Good reason this did not come to fruition. There was a lot of valid outrage when Hayes lost Cannon St sevices. I can’t imagine it will be popular to reroute it even further from the city. It’s not a good tradeoff. At the moment you cant send anything to Charing X w/o shortchanging another route. I am not particularly convinced there’s any value in CHX-Charlton to warrant that.

I think there is a lot of value in CHX-Charlton but that’s why i suggested locking in the Woolwich-Blackheath service into Victoria, if there is no space at CHX.

Cutting routes down to 1 tph in north Kent and SE London? Less so. That has a big impact on the line. For N. Kent it leaves 1 tph at a few stations as no SouthEastern services call to connect directly with the Lizzie line.

Woolwich line is set having 6tph SE service restored so it’s not as bad as before with the 2022 cuts but because it’s Thameslink and cancellations by them on this line is frequent it’s frustrating, especially with what we had before.

 

[bramling]

With significantly reduced commuting during school holidays (resulting in very empty trains) I can't see any issue with this at all to be honest. It seems sensible to drop peak extras and the likes at these times and not waste money.

It’s a complete misnomer that peak trains run around empty over the summer. For everyone who takes a proportion of their annual leave over the summer there’s someone else who chooses to use it at other times.

 

[Mattplans]

I think there is a lot of value in CHX-Charlton but that’s why i suggested locking in the Woolwich-Blackheath service into Victoria, if there is no space at CHX.

Not enough 'value' to displace any other of the important routes that run into both CHX and VIC. None of them have space. That's why peak extras are also running from Blackfriars as well as Victoria now. Charlton will still benefit from probably the most trains of any SE metro route 4 tph Slade Green 2 tph Dartford 2 tph Raainham (perhaps running from Cannon St instead?)
Additionally... another crossing at Lewisham Vale Jn.... it takes longer and makes journeys longer

 

[OneOfThe48]

It’s a complete misnomer that peak trains run around empty over the summer. For everyone who takes a proportion of their annual leave over the summer there’s someone else who chooses to use it at other times.

From my experience, peak time travel falls by 10%-20% over the summer and you can notice it in the trains being quieter

As someone without school age kids, I've sometimes found out its a school half term only once i've got on the train and noticed its a lot less busy than the week before

If operators need to cut their cloth to match changes in demand and revenue to reduce their subsidies which the Government regularly say are 'unsustainable', its sadly one area that they will need to look at

 

[NorthKent1989]

Not enough 'value' to displace any other of the important routes that run into both CHX and VIC. None of them have space. That's why peak extras are also running from Blackfriars as well as Victoria now. Charlton will still benefit from probably the most trains of any SE metro route 4 tph Slade Green 2 tph Dartford 2 tph Raainham (perhaps running from Cannon St instead?)
Additionally... another crossing at Lewisham Vale Jn.... it takes longer and makes journeys longer

I mean all the routes are of importance also this is why I think any Woolwich Medway service should use Lewisham junction as it would be 2tph service anyway speed west of Abbey Wood/Woolwich won’t make much of difference any.

A timetable recast is probably due now, especially around the Thameslink network

 

[TransportHub]

What though if you have to be in the office at a certain time and have to get up significantly earlier as a result to get an earlier train?

It seems to me that the money saved - likely very small in the scheme of things - by cancelling these services for 6 out of 52 weeks is insignificant compared to the personal inconvenience to those commuters - presumably quite a few - who rely on these services for work. But I suppose this brings up my point from the GD thread in that to me, the values and priorities of the 2020s are all wrong. Everything's about saving the pennies and never mind the consequences.

Planned multi-week cancellations of services during the summer holidays is not something I've ever known the railway doing all the way back to 1982 - through good times and less good. So why do it now?

My bold
It's worse than that, it's every school holiday not just the 6 weeks of summer. The Southern London Bridge coastal trains have been cancelled this week too

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

Will these come with enhancements - such as 2tph daily to East Grinstead?

The blocker for the full 2tph Grinsteads is a ThFO section 4 possession opportunity so LTP the stock goes to Streatham Hill for a hour or so and back. If for a particular STP week a possession isn't planned then the pax trains can run in place of the ECS, the crew diagrams are rigged up so MTWO versions fits in the ThFO ones.
The extra Grinsteads and school holidays cuts are separate schemes independent of each other. They just happen to have been used at the same time.

 

[nw1]

My bold
It's worse than that, it's every school holiday not just the 6 weeks of summer. The Southern London Bridge coastal trains have been cancelled this week too

That's even crazier, how many regular commuters take holiday in Oct and Feb? Just about none, I suspect - so cancelling the trains then has no rationale whatsoever.

 

[NorthKent1989]

That's even crazier, how many regular commuters take holiday in Oct and Feb? Just about none, I suspect - so cancelling the trains then has no rationale whatsoever.

Interesting point as those are half term dates too.

I wonder if they’ll only reduce trains in the bigger holidays only?

 

[nw1]

Interesting point as those are half term dates too.

That was my point, I was replying to @TransportHub who suggested the cancellations were every school holiday. The Oct and Feb half-terms are very much in the "off season", where few take holidays.

I wonder if they’ll only reduce trains in the bigger holidays only?

Even Easter is silly, I suspect most people commuting into Central London don't take much more time off than the Easter weekend. Perhaps the Thursday and the Tuesday too, but I doubt many take the entire two weeks off.

Christmas is a bit different, as the period between 27 Dec and New Year at least is basically like an extended weekend, so one could argue that a Saturday service on Mon-Fri is appropriate for that period.

 

[Harpo]

* money sloshing around for discounted admissions to attractions (which are essentially a luxury)

The VAT reduction for attractions is at corporate level. No guarantee of it getting passed on to the public.

 

[Magdalia]

That's even crazier, how many regular commuters take holiday in Oct and Feb? Just about none, I suspect - so cancelling the trains then has no rationale whatsoever.

Lots of parents with school age children take holiday at half term, unless they can make other arrangements for child care.