Opinions/suggestions for changes to Great Northern or Thameslink and linked services.

[Farigiraf]

As the final local stop / terminus, WGC should have outer calls.

Other posters have explained this in more detail, but in summary, Stevenage - Finsbury Park nonstop is both faster (which matters from places further from London than Potters Bar/Hatfield) and significantly less complicated to run compared to diverting to serve WGC.

It would make more sense to extend the WGC terminators to Stevenage long-term, as that's busier and has more connections than WGC, meaning that the TL semifasts from Peterborough/Cambridge wouldn't need an extra stop and all that entails.
For the time being though, that's not possible as there's not much capacity north of Welwyn. So for the forseeable future, WGC is likely to remain with suboptimal northbound connectivity.

 

[NCT]

Thank you. St Albans blows all of these places out of the water in usage terms.

And I should have been clearer - I referred to Potters Bar and Hatfield earlier but it became about Welwyn. As the final local stop / terminus, WGC should have outer calls.

Potters Bar especially seems more of a Slough. Which yes has fasts (arguably doesn’t need them - just more Crossrail) - but the benefits just aren’t there with a service which infiltrates the core / negates the tube ride and has exploded in usage. And certainly no-one at Hayes is missing their fast to Paddington. OOC will make this change more pronounced.

Potters Bar and Slough already get a compromised service level compared with Shenfield. Their journey times shouldn't be further compromised.

I don’t mean another Canary Wharf, but mid rise apartment buildings (3-6 floors) - TOD with light commercial, should be acceptable around all Home Counties rail linked places. The infrastructure is there and should be used to expand the real Greater London.

Develop towns. Let villages stay villages.

 

[Magdalia]

Back in the 90s, the service consisted of 2tph KX-Cambridge, most of which were fast to/from Welwyn GC. This was supplemented by 2tph KX-Letchworth, which called at places like New Southgate, Oakleigh Park, New Barnet, Potters Bar, Hatfield then all stations to Letchworth (the exact calling pattern varied slightly). Note that some of the latter services were booked for class 313s.

For the purposes of historical accuracy, this is not correct.

When the GN outer suburban service was introduced in 1978 Welwyn Garden City was served by 2tph Kings Cross-Royston. Off peak these called at Potters Bar and Hatfield. In 1985 one of these was truncated at Letchworth.

This continued until 1994 when the Letchworth train was diverted to Peterborough.

In order for Knebworth and Welwyn North to maintain their frequency, they got calls on the outer-suburban service, though in most cases each service called at only one.

peak time additional calls at Welwyn North and Knebworth go back much further than the FCC era.

In 1994 0645/0707 ex Peterborough called Knebworth and Welwyn North then fast to Finsbury Park. In the evening the 1720 to Peterborough called at Knebworth and the 1820 to Peterborough called at Welwyn North, and in 1995, both 1720 and 1820 were calling at Welwyn North and Knebworth.

Providing Welwyn Garden city with fast trains is stuffed by 2 key factors: it is London side of the 2 track section and it doesn't have platforms on the fast lines. This was recognised as long ago as 1973 when the Welwyn Garden City stops were taken out of the Cambridge Buffet Expresses. This was part of the ECML timetable acceleration resulting from the opening of the 100mph tracks through Peterborough.

 

[Baji]

Scrap the Gatwick Express please. Use those paths to strengthen Southern services.

If they need a service to run direct service between London Victoria and Brighton, perhaps they should just have the London Victoria to Brighton service to run as a combined service with the London Victoria to Littlehampton services where 12 cars run between London Victoria and Preston Park and at Preston Park train divides/attached with portion continuing to Littlehampton and other continuing as a shuttle service to Brighton. Benefit of that would mean a direct services between Clapham Junction and Brighton.
They could then either turn Gatwick express service between London Victoria to Brighton to be hourly at off peak and half hourly at peak or scrap it- that will then mean they can add more services on other routes

 

[Bikeman78]

If they need a service to run direct service between London Victoria and Brighton, perhaps they should just have the London Victoria to Brighton service to run as a combined service with the London Victoria to Littlehampton services where 12 cars run between London Victoria and Preston Park and at Preston Park train divides/attached with portion continuing to Littlehampton and other continuing as a shuttle service to Brighton. Benefit of that would mean a direct services between Clapham Junction and Brighton.
They could then either turn Gatwick express service between London Victoria to Brighton to be hourly at off peak and half hourly at peak or scrap it- that will then mean they can add more services on other routes

I'd be more inclined to leave the Brighton trains as they are and run them as Southern services. There's enough slack in the schedule for the down trains to stop at Clapham Junction and East Croydon. I've not checked the up direction.

