Potential capacity improvements at Reigate station?

[Minstral25]

Moderator note: Split from

Planned 387 and 377 cascades to Southern and Southeastern in 2025

Hi everyone. We’ve been told that 13 class 377s will be coming over to SE shortly, this is to replace more networkers. I guess they’re to replace 465s on some of the Ashford/gillingham runs? Would 52 coaches be enough to replace the remaining 465/9 fleet? And some 2 cars?

www.railforums.co.uk

I'd say the fact most of the main liners have been reduced to 8 cars is something that needs sorting and the Reigate's would benefit by using the 377/6's on them.

Would a 377/6 fit into Reigate - I thought that the station was limited to just 80m trains without going across the level crossing.

 

[Bikeman78]

Would a 377/6 fit into Reigate - I thought that the station was limited to just 80m trains without going across the level crossing.

Using Google maps I measured the distance between the signals to be 137 metres. Plenty of room for a 100m train. Back in the day, eight car VEPs would reverse onto the level crossing before departing towards Redhill. My recollection is that the western cab was level with the footbridge, about two coach lengths past the signal.

 

[JonathanH]

Back in the day, eight car VEPs would reverse onto the level crossing before departing towards Redhill.

That doesn't appear to be acceptable any more. Notably, the current peak services seem to be splitting in platform 0 at Redhill, proceeding as 4-car to Reigate and rejoining to the same unit at Redhill on their return.

 

[PGAT]

Additionally the stop car markers at Reigate don’t go beyond 4 coaches implying that’s the maximum permissible length

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Additionally the stop car markers at Reigate don’t go beyond 4 coaches implying that’s the maximum permissible length

When were these installed though, because if it was before the 377/6s came into use I can imagine that was the maximum permissible length of Southern services at Reigate?

 

[PGAT]

When were these installed though, because if it was before the 377/6s came into use I can imagine that was the maximum permissible length of Southern services at Reigate?

It was certainly before the 377/6s existed although that doesn't seem to have changed things unless anyone knows of them having ever running to Reigate?

 

[Class455]

Would a 377/6 fit into Reigate - I thought that the station was limited to just 80m trains without going across the level crossing.

I’ve always found this a bit bizarre given the platform length, but no they’re not allowed to go to Reigate due to the position of the signal. The maximum length that can run there is 4 coaches.

Otherwise I’m sure there would be longer trains running to Reigate by now.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

That doesn't appear to be acceptable any more. Notably, the current peak services seem to be splitting in platform 0 at Redhill, proceeding as 4-car to Reigate and rejoining to the same unit at Redhill on their return.

Thats because the Gatwick portions aren't running currently due to the landslip just North of 3Brisges on the Up Slow

 

[Southern Dvr]

The Down Siding at Reigate has been out of use for years, it also has no purpose. Therefore a relatively inexpensive platform extension and removal of siding would resolve the platform length issue. However nothing is as simple as it seems!

 

[Bikeman78]

That doesn't appear to be acceptable any more. Notably, the current peak services seem to be splitting in platform 0 at Redhill, proceeding as 4-car to Reigate and rejoining to the same unit at Redhill on their return.

I wasn't suggesting that it would be. With 37 metres to spare between the signals, it ought to be possible to reverse a five car and be to see the signal at the east end. But perhaps a test run has taken place which concluded that it won't work.

 

[Minstral25]

I wasn't suggesting that it would be. With 37 metres to spare between the signals, it ought to be possible to reverse a five car and be to see the signal at the east end. But perhaps a test run has taken place which concluded that it won't work.

Perhaps it is safety considering the position of the Level crossing meaning the train has to stop at a certain distance short of the crossing or the barriers have to come down for arrival. (The platform only stops a few feet short of the Crossing)

 

[Peter Sarf]

Perhaps it is safety considering the position of the Level crossing meaning the train has to stop at a certain distance short of the crossing or the barriers have to come down for arrival. (The platform only stops a few feet short of the Crossing)

From Google Earth it looks like the siding is very long, over twice the length of the platforms and faces Westwards with no crossover so only any use for trains from the West coming in wrong line !.

I would say it is simply the cost of extending the platforms Eastwards and shortening or removing the siding.

 

[Bikeman78]

Perhaps it is safety considering the position of the Level crossing meaning the train has to stop at a certain distance short of the crossing or the barriers have to come down for arrival. (The platform only stops a few feet short of the Crossing)

There are plenty of similar situations across the UK, e.g. Brimsdown, Enfield Lock and Cheshunt. There must be dozens more.

