Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
I can't see a LO extension from New Cross to Bromley North being at all workable unfortunately, not only would it need to cross the fast lines at Grove Park there would also be conflicting movements at New Cross and the lines through St John's are pretty much at full capacity with Cannon Street services.
Unfortunately extending London Overground to Bromley North would also be extremely wasteful except during the peak periods. Pre-Covid, the main line through Grove Park was mega busy during rush hour but the trains carried fresh air at other times, so effectively duplicating that main line makes no sense.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Closure of Stratford to Tottenham Hale & the intermediate station at Lea Bridge to passengers; third rail electrification to North Woolwich & diversion of services along the North London Line; 25Kv electrification of Stratford to Tottenham Hale & re-opening to passengers; West Ham interchange platforms built; conversion of part of the route south of Stratford to the Docklands Light Railway; re-opening of Lea Bridge station; closure of North Woolwich station; conversion of part of route to Crossrail/Elizabeth Line.
Obviously the area has changed enormously in that time too -definitely not "pretty much the same today as half a century ago"- in fact parts of it are totally & utterly transformed. As a result, I don't think anyone would regard the remaining, now electric, services on the route as candidates for closure?
Has any other line in Britain seen quite as many changes as this one has?
You omitted its earlier incarnation as the line between North Woolwich and Palace Gates. Somewhere on YouTube there is an upload of old 16mm film with appallingly bad picture quality of this route.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Chiltern Trains have a serious aspiration to divert some Marylebone-bound trains from South Ruislip via Greenford and a reinstated "Birkenhead" line to the new West London mega-hub at Old Oak Common. This would give vastly-improved connectivity compared with the existing terminus at Marylebone and potentially make Greenford a "mini-hub" for connections between the Central Line and High Wycombe/Oxford/Birmingham.
It's already possible to change to/from Central Line to Chiltern at both South and West Ruislip. Constructing new platforms at Greenford would be money wasted.
Chiltern Trains have a serious aspiration to divert some Marylebone-bound trains from South Ruislip via Greenford and a reinstated "Birkenhead" line to the new West London mega-hub at Old Oak Common.
Who are Chiltern Trains and what is it to do with them? The DfT decides where railways run. The days of franchisees coming up with empire building are long gone.
You asked what it has to do with Chiltern. The answer is that they can come up with a plan and the DfT have to OK it.
The only real difference is that there is far less incentive to do so as they would make very little extra money out of it if they are just paid to run trains rather than collect revenue. But hey, isnt nationalisation great.....
You asked what it has to do with Chiltern. The answer is that they can come up with a plan and the DfT have to OK it.
The only real difference is that there is far less incentive to do so as they would make very little extra money out of it if they are just paid to run trains rather than collect revenue. But hey, isnt nationalisation great.....
Indeed, as you say, why would they? That is why I queried how they could have 'serious aspirations' about it. They might have been thinking about it in 2019 but now there is no point.
Indeed, as you say, why would they? That is why I queried how they could have 'serious aspirations' about it. They might have been thinking about it in 2019 but now there is no point.
Network Rail’s West Midlands and Chiltern route study of 2017 has many references to the possibility of running services from Chiltern to Old Oak Common, but none of it suggests it was simply Chiltern’s “big idea”. So perhaps it was a joint effort by a few parties…
While Chiltern Railways exist, they are required to present a business case for their future operations. The DfT doesn't want to just press the pause button on all strategic development for 2-5 years when GBR hasn't even been put before Parliament yet.
The ORR stats suggest that Lelant Saltings got more passengers in 2020/21 than Coombe Junction Halt has in any year over the past ~20 years, despite COVID, having 1 train per day each way compared to Coombe's 2, and the P&R and timetable changing in summer 2019. Although of course these figures are based on ticket sales - I suspect a non-negligible number were passengers who bought a Lelant Saltings ticket in advance and only found out that the P&R had moved since their last visit when they arrived!
Actually I travelled to Lelant today to visit old neighbours and friends and took the chance to look at the Saltings. There is not much there and no shelter at all. The old parking area is not totally grassed over and the entrance into the former car park is blocked off. Strangely, there are still roadway signposts directing drivers and I suppose any walkers to the Saltings Station. The two services are pretty pointless for the ride back and forth to St Ives though, the service into St Ives does connect with the Sleeper and the return journey coes connect well with the 09:10 ex Penzance to Paddington. According to my friends in the village, most people resident in the Saltings are car owners, and retired and sadly, as is now more than regular in the St Ives area, many homes are either holiday lets or second homes.
I don't see much use for the Saltings Station in the future.