 

[PGAT]

I'd be more inclined to leave the Brighton trains as they are and run them as Southern services. There's enough slack in the schedule for the down trains to stop at Clapham Junction and East Croydon. I've not checked the up direction.

I am hearing that Gatwick Express will effectively operate as Southern anyway including ticket acceptance. Is anyone able to confirm whether or not this is the case?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

The Three Bridges-Bedford service should be curtailed to Luton outside of the peak. They already do it late evening and its not as if Bedford doesn't get a decent service now woth the Corby Connect service being prime conveyor of London bound traffic.

 

[JonathanH]

The Three Bridges-Bedford service should be curtailed to Luton outside of the peak. They already do it late evening and its not as if Bedford doesn't get a decent service now woth the Corby Connect service being prime conveyor of London bound traffic.

If it wasn't for the skip stops on the East Croydon to Gatwick corridor I reckon it could probably be cut out off-peak completely.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

If it wasn't for the skip stops on the East Croydon to Gatwick corridor I reckon it could probably be cut out off-peak completely.

They are pretty well used Redhill to Luton all day long but in pre fixed formation world would be run as 4/8 cars outside of the peaks. Mind you as they are first service to be sacrificed at first sign of any issues North or South of the river they get culled tells you the priority they are accorded in Thameslink.

 

[JonathanH]

They are pretty well used Redhill to Luton all day long but in pre fixed formation world would be run as 4/8 cars outside of the peaks. Mind you as they are first service to be sacrificed at first sign of any issues North or South of the river they get culled tells you the priority they are accorded in Thameslink.

The off-peak custom from the Redhill corridor towards London Bridge would easily fit on the 12-car Horsham to Peterborough service, if the timetable allowed it to call at all stations. (Clearly it doesn't and that is essentially why the Three Bridges to Bedford service can't easily be cut.) There is no way there are 2,000 people travelling from the Redhill corridor to London off peak in each hour, and that is the capacity the Horsham to Peterborough service would provide on its own.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

The off-peak custom from the Redhill corridor towards London Bridge would easily fit on the 12-car Horsham to Peterborough service, if the timetable allowed it to call at all stations. (Clearly it doesn't and that is essentially why the Three Bridges to Bedford service can't easily be cut.) There is no way there are 2,000 people travelling from the Redhill corridor to London off peak in each hour, and that is the capacity the Horsham to Peterborough service would provide on its own.

Most stations never provide the custom for the size of the train its the aggregate of demand across the route that matters. Anyhow I agree the 9J HRH-PBO service could cover off the 9R TBD-BED service but that could do with having the 1R REI-VIC service being strengthened to 8 cars which cant happen as Reigate can only hold 4 cars. Any Thameslink service reduction just leave units underutilised though that have to be paid for whether they are used or not.

 

[William3000]

This is the service already at peak and it's not enough in terms of crowding. The 717s were intended to run a 10tph service to Gordon Hill which still hasn't been achieved. As you say, it's incredibly obvious what needs to be done on the Hertford side of things. For Welwyn it's more complicated.

I don't really understand this reasoning. The ECML IC services also function as regional 'hybrids' and you cannot just decrease the service level because HS2 exists to benefit London and the opposite half of the country (and only Brum as you say)...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Jun 2026 ==


Welwyn, and the entire ECML South at that, seem to basically be forgotten compared the extremely frequent Thameslink service on the MML. In fact the entire scheme of bringing TL to the ECML has overall not been successful in my book. Major bottlenecks were not fixed and the allocation is just ridiculous, it's 14tph vs 6tph. It seems like an afterthought at times.