 

[paul1609]

Perhaps it is safety considering the position of the Level crossing meaning the train has to stop at a certain distance short of the crossing or the barriers have to come down for arrival. (The platform only stops a few feet short of the Crossing)

Was the Reigate Power Supply ever reinforced with the introduction of the Electrostars? I seem to remember that the Reigate Power is supplied from Redhill substation. I think a 4 car 377 draws more current than a 8 vep. Certainly down on the West Coastway the branches needed their own new substations.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Was the Reigate Power Supply ever reinforced with the introduction of the Electrostars? I seem to remember that the Reigate Power is supplied from Redhill substation. I think a 4 car 377 draws more current than a 8 vep. Certainly down on the West Coastway the branches needed their own new substations.

Reigate is fed as it was in the 1930's electrification teed off Redhill main line.

A 4 car 377 doesn't draw as much power as an 8 VEP but it is more than a 4 VEP.

 

[Baji]

I thought there were plans to extend the Reigate platform to accommodate 12 cars

Reigate station upgrade - Network Rail

We’re proposing a new, 12-car turn back platform at Reigate station to provide greater capacity, a more reliable service.

www.networkrail.co.uk

 

[JonathanH]

I thought there were plans to extend the Reigate platform to accommodate 12 cars

Reigate station upgrade - Network Rail

We’re proposing a new, 12-car turn back platform at Reigate station to provide greater capacity, a more reliable service.

www.networkrail.co.uk

There was never funding for it. It was latterly loosely tied in with the remodelling work at Croydon which has been deferred indefinitely.

 

[Minstral25]

Was the Reigate Power Supply ever reinforced with the introduction of the Electrostars? I seem to remember that the Reigate Power is supplied from Redhill substation. I think a 4 car 377 draws more current than a 8 vep. Certainly down on the West Coastway the branches needed their own new substations.

I understand that Redhill power supply is being upped in a Christmas 25 upgrade when southern approach at station will also be re-laid. I have no confirmed source on that so put it out as likely.

It would be good if they are doing this to upgrade Reigate station but no money available of course.

There was never funding for it. It was latterly loosely tied in with the remodelling work at Croydon which has been deferred indefinitely.

I thought there was future funding allocated but it was pulled before it could be spent and reallocated to Network North, along with the rest of the CARS scheme.

 

[Peter Sarf]

I thought there were plans to extend the Reigate platform to accommodate 12 cars

Reigate station upgrade - Network Rail

We’re proposing a new, 12-car turn back platform at Reigate station to provide greater capacity, a more reliable service.

www.networkrail.co.uk

I decided to look at the Video again in the Network Rail site you linked to.

It occurs to me that any capacity improvements should generally be to achieve the twelve car capacity. Otherwise it is a waste of scarce capacity further into London running anything less than ten cars into London.

I wonder if the twelve car reversing platform should be in the centre of the formation. So platform two gets buffers at the West end (towards the level crossing) and platform three becomes the through platform - effectively making platform two & three an island platform. This allows reversals to involve fewer (no) conflicting moves. I do not think it involves more work except there would be no level access out of platform two & three for passengers necessitating a bridge, stairs and lifts. That is probably useful for getting to the Platform one side station building and pick-up / drop-off area anyway.

The above bridge is unless passengers walked out onto the level crossing using a path between the two through lines - is that a done thing anywhere else ?.
It is a fairly slim service to the West of Reigate so the level crossing is not too frequently closed to traffic and people.

I notice the existing footbridge near Reigate station is on the wrong side of the road at the level crossing !.

Lookinmg at Google Earth there is enough space for a wider station footpring footprint to the South. The platforms can move Eastwards into the liberated disused sidings. Link here.

I can see the next step might be a flyover North of Redhill to get trains to Reigate from the London direction into a platform on the West side.

Then a flyover South of Redhill to get Gatwick bound trains from Reading/Reigate over to the down line.

How soon would the flyovers become relevant ?.

Edited (spelling correction)

 

[Minstral25]

I decided to look at the Video again in the Network Rail site you linked to.

It occurs to me that any capacity improvements should generally be to achieve the twelve car capacity. Otherwise it is a waste of scarce capacity further into London running anything less than ten cars into London.

8 car to Reigate would be fine (especially if the service remains Southern which looking at passenger destinations would be fine), but 12 car if needed for operational flexibility

I wonder if the twelve car reversing platform should be in the centre of the formation. So platform two gets buffers at the West end (towards the level crossing) and platform three becomes the through platform - effectively making platform two & three an island platform. This allows reversals to involve fewer (no) conflicting moves. I do not think it involves more work except there would be no level access out of platform two & three for passengers necessitating a bridge, stairs and lifts. That is probably useful for getting to the Platform one side station building and pick-up / drop-off area anyway.