Chiltern Trains have a serious aspiration to divert some Marylebone-bound trains from South Ruislip via Greenford and a reinstated "Birkenhead" line to the new West London mega-hub at Old Oak Common. This would give vastly-improved connectivity compared with the existing terminus at Marylebone and potentially make Greenford a "mini-hub" for connections between the Central Line and High Wycombe/Oxford/Birmingham.
This would require the (re)building of platforms and connecting bridge / subway at Greenford for Chiltern to serve or an awkward reversal to serve the current bay.
While Chiltern Railways exist, they are required to present a business case for their future operations. The DfT doesn't want to just press the pause button on all strategic development for 2-5 years when GBR hasn't even been put before Parliament yet.
Presumably that business case will be about trying to maintain as much of the current operation as the DfT will support rather than having any ideas about expansion. This is hardly the time and there are other places for investment. As someone has already pointed out the Central Line forms a perfectly acceptable connection to Greenford and West Ruislip.
Presumably that business case will be about trying to maintain as much of the current operation as the DfT will support rather than having any ideas about expansion. This is hardly the time and there are other places for investment. As someone has already pointed out the Central Line forms a perfectly acceptable connection to Greenford and West Ruislip.
It's about developing the business as a continuing financial concern. I suspect extending to OOC doesn't feature because the infrastructure changes required to make it happen are vastly beyond the scope of the next 5 years, but it will include areas of opportunity for expansion/investment.
May no longer happen but I seem to remember that there were two specific branch shuttles with odd quirks in the timetable and perhaps someone will be able to identify them. One was in the south-west of England where a particular station was only served in one direction to enable a round-trip to be completed quickly enough to maintain a regular frequency. The other even more paradoxical case was east of Merseyside where journeys at one end had advertised arrival times a minute or two after the return departure times by the same unit.
May no longer happen but I seem to remember that there were two specific branch shuttles with odd quirks in the timetable and perhaps someone will be able to identify them. One was in the south-west of England where a particular station was only served in one direction to enable a round-trip to be completed quickly enough to maintain a regular frequency. The other even more paradoxical case was east of Merseyside where journeys at one end had advertised arrival times a minute or two after the return departure times by the same unit.
The first might be Coombe Junction whose service varies (varied?) randomly every year depending on main line times at Liskeard. I don't recall that specific scenariobe, though. The second is Wrexham C, surely?
The first might be Coombe Junction whose service varies (varied?) randomly every year depending on main line times at Liskeard. I don't recall that specific scenariobe, though. The second is Wrexham C, surely?
Re. the second. appears it was Bidston-Wrexham C I had in mind. Timetable has at some time been regularised to a 58 minute end to end journey with two minutes at each end utilising two sets on an hourly headway. The snapshot journey I've just checked (1632 ex Bidston) was a 6L late start. Was this operation scheduled by a "bus bandit" perhaps?
Ormskirk to Preston, technically. It's more to do with the connection to Liverpool, as the 'direct' route via the mainline isn't very direct, and this route would provide a better direct connection between the two cities.
Ormskirk to Preston, technically. It's more to do with the connection to Liverpool, as the 'direct' route via the mainline isn't very direct, and this route would provide a better direct connection between the two cities.
And the unsatisfactory nature of the service is only emphasised by the complete lack of information about it at street level at the Greenford terminus , which is a TfL station. Word is TfL absolutely refused to take it on ( is this true?) with Crossrail but ceded on Romford - Upminster.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Would Stratford - Meridian Water count as a shuttle service? Unsatisfactory as Stratford - Tottenham hale is still only half-hourly in the evening peak.
From a practical sense, there is no way TfL could have taken on West Ealing to Greenford as they had no nearby depot from which to operate it or suitable rolling stock. Romford to Upminster is a bit more straightforward as it can be run alongside the West Anglia Overground operation.
Maybe they could have taken it on and subcontracted it to GWR to operate but what would be the point?
I really don't think a P&R for a train ride of less than a km is in any way realistic! Unless there were trains every 5 mins it would be quicker to walk.
Henley and the surrounding area, plus the people who drive in are mostly elderly and unlikely to want to walk in along the extremely polluted Reading Rd, plus the villages have non-existent/very limited public transport provision.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Henley railway station isn't anywhere near central enough in the town to be used for a Park & Ride scheme. The car parks in Henley aren't that oversubscribed (although I concede that the Waitrose car park does get busy). Ironically, the station car park is probably the easiest one to find space in. The railway line doesn't really run on the route of the primary car flow in any case.
The pollution and congestion in Henley is rather more the result of through traffic than people actually visiting Henley but there is no suitable route for a bypass anywhere nearby. It is one of those places where the primary need is to divert through traffic away from the area completely rather than construct a local bypass. Clearly the downgrading of the A423 many years ago did this in conjunction with the A404/M40 but it remains a convenient through route for many flows.
