London Bridge redevelopment

[Daz28]

I note that from 22nd to 24th of December, during rush hour only, Charing Cross bound trains won't stop at London Bridge.

Morning peak services - trains going to London Charing Cross that stop at London Bridge between 07:54 and 09:01 are unable to stop at London Bridge but at all other times Southeastern trains continue to stop there.

Is this due to some capacity reduction somewhere, or are SouthEastern just trying to get people ready for the main change on 12th January?

 

[Bald Rick]

I note that from 22nd to 24th of December, during rush hour only, Charing Cross bound trains won't stop at London Bridge.



Is this due to some capacity reduction somewhere, or are SouthEastern just trying to get people ready for the main change on 12th January?

It is because for those three days, the up passenger loop - the line that passes through London Bridge with no platform alongside it - is under possession for the track remodelling immediately adjacent to it on the approaches to the new platforms 10 and 11.

So all up trains to Charing Cross have to be routed via platform 6.

Now, in theory they could stop. But stopping trains in the morning peak requires 90 second dwell times minimum, whereas not stopping doesn't. So if trains were to stop, you could only run 20 trains per peak hour into Charing Cross, whereas non-stopping you can run the full 30. So non-stopping retains overall peak capacity into London, at the expense of some London Bridge calls.

It doesn't apply in the evening peak because the down lines ex Charing Cross (via platforms 4 and 5) are unaffected by the works.

Also, it doesn't hurt to give regular users a foretaste of what is to come from next January.

 

[ComUtoR]

It is because for those three days, the up passenger loop - the line that passes through London Bridge with no platform alongside it - is under possession for the track remodelling immediately adjacent to it on the approaches to the new platforms 10 and 11.

So all up trains to Charing Cross have to be routed via platform 6.

Why not route some through 4/5 You can still get to Charing Cross via both of those platforms.

 

[OxtedL]

Why not route some through 4/5 You can still get to Charing Cross via both of those platforms.

To get from 4/5 to the Charing Cross bound track west of London Bridge, you have to travel via the country-bound track for about 10 metres and then cross over. This means you completely stop all the trains heading east (that would normally use either 4 or 5) every time you do this.

Given that if you have ~30 tph heading into Charing Cross you need ~30tph heading back out again very soon, there is no way this can work.

You'll only ever see platform 5 being used by trains heading to Charing Cross when there are long queues of trains forming into platform 6 and the signaller decides they need to shift more. Its use isn't sustainable for more than very short periods of time.

 

[ComUtoR]

Given that if you have ~30 tph heading into Charing Cross you need ~30tph heading back out again very soon, there is no way this can work.

You'll only ever see platform 5 being used by trains heading to Charing Cross when there are long queues of trains forming into platform 6 and the signaller decides they need to shift more. Its use isn't sustainable for more than very short periods of time.

Isn't it better to re-time the service in the down direction and possibly flip the ECS moves via Cannon Street. Rather than a blanket cancellation of peak services for an hour. Surely the passenger impact is less in the down direction than on the up ? Those passengers needing London Bridge will go into Waterloo east and return, take alternative route, walk. The knock on effect will no doubt of been factored in but it seems that passengers are gonna have to suffer rather than alternatives being offered by SE (use of P4/5 etc)

 

[OxtedL]

Isn't it better to re-time the service in the down direction and possibly flip the ECS moves via Cannon Street. Rather than a blanket cancellation of peak services for an hour. Surely the passenger impact is less in the down direction than on the up ? Those passengers needing London Bridge will go into Waterloo east and return, take alternative route, walk. The knock on effect will no doubt of been factored in but it seems that passengers are gonna have to suffer rather than alternatives being offered by SE (use of P4/5 etc)

Cannon Street couldn't absorb the required number of trains to make this viable without cancelling a heap of trains. The ECS moves run the way they do now for a reason - there isn't a reliable way to squeeze more trains out through its throat towards London Bridge.

Unfortunately, even retiming down trains (e.g. by cancelling them and hence running them as ECS), you end up running something like 40tph through the single lead track into P4/5, and reversing directions on this track ~20 times an hour. This isn't operationally viable.

