London to Sheerness direct services?

[Ellwill]

Local press recently published an article claiming that the MP for Sittingbourne & Sheppey has written to Southeastern, asking them to consider trialling direct services between Sheerness and London (assumedly Victoria)

‘It will change things here’: Direct train services to London from Kent town could return

A town that’s had no direct train services to London for almost 40 years could see them return in what could be a massive boost for jobs and tourism.

www.kentonline.co.uk

 

[Kite159]

They did have a couple of peak time services before Covid arrived on the scene.

Potentially I guess South Eastern could extend the 17;12 London Victoria to Gillingham (Kent) & the 17;51 London Charing Cross to Gillingham (Kent) services to Sheerness as both seem to go ECS on arrival into Gillingham. Although I presume it will need the staff to work the trains to Sheerness. I'm sure there will be a couple of morning Gillingham starters which could be extended back to Sheerness if they start the day at Gillingham.

 

[Jim Jehosofat]

When I worked at Woolwich Arsenal station in the 70s there was a 06.52 from Sheerness to Cannon Street. Confused people as it had headcode 95 and not the normal 60 and 80 somethings that all the other trains displayed.

 

[izvor]

MPs just love to come up with this stuff, to show the masses that they are doing something. And I wouldn't exactly describe Sheerness as a "resort"! (I can think of other more appropriate descriptions, most of which are not repeatable here.)

Surely a better use of resources would be firstly to restore the half-hourly service off-peak and weekends? Not denying it's a busy line that needs improving.

 

[Ellwill]

MPs just love to come up with this stuff, to show the masses that they are doing something. And I wouldn't exactly describe Sheerness as a "resort"! (I can think of other more appropriate descriptions, most of which are not repeatable here.)

Surely a better use of resources would be firstly to restore the half-hourly service off-peak and weekends? Not denying it's a busy line that needs improving.

Though Sheerness itself wouldn't be considered a resort I think the more attractive prospect would be the connection by bus to Leysdown, which has always been a popular place for caravan holidays in the summer.

As for restoring the half hourly service off peak, I would assume that would depend on whether any 375/3s are spare from mainline working or the Medway Valley.

 

[izvor]

Though Sheerness itself wouldn't be considered a resort I think the more attractive prospect would be the connection by bus to Leysdown, which has always been a popular place for caravan holidays in the summer.

Hmm, I wonder how many Leysdown caravanners would actually consider the bus? If they are towing their own van then, zero, though I realise most caravans in the area are of the static variety. But with the limited bus service there, and now nothing on Sundays, or after 1800 M-S, holidaying there without your own transport is not really viable.

Surely restoring the half-hourly would not cost a unit as you'd merely use the peak-only one there all day? Of course, there would be crewing costs. Since Arriva pulled out of Sheppey a year or two ago, halving the bus service to the mainland, I would suggest that now would be a good time to do this.

Regarding the idea of a through service to London, surely another factor is the lifting bridge to the island? This would play havoc with main line services. I believe it is still raised once or twice a day, for large ships to Ridham Dock, can anyone say if this is still the case? A self-contained shuttle is a far better way of dealing with potential disruption.

 

[brad465]

They did have a couple of peak time services before Covid arrived on the scene.

Potentially I guess South Eastern could extend the 17;12 London Victoria to Gillingham (Kent) & the 17;51 London Charing Cross to Gillingham (Kent) services to Sheerness as both seem to go ECS on arrival into Gillingham. Although I presume it will need the staff to work the trains to Sheerness. I'm sure there will be a couple of morning Gillingham starters which could be extended back to Sheerness if they start the day at Gillingham.

The 17:51 service is normally 10-car, which is far too long for the branch. It might be alright if it could detach at least 4 cars at Gillingham, but that would consume resources and platform time.

Pre-covid the 17:12 and 18:12 were Victoria-Sheerness; I can't remember what the morning peak diagrams were, but they were all 6-car Networker. This may not be possible now as quite a few 466s have been/are being binned, and I doubt enough Electrostars are available to take their place.

 

[Trainlog]

Its indeed unfortunate that Sheppy has lost this direct link to London Victoria.

