Brighton line Blockade

[Railwaysceptic]

Closing the line from Christ's Hospital to Shoreham was such a bright idea, wasn't it? Not only have Steyning and other places on the line become dormitory towns for Brighton, the junctions at both end faced the right way for diversionary traffic between London and Brighton.

The line was closed in 1966 because it was losing money hand over fist. Between Christ's Hospital and Shoreham it had six stations serving villages. At that time none had a large population and even today the total population served directly is pretty small. In the 1960s taxpayers were respected far more by politicians than they are today, and scrounging off the taxpayer was not considered a legitimate tactic.

Today, with mooted plans to build a line to Heathrow from the south, the means to run a service from Brighton via Guildford and Woking to our busiest airport seems very attractive, but in 1966 no-one had the necessary crystal ball.

 

[yorksrob]

In BR days planned daytime possessions simply weren't permitted on the Brighton Line Easter to October, work would be done on the mid Sussex and elsewhere instead, blockades were almost unknown as well. I think BR were conscious of groups proposing converting lines to roads who would've said that if a line can be closed for a day it can be closed completely and there's a danger of that thinking re-emerging with the scale of closures NR are running. Ultimately their purpose is to run trains - a better balance needs to be found.

I wonder how many people planned a weekend in Brighton, watch the match on the beach big screen then today as a sport free break and how many more may simply have stayed overnight on the beach? Could be thousands heading for the station this evening blocking the streets and a nightmare scenario stopping the replacement busses! Hope the line does reopen at 2300 and GTR are ready to run several specials to London.

The Uckfield line is a country branch line that would require huge expenditure to bring it up to anything like a main line but still couldn't compete on journey time, forget that and press for construction of the long planned Arundel Jct East Chord so trains diverted via Horsham don't need to reverse at Littlehampton.

I was reading a copy of the Railway Magazine from around 1968, and it mentioned the Uckfield line being used as a diversionary route even then. It should be rejoined with Lewes for all sorts of reasons including diversions.

Even on a busy weekend, even if you were able to alternate diverted services between the Uckfield and Dorking routes, you would go a long way towards improving the situation.

 

[RichJF]

What would be better is a curve built somwhere near Lewes AND the Arundel chord built. Then when the line between Wivelsfield & Brighton is blocked you have 2 diversionary routes.

 

[swt_passenger]

How far ahead in the planning is the Arundel chord ?

It isn’t a current proposal. (Which might have been your meaning anyway.)

New lines such as Arundel Chord or proposed reinstatements such as BML2 don’t meet BCR requirements as diversionary routes. This is covered in the relevant route studies. They have to be permanently useful in their own right.

 

[swt_passenger]

It depends on the work doesn't it? There can be a lot of time spent to set up and then clear up before handing back to the railway, which is wasted time (and money) if you can just have longer to do the work in one go.

As you say, it’s all about continuous work. The suggestion earlier of a “continuous overnight blockade” that is lifted during each daytime is not really a “blockade”. The key point is continuous...

 

[Antman]

I wonder how much of the waffle on this matter would have been the same if we were in the middle of grey, wet and showery summer instead?

Absolutely.....................................I mean hot weather on the first Sunday in July................who'd have thought it?

 

[ainsworth74]

As you say, it’s all about continuous work. The suggestion earlier of a “continuous overnight blockade” that is lifted during each daytime is not really a “blockade”. The key point is continuous...

I suppose it depends on what people want. Would they prefer that Network Rail carry out a total blockade for a weekend or spread the work out over several weekends but accept that service will have to rundown earlier and start up again later for each of those weekends?

Then again I suppose there's possible a third way in that I've noticed that up here Network Rail have adopted a bit of a hybrid approach on the ECML where it shuts early on Saturday and then reopens mid-afternoon on Sunday (usually around 1200 - 1300). Meaning that they get a nice chunky blockade to do the work but that people can still travel for a good chunk of the weekend (and in particular get home on Sunday afternoon). Though, of course, I guess if they shut the ECML from last train on Friday until first train on Sunday those works would have maybe taken two weekends rather than four or five...