Is that not because of the differential between the number of platforms serving the ECML in addition to Thameslink being 13 - 11 at London King’s Cross and 2 at Moorgate versus just 4 serving the Midland Mainline at London St Pancras. Surely it’s this differential which accounts for the different 14 v 6 tph allocation? There are simply far more terminating platforms at London King’s Cross and Moorgate available meaning they can take the slack for some inner suburban, outer surburban, and regional expresses in a way that they can’t at London St Pancras.

 

[Magdalia]

Welwyn, and the entire ECML South at that, seem to basically be forgotten compared the extremely frequent Thameslink service on the MML. In fact the entire scheme of bringing TL to the ECML has overall not been successful in my book. Major bottlenecks were not fixed and the allocation is just ridiculous, it's 14tph vs 6tph. It seems like an afterthought at times.

Major bottlenecks were fixed. Up slow line 2 and extra platforms at Finsbury Park, platform 5 at Stevenage. the Hitchin flyover, extra platforms at Cambridge and Peterborough to name 5.

Be careful what you wish for: the GN might have had 8tph through the Thameslink core but fortunately we were spared the 2tph Cambridge-Maidstone.

I think the GN will get 8tph through the core, but it is a long way off. A new station at Crews Hill New Town and Thameslink from there to Orpington is the way to do it, giving a 4tph service Alexandra Palace-Bromley South.

 

[43074]

Welwyn, and the entire ECML South at that, seem to basically be forgotten compared the extremely frequent Thameslink service on the MML. In fact the entire scheme of bringing TL to the ECML has overall not been successful in my book. Major bottlenecks were not fixed and the allocation is just ridiculous, it's 14tph vs 6tph. It seems like an afterthought at times.

It isn't 14tph v 6tph though - the 6 x GN Thameslink services are supplemented by 10tph from Moorgate and 8tph from King's Cross so it's not a like for like comparison. That's an awful lot of trains for a part of the network which "seems to be forgotten" as you put it.

 

[cle]

I think the GN will get 8tph through the core, but it is a long way off. A new station at Crews Hill New Town and Thameslink from there to Orpington is the way to do it, giving a 4tph service Alexandra Palace-Bromley South.

Having both Moorgate AND TL services on both branches seems very confusing to me. Shouldn't we try and delineate - and increase frequency accordingly. eg. TL goes to 4tph WGC, and Moorgate - Hertford is 6tph with 2tph Stevenage and 2-4tph Gordon Hill to give 10-12tph to Moorgate (off-peak/peak - once Crews Hill is built out)

 

[bramling]

Having both Moorgate AND TL services on both branches seems very confusing to me. Shouldn't we try and delineate - and increase frequency accordingly. eg. TL goes to 4tph WGC, and Moorgate - Hertford is 6tph with 2tph Stevenage and 2-4tph Gordon Hill to give 10-12tph to Moorgate (off-peak/peak - once Crews Hill is built out)

The difficulty is that Moorgate means being locked at 6-car formations, whilst Thameslink can offer more. One of the big problems with the Hertford line is that 6 cars is a significant peak constraint, which may well become untenable if Crews Hill happens.

I guess you could concentrate Thameslink on Welwyn and flood the Hertford route with Moorgate services (making full use of the extra tracks between Alexandra Palace and Finsbury Park). In theory this way it might be possible to do something like 4tph Gordon Hill, 4tph Hertford North and 2tph Stevenage like you say. But any more than that and I think one needs to be looking at longer trains, which rules Moorgate out.

 

[cle]

The difficulty is that Moorgate means being locked at 6-car formations, whilst Thameslink can offer more. One of the big problems with the Hertford line is that 6 cars is a significant peak constraint, which may well become untenable if Crews Hill happens.

I guess you could concentrate Thameslink on Welwyn and flood the Hertford route with Moorgate services (making full use of the extra tracks between Alexandra Palace and Finsbury Park). In theory this way it might be possible to do something like 4tph Gordon Hill, 4tph Hertford North and 2tph Stevenage like you say. But any more than that and I think one needs to be looking at longer trains, which rules Moorgate out.

Moorgate can do 14tph supposedly but definitely 12tph. At 6 cars, that is no different to most outer tube lines' capacity with far less usage (better than many, eg Richmond branch) - and even with Crews Hill, I can't see it ever needing more. Larger new towns see lower rail use so I think it might be a 3m station maybe, max, nothing worth major interventions.