Personally, though it might be a bit far and could damage the NKML/Chatham mainline timetables, I always thought Sheerness would have been a good terminus for the Thameslink service as well as Rainham. Still, I can imagine it's too long for many of the intermediate stations, so it's more or less pointless as an idea.

The 17:51 service is normally 10-car, which is far too long for the branch. It might be alright if it could detach at least 4 cars at Gillingham, but that would consume resources and platform time.

I mean, there is sometimes coach splits at Faversham anyway. I can't remember the exact number of coaches, but some continue towards Dover Priory via Canterbury East, and some continue onto Ramsgate. Sure, it would need more staff, but providing the logistics were worked out in terms of staffing and timing, it doesn't seem impossible?

As for restoring the half hourly service off peak, I would assume that would depend on whether any 375/3s are spare from mainline working or the Medway Valley.

Perhaps, though to be honest, the half hourly Medway valley service has been the best thing that has happened to that line in years, apart from the peak time Javelin service (I wish it was permanent throughout the day ). So hopefully instead, it would come from splitting a Dover priory service further at Faversham instead.

 

[Ellwill]

surely another factor is the lifting bridge to the island? This would play havoc with main line services. I believe it is still raised once or twice a day, for large ships to Ridham Dock, can anyone say if this is still the case? A self-contained shuttle is a far better way of dealing with potential disruption.

As far as I'm aware, large commericial vessels plan their passage through the Kingsferry bridge at xx:10 & xx:40 (five minutes after SSS bound departures from SWL) to ensure minimal disruption to the railway's timetable.

But with the limited bus service there, and now nothing on Sundays, or after 1800 M-S, holidaying there without your own transport is not really viable.

Unfortunately this is the reality of living in Swale since Arriva pulled the plug on commercial operations. Chalkwell pretty much run a skeleton operation for whatever subsidies are yet to be cut by the council. It's night and day coming from Medway where even on a Sunday there'll be at least three per hour on the main routes.

I mean, there is sometimes coach splits at Faversham anyway. I can't remember the exact number of coaches, but some continue towards Dover Priory via Canterbury East, and some continue onto Ramsgate. Sure, it would need more staff, but providing the logistics were worked out in terms of staffing and timing, it doesn't seem impossible?

AFAIK the 14:40, 15:10 and 15:40 departures from Victoria run as a pair of Electrostars which divide at Faversham, front four coaches for DVP and rear four for RAM.

 

[Stephen42]

The 17:51 service is normally 10-car, which is far too long for the branch. It might be alright if it could detach at least 4 cars at Gillingham, but that would consume resources and platform time.

Pre-covid the 17:12 and 18:12 were Victoria-Sheerness; I can't remember what the morning peak diagrams were, but they were all 6-car Networker. This may not be possible now as quite a few 466s have been/are being binned, and I doubt enough Electrostars are available to take their place.

The other challenge with the 17:51 is that it's driver only operated and can't go further without a guard.

The two morning services were 06:24 and 07:00 from Sheerness arriving at Victoria 8:07 and 8:37. Both of those morning (and two evening services) are the start (or end) of the diagram so wouldn't require further units. They would increase the length of the diagram which.

St Pancras is much more popular than Victoria from Sheerness so adding those trains back might not be that useful apart from in estate agent's ads. The journey time to Victoria with the change is also relatively similar as time lost from change is gained by being on a faster train to Victoria.

 

[brad465]

I mean, there is sometimes coach splits at Faversham anyway. I can't remember the exact number of coaches, but some continue towards Dover Priory via Canterbury East, and some continue onto Ramsgate. Sure, it would need more staff, but providing the logistics were worked out in terms of staffing and timing, it doesn't seem impossible?

Perhaps a 12-car Ramsgate or Dover Priory service from Victoria could detach 4-cars at Gillingham, with the front 8 running fast to Sittingbourne, then all stations, while the rear 4 call at Rainham, Newington, Kemsley, Queenborough, Sheerness.

The other challenge with the 17:51 is that it's driver only operated and can't go further without a guard.

The two morning services were 06:24 and 07:00 from Sheerness arriving at Victoria 8:07 and 8:37. Both of those morning (and two evening services) are the start (or end) of the diagram so wouldn't require further units. They would increase the length of the diagram which.