 

[Warwick]

What exactly was the work that was being carried out? Just wondering.

 

[Taunton]

Today, with mooted plans to build a line to Heathrow from the south, the means to run a service from Brighton via Guildford and Woking to our busiest airport seems very attractive, but in 1966 no-one had the necessary crystal ball.

The most straightforward way to run a service from Brighton to Heathrow would be via Gatwick, East Croydon, Clapham Jc, Kenny O, a short link at Old Oak, and the GW main and Heathrow spur. It would cover all sorts of overlapping intermediate journeys as well, like Gatwick to Ealing Broadway, or Clapham Jc to Heathrow.

 

[Mojo]

When network rail were planning the works did they expect the country to be in the middle of a heatwave? It could have easily been wet & miserable

Highly unlikely based upon previous history of this date.

 

[Railwaysceptic]

The most straightforward way to run a service from Brighton to Heathrow would be via Gatwick, East Croydon, Clapham Jc, Kenny O, a short link at Old Oak, and the GW main and Heathrow spur. It would cover all sorts of overlapping intermediate journeys as well, like Gatwick to Ealing Broadway, or Clapham Jc to Heathrow.

Certainly, as long as they manage to secure train paths along possibly the busiest main line in the country and manage to find room at Acton Wells Junction for a new spur. However a fast and frequent link between Brighton and both Guildford and Woking would itself generate considerable patronage and be a worthwhile end in itself.

 

[chriskeene]

How about reinstating the missing link between Uckfield and Lewes so there is a viable diversionary route? Should have been done years ago.

Which means reversing trains at Lewes (which from experience when they divert in disruption has very limited capacity to do so).

Unless you build a nice tunnel - which are never never cheap (££££)

And once they get to Uckfield, it's then single track, so very limited capacity...

Unless you double track the link north at the same time (££££)

But then you have the problem that most of the line is not electrified, so no good for diversion....

Unless you also electrify, essentially all the way from nr the coast to just outside London - that's a substantial electrification work, well beyond what we may call in-fill. (£££££££)

To provide a diversionary route (amongst other use cases).

Worth remembering there were plans to put in a very short chord connecting Coastway west (approach from the East) to the Arun Valley northwards, to make a diversionary route, the business case to this very short piece of new line (no tunnels) could not be made.

 

[LAX54]

Absolutely.....................................I mean hot weather on the first Sunday in July................who'd have thought it?

No one well the last one was in the early 90's and then of course 76 normally July is clouds and rain !

 

[Robsignals]

They’ve had plenty of practice being completely caught out on weekend closures so they should be experts at it by now..

I'm very glad it was carnage free but sadly that probably means most potential travellers ruled out Brighton and Eastbourne due to all the bad publicity.

 

[Robsignals]

Which means reversing trains at Lewes (which from experience when they divert in disruption has very limited capacity to do so).

Unless you build a nice tunnel - which are never never cheap (££££)

And once they get to Uckfield, it's then single track, so very limited capacity...

Unless you double track the link north at the same time (££££)

But then you have the problem that most of the line is not electrified, so no good for diversion....

Unless you also electrify, essentially all the way from nr the coast to just outside London - that's a substantial electrification work, well beyond what we may call in-fill. (£££££££)

To provide a diversionary route (amongst other use cases).

Worth remembering there were plans to put in a very short chord connecting Coastway west (approach from the East) to the Arun Valley northwards, to make a diversionary route, the business case to this very short piece of new line (no tunnels) could not be made.

People seem to forget that the Uckfield line is 2 track with a lot of stations so expresses would be stuck behind locals, I don't think existing users would be happy to have their service bustituted via country lanes! Realistically the local service will have to be combined with Brighton trains which consequently will be anything but fast.

