London Bridge: The First Sign of Things to Come

1. New images of the future entrance on Tooley Street were released today…

2. @ Southern Heights – I see we have the now customary “no more Glasgow Airport car bomb attack” anti terror concrete blocks disguised as seats and 9 million metal bollards protecting the pavement edge. I understand the thinking about these things but they do create a horrible visual clutter as well as not doing much for pedestrian flow if you’re encumbered, pushing a buggy, wheeling a bicycle. Surely we can do better than this nonsense?

3. Re Southern Heights,

   Also confirmation in the associated text you linked to that demolition will start on the Tooley Street side at Easter 2016…

4. WW
   I trust you know about the metal protecting bollards @ Liverpool St – at the top of a set of steps?
   No, you couldn’t make it up.
   Oh for a revival of the “Railway Eye” web-site – which appears to be “parked” at present,

5. Greg,

   (assuming the steps are going down from the road)

   And why not? A suicide bomber is hardly going to be put off by steps. I would have thought any Land Rover owner would have worked that one out.

6. Re PoP,

   I suspect more that they don’t want the repair bill for the escalators getting rammed…

7. PoP
   The steps, in both cases are UP & in the case of East side are behind a set of railings as well ….
   Try google street view for a full scenario, I think.

8. @WW: I hadn’t noticed that! How retro! You’d almost think the IRA was still around… Ahem…

   What does please me is that the Shipwirght Arms does survive… A proper, old school pub, next to a station…

9. When discussing the possibility of cars driving up or down steps I would refer you all to the first (and best) ‘The Italian Job” film.

   I rest my case.

10. The Old Law Court in Belfast has a bomb proof wall around it (disguised as a classical podium), but they have built a new court next door made of glass.

11. The Cottons bridge seems to be missing…

12. @Southern Heights – you could leave it there. But there won’t be anything on the station side for it to connect to. A bridge to nowhere.
    Come to think of it, that would make good company for a subway to nowhere not a million miles from there.

13. @Southern Heights, @Mike P. The Cottons Bridge stays, but the barrier line at the station end goes; that passage under the tracks at the bottom of the existing ramps becomes unpaid, and the route for the emergency exits from the London end of the through platforms.

14. Re Mike P and Southern Heights,

    It will be there (both footbridges are a little ugly and tend to get left out of the nice looking renderings for some reason…) and it will connect with the bus station and upper level concourse. The Western end fire escapes from the new platforms 1-9 will open on to the area beneath the tracks it connects to.

15. Cottons Bridge? What is that?

16. @ timbeau,

    Cotton’s Bridge is the eastern of two footbridges over Tooley St near the north entrance to the station, Google Street View shows them well.

    On the architectural merit scale they are both possibly about “-1”

17. Ahhhh. Thanks for that, all. That makes sense. I seemed to remember last time this got discussed no-one came up with a definitive answer, and there was much discussion of Tooley Street being full of people heading for More London and heading for London Bridge via t’other bridge.
    Just too much “artistic license”, obvs.

18. And then architects wonder why people don’t trust their wonderfully attractive impressions of what a new development will look like.

19. The two footbridges are in the wide picture looking up Tooley Street towards Duke Street Hill.

    There is an odd perspective that makes them seem rather distant, but zoom in and they are there.

20. Just had a look at that on Streetview, not sure I have ever come out of the Joiner Street entrance, certainly not paid attention to it anyway… but there is something impressive about the way it is layers of pure civil engineering with no ‘design’… although there are also hints of an entrance to Mordor there, which at 530pm is probably not too far from true…

21. @Paul ‘On the architectural merit scale they are both possibly about “-1”’
    That is a bit harsh. The larger bridge, when viewed from the West, blends well with the Building to the North of Duke Street Hill. They look as though they were built together. When viewed from the East it is the concrete carbuncle which is the end of that same building which is the worst of the view. The smaller bridge is a much lighter looking construction being see-through until one is close up. Neither could possibly be said to blend with the massive, dark looking brick edifice that is the Northern face of the London Bridge Station viaducts. This is what detracts from any view on Tooley street or Dukes Hill Street. Anything to blend with that would be an offence to the rest of the architecture in the area. The brickwork may have it’s historical value but for a North facing wall it is altogether too dark. The new concourse entrance will bring some much welcomed relief for the part that is changed. As far as I am aware here appear to be no plans to improve the rest.

