London: mayor should run rail services

[ert47]

It's worth pointing out that the maximum length of 378s in service is 4 cars whereas S Stock and indeed all other unit types can be coupled to make longer trains.

Not sure if the timetable is well constructed but does this contribute to 97% of Lorol trains being on time?

Some 378s have been extended from 3 cars to 4 and I thought there was some provision for a 5th additional carriage in future. (with SDO being used in several stations on the ELL)

 

[notadriver]

Already happened between Sydenham and New Cross Gate - 12tph now (4tph from West Croydon, 4tph from Crystal Palace, both Looroll, and 2tph from Caterham, 2tph from Victoria, both Southern), more in the peak when Southern run a few extra services. Gets a bit frustrating constantly running on single yellow....single yellow....single yellow....and always losing time.

I wonder if 4 tph is really needed for Crystal Palace services. Reducing to 3 tph in the peaks might ease things a bit.

By the way it's LOROL, not looroll

 

[notadriver]

I think all 378s are 4 car. The problem is they can't run in multiple in service whereas all other non Lorol services can. Tubes are 7 or 8 car with a few exceptions such as shuttle type lines.

 

[jon0844]

By the way it's LOROL, not looroll

Not any more! That may have to become my new name for it!

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk

 

[SF-02]

If Livingstone can get his campaigners out en masse at every station in SE London as he did a couple of weeks ago this policy could be his masterstroke with enough publicity. The SE franchise ends in 2014 and lines to Dartford could come under TfL. Would be a lot to sort out though. Not sure many private operators would be that keen on taking it up as building Crossrail and rebuilding London Bridge up to 2018 will mean a lot of upheaval so he might be able to persuade DfT.

There's a lot of dislike for southeastern in outer SE London where he is electorally weak and needs to improve. Places like Bexley borough. It could turn quite a few commuters over to him I predict.

 

[jopsuk]

There are plans (and options on the order with Bombardier I think?) for 5 car, certainly for the ELL.
Is it really true that 378s couldn't work in passenger service? or is it just that the LOROL routes in the main have platforms that couldn't accommodate 8 car formations?

 

[notadriver]

Just platform length.

 

[mister-sparky]

If Livingstone can get his campaigners out en masse at every station in SE London as he did a couple of weeks ago this policy could be his masterstroke with enough publicity. The SE franchise ends in 2014 and lines to Dartford could come under TfL. Would be a lot to sort out though. Not sure many private operators would be that keen on taking it up as building Crossrail and rebuilding London Bridge up to 2018 will mean a lot of upheaval so he might be able to persuade DfT.

There's a lot of dislike for southeastern in outer SE London where he is electorally weak and needs to improve. Places like Bexley borough. It could turn quite a few commuters over to him I predict.

i think there's alot of dislike for southeastern across everywhere they serve haha. certainly from what i hear every day.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

Isn't Oysterisation one of the best words ever!?

No, it's not.

Oysterisation is an abomination.

 

[Zoe]

If Oysterization is an abomination then what about sprinterization?

 

[DaveNewcastle]

If Oysterization is an abomination then what about sprinterization?

Perhaps you're familiar with The Tempest?
Caliban's speech beginning "All the infections that the sun sucks up" and Trinculo's and Stephano's response to the monster will give you the flavour of my reply!

Shakespeare even seems to have anticipated the 4 wheels of a sprinter :
"For it hath been said, ‘ As proper a man as ever went on four legs cannot make him give ground;
and it shall be said so again,
This is some monster of the isle with four legs’"

(and where did those 'zeds' come from?)

 

[ntg]

What would the implications be for stations just outside greater London for stopping commuter services? For example, FCC trains from Moorgate to Welwyn Garden City (and indeed future Thameslink Maidstone East to Welwyn Garden City services). The majority of the stations lie within London with the latter five being in Hertfordshire.

I can't see any way around either having London extend transport authority into the depths of the home counties or else fragmenting existing networks such that the Mayor has authority only over lines that exist solely in London (which seems nonsensical).

edit: I see this was briefly discussed, but really, it's impossible to avoid. I think it will be inevitable with the introduction of ITSO the boundary of Greater London in respect to transport will collapse in favour of a wider South East England commuter network.

 

[Schnellzug]

What would the implications be for stations just outside greater London for stopping commuter services? For example, FCC trains from Moorgate to Welwyn Garden City (and indeed future Thameslink Maidstone East to Welwyn Garden City services). The majority of the stations lie within London with the latter five being in Hertfordshire.

I can't see any way around either having London extend transport authority into the depths of the home counties or else fragmenting existing networks such that the Mayor has authority only over lines that exist solely in London (which seems nonsensical).

Expand London to cover all of Hertfordshire, Essex, Surrey etc!


(Which, perhaps, might have some advantages, if traveclards and Oysters and that were valid everywhere.)

