How does Thameslink/Charing Cross south eastern services compare before and after the completion of the Bermondsey Dive Under?

[Whiggism]

Hi all, Im curious to know how often delays were and how often trains were held on red signals

Furthermore, commuters who travelled on these services pre grade separation, was being held on the approach of London Bridge expected?

 

[Fleetmaster]

Being held on approach to London Bridge for am uncomfortably long time (for standing room only trains) was a daily occurrence for any commuter in the boom years of privatization.

If not literally stopped, then you crawled, passengers glumly eyeing each other on parallel trains doing pretty much the same. It was clearly a classic structural problem that anyone familiar with simulators would recognize.

You were literally chuffed to bits on the very rare occasion that the train moved at relative speed and surprised you by only slowing as the platforms came into view. You put the lottery on, definitely.

Perversely, it was all timetabled, showing it was a long standing baked in problem that was at least predictable in ideal conditions.

I experienced nothing like it anywhere else on the network, although I never travelled into Waterloo.

No idea how it runs now, but it's a sure fire bet a dive under will have changed things drastically.

 

[ComUtoR]

The new layout is far superior.

The SE/Thameslink conflicts were an absolute nightmare. Getting a clear run into London Bridge was almost.impossible; especially for SE metro services.

L120 was one of the most notorious signals across the network.

 

[brad465]

It wasn't just the lack of a dive-under, there was also the bottleneck of the old Platform 6 being the only regular London Bridge platform for both Charing X and Thameslink services. P5 could be brought in during emergencies, but that blocked off down trains on the same route, and the passing loop of course had no platform so only empty stock and peak services skipping the stop there could use it. Now both the up and down Charing X services have 2 platforms each, and Thameslink having its own means there are 3 platforms in each direction for what once use to be 1 or 2.

 

[Horizon22]

It's definitely superior. Trains would regularly crawl into London Bridge.

One slight issue though is for Southeastern is that it did move some of the issues downstream, notably around New Cross / Tanners Hill.

 

[43066]

Speaking as someone who has commuted on the route for the last two decades it generally works far better now than in used to in the “old” London Bridge days, when the layout and timetable was far more complex and delays were common at Spa Road snd Blue Anchor junctions.

Separating services and simplifying the layout has *massively* improved things, with the trade off being a few compromises around flexibility, no direct Charing Cross - Greenwich line trains, etc.

One slight issue though is for Southeastern is that it did move some of the issues downstream, notably around New Cross / Tanners Hill.

Yes - albeit to some extent mitigated by the doubling of the tanners hill fly-down. The crossover from the Greenwich lines to the TL lines at North Kent East junction (just north of New Cross) is also a compromise.

 

[Magdalia]

One of the main purposes of all the work around London Bridge, including the Bermondsey flyover, was to separate South Eastern and Thameslink services.

I use Thameslink a lot more than South Eastern and my recollection of the old layout was that signal stops approaching London Bridge were almost inevitable in both directions. This was because of at grade conflicting movements and, in the northbound direction, both services having to share a single platform at London Bridge.

That's why it has been absurd to break that separation by having at grade conflicting movements between South Eastern and Thameslink in the London Bridge area by running trains to/from the Greenwich line, and one of the reasons why Thameslink to/from Maidstone via London Bridge should never happen.

Everything on Thameslink at London Bridge should run through the Bermondsey flyover area to/from New Cross Gate. That's what the new layout was designed for.

 

[Horizon22]

One of the main purposes of all the work around London Bridge, including the Bermondsey flyover, was to separate South Eastern and Thameslink services.

I use Thameslink a lot more than South Eastern and my recollection of the old layout was that signal stops approaching London Bridge were almost inevitable in both directions. This was because of at grade conflicting movements and, in the northbound direction, both services having to share a single platform at London Bridge.

That's why it has been absurd to break that separation by having at grade conflicting movements between South Eastern and Thameslink in the London Bridge area by running trains to/from the Greenwich line, and one of the reasons why Thameslink to/from Maidstone via London Bridge should never happen.

Everything on Thameslink at London Bridge should run through the Bermondsey flyover area to/from New Cross Gate. That's what the new layout was designed for.

IIRC this is because this was never the intention when building the new 2018 Thameslink; the link was meant to go towards Caterham or Coulsdon or Tattenham Corner (can’t remember which) but Windmill Junction didn’t have the capacity north of Croydon so that was scrapped so the other rushed option was tacking the North Kent SE service onto what is now Rainham - Luton. Not ideal.

In reality though I don’t think it causes any major delays, although it has somewhat scuppered the argument for Southeastern customers who wanted to keep the via Greenwich services to Charing Cross as it was “too complex and caused delays”.

 

[ComUtoR]

That's why it has been absurd to break that separation by having at grade conflicting movements between South Eastern and Thameslink in the London Bridge area by running trains to/from the Greenwich line, and one of the reasons why Thameslink to/from Maidstone via London Bridge should never happen.

You can run the service in parallel when going Up Greenwich > Southwark reversible / 1 Down > Down Greenwich Everything else is going to conflict. However, this isn't because of Thameslink. The conflict at North Kent East has pretty much always existed. If you removed the Rainham service and brought back the SE services up the Greenwich to Charing Cross you will still get a clash. If you run anything out of Cannon Street and into New Cross, you get a clash.

The only way to get rid of the clash at North Kent East is to run all moves in parallel and nothing goes towards Charing Cross

 

[Horizon22]

You can run the service in parallel when going Up Greenwich > Southwark reversible / 1 Down > Down Greenwich Everything else is going to conflict. However, this isn't because of Thameslink. The conflict at North Kent East has pretty much always existed. If you removed the Rainham service and brought back the SE services up the Greenwich to Charing Cross you will still get a clash. If you run anything out of Cannon Street and into New Cross, you get a clash.

The only way to get rid of the clash at North Kent East is to run all moves in parallel and nothing goes towards Charing Cross

Indeed. Some level of conflict is also inevitable approaching major city stations, and to completely remove them is hugely restrictive and considerably limits passenger connections & options at the expensive of a slight operational improvement.

Some places though the operational improvement is a major improvement on the status quo such as - in theory - the Lewisham & London terminals rationalisation.

 

[island]

Some places though the operational improvement is a major improvement on the status quo such as - in theory - the Lewisham & London terminals rationalisation.

Depends on your definition of "improvement" Some loud voices and politicians on the Bexleyheath line have been screaming blue murder at the lack of Charing Cross directs outside of peak. I understand they will get 1tph back in the May timetable. Albany Park was also hard done by.

 

[30907]

Depends on your definition of "improvement" Some loud voices and politicians on the Bexleyheath line have been screaming blue murder at the lack of Charing Cross directs outside of peak. I understand they will get 1tph back in the May timetable. Albany Park was also hard done by.

Though that isn't related to the Bermondsey job, as it could have been done anyway..

Back on topic - a very obvious point, but the (then only 4tph) Thameslink service via East Croydon was largely diverted via Tulse Hill in the peaks.

 

[Horizon22]

Depends on your definition of "improvement" Some loud voices and politicians on the Bexleyheath line have been screaming blue murder at the lack of Charing Cross directs outside of peak. I understand they will get 1tph back in the May timetable. Albany Park was also hard done by.

I did say “in theory”!

 

[Cricketer8for9]

As stated above immensely better. The non-stop services via Tulse Hill were tortuous and there were fewer than there are now.

 

[Bald Rick]

Immensely better - especially in the peaks. Simply because if you wanted a Thameslink train via London Bridge in the peaks, you had a choice of one…