22. I wonder if the bridges would still be built now if they didn’t already exist? Aren’t the planners basically going back to crossings generally rather than subways or footbridges?

    And of course many of the pedestrian flows in the wider area will presumably be completely different once the main concourse is at ground level.

23. @Southern Heights
    as well as the absence of the footbridges, there is another thing absent from that picture. The bus in the foreground is running with an open platform – south of the river! Even if the 47, 343, 381 or RV1 is in line for Borismasters, it is not expected that any more routes will run in that form, and in act the most recent re-design has made it impossible.

    I noted the “Tosca” branding on the shopfront – in the colours of a well-known anagrammatic caffeine-peddler.

24. I’ve long expected this building which the western bridge connects with to go, but it seems to hang on: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5060655,-0.0878548,3a,75y,69.83h,108.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stDZhLhOz7D0kkypWlWhXIw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

    It’s not very tall and has no active frontages at street level, which would bring in a lot of money in that location. Perhaps the owners are waiting until 2018.

25. Re Ed,

    Colechurch House – I believe the owners are (still) the Corporation of London.

    Workers getting into the City while not screwing up traffic over London Bridge would appear to have been the main aims when they built it (and may still be?).
    Hence they may not think like any most other potential owners…

26. @ngh: technically the Bridge House Estates, as administered by the Corporation of London to fund the maintenance of London Bridge – some of the land in Southwark has been in continuous ownership of the Bridge House Estates since the Middle Ages.

    Southwark Council have agreed to sell them the wide pavement in front of the building to enable a larger redevelopment, with some suggestion of a two storey pedestrian colonnade through the site.

27. Ian J,

    technically the Bridge House Estates, as administered by the Corporation of London to fund the maintenance of London’s bridges within the City of London. So, according to Mr Wikipedia, that is currently Blackfriars, Southwark, Tower, London and the Millennium bridges.

28. As Mr Wikipedia also points out, Tower Bridge is administered by the Bridge House Estates even though its northern landfall is outside the City. (If built, Lumley’s Link would also be just outside the boundary) Both Southwark Bridge and the Millennium Bridge were built by other organisations (although the BHE provided some of the funding for the latter) and their management was taken over by the BHE later.

    The more westerly of the two bridges actually spans Duke Street Hill – Tooley Street runs behind Colechurch House and under the approach span of London Bridge. The original Bridge House was somewhere in that area – on part of the site now occupied by the London Bridge Hospital, between Tooley Street and the river.

29. RE ngh ‘both footbridges are a little ugly and tend to get left out of the nice looking renderings for some reason…’
    Architects will quite happily delete from artistic impressions anything which obstructs a clear view of their new creation. The most beautiful of objects will be deleted if it’s considered to be an obstruction to their view: even if it blends in well.
    So Colechurch House is to be replaced at some time and the bridge is said to be ‘likely’ to disappear and the pavement only ‘likely’ to remain accessible as a colonnaded walk. It all sounds very iffy. Would the lack of the bridge have any consequences?

30. I still wonder if they have really worked out the passenger flows. The Westerly bridge currently takes a significant number of passengers across Tooley Street from the terminating platforms and form the large numbers crossing London Bridge in the morning and evening.

    In the new station plan, from 2018 onwards these passengers from Surrey & Sussex will all be driopped onto platform 5, down into the “Wembley Stadium Sized” pit and come out the main entrance. Effectively meaning there will be a large continuous stream of passengers crossing Tooley Street, which will surely cause traffic problems?