The above bridge is unless passengers walked out onto the level crossing using a path between the two through lines - is that a done thing anywhere else ?.
It is a fairly slim service to the West of Reigate so the level crossing is not too frequently closed to traffic and people.

I notice the existing footbridge near Reigate station is on the wrong side of the road at the level crossing !.

Lookinmg at Google Earth there is enough space for a wider station footpring to the South. The platforms can move Eastwards into the liberated disused sidings. Link here.

No. The levels to the road immediately south of the station is about 3m lower. That is why the planned 12 car platform stopped at the Eastbound starting signal of the station (platform 2 ended up around 16 cars long IIRC).

I can see the next step might be a flyover North of Redhill to get trains to Reigate from the London direction into a platform on the West side.

Then a flyover South of Redhill to get Gatwick bound trains from Reading/Reigate over to the down line.

How soon would the flyovers become relevant ?.

Unlikely - again the site constraints and that Redhill station is on an embankment about 20m higher than local area. Oh and money!

 

[Peter Sarf]

8 car to Reigate would be fine (especially if the service remains Southern which looking at passenger destinations would be fine), but 12 car if needed for operational flexibility

Yes just thinking of future proofing. I suppose money could be saved by making the platforms 8car but making the track layout suitable for platform extensions (for little or no extra cost).

No. The levels to the road immediately south of the station is about 3m lower. That is why the planned 12 car platform stopped at the Eastbound starting signal of the station (platform 2 ended up around 16 cars long IIRC).

Not sure I understand ?.
But if the levels are that different does a subway under the station become possible (if that is what you are replying to ?) ?.

Unlikely - again the site constraints and that Redhill station is on an embankment about 20m higher than local area. Oh and money!

No surprise there !.

 

[JonathanH]

8 car to Reigate would be fine (especially if the service remains Southern which looking at passenger destinations would be fine), but 12 car if needed for operational flexibility

I thought the consulted plan was 12 car Thameslink trains to Reigate, and the Victoria service switched to Gatwick, saving a 700, and Southern diverted to Gatwick, thereby removing the need for services to split and join at Redhill.

A business case based on Reigate trains being able to run 8 car all day to Victoria seems very difficult to justify, even if some trains are standing from Purley.

Obviously, the 'free' option of 4 car is sufficient between Reigate and Redhill, but Southern don't want the performance risk of splitting more trains than necessary at Redhill.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

I understand that Redhill power supply is being upped in a Christmas 25 upgrade when southern approach at station will also be re-laid. I have no confirmed source on that so put it out as likely.

Brighton Line is full reinforced already although maybe they are reconfiguring the DC supply to Reigate so at least it fed directly off Redhill substation.

Theres no way they are upgrading the Southern approaches that was discounted when platform 0 was built. The S&C is certainly knackered but can only see it being like for like.

 

[Minstral25]

Not sure I understand ?.
But if the levels are that different does a subway under the station become possible (if that is what you are replying to ?) ?.

Reigate Station already has a subway - the station is towards the bottom of a hill, so one side is much lower than the other. Trying to make the middle road a turn round only road would mean a new westbound platform would have to be built around 20 ft in the air. You cannot see the levels from the Google map view.

I thought the consulted plan was 12 car Thameslink trains to Reigate, and the Victoria service switched to Gatwick, saving a 700, and Southern diverted to Gatwick, thereby removing the need for services to split and join at Redhill.

A business case based on Reigate trains being able to run 8 car all day to Victoria seems very difficult to justify, even if some trains are standing from Purley.

Obviously, the 'free' option of 4 car is sufficient between Reigate and Redhill, but Southern don't want the performance risk of splitting more trains than necessary at Redhill.

My comment is that 8 car is all that is needed to improve the service that is not working as it could as a 4 car service (12 car would be achieved by adding the 4-car from Gatwick in the peaks as now), I wasn't commenting on business cases.

Passengers at Purley on a few off-peak services cannot get on 4 car trains, plus being full at Clapham with East Croydon passengers on Reigate bound journeys for Redhill and Reigate passengers means they have 30-minute wait for next service; plus, that GTR cancel Reigate service as it is only 4 cars in disruption both means 4 car is not an ideal solution.

Reigate passengers to Victoria is about 3-4 times greater than London Bridge and Thameslink, so moving to Thameslink service would not be beneficial to passengers generally.

Brighton Line is full reinforced already although maybe they are reconfiguring the DC supply to Reigate so at least it fed directly off Redhill substation.