No one would use an intensive network of park and ride buses either. I'd imagine a large amount of the traffic in Henley is from the outlying villages around it in any case.
The car parks in Henley town centre are frequently at over 75 percent occupancy, the slow movements in and out the car park lead to the general traffic congestion and high pollution levels in the town centre.
Henley to Reading is the biggest flow by far, the bus service is slow between Henley and Reading, the train not convenient (including expensive/non-existent parking at several nearby stations) for anyone living in the suburban areas of north Reading, the villages and Sonning Common.
Oxford to Henley is also sizeable, but a lot of the traffic heads for peripheral areas of Henley away from the narrow and congested town centre streets and the fast dual carriageway section between Fairmile Cemetery on the edge and Bix helps to speed up travel times.
High Wycombe to Henley and Maidenhead to Henley pale in comparison, most M4 east of Maidenhead to Oxford traffic will go A404 (M) to M40, then M40/A40 to Oxford.
Ideally, yes, you'd build a northern A4130 bypass from halfway up the Fairmile past Phyliss Court over a new Henley Bridge joining the A4130 again in Remenham Hill, but the nimbyism would be akin to a mini HS2, property acquisition in the tens of millions etc.
The biggest outlying villages (Sonning/Peppard Common is heading towards Henley's size in the next decade) have very convenient, relatively fast routes to the proposed park and ride site in Mill Lane. No one would use the park and ride bus solution because it would be slower than existing options and get caught up in the existing through traffic you mention. If you can take away a sizeable chunk of the local traffic into central Henley, then you solve a lot of the issues with Henley town centre congestion and pollution. All of them apart from Binfield Heath/Shiplake/Dunsden/the Assendons/Bix have no regular public transport to and from the town.
The car parks in Henley town centre are frequently at over 75 percent occupancy, the slow movements in and out the car park lead to the general traffic congestion and high pollution levels in the town centre.
Yes, access to the car parks isn't great but they aren't really that expensive for the short visits most of the locals make to them. Kings Road is free for an hour, costs £1.20 for two hours and £1.80 for three. There is outcry whenever anyone tries to charge more despite the congestion, with people suggesting that Henley shops would lose custom. That isn't the kind of parking charge that is going to force people out of the town centre to a park and ride site. Maybe it might help for people staying longer but that is niche for the people from the outlying villages.
The biggest outlying villages (Sonning/Peppard Common is heading towards Henley's size in the next decade) have very convenient, relatively fast routes to the proposed park and ride site in Mill Lane. No one would use the park and ride bus solution because it would be slower than existing options and get caught up in the existing through traffic you mention. If you can take away a sizeable chunk of the local traffic into central Henley, then you solve a lot of the issues with Henley town centre congestion and pollution. All of them apart from Binfield Heath/Shiplake/Dunsden/the Assendons/Bix have no regular public transport to and from the town.
The road via Harpsden may be the one that people take from Sonning Common to Henley but, as a narrow road with a number of blind bends, it is hardly ideal to promote as the main route to Henley for Sonning Common residents - going via Peppard / Greys Green / Badgemore is much more appropriate and that puts you at a completely different place in Henley than Mill Lane.
Sonning Common has had bus services to Henley over the years, but they haven't survived (other than to transport school children).
I struggle to see how a park and ride site at Mill Lane is the answer to making the Henley line more useful. I'm not even sure that diverting some of the demand on the line from Henley to an out of town car park for travelling in the other direction would be particularly helpful. The local traffic isn't going away.
Henley and the surrounding area, plus the people who drive in are mostly elderly and unlikely to want to walk in along the extremely polluted Reading Rd, plus the villages have non-existent/very limited public transport provision.
It can in very limited cases such as where you want to ban or near-ban cars from a location. While it is (only a tiny) bit more than 1km, Corfe Castle is a good example.
It can in very limited cases such as where you want to ban or near-ban cars from a location. While it is (only a tiny) bit more than 1km, Corfe Castle is a good example.
The number of those that are practical without bus/tram frequencies must be tiny. Corfe is very much an outlier - being tourists who will be happier to wait and for whom the trip itself is part of why they are there.
The number of those that are practical without bus/tram frequencies must be tiny. Corfe is very much an outlier - being tourists who will be happier to wait and for whom the trip itself is part of why they are there.
Indeed, it is something that is quite specific to tourism, really. If you're going to work, a train ride is a nuisance (and if a sit-in cafe is provided people won't mind a half hour wait because that's part of your day too). If you're a tourist, a possibly slightly expensive classic DMU or steam train ride is an enjoyable part of your day.
The number of those that are practical without bus/tram frequencies must be tiny. Corfe is very much an outlier - being tourists who will be happier to wait and for whom the trip itself is part of why they are there.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