There is also a lot of choice in proximity - Picc lines, the GN route, WA at Hertford... plus Finsbury Park and Highbury enabling interchange to the Vic.

 

[43074]

The Three Bridges-Bedford service should be curtailed to Luton outside of the peak. They already do it late evening and its not as if Bedford doesn't get a decent service now woth the Corby Connect service being prime conveyor of London bound traffic.

There is very little benefit to doing this though as most of the traincrew are Bedford based anyway.

Given the Universal Studios theme park is only a few years off, it would be pointless curtailing them at Luton now only to reinstate them in a few years.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Jun 2026 ==

If it wasn't for the skip stops on the East Croydon to Gatwick corridor I reckon it could probably be cut out off-peak completely.

Not true, there is enough demand from Luton to St Albans inclusive to London for a 15 minute interval fast service, it would cost far more in revenue to remove it than it would just to leave as is.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Jun 2026 ==

Having both Moorgate AND TL services on both branches seems very confusing to me. Shouldn't we try and delineate - and increase frequency accordingly. eg. TL goes to 4tph WGC, and Moorgate - Hertford is 6tph with 2tph Stevenage and 2-4tph Gordon Hill to give 10-12tph to Moorgate (off-peak/peak - once Crews Hill is built out)

Users of the GN have managed to understand having trains to both Kings Cross and Moorgate for decades, I'm sure they can cope with a choice between Thameslink Core or Moorgate as well!

 

[devon_belle]

I will be disheartened if precious GTR units are used to return GatEx to 4 tph (unless they open it up to Southern tickets) instead of much needed metro service reintroductions! Alas, maybe I can hope for May '27...

 

[cle]

Users of the GN have managed to understand having trains to both Kings Cross and Moorgate for decades, I'm sure they can cope with a choice between Thameslink Core or Moorgate as well!

Has the Hertford Loop line had regular Kings Cross services - other than by virtue of weekends - in many years? I think simpler and higher frequency is a far better practice than this '2tph from everywhere to everywhere' fetish people have here - per the Southeastern routes too. Makes for a more reliable railway too.

I have no doubt people's brains can handle it, doesn't make it better. 4tph Welwyn GC - Core - Catford loop all week would be a great service, mirroring St Albans - Sutton as an 8 car inner.

 

[bramling]

Moorgate can do 14tph supposedly but definitely 12tph.

Moorgate may be able to do this, but can the rest of the route? Remember that the third track between Alexandra Palace isn’t fully dedicated to the Hertford service, it also carries ECS workings from/to both Bounds Green and Hornsey. These cannot just disappear, and there’s also the potential need for other services to use platforms 1 and 8 at Finsbury Park.

At 6 cars, that is no different to most outer tube lines' capacity with far less usage (better than many, eg Richmond branch) - and even with Crews Hill, I can't see it ever needing more. Larger new towns see lower rail use so I think it might be a 3m station maybe, max, nothing worth major interventions.

Hertford has always been the busier of the routes, there are morning peak services which have people standing by Cuffley. By London commuter standards 6x 20metres is short.

 

[cle]

Hertford has always been the busier of the routes, there are morning peak services which have people standing by Cuffley. By London commuter standards 6x 20metres is short.

I agree that it's short... but also, it's infrequent.

There are 5 trains between 7am-8am, and 4 8am-9am. I am advocating for a big increase in those services. They have 2tph after about 8pm which is terrible. So before we talk about length, I think expanding what we have there makes the most sense, and advancing it towards a singular metro service.

 

[Transilien]

Has the Hertford Loop line had regular Kings Cross services - other than by virtue of weekends - in many years? I think simpler and higher frequency is a far better practice than this '2tph from everywhere to everywhere' fetish people have here - per the Southeastern routes too. Makes for a more reliable railway too.

I agree with you. Is Moorgate open on the weekends now? It would make sense IMO to have the branch during the weekends to free up King’s Cross for the ever growing leisure market.

 

[Hadders]

I agree with you. Is Moorgate open on the weekends now? It would make sense IMO to have the branch during the weekends to free up King’s Cross for the ever growing leisure market.