    Unless someone knows better than me

31. @T33
    “the “Wembley Stadium Sized” pit “…….. is actually only the size of the PITCH at Wembley – which is the standard size for all football pitches specified by UEFA.

    You could just about fit London Bridge station inside the actual stadium.

32. T33 – you’re not wrong. Tooley Street seems jammed up a lot of the time as it is. There’s still a need for a bridge. Any redevelopment looks likely with the story above of Southwark selling land for it. A 100m tower is plausible. It should contain bridge access.

    Another development of 25 storeys is being proposed to the east of the station, though at least no road crossing involved. http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/8451

    It does however give a hint of how London Bridge will evolve in future. Quite a few more towers.

33. @Ed: Actually the Southern passengers will be quite lucky, they will retain the use of the overpass to Colechurch House, it’s the drect link from the Southeastern platforms to that link and the direct link to the Cottons & Hays Galleria that is going… A bad mstake I think….

34. @SH – I thought like you at first, then realised that it isn’t just the SouthEastern passengers, but the Thameslink ones too – which will be a lot of the people who currently exit on the High Level side.

35. @MikeP Yes all the Horsham/East Grinstead/Brighton/Redhill/Purley/East Croydon passengers will be moved from the Terminus to Platform 4/5 – so all will now be crossing Tooley Street.

    Another thing I’ve noticed is the depth of the new concourse – there are 4 flights of stairs from the platform to Ground level – when changing platforms it’ll take 3 or 4 extra minutes. They will need to create a footbridge almost as soon as the station is open.

    IMO this thoughtless design is becoming very common – the new footbridge at East Croydon being similarly bad – now three flights of stairs to go up instead of a simple ramp meaning quick changes are now virtually impossible as you follow huge crowds lumbering up the stairs – the older and less fit members struggling with the steepness (I’m in both groups so know very well)

36. @T33 – the discussion about the depth of the concourse (and the alleged need for a footbridge) has already been had hereabouts. The counter-claim is that the escalators will do the job just fine. More than that I will not say for fear of being moderated.

37. Since the core issue is the actual time from platform to/from the office (or at least the main onwards street or Bridge that people are aiming for), couldn’t London Bridge regulars time the current entry/exit times before big changes, and then afterwards, and then compare the two. At least there is then comparable data to make a case that the railway shouldn’t think in future schemes just about passenger entry/exit times to/from the ticket barrier.

38. T33,

    There is a world of difference between thoughtless design and design that has been carefully thought about but you don’t happen to agree with.

39. @T33:

    Any new footbridge would have the same issues as the new ones at East Croydon and the two New Cross stations: they’d have to be built higher up above the tracks than the old Yorkie bar one built in the 1970s, so you’ll get lots of steps either way.

    In mitigation, the old interchange involved long ramps or stairs, while the new one will also have escalators and lifts. Furthermore, by untangling the tracks, services will be more frequent, so even if you’ve just missed one train, there’ll be another along very soon after.

    This was not the case with the old layout, where the notionally ‘cross-platform’ interchange between Charing Cross and Thameslink services could still involve a long wait while a couple of delayed Charing Cross services inched slowly through, eventually followed by an utterly rammed and laughably short-formed service to Luton.

    Yes, it’ll take slightly longer – seconds, for most – to change platforms, but when you get there, the more frequent trains will more than make up for that. And there’s lots of shiny new shops selling untold variations of the artisanal, organic sludge they call ‘coffee’ that they’ll sell to you for truly insulting amounts of money. What’s not to like?

40. Milton

    The time to measure time to office from time getting off the train to be able to compare it to when the works have been completed have long gone.

    It should have been done before any of the works started and should have been done over a reasonable period of time.

41. @PoP: The difference between the two depends on what the design priorities were… I’m not sure if they coincide with those of the most common type of user of this station.

