• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (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!

Southeastern Maidstone - Blackfriars 2022.

Status
Not open for further replies.

CFRAIL

Member
Joined
17 May 2019
Messages
232
I think this is going ahead. I believe Ashford drivers who had networkers taken off their traction will be signing them again. Another indication?
I've heard that the circa 30 new SE drivers all for the Ashford depot, will initially sign Blackfriars to Maidstone East with 465's as a kind of separate link.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

4-SUB 4732

Established Member
Joined
7 Jan 2018
Messages
2,150
I've heard that the circa 30 new SE drivers all for the Ashford depot, will initially sign Blackfriars to Maidstone East with 465's as a kind of separate link.
Hmmm... Very odd. Why they'd restrict themselves so heavily to that, who knows.
 

Class 466

Established Member
Joined
5 Mar 2010
Messages
1,408
Note that with 707s coming in, they'd easily free up enough 465/9 + 466 (6 Car) diagrams solely on Metro currently. Then you've got two 8 car 377 diagrams that are currently peak only and spend all day in Grosevenor Shed. I think that's where the stock will come from rather than any splitting down - given you cant run 8 car 465s on the MDE line.
 

brad465

Established Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
6,968
Location
Taunton or Kent
Note that with 707s coming in, they'd easily free up enough 465/9 + 466 (6 Car) diagrams solely on Metro currently. Then you've got two 8 car 377 diagrams that are currently peak only and spend all day in Grosevenor Shed. I think that's where the stock will come from rather than any splitting down - given you cant run 8 car 465s on the MDE line.
Yes I reckon the 6-car Networker sets could dominate the BFR-MDE services coming in, where their shorter length won't be an issue if 8 car 377s continue to run Ashford services, combined with the doubling of line frequency west of Maidstone.
 

FR510

Member
Joined
20 Oct 2020
Messages
50
Location
Kent
I think this is going ahead. I believe Ashford drivers who had networkers taken off their traction will be signing them again. Another indication?
Ashford don't sign the Medway Valley, only Tonbridge, Slade Green & Gillingham do. I believe Ashford are resigning the 465s for the MDE-BFR service. 466 are no longer allowed to run on their own - therefore cannot be used on the Valley anymore. There is an issue with platform lengths using a 465 on the valley. Which is why it's diagrammed for a 375/3 series. A 4 car 375 has to SDO release at 2 stations.
 

brad465

Established Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
6,968
Location
Taunton or Kent
Ashford don't sign the Medway Valley, only Tonbridge, Slade Green & Gillingham do. I believe Ashford are resigning the 465s for the MDE-BFR service. 466 are no longer allowed to run on their own - therefore cannot be used on the Valley anymore. There is an issue with platform lengths using a 465 on the valley. Which is why it's diagrammed for a 375/3 series. A 4 car 375 has to SDO release at 2 stations.
My understanding is only Beltring has that problem (a 4 car 375 has had an automated announcement stating this on arrival), however in the early part of the last decade there were occasional 465 runs on services on that line (especially in leaf fall season), which means that they either managed to stop them going to Paddock Wood or something happened to either Beltring or another point on the line that makes it no longer possible. What's been the case for a long time is in the peaks all services start/terminate at Paddock Wood, so whatever stock is allocated to a SOO-MDW service has to be able to go onto PDW because it will do in the peak.
 

Class 466

Established Member
Joined
5 Mar 2010
Messages
1,408
Ashford don't sign the Medway Valley, only Tonbridge, Slade Green & Gillingham do. I believe Ashford are resigning the 465s for the MDE-BFR service. 466 are no longer allowed to run on their own - therefore cannot be used on the Valley anymore. There is an issue with platform lengths using a 465 on the valley. Which is why it's diagrammed for a 375/3 series. A 4 car 375 has to SDO release at 2 stations.
The issue with 465s is the rear cab door hanging off if the driver doesn't pull past the end of the platform slightly at some stations. They did run along there okay from October 2011 to May 2012 alongside 2x2 466 however. 375/3s work fine for along both lines but shortly after introduction the MVL timetable was changed and added 2 minutes to the journey time to improve reliability (375 acceleration is slower than a 465/466 - especially on the /3s).
 

