TFL & "Managed Decline"

[JonathanH]

Would make much more sense to enlarge (or in the case of North Ockendon, shrink) Greater London's boundary to the be the utterly inescapable physical barrier of the M25.

The M25 is an artificial boundary itself being the combination of two different planned roads at different distances from Central London. There is no justification for extending Greater London out to the M25 given the green belt and the upheaval it would cause.

 

[Lewlew]

Why on Earth would you go through the expense of transferring stock to a line that are at best a couple of years younger (and are longer anyway so probably won't fit)? Makes no sense whatsoever.

Correct that the 1973 stock won’t fit in the Bakerloo tunnels. The latest talk was new trains for the Jubilee with the 96ts being split between the Northern and Bakerloo but that has gone quiet.

 

[Wolfie]

Damn. OK, withdraw all buses from there. Especially if they're a certain type introduced under the member for that area

Actually, there's a great idea. Dozens of bendy buses for Uxbridge....

 

[tspaul26]

Re 2. Isn't there some historic/legal obligation to provide a free ferry for passengers at Woolwich? Isn't that why it has always been free??

There is provision in the Metropolitan Board of Works (Various Powers) Act 1885, but I’m not at work so can’t check the exact wording (it’s not available online as far as I’m aware).

 

[Bletchleyite]

....and that's a problem because...?

Adversarial politics is about the worst thing about the UK.

 

[jumble]

If a line were to close, my suggestion would be the Uxbridge branch of the Met. The peak hour Piccadilly could continue to serve the stations from there to Rayners Lane, the West Ruislip branch of the Central is close, as is Uxbridge to West Drayton, with its (by then) Crossrail trains. The Jubilee could take some of the traffic northwards from Baker Street, and Harrow-on-the-Hill would still have a very good service southbound. Might just concentrate the mind of Uxbridge's MP when his constituents kick off. Just leave the Jubilee alone!

If you were to see how many people join Met trains in the morning peaks and get off in the evening peak at Rayners Lane you would come to the conclusion that this would not be a good idea at all
Pre pandemic you could not get a seat on some Peak services after Hillingdon

 

[JonathanH]

Pre pandemic you could not get a seat on some Peak services after Hillingdon

If there were pre pandemic loadings now we wouldn't be talking about cuts and budget savings. It must be imagined that TfL's analysts are keeping a close eye on loadings and know where service reductions are appropriate and where they aren't.

 

[JamesRowden]

The real solution to balance the books is to raise TfL fares (for example by 50%) and/or cut off-peak frequency at the extermities. Does Barking-Upminster really need an Underground train every 5 minutes outside the peak (I say this as someone who uses the service many times a year)?

I travelled West Croydon to Elm Park for £1 (with railcard discount) on the Overground/Underground in 2016. That fare was stupidly low and probably not much more now.

This situation seems to be completely caused by each political party wanting to win votes off each other, rather than a problem that doesn't have a simple (if it weren't for politics) good solution.

 

[bramling]

Why on Earth would you go through the expense of transferring stock to a line that are at best a couple of years younger (and are longer anyway so probably won't fit)? Makes no sense whatsoever.

I meant a proportion of the new Picc Line fleet, allowed for by reduced services on both lines. That is workable, albeit would be painful (you’d almost certainly have to lose regular Bakerloo services north of Queen’s Park bar depot workings).

 

[ScottGallagher]

Correct that the 1973 stock won’t fit in the Bakerloo tunnels. The latest talk was new trains for the Jubilee with the 96ts being split between the Northern and Bakerloo but that has gone quiet.

Why on Earth would you go through the expense of transferring stock to a line that are at best a couple of years younger (and are longer anyway so probably won't fit)? Makes no sense whatsoever.

Genuine question here ,As both the Bakerloo and Piccadilly line tunnels were originally built by the same Yerkes company around the same time why wouldn't they have the same dimensions?

 

[bramling]

Genuine question here ,As both the Bakerloo and Piccadilly line tunnels were originally built by the same Yerkes company around the same time why wouldn't they have the same dimensions?