    But then we’ll have to see what happens at the end of the project…

    @T33: A large number of those passengers may however stay on and continue on to one of the next three stations: Blackfriars, City Thameslink or Farringdon. As for them new travel opportunities have opened up…

42. Anomnibus,

    Just for the record:

    I don’t recall ever having seen a Thameslink service to Luton at London Bridge. They were always Bedford services.

    In fact for me just about the only good feature of the old station was changing from a Southeastern service to Charing Cross to a Thameslink one to Bedford. Not even cross-platform interchange. Just get off at platform 6 and wait for a Thameslink train from the same platform. When travelling with an elderly relative this is substantially even better than lifts to all platforms.

43. @PoP:

    In my defence, it’s been a while. I do remember taking a train to Luton from Platform 6 at London Bridge. Whether it terminated there I can’t recall, but I’ll defer to the better memories of others.

    The same-platform interchange was great in theory, but I remember spending some time waiting for the Thameslink trains to make their way to the head of the queue. The ratio of Thameslink to Charing Cross services was rather low.

44. @MikeP Apologies I must have missed that part of the discussion

    @PoP You are of course right, thoughtless is the wrong word. It is of course properly designed in a Mechanical and structural sense. I was trying to express an opinion that the design is not very good for passengers which it will make changing platforms more difficult as has happened at East Croydon.

    @Anomnibus whilst the footbridge would probably have to be built over the “imaginary” AC wires, an alternative to the only exit from the platform would be welcome for many passengers to swap platforms as there will be inevitable huge crowding around the 2 exits from the platform – As someone who has got off the wrong end of a train at the terminal platforms and taken over 5 minutes to get off the narrow platforms – the narrow escalators will cause the same issue although full width platforms will allow passengers to get to the escalators faster.

    @POP the 6:56 from Redhill (origin I think Brighton) to Luton was a daily train for many years calling at London Bridge – It was cut in the Jan 2015 timetable. I think it extended to Bedford but when I used it regularly around 2011 it was a Luton train

45. T33,

    But in what way is arrangements for passengers changing trains not fully thought out?

    You might not like it because it takes longer but that does not mean it hasn’t been carefully thought through for the benefit of the greatest number of passengers taking into account all sorts of factors such as circulating area and any engineering restraints there may be. There will always be many passengers for whom shortest interchange time is an absolute priority but that is not universal and there are other issues such as ease-of-access, safety when overcrowding, regulations concerning safe evacuation etcetera. Remember that when the station gets rebuilt all the grandfather rights are extinguished.

46. @MC: so many origins, so many destinations, and then many of the origins move from high level side to low level. I tried some educated guesswork, but gave up as the matrix was getting stupidly big. It’s easy to forget just how far down Tooley Street the new entrance will be – people in More London will be hugely advantaged.
    SH raises an interesting question as to how many members of the massive tide across London Bridge will find TL quicker after the re-opening. I’d discount Farringdon from that equation, not being London Terminals from the south – and the north-west corner of the city (say Museum of London) is only a brisk 20 minute walk. I used to do Cannon Street to there in under 15 minutes.

47. @PoP I respectfully disagree – improved stations are supposed to enable passengers can get to where they need to be quickly. I accept that we now have a higher H&S standard but the majority of passengers (particularly commuters who generally know where they are going) do not want long and complicated diversions.

    I fear the situation is the same at London Bridge, longer changes than previously and massive queuing getting off the platforms. Why because a single escalator each side is not going to clear the platform quickly when a 12 coach Class 700 arrives from the South. Not many will take the stairs as it is 4 flights high. Hence why an additional footbridge would have been very wise probably at the country end to spread passengers down the train.

    I do not think either that many will swap to Blackfriars or other core stations because they are already accessible directly from most of the Southern Network by the existing Thameslink trains. So these customers are not travelling through London Bridge currently.