Theres no way they are upgrading the Southern approaches that was discounted when platform 0 was built. The S&C is certainly knackered but can only see it being like for like.

Yes, not upgrading the Southern approach when doing the northern was a shame and that is why Redhill now. as well as being a dilapidated station, is also an awful passenger unfriendly experience due to the platform 0 problem.

Not upgrading the southern approach means that platform 1 cannot be a through road. Simply making platform 1 into a through road instead of platform 0 would benefit passengers enormously.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Reigate Station already has a subway - the station is towards the bottom of a hill, so one side is much lower than the other. Trying to make the middle road a turn round only road would mean a new westbound platform would have to be built around 20 ft in the air. You cannot see the levels from the Google map view.

Thanks for the info on ground levels.
I am hoping the work required to make platform three (new and to the South) would require almost the same amount of building up of levels whether it was a through platform or a terminating platform. Making it a through platform would cause the platforms two and three to be a little further East away from the level crossing so that the station throat is no wider at the level crossing. Maybe not an issue as currently trains are supposed to stop short of the level crossing so that a stopping train overrunning has less chance of encroaching on the level crossing anyway.

My comment is that 8 car is all that is needed to improve the service that is not working as it could as a 4 car service (12 car would be achieved by adding the 4-car from Gatwick in the peaks as now), I wasn't commenting on business cases.

Passengers at Purley on a few off-peak services cannot get on 4 car trains, plus being full at Clapham with East Croydon passengers on Reigate bound journeys for Redhill and Reigate passengers means they have 30-minute wait for next service; plus, that GTR cancel Reigate service as it is only 4 cars in disruption both means 4 car is not an ideal solution.

Reigate passengers to Victoria is about 3-4 times greater than London Bridge and Thameslink, so moving to Thameslink service would not be beneficial to passengers generally.

This reminds me how some people I know who work in hotels etc in the West end (so around Victoria) moved to Croydon to benefit from the overnight service to/from East Croydon. Since that overnight service ceased they now find it rather inconvenient having to get a night bus to Blackfriars station to pick up Thameslink. This is made worse by the bus service actually going past the closed (overnight) City Thameslink station.

So I agree Thameslink is not much of an alternative to Victoria.

As a Croydon resident I am sometimes wondering if my space from Victoria on a longer distance train might be depriving someone from Clapham Junction who lives in deepest Surrey of a train home !.

It is really a problem with London being so big.

Yes, not upgrading the Southern approach when doing the northern was a shame and that is why Redhill now. as well as being a dilapidated station, is also an awful passenger unfriendly experience due to the platform 0 problem.

Not upgrading the southern approach means that platform 1 cannot be a through road. Simply making platform 1 into a through road instead of platform 0 would benefit passengers enormously.

If I remember the layout at Redhill correctly platform 0 is the new platform furthest to the West ?.

Platform 0 certainly has the feel of an out of the way platform easy to miss when in the subway and I remember its lift not working when I was helping someone with their luggage there !.

Platforms one and two would be the island on the West (Up) side ?. Now I suppose platform one has become the terminating/reversing platform in the middle of platforms 0, 1 & 2.

 

[Minstral25]

Thanks for the info on ground levels.
I am hoping the work required to make platform three (new and to the South) would require almost the same amount of building up of levels whether it was a through platform or a terminating platform. Making it a through platform would cause the platforms two and three to be a little further East away from the level crossing so that the station throat is no wider at the level crossing. Maybe not an issue as currently trains are supposed to stop short of the level crossing so that a stopping train overrunning has less chance of encroaching on the level crossing anyway.

The plan for 12 coach platform 3 was entirely on the car park area. If you look at Google Maps there are 9 parallel parking spaces just outside the existing platforms - that is where platform 3 ended to avoid the lower levels by the station. The main part of the car park by the sidings is level with tracks.

This reminds me how some people I know who work in hotels etc in the West end (so around Victoria) moved to Croydon to benefit from the overnight service to/from East Croydon. Since that overnight service ceased they now find it rather inconvenient having to get a night bus to Blackfriars station to pick up Thameslink. This is made worse by the bus service actually going past the closed (overnight) City Thameslink station.

So I agree Thameslink is not much of an alternative to Victoria.

As a Croydon resident I am sometimes wondering if my space from Victoria on a longer distance train might be depriving someone from Clapham Junction who lives in deepest Surrey of a train home !.

It is really a problem with London being so big.

Most of Redhill route stations have way more passengers to London Bridge & Thameslink, Reigate is the exception. Perhaps caused by where the services go from Reigate.