The Piccadilly and Hampstead lines have always seemed better engineered than the Bakerloo, which was the first of the three. Features like longer platforms, platforms normally in the middle instead of either side, and in general fewer sharp curves (though not entirely absent - for example at South Kensington).

 

[birchesgreen]

A lot of the tight curves in the older tubes are due to having to follow street layouts and not go under certain buildings.

 

[bramling]

A lot of the tight curves in the older tubes are due to having to follow street layouts and not go under certain buildings.

This doesn’t seem to be the full story though, as all three of the Bakerloo, Piccadilly and Hampstead were bound by this, yet the Bakerloo seems to have ended up with a far worse alignment than the other two. I suppose it could simply be the particular street layout available for the desired route.

 

[Busaholic]

If you were to see how many people join Met trains in the morning peaks and get off in the evening peak at Rayners Lane yo(u would come to the conclusion that this would not be a good idea at all
Pre pandemic you could not get a seat on some Peak services after Hillingdon

Of course it wouldn't be a good idea - it might force some onto other Underground lines or (shock!horror!) buses. After all, if the Jubilee Line (as suggested earlier in the thread) was to cease operating in S.E. London the repurcussions would be far greater. All those people arriving at North Greenwich on buses queuing to get onto a (probably full on arrival anyway) 108 through the Blackwall Tunnel as the only way to get to the right side of the Thames for their work. No, if Johnson and co. want to play silly whatsits then let the people who voted for him be sorely inconvenienced: it's just unfortunate that the 'innocent' get hurt too until sense prevails, if it ever does.

 

[cactustwirly]

Why can't TFL get rid of the free tickets for kids and elderly, rather than cut actual services. Surely this is going to save more money?

 

[The Ham]

What is happening is essentially the Johnson government punishing London for voting Labour and voting Khan, and also perhaps to a small extent a dislike of TfL by Johnson himself, perhaps again because it is a Labour creation and has tended to act as a mouthpiece for the left-leaning mayors Livingstone and Khan (for some reason this didn’t seem to happen in the same way during the Johnson mayoral years).

TfL has always come across as a very political organisation in a way that something like Network Rail doesn’t. Looking back over the last two decades I’m not sure this has served London particularly well. Things like the Victoria Line upgrade and S stock have been got right, but a lot has been got wrong too.

The issue with trying to politically harm London is that it's likely to happen the South East.

I can imagine that a MP in Surrey or Hampshire (almost certainly a Tory MP) will be very happy about having to say that because of the government not providing enough funding to TfL is the reason that their local area isn't going to see any increase in services for the next 30 years because Crossrail 2 isn't going to be built because the Tories want to harm the Labour party.

 

[bramling]

The issue with trying to politically harm London is that it's likely to happen the South East.

I can imagine that a MP in Surrey or Hampshire (almost certainly a Tory MP) will be very happy about having to say that because of the government not providing enough funding to TfL is the reason that their local area isn't going to see any increase in services for the next 30 years because Crossrail 2 isn't going to be built because the Tories want to harm the Labour party.

Absolutely. However, Boris seems so utterly obsessed with the “punish London” and “shaft Khan” agenda that he’s overlooking all this, and taking the south-east Conservative votes for granted.

Hence I’d imagine a lot of south-east Conservative voters getting increasingly fed up with him and his government, which will no doubt turn to serious questions being asked regarding his leadership. From what I gather, this is already an issue in Bexley & Sidcup.

It’s actually a highly risky strategy for Boris personally as well, as it’s by no means inconceivable that, should he last long enough to fight the next election as incumbent PM, he could lose in his own Uxbridge seat. By current London standards, his majority there is wafer-thin.

 

[JonathanH]

I can imagine that a MP in Surrey or Hampshire (almost certainly a Tory MP) will be very happy about having to say that because of the government not providing enough funding to TfL is the reason that their local area isn't going to see any increase in services for the next 30 years because Crossrail 2 isn't going to be built because the Tories want to harm the Labour party.