The only solutions, as roughly outlined by Bald Rick, are:

1. Find a way to cut dwell times on P6 to well under 90 seconds.
2. Cancel a heap of trains, to Charing Cross or Cannon Street or both.
3. Run trains non-stop through P6.

(1) is unrealistic in the ordinary peak, (2) cuts capacity into London considerably. So (3) is the most sensible.

As noted above, since (3) is soon the reality for a couple of years anyway, it's not really worth hoping that for example "fewer people are travelling because it's Christmas" as you might sometimes try for this kind of work. It genuinely is the best solution that doesn't cancel trains.

 

[ComUtoR]

Unfortunately, even retiming down trains (e.g. by cancelling them and hence running them as ECS), you end up running something like 40tph through the single lead track into P4/5, and reversing directions on this track ~20 times an hour. This isn't operationally viable.

Whats wrong with holding a train on Met Jn whilst a service heads into London ?

No need to cancel trains on the down just hold them and re-time into London Bridge or possibly increase the dwell times for Waterloo East.

Cheers for the answers. SE are supposed to be communicating better with passengers yet we still see a generic. "Disruptions due to Engineering works" and now a generic "Thameslink program" I was expecting more of an informed poster about the works. Guess my expectations were too much.

Cheers again.

ComUtor

 

[hwl]

Whats wrong with holding a train on Met Jn whilst a service heads into London ?

No need to cancel trains on the down just hold them and re-time into London Bridge or possibly increase the dwell times for Waterloo East.

Cheers for the answers. SE are supposed to be communicating better with passengers yet we still see a generic. "Disruptions due to Engineering works" and now a generic "Thameslink program" I was expecting more of an informed poster about the works. Guess my expectations were too much.

Cheers again.

ComUtor

It doesn't work like that - You've got to get 29 down services thorough which only works with the current track layout and signalling if you have P4 and 5 working in the down direction virtually all the time.

Why worry about 3 days before Christmas when passengers are best getting used to the not stopping at London Bridge reality that lasts over 18 months.

 

[OxtedL]

Whats wrong with holding a train on Met Jn whilst a service heads into London ?

The central problem is that you would have to hold a train there for the full ~80 seconds the train heading to Charing Cross took to depart (from a probable stand) and clear the junction, and then some more time for signalling to reset, etc. This is assuming that these trains are not stopping so do not have to despatch the train (adding more time).

You then have to get 3 down trains through on sub-90 second headways, from a stand, and repeat the process every 6 minutes. Even non-stopping all down trains at London Bridge the signalling probably cannot achieve this, and certainly not with any reliability.

We could imagine alternative ways of flighting trains through, but they will all fail in a similar way. The track layout is not designed to allow you to do what you propose on the frequency required.

Hope this helps, and doesn't have any big inaccuracies.

 

[Class377/5]

Cheers for the answers. SE are supposed to be communicating better with passengers yet we still see a generic. "Disruptions due to Engineering works" and now a generic "Thameslink program" I was expecting more of an informed poster about the works. Guess my expectations were too much.

Cheers again.

ComUtor

The sheer amount of changes means its unrealistic to expect detailed information on a single poster. Idea is to get you attention then check websites etc for detailed information.

 

[user15681]

There's a large amount of detailed information out there as it is. Letters should be going out at the end of November with regards to getting tickets reprinted (if you have a 'London Terminals' only season ticket that expires in late January 2015 or afterwards, you will need to go to a ticket office when you get the letter and simply get it exchanged for a newly printed one which will have the new coding on it and will be able to operate the relevant ticket barriers on the Underground)

 

[Bald Rick]

Thank you gentlemen for explaining. To add what little I can :

It takes 70 seconds for a 12 car train leaving P5 towards CHX to be clear of the fouling point such that a train from Charing Cross could then be signalled into P4 or P5. (I've just timed it). This dies not include the time taken to perform dispatch duties at the platform, which is another 20 seconds.

Given that trains are departing CHX every 120seconds in the high peak, standing a down train at Met Jn would cause the next one to be, in theory, only 30 seconds behind. In practice it takes a 12 coach train 30 seconds just to travel it's own length, let alone between the 3 signal sections necessary to create the headway. Broadly speaking, every train sent up via P5 would use a down path. And there aren't any down paths spare.

