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

JamesRowden said:

The primary purpose would be to make the journey time between London and stations south of Gatwick 14 minutes faster on the Peterborough-Horsham service. The potential to create a new optimised timetable around this pattern should be able to provide Horsham and Crawley something close an effective every 15 minute service to London rather than the present service where the Thameslink service seems too slow to be particularly useful for London journeys.

Click to expand...

It could probably still stop at Horley, and cross at the junction south of Earlswood but could demand at the stations between Horsham and Horley effectively fill a half-hourly 12-car 700?

While I recognise that no one wanting London from stations south of Gatwick really wants to suffer the delay of going via Redhill, there is at least some southbound demand from there that needs to be catered for.

Mgameing123 said:

I mean it’s only if we use Class 387’s. By skipping stations in the core you can save a bit of time to allow for a longer dwell at St Pancras.

Click to expand...

How do you organise the accessibility for the 387s given no humps in the right place and the need to use ramps that take a lot of time to put down and lift up, as well as staffing requirements to do this (there will be two, maybe three, sections per train).

You also have a train that requires someone to use a T-key to lower and lift the table that has the call for aid button.

Class15 said:

The 387s worked this route for years and they didn’t take over a minute for a passenger stop, which is also the amount of time allowed for all passenger stops in the core.

Click to expand...

The longer-distance Thameslink services were 377 operated before 700s, IIRC.
Nevermind, both were used. In theory there's capacity in the TL core for slightly slower services, but it'd fall apart during any minor disruption.

JamesRowden said:

The primary purpose would be to make the journey time between London and stations south of Gatwick 14 minutes faster on the Peterborough-Horsham service. The potential to create a new optimised timetable around this pattern should be able to provide Horsham and Crawley something close an effective every 15 minute service to London rather than the present service where the Thameslink service seems too slow to be particularly useful for London journeys.

Click to expand...

I agree that the Horsham Thameslink is too slow to be useful for London travel from stations south of Horley. Presumably this proposal would involve axeing the Gatwick Express - I'm fairly sure that the GX is remaining for the foreseeable future (too much of a money spinner) but in an ideal world the paths could certainly be better utilised.

I'm guessing the VIC-Brighton fast would be kept and moved to Southern, so what you'd do with the remaining half-hourly shuttles is a good question. What your proposal does is add up to half an hour to GTW-VIC journey times on these shuttles, making them effectively useless for Airport-London travel.

There are economic consequences of removing 2 airport trains from Gatwick, but besides that, if the train's pretty useless for Gatwick travel then what use is there in running them to Gatwick? Could run them to Tonbridge or Reigate instead. Redhill - Gatwick already has 4tph via GWR and the Three Bridges - Bedford service, so the only stations that would lose out on a Gatwick/Crawley connection would be Coulsdon South and Merstham. Those flows consisted of approx 60,000 journeys last year, so the loss of a connection would probably lose you around 40-50k trips per year on these flows. I reckon you can grow Nutfield, Godstone or Reigate stations by that much with more trains to London.

JamesRowden said:

I wonder if Peterborough-Horsham services should run nonstop between East Croydon and Gatwick via the Quarry Line, with the 2tph Victoria-Gatwick non-stop shuttles becoming a stopper via Redhill.

Click to expand...

I've previously suggested something similar, what'd I do is run the Peterborough to Horsham services to Gatwick via the Quarry Line as you suggest, but terminate them at Gatwick off-peak with extensions to Eastbourne, Littlehampton and Bognor Regis* in the peaks (replacing the London Bridge peak extras).

I'd then extend the Bedford to Three Bridges services to Horsham, and add additional stops at Coulsdon South and Merstham, bringing back a simple all-stations service along the corridor, divert the Victoria to Reigate service from Redhill to Three Bridges, allowing the only Victoria service along the corridor to run as 8 or 12 coaches throughout the day, and run a London Bridge to Reigate service, with 4 coaches off-peak and 8/12 coaches with Gatwick portions in the peaks.

I wouldn't have anything replace the Gatwick shuttles between Victoria and East Croydon, as leaving some "spare" paths allows the Gatwick Express Brighton service (rebranded to a Southern service) to additionally stop at Clapham Junction and East Croydon.