The quid-pro-pro of people continuing to predominately work from home over the long term is that there isn't going to be investment in the rallways because it isn't needed. The electorate can't have it both ways. Railway provision may not be the political issue it used to be. While I recognise that a shiny new bit of railway or an increase in services may be something for politicians to point to, there are other matters about which voters are going to make their decisions.

 

[Snow1964]

The Piccadilly and Hampstead lines have always seemed better engineered than the Bakerloo, which was the first of the three. Features like longer platforms, platforms normally in the middle instead of either side, and in general fewer sharp curves (though not entirely absent - for example at South Kensington).

It’s a bit more complicated that, it actually started as 4 lines (Finsbury Park - Aldwych) and (Hammersmith - Leicester Square) were started as separate lines, but joined together before opening.

Some of the sharp curves on Piccadilly line we’re later eased, can’t remember if they cut some webbing off some segments, or if they removed part of a ring one by one, chiselled off some clay, and added some spacers (thus leaving a non-round tunnel). I know Central line had some of latter when platforms extended (as were built on humps, and extension would have been on slope).

As the new Piccadilly line trains are bit longer than existing 6car (new are 9 car, actually 5 cars with 4 suspended joining sections without bogies between each) there will be capacity increase even staying at existing 24 trains per hour. It would be very easy to send those ordered for enhanced frequency to Bakerloo.

Probably very easy to defer the transfer of Ealing Broadway service from District Line to Piccadilly line, and cutting some workings back to Acton Town, or reducing Heathrow frequency once Elizabeth line is open, thus needing even fewer of the new Piccadilly line fleet on the Piccadilly. Could probably just about convert the Bakerloo if it lost some Harrow workings (and there are enhancement trains for Overground which could run instead), especially if the intended enhancements get deferred due to the cash crisis at TfL

 

[DynamicSpirit]

The real solution to balance the books is to raise TfL fares (for example by 50%) and/or cut off-peak frequency at the extermities.

The risk is that cuts usage, which is to some extent self-defeating, AND pushes more people to cars - which is even more self-defeating because that slows down the buses, making them more expensive to operate.

I'd argue that the real solution to balance the books is to implement some kind of London-wide congestion charge - obviously not as expensive as the central London one, but enough to act as some deterrent to people driving unnecessarily. That will have the side-effect of making buses quicker and therefore both more attractive and cheaper to run (because of less congestion on the roads), as well as giving health/pollution benefits. I really don't understand why Sadiq Khan has been so opposed to something like that.

Does Barking-Upminster really need an Underground train every 5 minutes outside the peak (I say this as someone who uses the service many times a year)?

That's probably an extreme case, and I suspect if that's the frequency of that line, you could reduce it. But frankly, the number of places where you could make substantial savings in that way is going to be too small to make much of a dent in TfL's finances.

I travelled West Croydon to Elm Park for £1 (with railcard discount) on the Overground/Underground in 2016. That fare was stupidly low and probably not much more now.

That fare now shows as £1.70 off-peak. Even so, I agree with you that kind of fare is ridiculous and ought to be higher. The problem here is the zonal fare system, which doesn't account for how long the journey is - only that you haven't passed through zone 1. I feel it's long overdue for replacing with a distance-based fare system which would allow for longer orbital journeys to be charged more appropriately. But again, there probably aren't enough people making those kind of journeys to make that much difference to TfL's finances.

 

[hkstudent]

The risk is that cuts usage, which is to some extent self-defeating, AND pushes more people to cars - which is even more self-defeating because that slows down the buses, making them more expensive to operate.

I'd argue that the real solution to balance the books is to implement some kind of London-wide congestion charge - obviously not as expensive as the central London one, but enough to act as some deterrent to people driving unnecessarily. That will have the side-effect of making buses quicker and therefore both more attractive and cheaper to run (because of less congestion on the roads), as well as giving health/pollution benefits. I really don't understand why Sadiq Khan has been so opposed to something like that.



That's probably an extreme case, and I suspect if that's the frequency of that line, you could reduce it. But frankly, the number of places where you could make substantial savings in that way is going to be too small to make much of a dent in TfL's finances.