 

[Clip]

yes they do. like orpington on the seml, the metro trains run all shacks from charing cross/cannon st to there, the fasts make their first stop there. a similar thing happens with bromley south on the chatham line.
theres woking and guildford for southwest, and east croydon/dorking/oxted with southern.

Ok so lets take Bromlley south as an example.

4 platforms/tracks and you are saying it would be wise to have a terminating train there and the inevitable delays that the turn around would cause by it having to sit in the platform for a considerble longer time then if it was just setting down/picking up on the route it would take now? Is that really sensible at such a busy station to now make it an interchange.


And as someone and myself have said earlier - the cost. Currently TfL are around £6-7 Billion pounds in debt. Ken wants to reduce fares(saving 290 million over 20 years? where has he plucked that figure from) and improve the infrastructure to make them all step free and be staffed at TfL levels as per LOROL. Im no economist but it seems to me that just servicing the current debt levels is another thing which pushes up fare rises but then to cut your income and spend more money is not going to see that reduced. How can anyone possibly think this is a good idea if you just look at the money side of it.

I still dont think its a good idea anyway.

 

[tbtc]

What would the implications be for stations just outside greater London for stopping commuter services? For example, FCC trains from Moorgate to Welwyn Garden City (and indeed future Thameslink Maidstone East to Welwyn Garden City services). The majority of the stations lie within London with the latter five being in Hertfordshire.

I can't see any way around either having London extend transport authority into the depths of the home counties or else fragmenting existing networks such that the Mayor has authority only over lines that exist solely in London (which seems nonsensical)

Merseyrail run services to Chester, so there is precedent

 

[jopsuk]

Moor park and beyond on the Met (all relevant branches), Buckhurst hill and beyond on the Central (plus parts of the Hainault loop), Carpenders Park and beyond on the Watford DC- all TfL operated, all outside Greater london (plus numerous TfL bus routes beyond GL). But all operating under political agreements. There are many broughs, if not whole counties, that it would make enormous sense to include within GL- Epsom and Ewell for example?

 

[Clip]

Moor park and beyond on the Met (all relevant branches), Buckhurst hill and beyond on the Central (plus parts of the Hainault loop), Carpenders Park and beyond on the Watford DC- all TfL operated, all outside Greater london (plus numerous TfL bus routes beyond GL). But all operating under political agreements. There are many broughs, if not whole counties, that it would make enormous sense to include within GL- Epsom and Ewell for example?

What Political agreements do the central line and met line run under then as they are both owned and operated by TfL? Im not to much up on the whole ownership and agreements of LUL so would like to know.

The Watford DC line made sense given that they were taking over the whole Silverlink operation and iirc it is pretty much Isolated most of the way from the WCML so it doesnt impact on other long distance service and shares some parts of another TfL owned and operated railway.

 

[Gareth]

So what's the idea here then? Basically, a GLA-controlled Network South East?

 

[Chris125]

I thinks its a great idea, you only have to look at London Overground to see what can be done.

Chris

 

[transmanche]

Merseyrail run services to Chester, so there is precedent

And TfL already operate services to Amersham/Chesham, Watford and Epping.

There seems to be an assumption that 'the Mayor having more control' over London rail services means 'all services being transferred to LOROL' - when that's not necessarily the case. It could simply be that the Mayor has more control over fares, service patterns and pay for extra services (anyone remember the 'Jazz Train' paid for by the GLC?).

If anything, simply having a proper unified fare structure for LU/LO/DLR/NR services in Greater London would be a huge improvement.

 

[mister-sparky]

Ok so lets take Bromlley south as an example.

4 platforms/tracks and you are saying it would be wise to have a terminating train there and the inevitable delays that the turn around would cause by it having to sit in the platform for a considerble longer time then if it was just setting down/picking up on the route it would take now? Is that really sensible at such a busy station to now make it an interchange.

no that's not what i meant at all. bromley was just an example. the bromley south line metro services go to orpington where they terminate in the bays. nothing would change if tfl took over

 

[Mojo]

I've always felt sorry for those on NR routes in Greater London which, by and large, tend to have an inferior service to those provided on TfL Rail routes.

 

[swt_passenger]

There seems to be an assumption that 'the Mayor having more control' over London rail services means 'all services being transferred to LOROL' - when that's not necessarily the case.

I think it's because there's a naiive assumption that TfL would immediately replace hundreds of perfectly adequate EMUs with brand new 378s. But the quantity needed would be an order of magnitude greater than the ex Silverlink services - many routes are 8 car all day, with existing plans to raise capacity to 10 or 12 car services. SWT's 455 fleet alone is almost twice the size of the 378 fleet...