FR510

Member
Joined
20 Oct 2020
Messages
50
Location
Kent
My understanding is only Beltring has that problem (a 4 car 375 has had an automated announcement stating this on arrival), however in the early part of the last decade there were occasional 465 runs on services on that line (especially in leaf fall season), which means that they either managed to stop them going to Paddock Wood or something happened to either Beltring or another point on the line that makes it no longer possible. What's been the case for a long time is in the peaks all services start/terminate at Paddock Wood, so whatever stock is allocated to a SOO-MDW service has to be able to go onto PDW because it will do in the peak.
SDO release at Wateringbury too, although in reality it does just fit on. A 465 will not fit at Cuxton on the UP due to the guard despatching from the rear cab and the rear cab being off the end of the platform. Modern H&S as an issue with this. The 4 car stop mark at Cuxton on the up which was down the ramp to allow for the rear cab has been removed and replaced with a S car mark which is on the platform end now.
 

brad465

Established Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
6,968
Location
Taunton or Kent
SDO release at Wateringbury too, although in reality it does just fit on. A 465 will not fit at Cuxton on the UP due to the guard despatching from the rear cab and the rear cab being off the end of the platform. Modern H&S as an issue with this. The 4 car stop mark at Cuxton on the up which was down the ramp to allow for the rear cab has been removed and replaced with a S car mark which is on the platform end now.
I see, while I doubt this will happen, I do think the capacity should be created to allow 465s/alternative stock to be able to run there, especially now solo 466s cannot, for the sake of resilience, even if no plans to make 465s return regularly are made. Since 375/3s became a permanent feature in 2012 there have been occasions where 466s returned at least partially, including when the sea wall at Shakespeare tunnel collapsed and 375/3s had to run shuttles east of Dover, the semi-permanent return of a 466 to the MDW shuttle from September 2018-December 2019, including a 3-4 week period where power supply issues on the Sheerness branch made 466s run all services on the Medway Valley Line. There have also been odd occasions where a 466 turned up for just a day or two that demonstrate past resilience issues.
 

FR510

Member
Joined
20 Oct 2020
Messages
50
Location
Kent
I see, while I doubt this will happen, I do think the capacity should be created to allow 465s/alternative stock to be able to run there, especially now solo 466s cannot, for the sake of resilience, even if no plans to make 465s return regularly are made. Since 375/3s became a permanent feature in 2012 there have been occasions where 466s returned at least partially, including when the sea wall at Shakespeare tunnel collapsed and 375/3s had to run shuttles east of Dover, the semi-permanent return of a 466 to the MDW shuttle from September 2018-December 2019, including a 3-4 week period where power supply issues on the Sheerness branch made 466s run all services on the Medway Valley Line. There have also been odd occasions where a 466 turned up for just a day or two that demonstrate past resilience issues.
Yes, there was often a spare 466 at Gillingham EMUD in case it was needed on the Valley or the Island. This can no longer happen. A 465 cannot operate the Sheerness to Sittingbourne service either without missing out Swale. The curvature of the platform means the guard cannot safely despatch from the rear cab.
 

brad465

Established Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
6,968
Location
Taunton or Kent
Yes, there was often a spare 466 at Gillingham EMUD in case it was needed on the Valley or the Island. This can no longer happen. A 465 cannot operate the Sheerness to Sittingbourne service either without missing out Swale. The curvature of the platform means the guard cannot safely despatch from the rear cab.
That's interesting, because I have in the past been on a 465/9 operating the shuttle on that branch before. From memory it was in December 2017, where a much reduced service on the Chatham Mainline meant the 4 car unit was timed to meet up with the hourly Victoria services at Sittingbourne and presumably was needed as more passengers wanting the branch were arriving/departing at once (a 466 was doing the other working that wasn't timed as conveniently for onward connections).
 