Tunnelling through the Downs would be impossibly expensive, the bridge over the A27 dual carriageway alone would cost 3x lthe Arundel chord. Don't think the Inspectorate will be happy with loaded shunts at Lewes all the time either so at least a reversing siding will be needed more £££.

 

[AndrewE]

Realistically the local service will have to be combined with Brighton trains which consequently will be anything but fast.
Tunnelling through the Downs would be impossibly expensive, the bridge over the A27 dual carriageway alone would cost 3x lthe Arundel chord. Don't think the Inspectorate will be happy with loaded shunts at Lewes all the time either so at least a reversing siding will be needed more £££.

Smart timetabling can cope with fast and slow trains on the same line if there are occasional 4-platform stations for overtaking. And as for price, nothing is impossible! The Hindhead tunnel on the A43 cost £370 million a decade ago and that was extra expensive because of the amount of work to control silica exposure. The tunnel to avoid Lewes would be through chalk, a far easier medium to bore (and which consequently determined the actual levels of the channel tunnnel.)

 

[Robsignals]

The line was closed in 1966 because it was losing money hand over fist. Between Christ's Hospital and Shoreham it had six stations serving villages. At that time none had a large population and even today the total population served directly is pretty small. In the 1960s taxpayers were respected far more by politicians than they are today, and scrounging off the taxpayer was not considered a legitimate tactic.

Today, with mooted plans to build a line to Heathrow from the south, the means to run a service from Brighton via Guildford and Woking to our busiest airport seems very attractive, but in 1966 no-one had the necessary crystal ball.

In it's final years all boxes were closed except Shoreham bridge crossing, in 1966 a serious crash happened at Itchingfield jct involving 2 non passeger trains diverted off the Brighton line. It was assured that the crew of the Up train had fallen asleep in the 30min since they'd last passed a signal, despite being due to close in months the line was repaired and reopened. It should've been kept and electrified as a diversionary route.

 

[Robsignals]

I was reading a copy of the Railway Magazine from around 1968, and it mentioned the Uckfield line being used as a diversionary route even then. It should be rejoined with Lewes for all sorts of reasons including diversions.

Even on a busy weekend, even if you were able to alternate diverted services between the Uckfield and Dorking routes, you would go a long way towards improving the situation.

I'd like to see the line reopened to Lewes but it's never going to be a main line and will be very little use as a diversion.

 

[Taunton]

Worth remembering there were plans to put in a very short chord connecting Coastway west (approach from the East) to the Arun Valley northwards, to make a diversionary route, the business case to this very short piece of new line (no tunnels) could not be made.

Much better for Network Rail to make positive business cases for things like the Shaftholme Flyover, north of Doncaster on the ECML, to allow coal trains to avoid running across the main line - where the flow of coal to power stations has ended at the eventual completion of the project.

 

[Antman]

People seem to forget that the Uckfield line is 2 track with a lot of stations so expresses would be stuck behind locals, I don't think existing users would be happy to have their service bustituted via country lanes! Realistically the local service will have to be combined with Brighton trains which consequently will be anything but fast.

Tunnelling through the Downs would be impossibly expensive, the bridge over the A27 dual carriageway alone would cost 3x lthe Arundel chord. Don't think the Inspectorate will be happy with loaded shunts at Lewes all the time either so at least a reversing siding will be needed more £££.

Locals? 2tph to East Grinstead on Sundays and an hourly shuttle from Oxted to Uckfield. Who said anything about tunneling through the downs?

 

[Robsignals]

I suppose it depends on what people want. Would they prefer that Network Rail carry out a total blockade for a weekend or spread the work out over several weekends but accept that service will have to rundown earlier and start up again later for each of those weekends?