The other fatal flaw in his soundbites for the media is that there are many outlying TOC stations where it would be impossible to run 4 tph services, because as the branches combine towards the terminus the two tracks are eventually running at capacity. An example of this is the SWT main line side inner suburban services towards Waterloo. There are origins all over the place, mostly 2 tph, that combine into about 18 tph through Wimbledon.

 

[ert47]

There seems to be an assumption that 'the Mayor having more control' over London rail services means 'all services being transferred to LOROL' - when that's not necessarily the case.

I think it's because there's a naiive assumption that TfL would immediately replace hundreds of perfectly adequate EMUs with brand new 378s. But the quantity needed would be an order of magnitude greater than the ex Silverlink services - many routes are 8 car all day, with existing plans to raise capacity to 10 or 12 car services. SWT's 455 fleet alone is almost twice the size of the 378 fleet...

Personally, I was only trolling about the 377's being replaced by new 378s. But remember that the old 313s didnt get replaced straight away.

If Looroll (so using that now) does take over some more routes from other TOC's, it would have to be staggered somewhat. And even with that it could be rather awkward to pull off operationally. (would they have to lease units from the TOC that already operates that route?). With silverlink, it was easier to do as the North London routes are quite isolated...

In the end this will probably be just a pipe dream...

 

[Minstral25]

I think it's because there's a naiive assumption that TfL would immediately replace hundreds of perfectly adequate EMUs with brand new 378s. But the quantity needed would be an order of magnitude greater than the ex Silverlink services - many routes are 8 car all day, with existing plans to raise capacity to 10 or 12 car services. SWT's 455 fleet alone is almost twice the size of the 378 fleet...

The other fatal flaw in his soundbites for the media is that there are many outlying TOC stations where it would be impossible to run 4 tph services, because as the branches combine towards the terminus the two tracks are eventually running at capacity. An example of this is the SWT main line side inner suburban services towards Waterloo. There are origins all over the place, mostly 2 tph, that combine into about 18 tph through Wimbledon.

Spot on and the lack of separated slow and fast lines through much of the SWT Windsor lines west of Barnes would put paid to differing services.

However I can see it working in the Southern Metro area, where much of the routes on the slow lines from Victoria and London Bridge are totally within London. There are short extensions to Caterham/Epsom/Tattenham Corner and Epsom Downs. Add to that the Wimbledon Loop and Ken could have his dream especially as I think Caterham/Tattenham with the new Thameslink services could drop the slows into London and these could terminate at an extended East Croydon Station.

The only real issue would be the trains going South from Epsom to Dorking and Horsham - perhaps these lines could go to SWT from Southern at the same time and all trains go to Waterloo instead of Victoria

 

[transmanche]

If Looroll (so using that now) does take over some more routes from other TOC's, it would have to be staggered somewhat. And even with that it could be rather awkward to pull off operationally. (would they have to lease units from the TOC that already operates that route?). With silverlink, it was easier to do as the North London routes are quite isolated.

There's no reason why LOROL has to be involved whatsoever. We haven't seen the creation of specific TOCs to serve PTE areas.

The 'LOROL solution' was selected as the best choice for that group of services. But elsewhere, there's no reason why Overground branding can not be applied to stations and services that continue to be operated by their existing TOCs.

 

[ert47]

There's no reason why LOROL has to be involved whatsoever. We haven't seen the creation of specific TOCs to serve PTE areas.

The 'LOROL solution' was selected as the best choice for that group of services. But elsewhere, there's no reason why Overground branding can not be applied to stations and services that continue to be operated by their existing TOCs.

Kinda like the Overground Network branding that was around a few years back?

 

[IanXC]

No, it's not.

Oysterisation is an abomination.

I meant the word, not the actual undertaking!

If Oysterization is an abomination then what about sprinterization?

Blimey where did all the 'z's come from?!


On a more serious note, there is a possibility that boundaries could change as we see the implementation of City Regions. Leeds for instance includes Craven, Harrogate and Selby from North Yorkshire, Barnsley from South Yorkshire, as well as York, so its not beyond the realms of possibility for further "travel to work" areas to be added to Greater London.

 

[transmanche]

The 'LOROL solution' was selected as the best choice for that group of services. But elsewhere, there's no reason why Overground branding can not be applied to stations and services that continue to be operated by their existing TOCs.

Kinda like the Overground Network branding that was around a few years back?

Exactly... but probably with the Mayor having more influence and control on rail services than the Overground Network offered. E.g. proper integrated fares, station management by TfL, etc.

 

[Zoe]

On a more serious note, there is a possibility that boundaries could change as we see the implementation of City Regions. Leeds for instance includes Craven, Harrogate and Selby from North Yorkshire, Barnsley from South Yorkshire, as well as York, so its not beyond the realms of possibility for further "travel to work" areas to be added to Greater London.

I'm not sure a London city region would be any different to the current Greater London area though as if it was then it would be out of line with the EU region of London.