If I remember the layout at Redhill correctly platform 0 is the new platform furthest to the West ?.

Platform 0 certainly has the feel of an out of the way platform easy to miss when in the subway and I remember its lift not working when I was helping someone with their luggage there !.

Platforms one and two would be the island on the West (Up) side ?. Now I suppose platform one has become the terminating/reversing platform in the middle of platforms 0, 1 & 2.

Yes Platform 0 and platform 2 constantly swap trains, and it is a convoluted route from one to the other, via a subway at one end of platform. Also because of the location of points & signals, trains tend to go a long way down the platform before stopping. Passengers often miss trains on platform changes.

Previously the swap was platform 1 to platform 2 and rarely was a train missed.

Redhill has become an operational nightmare for passengers.

 

[Peter Sarf]

The plan for 12 coach platform 3 was entirely on the car park area. If you look at Google Maps there are 9 parallel parking spaces just outside the existing platforms - that is where platform 3 ended to avoid the lower levels by the station. The main part of the car park by the sidings is level with tracks.

Oh I see so platforms two & three would be well back from the level crossing and existing buildings. I suppose if it is level there then it should be easy only if platform two loses it West end which is what I infer from the video. Seems all of the length of the two sidings would go to the new layout ?.

Most of Redhill route stations have way more passengers to London Bridge & Thameslink, Reigate is the exception. Perhaps caused by where the services go from Reigate.

I reckon planners should consider how many people settle somewhere that suits their commuting needs and also apply for jobs that are an easier commute. To then undo all that by changing a service is a bit of lack of consideration.

Yes Platform 0 and platform 2 constantly swap trains, and it is a convoluted route from one to the other, via a subway at one end of platform. Also because of the location of points & signals, trains tend to go a long way down the platform before stopping. Passengers often miss trains on platform changes.

Yes, before platform 0 was added it was always a simple few steps cross platform as all on the one island.

Previously the swap was platform 1 to platform 2 and rarely was a train missed.

Redhill has become an operational nightmare for passengers.

I remember the train we required was at least four coaches further up platform 0. A hopeless task having just negotiated a flight of steps, then hunted for the route to platform zero and lastly hauled the luggage up a flight of steps. All due to a platform change.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Yes Platform 0 and platform 2 constantly swap trains, and it is a convoluted route from one to the other, via a subway at one end of platform. Also because of the location of points & signals, trains tend to go a long way down the platform before stopping. Passengers often miss trains on platform changes.

The signals and points don't have a major impact on where 4 car or even the 3 car GWR stop and if the railway was really putting the passenger first they would keep them towards the country end of the platform to keep the walking distance down.

 

[Minstral25]

Oh I see so platforms two & three would be well back from the level crossing and existing buildings. I suppose if it is level there then it should be easy only if platform two loses it West end which is what I infer from the video. Seems all of the length of the two sidings would go to the new layout ?.

Yes and little return from £80 million apparently. Not going to happen so need a simpler solution without a third platform.

I remember the train we required was at least four coaches further up platform 0. A hopeless task having just negotiated a flight of steps, then hunted for the route to platform zero and lastly hauled the luggage up a flight of steps. All due to a platform change.

Exactly - doesn't help very little directional information or PIS systems

The signals and points don't have a major impact on where 4 car or even the 3 car GWR stop and if the railway was really putting the passenger first they would keep them towards the country end of the platform to keep the walking distance down.

Been raised many times but Network Rail keep telling the Rail users the points are the issue, however my mark 1 eyeballs agree with you.

 

[Hugo Smith]

The plan for 12 coach platform 3 was entirely on the car park area. If you look at Google Maps there are 9 parallel parking spaces just outside the existing platforms - that is where platform 3 ended to avoid the lower levels by the station. The main part of the car park by the sidings is level with tracks.


Most of Redhill route stations have way more passengers to London Bridge & Thameslink, Reigate is the exception. Perhaps caused by where the services go from Reigate.



Yes Platform 0 and platform 2 constantly swap trains, and it is a convoluted route from one to the other, via a subway at one end of platform. Also because of the location of points & signals, trains tend to go a long way down the platform before stopping. Passengers often miss trains on platform changes.

Previously the swap was platform 1 to platform 2 and rarely was a train missed.

Redhill has become an operational nightmare for passengers.

Had this problem on the 21st of Feb when the train to Reading changed platform from 2 to 0 literally as the train was hitting the points. I can remember looking at realtimetrains at the time and wondering why it changed platform for seemingly no reason. I think the station has actually got worse since they added platform 0