St Pancras is much more popular than Victoria from Sheerness so adding those trains back might not be that useful apart from in estate agent's ads. The journey time to Victoria with the change is also relatively similar as time lost from change is gained by being on a faster train to Victoria.

The xx:12 down services and xx:45 up services are peak extras only, so having these start from/end at Sheerness isn't as difficult, and the pre-covid ones were peak extras entirely, rather than extending an existing service. But there are other challenges as you allude to, including St Pancras being more attractive, and the fact the Sheerness extensions were on stopping patterns into London, not fasts.

 

[Trainlog]

St Pancras is much more popular than Victoria from Sheerness so adding those trains back might not be that useful apart from in estate agent's ads. The journey time to Victoria with the change is also relatively similar as time lost from change is gained by being on a faster train to Victoria.

Granted, Sittingbourne is not spoilt for choice in terms of the amount and variety of services and London terminal destinations it gets; however, having that direct train after a long day would be welcome to those on that branch, as you aren't dealing with waiting for the connecting services, and you are still comfy in the seat you sat down in from London.

It just takes out a barrier that people would rather avoid in the evening and would make people consider starting their journey at Sheerness as opposed to driving to Sittingbourne station and catching the services there.

Perhaps a 12-car Ramsgate or Dover Priory service from Victoria could detach 4-cars at Gillingham, with the front 8 running fast to Sittingbourne, then all stations, while the rear 4 call at Rainham, Newington, Kemsley, Queenborough, Sheerness.

I quite like this idea. With 12 coaches, I could envision a 3-4 coach unit from the 12-car formation doing that, provided the logistics, staffing, and timetabling were aligned to make this a possibility.

 

[brad465]

Passing along the branch today, I discovered Kemsley is getting a 1,200 home development and two schools, among other features, on the fields adjacent to the west of Kemsley station. This development will almost certainly increase use of the station given its next door. It may not be enough to justify a return of peak London services, but I think they should at least look at bringing 2tph back off peak all day and Saturdays on the branch.

 

[Cach17]

Passing along the branch today, I discovered Kemsley is getting a 1,200 home development and two schools, among other features, on the fields adjacent to the west of Kemsley station. This development will almost certainly increase use of the station given its next door. It may not be enough to justify a return of peak London services, but I think they should at least look at bringing 2tph back off peak all day and Saturdays on the branch.

It's one of three SE mainline routes (Victoria-Maidstone-Ashford and Dover-Faversham being the others) still stuck with 1tph for a large part of the day post-Covid. Wish they'd hurry up and restore them.

The ambitious proposals contained in the 2021 Kent Rail Strategy (including an hourly Sheerness-Victoria service) seem like distant dreams now...

 

[CFRAIL]

I'm fairly certain that the off peak demand simply isn't there for a half hourly service. As discussed further up thread, a good option would be some joined up thinking with the bus provider. Some peak direct services would be welcome I'm sure, how about one to/from VIC and one to/from STP?

 

[brad465]

I'm fairly certain that the off peak demand simply isn't there for a half hourly service. As discussed further up thread, a good option would be some joined up thinking with the bus provider. Some peak direct services would be welcome I'm sure, how about one to/from VIC and one to/from STP?

Maybe at the moment, but with 1,200-1,500 homes about to be built within close proximity to one of the stations on the branch and the dynamic changes.

Also, the Medway Valley line now has 2tph over its whole length all day Monday-Saturday, and the busiest stations on there have comparable usage to Sheerness, Queenborough, Kemsley and the interchange with Sittingbourne.

 

[pdeaves]

And I wouldn't exactly describe Sheerness as a "resort"!

"Last resort"
I would have thought that good connections at Sittingbourne would serve more people, better overall, than trying to mess around with multiple "misses Sittingbourne" through services.

 

[Mikey C]

Granted, Sittingbourne is not spoilt for choice in terms of the amount and variety of services and London terminal destinations it gets; however, having that direct train after a long day would be welcome to those on that branch, as you aren't dealing with waiting for the connecting services, and you are still comfy in the seat you sat down in from London.

Once the seats are replaced with ironing boards, the passengers will be glad of the chance of getting up to stretch their aching posteriors