That fare now shows as £1.70 off-peak. Even so, I agree with you that kind of fare is ridiculous and ought to be higher. The problem here is the zonal fare system, which doesn't account for how long the journey is - only that you haven't passed through zone 1. I feel it's long overdue for replacing with a distance-based fare system which would allow for longer orbital journeys to be charged more appropriately. But again, there probably aren't enough people making those kind of journeys to make that much difference to TfL's finances.

Tbh, off peak travel demand was so low that, using super low fare for non zone 1 journeys is to attract more people to travel, to fill the empty trains.
Some fare paying pax still better than no pax.

 

[Mojo]

The TfL hire bikes don't go out as far as Ruislip/Uxbridge, unfortunately. They don't go very far beyond central London at all in fact, in most directions ... and there are a few glaring gaps in provision that need filling in even there.

Although there is a separate cycle hire scheme in Uxbridge, confusingly also called Santander Cycles, but these are funded by Brunel University and London Borough of Hillingdon.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why can't TFL get rid of the free tickets for kids and elderly, rather than cut actual services. Surely this is going to save more money?

Because they have no intention of closing anything. It is posturing.

 

[317 forever]

I *so* wish Johnson would simply have the courage to do away with the mayoralty altogether. It’s so frustrating all this petty mayoral politics gets tangled up with TfL.

Having said that, even in LT days the politicians were never too far away, but at least most of the time (GLC days excepted) you didn’t have London transport caught in the middle of a spat between *two* lots of politicians, which is what we have at the moment.

There was the referendum in 1998 where Londoners voted to introduce the position of elected Mayor. The Conservatives even came round to supporting the idea.

It would therefore be undemocratic to abolish the position unless Londoners cast such a vote in a future ballot.

The Queen's Park to Baker Street section could even be transferred to the Jubilee Line during such a shutdown, diverting the trains that currently terminate at West Hampstead.

Reopening could then eventually coincide with the Lewisham extension and new stock, which would be considerably easier to introduce with no 72TS to worry about.

I wonder whether a Baker Street - Queen's Park shuttle could operate? This would depend on whether there is the facility to turn trains round at Baker Street. The Baker Street - Elephant & Castle section largely goes near the Jubilee or Northern Line. Regent's Park is near Great Portland Street, served by other lines, and Lambeth North near Waterloo or Elephant & Castle.

The Queen's Park to Baker Street section could even be transferred to the Jubilee Line during such a shutdown, diverting the trains that currently terminate at West Hampstead.

Reopening could then eventually coincide with the Lewisham extension and new stock, which would be considerably easier to introduce with no 72TS to worry about.

I wonder whether a Baker Street - Queen's Park shuttle could operate? This would depend on whether there is the facility to turn trains round at Baker Street. The Baker Street - Elephant & Castle section largely goes near the Jubilee or Northern Line. Regent's Park is near Great Portland Street, served by other lines, and Lambeth North near Waterloo or Elephant & Castle.

 

[Busaholic]

I wonder whether a Baker Street - Queen's Park shuttle could operate? This would depend on whether there is the facility to turn trains round at Baker Street. The Baker Street - Elephant & Castle section largely goes near the Jubilee or Northern Line. Regent's Park is near Great Portland Street, served by other lines, and Lambeth North near Waterloo or Elephant & Castle.

That would be ridiculous, if even possible, which I doubt. Only Baker Street to Waterloo would be possible on the Jubilee, Baker Street is nowhere near the Northern Line (if you think Euston is, then Queen's Park etc passengers can use Overground to go there instead!) TfL have already withdrawn virtually all bus services between Oxford Circus and Charing Cross to encourage more people onto the Bakerloo, etc etc. Oh, and Waterloo to Oxford Circus is one half of the obvious and quickest way to get to Kings Cross from Waterloo, now that there's no direct bus link again, and is used by thousands every day.

 

[Dstock7080]

I wonder whether a Baker Street - Queen's Park shuttle could operate? This would depend on whether there is the facility to turn trains round at Baker Street.

