• 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!

Oops Gatwick Express is not fastest

Status
Not open for further replies.

island

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
17,907
Location
0036
Nowadays we seem to have trains branded Gatwick Express that are neither express, nor dedicated to CVictoria and Gatwick only. So why are they branded in this way? I suspect it's mainly for revenue. Therefore I don't see any need or benefit to passnegers in having these services at all!

They're not branded Gatwick Express, they're branded "express". And I cannot see any reason for the distinction other than a brazen attempt to charge more. Especially when it can be argued that Southern Only tickets must be valid on it.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
34,247
At the moment Thameslink is four/hour to London. Does anyone know the planned Gatwick frequency once the "Thameslink 2000" expansion takes place?

The line diagrams in the latest RUSs seem to show 8 tph Thameslink through Gatwick, ie 4 from Brighton as now, and 2 each from Horsham and Three Bridges. However the latter may well be running via Redhill and not transferring to the fast lines until south of Croydon - so may not be as competitively timed as the Brightons.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
18,051
Location
Reston City Centre
The line diagrams in the latest RUSs seem to show 8 tph Thameslink through Gatwick, ie 4 from Brighton as now, and 2 each from Horsham and Three Bridges. However the latter may well be running via Redhill and not transferring to the fast lines until south of Croydon - so may not be as competitively timed as the Brightons.

Thanks for confirming.

I appreciate that these things are still a bit "up in the air" (if you'll excuse the pun...) but there's even less need for a dedicated Gatwick "express' if Thameslink is twice the frequency...

...especially as Thameslink will connect with Crossrail (so links to much of London)
 

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
This isn't actually a southern issue. Govia have been trying to cut the gat ex and incorporate it into the Brighton express since taking both franchises. They have debranded as much as possible (442s are 'express'. They do not say Gatwick anywhere on them) and there was even talk of merging the gat ex drivers and train crew with south central Victoria drivers but the DfT won't allow it. Therefore they have to keep the service separate from the other BML services.
 

ushawk

Established Member
Joined
5 Nov 2010
Messages
1,965
Location
Eastbourne
I do use the Gatwick Express in the morning peaks from Gatwick to Victoria as i change there from a London Bridge train (Victoria is closer to my work), its usually only half full.

I think Southern should just abolish the GatEx brand and incorporate it into Southern and just advertise it as a non-stop service and should also let Southern Only tickets be used, a lot of airport passengers dont even use it due to the difference in the price (which clogs up the other trains), defeats the object of having it really. Maybe cut it down to 2 tph and run it with 1x422 in the off-peak and 2x422 in the peak so then additional paths get freed up.
 
Joined
2 May 2011
Messages
287
Location
Nowhere
This isn't actually a southern issue. Govia have been trying to cut the gat ex and incorporate it into the Brighton express since taking both franchises. They have debranded as much as possible (442s are 'express'. They do not say Gatwick anywhere on them) and there was even talk of merging the gat ex drivers and train crew with south central Victoria drivers but the DfT won't allow it. Therefore they have to keep the service separate from the other BML services.

Correct. The 442s were originally rolled out with "Gatwick Express" proudly showing in large letters on the sides of the front and rear carriages, in the recognised gatex font. Then the "Gatwick" wording was removed, leaving just the slightly odd term "Express".
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
34,247
Correct. The 442s were originally rolled out with "Gatwick Express" proudly showing in large letters on the sides of the front and rear carriages, in the recognised gatex font. Then the "Gatwick" wording was removed, leaving just the slightly odd term "Express".

After the latest ruling maybe they should reduce the wording to "Excess", and explain it is about the fares...
 

NightatLaira

Member
Joined
14 Jun 2010
Messages
490
I personally think it should remain as a non-stop service from Victoria to Gatwick with the current frequenices and timings - the train's especially built for the route with additional luggage space and a proper luggage van. Even if it has to crawl through Clapham and East croydon - the added hassle of adding in a stop there combined with the complications of commuters trying to use it as well would outweigh the benefit.

What would be more sensible though is if they removed the premium ticket prices. Then if you could board a Gatwick Express with a cheap fare ticket you'd actually get people using it more! And I believe this would apply to first class as much as standard. Then they wouldn't be running around empty all the time, and FCC routes to London Bridge/ St Pancras International would have boosted capacity...
 

N Levers

Member
Joined
22 Dec 2010
Messages
308
I personally think it should remain as a non-stop service from Victoria to Gatwick with the current frequenices and timings - the train's especially built for the route with additional luggage space and a proper luggage van. Even if it has to crawl through Clapham and East croydon - the added hassle of adding in a stop there combined with the complications of commuters trying to use it as well would outweigh the benefit.

I think it should call Gatwick, East Croydon, Clapham (set down north, pick up south - not call peaks) then Victoria.

Then most other [EDIT: Victoria, not Thameslink] trains through Gatwick (Littlehamptons/Ore/Eastbournes etc.) should be pick up only southbound and set down only northbound.