To sum up:

• Peterborough to Gatwick via the Quarry Line, 12 coaches, peak time extensions from Gatwick to Eastbourne, Littlehampton and Bognor Regis.
• Bedford to Horsham, serves most stops along the Redhill line, 12 coaches.
• Victoria to Brighton, stops at Clapham Junction, East Croydon, Gatwick and Haywards Heath, replaces the Gatwick Express, 8/12 coaches throughout the day.
• Victoria to Three Bridges, serves most stops along the Redhill Line, 8/12 coaches throughout the day.
• London Bridge to Reigate, 4 coaches off-peak, 8/12 coaches during peak times with Gatwick portions splitting/joining at Redhill.

*though I do recall something being mentioned on the forum about issues with 12-coach 700s stopping at some stations on the Arun Valley line, so I'm not 100% sure if this is possible.

London Trains said:

Peterborough to Gatwick via the Quarry Line, 12 coaches, peak time extensions from Gatwick to Eastbourne, Littlehampton and Bognor Regis.

Click to expand...

Running Sussex coast commuter trains anywhere near the ECML with the current timetable is a disaster waiting to happen.

London Trains said:

• Peterborough to Gatwick via the Quarry Line, 12 coaches, peak time extensions from Gatwick to Eastbourne, Littlehampton and Bognor Regis.
• Bedford to Horsham, serves most stops along the Redhill line, 12 coaches.

Click to expand...

Slowing down the Horsham stopper even further without giving Crawley a faster service? What would be the point of using the Quarry line on the Peterborough service then?
Also 12-car trains on Redhill line stoppers will be transporting a lot of fresh air.

Mgameing123 said:

I mean it’s only if we use Class 387’s. By skipping stations in the core you can save a bit of time to allow for a longer dwell at St Pancras. It’s the same thing the peak time fast services do on the Elizabeth Line do.

Click to expand...

Peak time services on the Elizabeth Line do not skip stop Bond St, Tottenham Ct Road & Farringdon, whcih is the equivalent.

Mgameing123 said:

Well then your going to have to use Class 700's for this brand new Luton Airport - Gatwick Airport express.

Click to expand...

We already have Luton Aiport - Gatwick Airport expresses, calling only at E Croydon, Harpenden and St Albans outside the core.

Class15 said:

I cannot understand why 387s wouldn't be able to be used for this. Dwell times on Thameslink in the core are booked to be a minute but never is this full amount of time needed - a 387 could easily do this in 1 minute.

Click to expand...

No, they can’t

Class15 said:

Okay, a slightly longer voltage change time. How much longer? Because I don’t personally believe this is a showstopper.

Click to expand...

At least 30 seconds.

Class15 said:

Thats not a good enough reason. The 387s worked this route for years and they didn’t take over a minute for a passenger stop

Click to expand...

Yes they did. And with passenger numbers in the core now much, much higher, their door cycle time, and narrower door width (and lack of standbacks) means passenger alighting / boarding time would be longer than it was back then.

Class15 said:

How much do you think the 387s have collapsed in the last ~10 years that they can’t do this anymore?

Click to expand...

See above

Class15 said:

Okay, so let’s say a minute and a half to timetable. This is still absolutely doable.

Click to expand...

It is not. The timetsble relies on max 1 min dwells and minimum 75sec headways. Add in half a minute on the dwell and the timetable breaks, even without any delay or any length.

Farigiraf said:

Running Sussex coast commuter trains anywhere near the ECML with the current timetable is a disaster waiting to happen.


Slowing down the Horsham stopper even further without giving Crawley a faster service? What would be the point of using the Quarry line on the Peterborough service then?
Also 12-car trains on Redhill line stoppers will be transporting a lot of fresh air.

Click to expand...

I think that 8tph of express services from Victoria to Gatwick formed of 2tph to each of Portsmouth, Littlehampton, Brighton and Eastbourne is enough to cater for demand, while the express service from Gatwick via Thameslink could do with being upped from 4tph to 6tph.

Bald Rick said:

No, they can’t

Click to expand...

