Future of TSGN Franchise?

[Jorge Da Silva]

It is almost certain that the Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern Franchise will be split up. But what will it be split into? Should TfL takeover parts of TSGN?

 

[bramling]

It is almost certain that the Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern Franchise will be split up. But what will it be split into? Should TfL takeover parts of TSGN?

I wouldn’t be unhappy with going back to Southern and a separate Thameslink/GN franchise, like we had with FCC. That worked tolerably well, although of course it wouldn’t resolve one of the root causes of the current shambles which is the Thameslink Programme itself.

 

[swt_passenger]

GN aspects of this were discussed a few months ago, in response to a DfT update:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...olled-into-london-overground-and-lner.164501/
Moorgate services to TfL.
Remaining GN to ECML.
Thameslink stand alone.
Southern and GatEx back to as was.

Is what I think.

What is the point of this thread given that you raised the same issue on Sunday?

 

[bramling]

GN aspects of this were discussed a few months ago, in response to a DfT update:
https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...olled-into-london-overground-and-lner.164501/
Moorgate services to TfL.
Remaining GN to ECML.
Thameslink stand alone.
Southern and GatEx back to as was.

Is what I think.

What is the point of this thread given that you raised the same issue on Sunday?

I’m not keen on the idea of putting some services with LNER. For many GN destinations it would give an odd arrangement where someone could take a LNER service in one direction then going home would make exactly the same journey on a TL one. The current interim service would have been more complex, as for example on weekends we currently have 365s 387s and 700s all interworking on certain services.

Logistically I can’t see the point of TFL involvement. The route is already getting new trains. They’re unlikely to run more than is already committed. Many stations are already manned first to last. Still we’re left with painting stations, which are already not too bad in the grand scheme of things - it’s nothing like the old NLL. Is it really worth introducing the complexity of a third operator just for this? Three operators will be a right mess for things like driver diagramming - and potentially rather inefficient.

 

[swt_passenger]

I’m not keen on the idea of putting some services with LNER. For many GN destinations it would give an odd arrangement where someone could take a LNER service in one direction then going home would make exactly the same journey on a TL one. The current interim service would have been more complex, as for example on weekends we currently have 365s 387s and 700s all interworking on certain services.

Logistically I can’t see the point of TFL involvement. The route is already getting new trains. They’re unlikely to run more than is already committed. Many stations are already manned first to last. Still we’re left with painting stations, which are already not too bad in the grand scheme of things - it’s nothing like the old NLL. Is it really worth introducing the complexity of a third operator just for this? Three operators will be a right mess for things like driver diagramming - and potentially rather inefficient.

Can’t really disagree with any of that, but has anything changed since we last discussed it in May? I doubt it, so this is going to be another repeat thread.

I’m sure we’ve done breaking up or combining Southern and Southeastern over the last few days already.

 

[yorkie]

As we already have these threads...

• Remaining Great Northern services post Thameslink to be rolled into London Overground and LNER?
• Future sizes of franchises

...I don't think we need another one.