 

[Busaholic]

Thank you gentlemen for explaining. To add what little I can :

It takes 70 seconds for a 12 car train leaving P5 towards CHX to be clear of the fouling point such that a train from Charing Cross could then be signalled into P4 or P5. (I've just timed it). This dies not include the time taken to perform dispatch duties at the platform, which is another 20 seconds.

Given that trains are departing CHX every 120seconds in the high peak, standing a down train at Met Jn would cause the next one to be, in theory, only 30 seconds behind. In practice it takes a 12 coach train 30 seconds just to travel it's own length, let alone between the 3 signal sections necessary to create the headway. Broadly speaking, every train sent up via P5 would use a down path. And there aren't any down paths spare.

Just as a passenger, albeit one who started travelling over those lines regularly almost fifty years ago now, and sporadically before that, I must say you've explained entirely to my satisfaction that this really is the best that can be done in the circumstances.
Thank you.

 

[Bald Rick]

Thank you. That has made my day, and it's only just 0800!

 

[DynamicSpirit]

As a side effect that also rather nicely shows how much of an improvement it'll be once the London Bridge rebuild is complete and you have two platforms permanently available for CHX-bound trains

 

[Minstral25]

The sheer amount of changes means its unrealistic to expect detailed information on a single poster. Idea is to get you attention then check websites etc for detailed information.

I think though they could put posters on the affected departure stations detailing existing timetable and showing the alternatives that will be on Offer.

So for example a poster at say Redhill noting the 7:51 to London Bridge is withdrawn and the alternative is to catch the 8:02 to Victoria, assuming you can get on it, then change at East Croydon, fight you way with all the other 900 diverted passengers onto the first train to London Bridge, hopefully squeeze into it and arrive 30 minutes later than normal! If you can't get on the first train at East Croydon you could be up to an hour later! We hope you enjoy your new exciting journey!

 

[swt_passenger]

I think though they could put posters on the affected departure stations detailing existing timetable and showing the alternatives that will be on Offer.

So for example a poster at say Redhill noting the 7:51 to London Bridge is withdrawn and the alternative is to catch the 8:02 to Victoria, assuming you can get on it, then change at East Croydon, fight you way with all the other 900 diverted passengers onto the first train to London Bridge, hopefully squeeze into it and arrive 30 minutes later than normal! If you can't get on the first train at East Croydon you could be up to an hour later! We hope you enjoy your new exciting journey!

Didn't they put station specific posters up in August, which were all generally ignored because people didn't cotton on to the fact that the "work at London Bridge" affected the timetable over the whole network?

I think someone mentioned it in an earlier thread.

 

[Minstral25]

Didn't they put station specific posters up in August, which were all generally ignored because people didn't cotton on to the fact that the "work at London Bridge" affected the timetable over the whole network?

I think someone mentioned it in an earlier thread.

They did at Redhill in August - where both Blackfriars and London Bridge Trains were withdrawn plus all Victoria trains were re-timed. It went up at about 1pm on the Friday before - far too late for most to read and they were well hidden anyway

 

[acepepper]

Up CHX trains in the morning already alternate between two platforms, except one of them doesn't have a platform and thus the trains don't call - indeed it is half of the trains in the morning high peak hour. Most of them stop to wait time though.

The benefit is that because all trains call, the loadings will in time balance out, thus reducing the actual dwell times.

This is in addition to the benefit of avoiding conflict with TL services, which is significant.

I don't think passengers really realize how much pain they will experience over the next few years and for SE passenger I don't think the gain will be as significant as being made out. The age old problem of the bottleneck at Borough Market will still exist after completion of all this work and although it will be eased somewhat with Thameslink being shifted away from there, I can remember the days before Thameslink existed and Borough Market was a problem then and will remain so after they've gone.

 

[30907]

I commuted into Waterloo East for a couple of years pre Thameslink.
I don't recall Borough Market to Metropolitan Jn being a particular source of delay, apart from the low speeds, but even if the section were 4 tracked, CX has no room for extra trains.