FR510

Member
Joined
20 Oct 2020
Messages
50
Location
Kent
That's interesting, because I have in the past been on a 465/9 operating the shuttle on that branch before. From memory it was in December 2017, where a much reduced service on the Chatham Mainline meant the 4 car unit was timed to meet up with the hourly Victoria services at Sittingbourne and presumably was needed as more passengers wanting the branch were arriving/departing at once (a 466 was doing the other working that wasn't timed as conveniently for onward connections).
Perhaps it wasn't stopping at Swale - or if it was, the dwell time should have been increased because the guard would have to manually lock out a carriage or 2 before giving the driver the right away.
 

Class 466

Established Member
Joined
5 Mar 2010
Messages
1,408
That's interesting, because I have in the past been on a 465/9 operating the shuttle on that branch before. From memory it was in December 2017, where a much reduced service on the Chatham Mainline meant the 4 car unit was timed to meet up with the hourly Victoria services at Sittingbourne and presumably was needed as more passengers wanting the branch were arriving/departing at once (a 466 was doing the other working that wasn't timed as conveniently for onward connections).
The 465/9 would've been used as cover or because that's all that was available. Purely chance it was on the diagram that connected better.

Perhaps it wasn't stopping at Swale - or if it was, the dwell time should have been increased because the guard would have to manually lock out a carriage or 2 before giving the driver the right away.
The issue at Swale only became an official thing in December 2019. Prior to that 465s were used on there occasionally calling at Swale without a problem.
 

brad465

Established Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
6,968
Location
Taunton or Kent
The 465/9 would've been used as cover or because that's all that was available. Purely chance it was on the diagram that connected better.


The issue at Swale only became an official thing in December 2019. Prior to that 465s were used on there occasionally calling at Swale without a problem.
Was that because of the new PRM legislation coming into effect and the potential need to monitor such passengers more easily by any chance? Of course Networkers doing peak Sheerness services don't call at Swale anyway so I presume (in non-Covid times) are still running those services.

It does seem like our changes in safety standards of network operations have only seen SE be reactive, or not bothered to put anything in to maintain status quo/flexibility of operations when it comes to branch lines: the Medway Valley line can't take 465 passenger services anymore, Swale can't see anything more than 4 cars call at it, and of course the Bromley North branch until recently didn't permit anything other than 466s operating on it until DOO equipment could be adjusted (assuming that was the issue that caused a 466 derogation to extend their use there for another year).
 

southern442

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2013
Messages
2,186
Location
Surrey
A couple of questions, does this imply that the Victoria-Canterbury West service will be cut back to terminate at Ashford?
And secondly, does this allow for a semi-fast London-North Kent via Dartford service? It seems these have been somewhat missed since the Thameslink service was introduced.
 

Horizon22

Established Member
Associate Staff
Jobs & Careers
Joined
8 Sep 2019
Messages
7,446
Location
London
A couple of questions, does this imply that the Victoria-Canterbury West service will be cut back to terminate at Ashford?
And secondly, does this allow for a semi-fast London-North Kent via Dartford service? It seems these have been somewhat missed since the Thameslink service was introduced.

There are already semi-fast services to Gravesend from Charing Cross although perhaps not as "fast" as many would like and of course not via the North Kent. I sincerely doubt that service is coming back any time soon - not to mention Crossrail at Abbey Wood will seriously alter travel patterns. But no, I don't think these would have any impact on availability of paths there.
 

southern442

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2013
Messages
2,186
Location
Surrey
There are already semi-fast services to Gravesend from Charing Cross although perhaps not as "fast" as many would like and of course not via the North Kent. I sincerely doubt that service is coming back any time soon - not to mention Crossrail at Abbey Wood will seriously alter travel patterns. But no, I don't think these would have any impact on availability of paths there.
That's very true, I bet Crossrail into the city would be a considerable time improvement, not to mention a far better scope of destinations.
 