This and being regular fares
 
Last edited:

class377man

Member
Joined
7 Jan 2009
Messages
224
Sorry you are not selling the use of Victoria for me,

Thameslink has many other options as I said earlier not just London Bridge (yes I know that London Bridge is the quote for the speed) - Once the underground station is re-opened change at Blackfrairs for the Circle / District east bound. Why would anyone heading to Kings Cross use Victoria when you can use St Pancras?

Fair point re KXSP, brain lapse on my part. I still think most people will use Victoria overall, especially until the Thameslink is up and running properly seven days a week.

Won't London Bridge be out of bounds for Thameslink during the rush hour come the end of the programme?
 

Surreytraveller

On Moderation
Joined
21 Oct 2009
Messages
3,905
Correct. The 442s were originally rolled out with "Gatwick Express" proudly showing in large letters on the sides of the front and rear carriages, in the recognised gatex font. Then the "Gatwick" wording was removed, leaving just the slightly odd term "Express".

the reason for the removal of the word 'Gatwick' is because the stock is also used on the Brighton Expresses. It would confuse the public even more if 'Gatwick Express' trains were used on services that didn't even stop at Gatwick!
 

N Levers

Member
Joined
22 Dec 2010
Messages
308
the reason for the removal of the word 'Gatwick' is because the stock is also used on the Brighton Expresses. It would confuse the public even more if 'Gatwick Express' trains were used on services that didn't even stop at Gatwick!

Ah but this could add further confusion as "Gatwick Express" costs extra while the other "Brighton express" (Which is further) does not cost more to travel on.
 
Joined
6 Jan 2011
Messages
91
Even the Southern non-express services to Victoria are only a couple of minutes slower, and much cheaper!

Errr..not 100% factually correct.

For 3 or more people travelling at peak time the Gatwick Express is cheaper to Victoria than the Southern train due to group fares being valid at any time on the Express.

Single - Gatwick to Victoria Southern £12.50 per person
Single - 3 for 2 or 4 for 2 - Gatwick to Victoria Express £35.80

(For 4 people travelling at peak time the Gatwick Express to Victoria is cheaper than the FCC fare to London Bridge and stations to St Pancras.)

Shocking isn't it ;)
 

N Levers

Member
Joined
22 Dec 2010
Messages
308
Errr..not 100% factually correct.

For 3 or more people travelling at peak time the Gatwick Express is cheaper to Victoria than the Southern train due to group fares being valid at any time on the Express.

Single - Gatwick to Victoria Southern £12.50 per person
Single - 3 for 2 or 4 for 2 - Gatwick to Victoria Express £35.80

(For 4 people travelling at peak time the Gatwick Express to Victoria is cheaper than the FCC fare to London Bridge and stations to St Pancras.)

Shocking isn't it ;)

This is just getting silly. I can see why people think the national fares struture is confusing when the fare structure of just one TOC on one route is confusing
 
Joined
6 Jan 2011
Messages
91
This is just getting silly. I can see why people think the national fares struture is confusing when the fare structure of just one TOC on one route is confusing

From Gatwick to London Bridge there are 4 fares available and there also are 4 Gatwick to London Zone 1-6 Travelcards.
FCC only, Southern only, Not Gatwick Express and Any Permitted.

Such a simple journey so many choices :lol:
 
Last edited:
Joined
2 May 2011
Messages
287
Location
Nowhere
I personally think it should remain as a non-stop service from Victoria to Gatwick with the current frequenices and timings - the train's especially built for the route with additional luggage space and a proper luggage van.

Well not quite. The 442s currently being used were built for use out of Waterloo on the "Wessex Electrics" route. I guess one could argue they were especially "rebuilt" for Gatwick, but there's lots of debate about whether they are actually suited to this service (lack of double doors, insufficient luggage space etc).
 

bb21

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
4 Feb 2010
Messages
24,451
From Gatwick to London Bridge there are 4 fares available and there also are 4 Gatwick to London Zone 1-6 Travelcards.
FCC only, Southern only, Not Gatwick Express and Any Permitted.

Such a simple journey so many choices :lol:

I must say that Southern Only is offered on this flow, given that SN prices the inter-available fare.

Well not quite. The 442s currently being used were built for use out of Waterloo on the "Wessex Electrics" route. I guess one could argue they were especially "rebuilt" for Gatwick, but there's lots of debate about whether they are actually suited to this service (lack of double doors, insufficient luggage space etc).

Dare i say that I find the 442s much more comfortable before their refurbishment?
 

RobShipway

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2009
Messages
3,337
When I lived in Bournemouth back in the 1990's I used to find that the Class 442's where very comfortable with a smooth ride, but having seen photos of the insides since they were rebuilt it does look to me as if they are more cramped with the seating capacity than they were before.

I agree that the GatEx service, should just remain a non stop service from Gatwick to Victoria which surely is what previously did make it the fastest service into London?
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
34,247
Won't London Bridge be out of bounds for Thameslink during the rush hour come the end of the programme?