Moorgate has been open at weekends for the best part of 10 years. With the new LNER timetable I doubt there's space for any more GTR trains to go into Kings Cross. It's noticeable that on Sundays the Peterborough to Kings Cross trains have been reduced in length to 8 car - they were 12s. My suspicion is this is because they have to use platform 9 or 10 which can only take 8-cars.

 

[cle]

Old Street is of course a big draw on weekends, and not just at night - Brick Lane, Columbia Road, attractions all across the area - lots of visitors. And of course Highbury & Islington in the last 10 years has exploded in usage - they close Drayton Park on Arsenal home games though... so H&I takes the slack even more.

And now that Moorgate is a Crossrail station, it's even more important, all week.

 

[rmHawk765]

A new station at Crews Hill New Town

The new Conservative majority government of Enfield opposes this project and it is almost certainly not going ahead, so we can say goodbye to that.

Is that not because of the differential between the number of platforms serving the ECML in addition to Thameslink being 13 - 11 at London King’s Cross and 2 at Moorgate versus just 4 serving the Midland Mainline at London St Pancras.

It isn't 14tph v 6tph though - the 6 x GN Thameslink services are supplemented by 10tph from Moorgate and 8tph from King's Cross so it's not a like for like comparison. That's an awful lot of trains for a part of the network which "seems to be forgotten" as you put it.

This 'awful lot' of trains is still a lot less than the MML. That's why I originally raised my point on the allocation. I actually don't want anything more than 8tph through the core to the ECML with the infrastructure staying as is. Here's the service at major stations compared (MML vs ECML):

• Suburban stations - ECML wins-ish - 4tph off-peak vs 2-4tph peak, 4tph peak vs 4-8tph peak
• Suburban - 4tph semi-fast, 4tph slow (Hendon & Cricklewood slow only), vs 2tph semi-fast (Ally Pally, New Barnet, Potters Bar, Hatfield only), 2-6tph slow
• St Albans vs Welwyn - 4-6 fast, 4 semi-fast, 4 slow (total 18), vs 2 semi-fast, 2-4 slow (total 6)
• St Albans vs Hertford - as above, vs 2-6 slow
• Luton vs Stevenage - 4-6 fast, 4 semi-fast (total 14), vs 4 fast, 2 semi-fast, 2 slow (total 8)
• Bedford vs Cambridge - Cambridge obviously wins, but the current Cambridge timetable means almost every Ely/Kings Lynn train that needs to split/join is delayed, and this has knock-on effects

As you can see there is a big discrepancy in service and one of the reasons is that all the TL capacity is used up by the MML. Which is understandable as there's nowhere else for MML trains to go, and would be fine if the ECML made up for it with KGX terminators, but it doesn't. And as I mentioned earlier, the Dec 2025 timetable means there is essentially no space left at KGX.

I think simpler and higher frequency is a far better practice than this '2tph from everywhere to everywhere' fetish people have here - per the Southeastern routes too.

Ultimately this is nothing more than a cost saving measure which doesn't work. Instead of expanding termini, let's send literally everything everywhere and hope it works... basically the current Thameslink network. Cross-city lines work very well until they start going way out of cities.

In theory this way it might be possible to do something like 4tph Gordon Hill, 4tph Hertford North and 2tph Stevenage like you say.

The envisaged peak service with the 717s was 2tph Stevenage, 6tph Hertford, 2tph Gordon Hill. In 2019 it was very similar except the total frequency was 8tph, I can't remember if this was because the Gordon Hill terminators didn't exist or something. It is currently 6tph to Hertford in the morning peak but confusingly not the evening, though ETUG says this will change in December.

 

[Magdalia]

The new Conservative majority government of Enfield opposes this project and it is almost certainly not going ahead, so we can say goodbye to that.

The borough council can oppose the Crews Hill New Town but it isn't their choice whether it goes ahead. Parliament can legislate to create a New Town Development Corporation, and the government can make any associated infrastructure a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project.