Is there proof of the 387s being as slow as you suggest? I never recall this.

Bald Rick said:

At least 30 seconds.

Click to expand...

The 700s can do this in 30 if pressed, so 60 seconds. Fantastic!

Bald Rick said:

Yes they did. And with passenger numbers in the core now much, much higher, their door cycle time, and narrower door width (and lack of standbacks) means passenger alighting / boarding time would be longer than it was back then.

Click to expand...

But if this is a combination of the Luton and Gatwick airport expresses, surely commuting volumes wouldn’t affect this so much?

Bald Rick said:

See above
It is not. The timetsble relies on max 1 min dwells and minimum 75sec headways. Add in half a minute on the dwell and the timetable breaks, even without any delay or any length.

Click to expand...

Going northbound in the peaks there is always a 7.5 minute gap between the 12/42 Bedford service and the 19/49 Kentish Town service.

Farigiraf said:

Running Sussex coast commuter trains anywhere near the ECML with the current timetable is a disaster waiting to happen.


Slowing down the Horsham stopper even further without giving Crawley a faster service? What would be the point of using the Quarry line on the Peterborough service then?
Also 12-car trains on Redhill line stoppers will be transporting a lot of fresh air.

Click to expand...

My ideas are just maintaining the status quo between Three Bridges and Horsham, I suppose the Peterborough services could run to Horsham in addition to the stoppers but I don't think the local links should be completely removed. The point of running the Peterborough service via the Quarry Line is to provide more services from Gatwick to the more popular destinations, which are London Bridge and the Thameslink core stations.

Most of the stopping services along the Redhill Line are already 12 coaches, my idea just makes much better use of this capacity by running longer trains into Victoria throughout the day and some shorter trains into London Bridge off-peak.

JamesRowden said:

The primary purpose would be to make the journey time between London and stations south of Gatwick 14 minutes faster on the Peterborough-Horsham service. The potential to create a new optimised timetable around this pattern should be able to provide Horsham and Crawley something close an effective every 15 minute service to London rather than the present service where the Thameslink service seems too slow to be particularly useful for London journeys.

But this is just an idea.

Click to expand...

People at those stations can simply change at Gatwick if they want a faster service. Shouldn’t really come at the expense of the Redhill line where this isn’t applicable

Class15 said:

Is there proof of the 387s being as slow as you suggest? I never recall this.

Click to expand...

Yes, all the timings I took to prove it 12-15 years ago!

Class15 said:

The 700s can do this in 30 if pressed, so 60 seconds. Fantastic!

Click to expand...

You misunderstood, ie the 387s took at least 30 seconds longer than 60 seconds at the voltage changeover. Often over two minutes.

Class15 said:

But if this is a combination of the Luton and Gatwick airport expresses, surely commuting volumes wouldn’t affect this so much?

Click to expand...

I guess you don’t commute on the line. Besides, we don’t want to run half empty trains to and through the core in the peak.

Class15 said:

Going northbound in the peaks there is always a 7.5 minute gap between the 12/42 Bedford service and the 19/49 Kentish Town service.

Click to expand...

Not always. The 1742 has a 1747 Bedford right behind it. It is likely that the 1812 will similarly have a 1817 Bedford behind it in a year or two. Besides the 12/42 are both ex Brighton and not great runners in the peak, having the firebreak path behind them is routinely used.

Although 387s could operate in the core it's sub-optimal and would cause delays.

The 700s are ideal trains for the core. Wide doors, large standing areas for customers, including down the aisle. 387s on the other hand have norrower doors, smaller standing areas and a narrower aisle.

Seconds count in the core.

Hadders said:

Although 387s could operate in the core it's sub-optimal and would cause delays.

The 700s are ideal trains for the core. Wide doors, large standing areas for customers, including down the aisle. 387s on the other hand have norrower doors, smaller standing areas and a narrower aisle.

Seconds count in the core.

Click to expand...

I don’t know why anyone would really want to put 387s on core services, when currently we have eight GN-only diagrams.

Surely they would be the first candidate if anything was going to go over to Electrostars? The GN service absolutely do not need to be 700s, and 387s are more suitable.