Then again I suppose there's possible a third way in that I've noticed that up here Network Rail have adopted a bit of a hybrid approach on the ECML where it shuts early on Saturday and then reopens mid-afternoon on Sunday (usually around 1200 - 1300). Meaning that they get a nice chunky blockade to do the work but that people can still travel for a good chunk of the weekend (and in particular get home on Sunday afternoon). Though, of course, I guess if they shut the ECML from last train on Friday until first train on Sunday those works would have maybe taken two weekends rather than four or five...

Showing my age BR long distance routes shut down Saturday evening opened late Sunday morning with very extended timings then magically at 1600 full speed timings resumed! On Southern Region it was generally all day Sunday but rarely Saturday anywhere and blockades only at Christmas or maybe easter. Some of the recent Brighton line blockades were renewing S & C I remember being installed with nothing more than Sunday partial closures.

I can see it's more efficient to do blockades and it simply may not be possible to carry out the scale of work now underway otherwise but it's no good having a gee whiz railway if the passengers have been driven away by "never again" experiences.

 

[Robsignals]

Locals? 2tph to East Grinstead on Sundays and an hourly shuttle from Oxted to Uckfield. Who said anything about tunneling through the downs?

BML2 are proposing a commercial all week competing service. After electrification would expect 2tph local service 1 at small stations. The tunnel is their plan to avoid Lewes and save a few minutes.

 

[yorksrob]

I'd like to see the line reopened to Lewes but it's never going to be a main line and will be very little use as a diversion.

If you juiced it up enough to send a couple of twelve carriage units each way an hour, it would prove preferable to many people to changing to a bus, then back to a train etc. Remember, the Tonbridge - St Leonards line manages a fairly main line level of service within constrained infrastructure.

I do think the route through Uckfield should be doubled.

 

[Robsignals]

Much better for Network Rail to make positive business cases for things like the Shaftholme Flyover, north of Doncaster on the ECML, to allow coal trains to avoid running across the main line - where the flow of coal to power stations has ended at the eventual completion of the project.

The Arundel chord was originally proposed in the franchise bid that reintroduced the Southern brand after Connex with 2tph Victoria to Brighton via Worthing. I think the franchisee was going to provide some of the funding which is probably the only reason it's still in the plan.

 

[trainmania100]

If

What exactly was the work that was being carried out? Just wondering.

it was this weekend, then there was diggers and tamper at Hassocks/Burgess hill so probably a small section of drainage or something

 

[Robsignals]

If you juiced it up enough to send a couple of twelve carriage units each way an hour, it would prove preferable to many people to changing to a bus, then back to a train etc. Remember, the Tonbridge - St Leonards line manages a fairly main line level of service within constrained infrastructure.

I do think the route through Uckfield should be doubled.

12 cars do run via Littlehampton 2ph on Saturdays 1 on Sundays but it takes an hour longer, I don't think via Uckfield will be any faster. In theory a non stop bus is quicker.

 

[Tunnel Bore]

If

it was this weekend, then there was diggers and tamper at Hassocks/Burgess hill so probably a small section of drainage or something

I think there was a lot of opportunistic work going on during the main closure. There were drain clearance trucks parked at Balcombe with long hoses running south.

 

[Robsignals]

If

it was this weekend, then there was diggers and tamper at Hassocks/Burgess hill so probably a small section of drainage or something

I don't know but have a suspicion it may have been preparation work in the tunnels such as installing lighting and suchlike. The work you saw might have been taking advantage of the possession, if it was clear of Keymer jct then could divert via Lewes.

 

[Antman]

12 cars do run via Littlehampton 2ph on Saturdays 1 on Sundays but it takes an hour longer, I don't think via Uckfield will be any faster. In theory a non stop bus is quicker.

Surely via Uckfield has got to be quicker than via Littlehampton?

There is also the fact that reopening the line would provide some useful local links.

 

[trainmania100]

Surely via Uckfield has got to be quicker than via Littlehampton?

There is also the fact that reopening the line would provide some useful local links.

Uckfield is a terminus now.