 

[43074]

This 'awful lot' of trains is still a lot less than the MML. That's why I originally raised my point on the allocation. I actually don't want anything more than 8tph through the core to the ECML with the infrastructure staying as is. Here's the service at major stations compared (MML vs ECML):

• Suburban stations - ECML wins-ish - 4tph off-peak vs 2-4tph off-peak, 4tph peak vs 4-8tph peak
• St Albans vs Welwyn - 4-6 fast, 4 semi-fast, 4 slow (total 18), vs 2 semi-fast, 2-4 slow (total 6)
• St Albans vs Hertford - as above, vs 2-6 slow
• Luton vs Stevenage - 4-6 fast, 4 semi-fast (total 14), vs 4 fast, 2 semi-fast, 2 slow (total 8)
• Bedford vs Cambridge - Cambridge obviously wins, but the current Cambridge timetable means almost every Ely/Kings Lynn train that needs to split/join is delayed, and this has knock-on effects

As you can see there is a big discrepancy in service and one of the reasons is that all the TL capacity is used up by the MML. Which is understandable as there's nowhere else for MML trains to go, and would be fine if the ECML made up for it with KGX terminators, but it doesn't. And as I mentioned earlier, the Dec 2025 timetable means there is essentially no space left at KGX.

There are more GTR services passing through Finsbury Park in the high peak than there are at West Hampstead so that's not actually true - the difference is the demand on the GN is more spread across the different branches. There's not much point comparing the Midland and Great Northern though as they are apples and oranges, not only in terms of train service but also by their population and geography.

On the GN inners the likes of Brookmans Park, Welham Green or Hadley Wood are pretty quiet off peak in the first instance, whilst the Hertford route is more densely populated south of Gordon Hill and goes up to 4tph from December anyway. On the GN 'outers' there's the small matter of Welwyn viaduct which imposes a constraint on the number of trains north of Welwyn, but in fairness I'm not convinced it actually needs extra trains - Cambridge area is essentially full (both now and after East West Rail), Huntingdon/St Neots etc are served by 4tph in the peaks but the 9Jxx provide ample capacity off peak, Hitchin/Stevenage etc have benefitted from extra peak capacity with additional Letchworth trains over the last couple of timetables.

 

[rmHawk765]

I guess you could concentrate Thameslink on Welwyn and flood the Hertford route with Moorgate services (making full use of the extra tracks between Alexandra Palace and Finsbury Park).

I fully agree that the current infrastructure surprisingly hasn't been maximised. As much as I talk about the Cambridge situation and King's Cross, the Hertford Loop can actually be split pretty cleanly and not currently at capacity at all. Before any TL routes down the line are even considered Moorgate needs to be at 14tph.

The borough council can oppose the Crews Hill New Town but it isn't their choice whether it goes ahead. Parliament can legislate to create a New Town Development Corporation, and the government can make any associated infrastructure a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project.

Well as I said, it's not a given it's not going ahead. But with Tempsford also being an option with much less opposition, it's difficult to see why Crews Hill would be chosen, apart from the obvious location factor.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

This 'awful lot' of trains is still a lot less than the MML. That's why I originally raised my point on the allocation. I actually don't want anything more than 8tph through the core to the ECML with the infrastructure staying as is. Here's the service at major stations compared (MML vs ECML):

• Suburban stations - ECML wins-ish - 4tph off-peak vs 2-4tph off-peak, 4tph peak vs 4-8tph peak
• St Albans vs Welwyn - 4-6 fast, 4 semi-fast, 4 slow (total 18), vs 2 semi-fast, 2-4 slow (total 6)
• St Albans vs Hertford - as above, vs 2-6 slow
• Luton vs Stevenage - 4-6 fast, 4 semi-fast (total 14), vs 4 fast, 2 semi-fast, 2 slow (total 8)
• Bedford vs Cambridge - Cambridge obviously wins, but the current Cambridge timetable means almost every Ely/Kings Lynn train that needs to split/join is delayed, and this has knock-on effects

As you can see there is a big discrepancy in service and one of the reasons is that all the TL capacity is used up by the MML. Which is understandable as there's nowhere else for MML trains to go, and would be fine if the ECML made up for it with KGX terminators, but it doesn't. And as I mentioned earlier, the Dec 2025 timetable means there is essentially no space left at KGX.

With the Corby Connect service now providing two fasts this was an opportunity to rationalise Thameslink services across MML. The 9Rxx could be curtailed at Luton and make additional calls and the 9P shortened back to West Hampstead. This would leave core frequency the same but lower overall mileage would would save units and crews and release capcity on the Fast Lines.