If people, not unreasonably IMO, want a more comfortable journey on the through services then the way to achieve this is to improve the 700s, not bring in another type.

Presumably, apart from the hump issues, it would be theoretically possible to run 387s in service through the core at very quiet times if there was ever an operational need to do so?

PGAT said:

People at those stations can simply change at Gatwick if they want a faster service. Shouldn’t really come at the expense of the Redhill line where this isn’t applicable

Click to expand...

I think people can similarly change at Gatwick and East Croydon from the alternative setup. And we should be looking for the best overall compromise rather than trying to keep every individual aspect no worse than present.

Bald Rick said:

I guess you don’t commute on the line. Besides, we don’t want to run half empty trains to and through the core in the peak.

Click to expand...

You guess incorrectly. I use this line every day, from Kentish Town to Blackfriars, and frequently see loadings of trains I’m not taking.

I remember in the past having a thread where we were actually talking about signalling decisions on the Thameslink core as I was delayed in the peak, so you know I take this line.

The fact that EMR operate 8-car 360 sets on the Corby trains in the peak (which are the trains we are suggesting transferring to TL and sending to Gatwick) suggests 387s wouldn’t be too much of an issue.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Yesterday at 15:35 ==

Bald Rick said:

Yes, all the timings I took to prove it 12-15 years ago!



You misunderstood, ie the 387s took at least 30 seconds longer than 60 seconds at the voltage changeover. Often over two minutes.



I guess you don’t commute on the line. Besides, we don’t want to run half empty trains to and through the core in the peak.




Not always. The 1742 has a 1747 Bedford right behind it. It is likely that the 1812 will similarly have a 1817 Bedford behind it in a year or two. Besides the 12/42 are both ex Brighton and not great runners in the peak, having the firebreak path behind them is routinely used.

Click to expand...

Alright, understood. In which case I must then ask, if the 377/7s (almost identical to 387s) can do voltage changeover in a minute at North Pole, why can’t the 387s do it at Farringdon and City Thameslink.

Class15 said:

You guess incorrectly. I use this line every day, from Kentish Town to Blackfriars, and frequently see loadings of trains I’m not taking.

I remember in the past having a thread where we were actually talking about signalling decisions on the Thameslink core as I was delayed in the peak, so you know I take this line.

The fact that EMR operate 8-car 360 sets on the Corby trains in the peak (which are the trains we are suggesting transferring to TL and sending to Gatwick) suggests 387s wouldn’t be too much of an issue.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Yesterday at 15:35 ==


Alright, understood. In which case I must then ask, if the 377/7s (almost identical to 387s) can do voltage changeover in a minute at North Pole, why can’t the 387s do it at Farringdon and City Thameslink.

Click to expand...

There’s a pretty obvious answer to your last question, involving passengers.

What exactly is the benefit of this proposal?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Yesterday at 19:51 ==

Class15 said:

I remember in the past having a thread where we were actually talking about signalling decisions on the Thameslink core as I was delayed in the peak, so you know I take this line.

Click to expand...

Apologies, I don’t remember every conversation I have!

Class15 said:

Because they are completely unsuitable and 387s would work far better?

I cannot understand why 387s wouldn't be able to be used for this. Dwell times on Thameslink in the core are booked to be a minute but never is this full amount of time needed - a 387 could easily do this in 1 minute.

Okay, a slightly longer voltage change time. How much longer? Because I don’t personally believe this is a showstopper.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Yesterday at 11:35 ==


Thats not a good enough reason. The 387s worked this route for years and they didn’t take over a minute for a passenger stop, which is also the amount of time allowed for all passenger stops in the core.

How much do you think the 387s have collapsed in the last ~10 years that they can’t do this anymore?

Okay, so let’s say a minute and a half to timetable. This is still absolutely doable.

Click to expand...

Because you need to have some form of padding in case something goes wrong.

Mgameing123 said:

Because you need to have some form of padding in case something goes wrong.

Click to expand...

The Thameslink core currently runs every 2.5 minutes, on a headway of 75 seconds and station dwells of 60 seconds.

If you want more examples of railways with basically no padding, see also the North London line (particularly-peak), The Great Western slows and the WCML fasts.