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
4,005
Today's New Eltham fast to London Bridge pattern is surely faster than the beloved old Blackheath-Woolwich routing to Gillingham? Especially as that added Charlton in later years.

As said, so many North Kent folks will decamp at Abbey Wood going forward, especially those for the West End who might have taken the Jubilee line, or Canary Wharf people grabbing the DLR at one of three points. City people might still use London Bridge and Cannon St, it will depend where.
 

southern442

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2013
Messages
2,186
Location
Surrey
Today's New Eltham fast to London Bridge pattern is surely faster than the beloved old Blackheath-Woolwich routing to Gillingham? Especially as that added Charlton in later years.

As said, so many North Kent folks will decamp at Abbey Wood going forward, especially those for the West End who might have taken the Jubilee line, or Canary Wharf people grabbing the DLR at one of three points. City people might still use London Bridge and Cannon St, it will depend where.
I'd probably say that even people going to the City might switch to XR due to the Whitechapel and Liverpool Street connections.
How often does the New Eltham - London Bridge service run? Wikipedia says every half-hour but from what I can see it seems to be peaks only in the 'rona times.

As a separate note, the yet further slimming down of services on the Chatham Main Line is quite disappointing to see. Yes, HS1 provides a faster journey time but only if you can regularly afford it, in my eyes that is certainly not a 'replacement' in my view.
(Off-topic, but I sincerely hope the same thing does not happen with HS2 services unless they are made to be somewhat affordable, i.e. no more expensive than the current Avanti fasts.)
 

traingeek97

Member
Joined
7 Jun 2020
Messages
85
Location
Kent
How often does the New Eltham - London Bridge service run? Wikipedia says every half-hour but from what I can see it seems to be peaks only in the 'rona times.

@southern442 It was half hourly before the amended timetable. The first version of the Coronavirus timetable had a semi-fast service between Dartford and Charing Cross via Sidcup.
 

James H

Member
Joined
25 Jun 2014
Messages
1,083
This has now hit the Kent media
There have been objections over the plans from the Sevenoaks Rail Travellers Association, Maidstone Borough Council and West Malling Parish Council.


At a virtual Kent County Council (KCC) scrutiny meeting yesterday, 13 county councillors of all political stripes urged the Department for Transport to rethink.
 

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,397
Location
UK
It has emerged that there are “practical constraints” to the government-led plans, including no direct train link from London Bridge to Blackfriars, while signals on the proposed under-the-hour rail route need to be upgraded.

I'm concerned over this part of the article. The route was extensively upgraded recently. Thameslink services run between London Bridge and Blackfriars so there should be a direct link available. Does anyone know what signals need upgrading or why the article is stating there isn't a dirfect link ?
 

Ianno87

Veteran Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
15,215
The papers for the meeting mentioned in the article are here:

Video of the meeting:

Found in the documents:
Following information received from a number of sources within the rail industry, it has become evident that this ambition would need to be delivered in two stages: an initial service to London Blackfriars, with an eventual extension via St Pancras to Cambridge. It has also become clear that there are several constraints to the operation of the original service, which will result in its routeing via Bromley South and the Catford loop line rather than via London Bridge:

(i) There is concern that the operation of the full 24tph service through the central-core (which would be realised with the addition of 2tph to/from Maidstone) would result in service disruption affecting all branches of the Thameslink network. This is partly due to the fact that the signalling technology required to support 24tph has not proved as resilient as was presumed when the full Thameslink programme was planned, and partly due to the delayed deployment of a new Traffic Management System known as ‘Digital Railway’;

(ii) There is no crossover from the tracks which link London Bridge with Blackfriars to the bay platforms (3 & 4) at Blackfriars, which means that trains required to terminate at Blackfriars must be routed via Elephant & Castle