It is not possible to reverse at Baker Street Bakerloo, nearest place would be Paddington.

 

[Class 170101]

Duplication of bus routes along long stretches of road encompassing many areas has gradually been phased out in recent years, with very few exceptions for which there are good reasons e.g. all-day bus passenger demand and lack of suitable parallel railway lines.

But might also reflect the way routes are set up. Where I live we have a parallel bus route to the town centre as it also serves the main Hospital, a bus park, a rail station, two major supermarkets and several schools with consequently high demand, however beyond the town centre to the opposite side there isn't so many traffic generators on either route a university for one and another major supermarket for the other.

Just reported in the Evening Standard, the latest escalation from TFl,

• An entire tube line may have to close (implied Bakerloo or Jubilee most likely)
• A Section 114 notice may have to be issued, effective "bankruptcy"
• 5% fare rise predicted for January (RPI + 1%)

TfL: entire Tube line may have to close and bankruptcy notice issued

TfL commissioner says problems are even more challenging than Crossrail as bumper fares hike looms

www.standard.co.uk

Probably could cease operating west of Rayners Lane for the Piccadilly Line, and reduce therefore number of trainsets required, the same on the Bakerloo Line north of Queen's Park except for some movements to and from Stonebridge Park and again would reduce the number of train sets required. Here is the controversial one, cease operating the Metropolitian Line south of Baker Street and to Amersham, Half Hourly service only Moor Park to Chesham. Even more contoversial withdraw the Met south of Wembley Park passengers change onto the Jubilee Line. Not running on the Jubilee Line towards North Greenwich and Stratford would harm both the O2, Olympic Park area and Westfield (Stratford) and most of these will be traffic generators going forward regardless of covid.

What a load of tripe. All they will need to do is reduce frequencies commensurate with reduced demand, and increase bus fares to a similar level to other cities rather than the penny-levels they are at now. Plus, if they want, add locally funded subsidy.

This is just bluster to try to get more money from central Government.

If they did want to kill a Tube line the Waterloo and City would be the one, but I'm unconvinced that is necessary.

Frequency reductions seem likely and potentially you might close the Drain it really depends how demand comes back.

Why can't TFL get rid of the free tickets for kids and elderly, rather than cut actual services. Surely this is going to save more money?

Politically that would be unacceptable to be seen to damage a child's future (and if not it should be). As for Elderly passes removal I'd consider that to be a non-starter as well. The 'Grey' Vote is very strong politically but also those passes allow people to move around and keep active rather than stay at home all day everyday and the potential costs of social care of inactive people which are probably higher than the costs of the passes themselves.

 

[Starmill]

Can anyone shed any light on the state of the Silvertown Tunnel contract? Has progressed such that it not be cancelled? Surely deferring the new tunnel a decade would help with the current finances?

The proposed toll for the Blackwall Tunnel could be expedited.

If there's a historical obligation to provide a free crossing at Woolwich, Parliament could be lobbied to repeal it and start charging, or cease funding the service publicly.

 

[bramling]

That would be ridiculous, if even possible, which I doubt. Only Baker Street to Waterloo would be possible on the Jubilee, Baker Street is nowhere near the Northern Line (if you think Euston is, then Queen's Park etc passengers can use Overground to go there instead!) TfL have already withdrawn virtually all bus services between Oxford Circus and Charing Cross to encourage more people onto the Bakerloo, etc etc. Oh, and Waterloo to Oxford Circus is one half of the obvious and quickest way to get to Kings Cross from Waterloo, now that there's no direct bus link again, and is used by thousands every day.

A Queen’s Park to Paddington shuttle would be possible, 5 trains or so for a 5-minute service. Feed into Crossrail at Paddington.

 

[deltic]

Why can't TFL get rid of the free tickets for kids and elderly, rather than cut actual services. Surely this is going to save more money?

No - concessionary fares are paid for by London Boroughs and free tickets for kids costs very little and may generate revenue from families that would otherwise not travel -