The whole point of the programme at London Bridge is to give Thameslink 18 tph through London Bridge station at all times. There will be two dedicated platforms, and the Bermondsey flyovers provide two dedicated non conflicting tracks for Thameslink's services from the SN and SE routes through to Blackfriars...

OTOH during the later stages of the London Bridge rebuild Thameslink will likely be diverted via Elephant and Castle all day...
 

Minstral25

Established Member
Joined
10 Sep 2009
Messages
1,964
Location
Surrey
Dare I say that the Gatwick and Brighton Expresses ought be merged.

It's already done in the rush hour but extend this all day will mean 4 fast trains to Brighton from Victoria and also with Thameslink four from London Bridge. The way it is currently going hourly there will be 4 Thameslink, 4 Gatwick Express and 4 from Victoria (if southern get there way to make it 4 from 3 current). If the Gatwick Express and Victoria are merged then there will be 4 spare paths an hour going through the East Croydon Bottleneck to the benefit of many overcrowded services.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Well not quite. The 442s currently being used were built for use out of Waterloo on the "Wessex Electrics" route. I guess one could argue they were especially "rebuilt" for Gatwick, but there's lots of debate about whether they are actually suited to this service (lack of double doors, insufficient luggage space etc).

To be fair to the 442's they were rebuilt for the Brighton GatEx extension services which are outer suburban commuter trains really. The 460's could never have coped with these services due to lack of seats. Now they are used on the regular services just to Gatwick they are not ideal but as both ends are terminus's it sort of works as dwell times are unimportant.
 

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
5,610
Yep it makes absolute sense, path-wise. One pair could be non-stop to Brighton, and one could stop at a couple of places.

The extra paths could even be for relief services to Hove for example, which could also stop at Gatwick to help spread airport passengers and their luggage around more Southern services.
 
Joined
2 Jun 2009
Messages
1,135
Location
North London
Yep it makes absolute sense, path-wise. One pair could be non-stop to Brighton, and one could stop at a couple of places.

The extra paths could even be for relief services to Hove for example, which could also stop at Gatwick to help spread airport passengers and their luggage around more Southern services.

I agree, I agree, I agree.

Trouble is Gatwick Airport want a dedicate airport services for their passengers rather than having to share with commuters. Never mind the fact that fleets of passengers prefer the budget airline shuttle vans.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
18,051
Location
Reston City Centre
I agree, I agree, I agree.

Trouble is Gatwick Airport want a dedicate airport services for their passengers rather than having to share with commuters. Never mind the fact that fleets of passengers prefer the budget airline shuttle vans.

Can you imagine if Manchester Airport took the same attitude? And the supine railway gave them what they wanted?

(Or Southampton/ Birmingham/ Liverpool etc?)

Not having a go at you, am criticising Gatwick Airport
 

87015

Established Member
Joined
3 Mar 2006
Messages
5,078
Location
GEML/WCML/SR
The problem is that if you merge the two you either have to add a stop with a large dwell time on the Brighton fasts and loose a load of line capacity, or leave it as the usual dwell time and watch performance on the Brighton mainline sink like a stone as station overtime goes through the roof.
 

Greenback

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
9 Aug 2009
Messages
15,268
Location
Llanelli
Can you imagine if Manchester Airport took the same attitude? And the supine railway gave them what they wanted?

(Or Southampton/ Birmingham/ Liverpool etc?)

Not having a go at you, am criticising Gatwick Airport

Manchester Airport, or any of the others mentioned, have never had a dedicated francishe, Gatwick did, so it's no wonder they didn;t want to lose it. I expect concessions were made to soften the blow, depsite the fact that it has just confused the issue.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
34,247
I found a consultation about this on the old DfT website a while back that explained that the DfT's original main proposal was to bin the service completely.

BAA (as it was then) seemed to think the train permanently waiting in the platform was essential - so they came up with most of the funding for the new platform layout at Gatwick in order to get round all the arguments about line capacity, with the eventual layout allowing for GatEx trains to terminate and turnback between the up and down fast lines.

I suspect this cash input is what swayed DfT into keeping the offpeak service as it is...
 

Greenback

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
9 Aug 2009
Messages
15,268
Location
Llanelli
I found a consultation about this on the old DfT website a while back that explained that the DfT's original main proposal was to bin the service completely.

BAA (as it was then) seemed to think the train permanently waiting in the platform was essential - so they came up with most of the funding for the new platform layout at Gatwick in order to get round all the arguments about line capacity, with the eventual layout allowing for GatEx trains to terminate and turnback between the up and down fast lines.

I suspect this cash input is what swayed DfT into keeping the offpeak service as it is...

BR thought it was a useful tool to help direct airport passengers to the Express, rathe rthan have them crowd on to already busy services from the coast.

To be honest, I can see the sense in that, but I'm not sure why the airport operator should be so concerned about railway matters, except for the fact that they would find it useful for their own marketing as a rival to Heathrow.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top