(iii) There is also doubt that an additional 2tph could be accommodated on the fast route from Chislehurst Junction to London Bridge without causing performance delays with other services. All of these factors have led to the conclusion that the new service would need initially to be operated via the Catford loop line into the bay platforms at Blackfriars. This would restore a direct link between the Maidstone East line stations and the City, but would not provide the additional through connectivity to the other stations in the central Thameslink core.
It is however not true to state that this would be a slow service, in the sense that the Sevenoaks via Bat & Ball to Blackfriars is a slow stopping service calling at all stations on its route. The new service to/from Maidstone East would more accurately be described as semi-fast and would be expected to take an average of about 65 or 66 minutes to/from Blackfriars. This would represent an increase in journey time of 20% when compared with the original proposal, and not 33% as has been reported. The stopping pattern of the new service is yet to be agreed by the Department for Transport, which now controls all aspects of the train operating companies, but it would be expected to call at West Malling, Borough Green & Wrotham, Otford, Swanley, Bromley South, Denmark Hill and Elephant & Castle only before terminating at Blackfriars. Unlike the slow Bat & Ball service, it would not call at all the intermediate stations on the Catford loop line. This is far from ideal and does fall short of the original goal as set out in LTP4, and which remains Kent County Council’s ultimate goal for this service, but it is the only realistic option for the new service at present.
 

NorthKent1989

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2017
Messages
1,898
Today's New Eltham fast to London Bridge pattern is surely faster than the beloved old Blackheath-Woolwich routing to Gillingham? Especially as that added Charlton in later years.

As said, so many North Kent folks will decamp at Abbey Wood going forward, especially those for the West End who might have taken the Jubilee line, or Canary Wharf people grabbing the DLR at one of three points. City people might still use London Bridge and Cannon St, it will depend where.

I recall that when the service was diverted via Greenwich it was roughly the same time as the Sidcup service now, maybe a 2/3 mins time difference and that was with the stop at Charlton too

This has now hit the Kent media

I can understand why they would be unhappy but it’s better than nothing
 

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
4,005
Would this be a new frequency to Maidstone, or replace an existing one? In which case, it is still a benefit. Stopping patterns could be played with if it is a net new frequency - appreciate the Catford Loop is slower than via Grove Park, but the Denmark Hill connection may be useful. ELL both ways and connections to Victoria (if missed, for instance).

Do the HS1 trains still run? That was ~45 mins Maidstone to St Pancras also (and a much quicker way to Cambridge!)
 

Aictos

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2009
Messages
10,403
What's the issue with terminating at Blackfriars and going via Elephant and Castle to do this?
 

Class 466

Established Member
Joined
5 Mar 2010
Messages
1,408
Would this be a new frequency to Maidstone, or replace an existing one? In which case, it is still a benefit. Stopping patterns could be played with if it is a net new frequency - appreciate the Catford Loop is slower than via Grove Park, but the Denmark Hill connection may be useful. ELL both ways and connections to Victoria (if missed, for instance).

Do the HS1 trains still run? That was ~45 mins Maidstone to St Pancras also (and a much quicker way to Cambridge!)
New, so Maidstone East would have 4tph to London off peak rather than the current 2.

Yep the Maidstone West to St Pancras services still run. Albeit only 2tpd in each direction rather than the previous 3.
 

brad465

Established Member
Joined
11 Aug 2010
Messages
6,968
Location
Taunton or Kent
New, so Maidstone East would have 4tph to London off peak rather than the current 2.

Yep the Maidstone West to St Pancras services still run. Albeit only 2tpd in each direction rather than the previous 3.
Do you mean "yet" in that last line? The peak high speed services not only are a good service for Maidstone and Snodland, but in the morning they provide more capacity for Strood and Gravesend, who often lose out to Medway town services being more crowded, or in the case of the Broadstairs' services they're skipped entirely.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top