48. @T33
    “Blackfriars or other core stations are already accessible directly from most of the Southern Network by the existing Thameslink trains”
    Only from the Brighton Line, not any of the branches.
    Not very fast via Tulse Hill
    Not very frequent either.

    If everybody bails out of Thameslink trains from the BML at London Bridge after all this is over, the whole project will have been a pointless waste of money.

    Quite a few who currently walk across London Bridge (or along Southwark Street – don’t forget Blackfriars has an entrance on the South Band) or change for Cannon Street may find Blackfriars or CTL preferable when TL services are faster, more frequent, and serve more destinations

49. T33,

    improved stations are supposed to enable passengers can get to where they need to be quickly

    I think you are going to be very disappointed with future station rebuilds. Nearly always they result in passengers taking longer to change trains. I used to be able to easily make a four minute connection westwards at Reading when arriving on a train from Redhill. It now can only be done with great difficulty.

    Stratford is another case in point. Creating two new big platforms for DLR trains to Canary Wharf may have done wonders for crowd safety and being able to provide a more frequent service but means a longer interchange if arriving from the east on platform 5.

    Its the same on the Underground with stations such as Paddington on the Hammersmith & City line built for spaciousness and being able to handle large volumes of people resulting in longer interchange times. King’s Cross is especially famous for this with the shortest routes being discouraged and not actively signposted.

    It may be that the lack of capacity to the lower concourse at London Bridge is deliberate to avoid the concourse being swamped with a train load of passengers. For pedestrian flows the main concern is that the platform is cleared before the next train arrives. Of course, if the new station cannot achieve that then there will be serious problems.

    If you had an additional footbridge at the country end you could possibly make things worse as you would then get conflicting flows on the platform.

    I am not saying you are wrong. You may be right. I am just saying these things are complicated, generally much more complicated than people appreciate. I remember Anomnibus once suggesting a reversal of direction of escalators at St Pancras because he thought they had got it wrong but I also remember being given a tour of the station and having the pedestrian flow explained to me and how and why they dealt with it the way they did and it is a lot more complicated than people reading this website would give credit for.

    I simply go back to my original point. You probably would not believe how much thought does go into the design to safely accommodate passenger flows. They may occasionally get it slightly wrong. King’s Cross main line was a case in point but once realised it was quickly and easily rectified. They don’t do this thoughtlessly nor do they fail to take into account passenger needs. Passenger needs and passenger wants are two different and sometimes incompatible things.

50. Pedantic of Purley 27 September 2015 at 22:58

    “Stratford is another case in point. Creating two new big platforms for DLR trains to Canary Wharf may have done wonders for crowd safety and being able to provide a more frequent service but means a longer interchange if arriving from the east on platform 5.”

    Not if you’re cheeky enough to take the short cut from platform 3 to 3a via a convenient Central Line train.

51. @ PoP – I understand the points you make but I do feel we have a spectacular ability in this country to just get things about 85% correct and the remaining 15% becomes a progressively worsening nightmare that is nigh on impossible to fix. LU has an apparent aversion to providing escalators on certain climbs up from platforms. This causes jams and delays for people because of differing levels of fitness. It won’t provide escalators from ticket halls to street level except in very rare cases (TCR being such an exception). I used Putney NR station for the first time in decades the other day. Nice new staircase – pretty steep and no central railing to help split the flows and allow fitter people to bypass the slower ones. LU would provide a central railing. Why the difference? I fear London Bridge will end up with some very real issues once people acclimatise themselves to carriage positions relative to escalators. I can see real problems for the operators getting trains away because of huge bulges of people wanting to get down the escalators. Apart from shouting at people to “stand clear” there’s no easy fix after you’ve spent hundreds of millions of pounds on a redesign that doesn’t work. What happens when you have people dashing up escalators meeting a bulge of people at the top of the escalators on the platforms waiting to go down? Isn’t this precisely the issue with the SE to / from Thameslink interchange flow? We all know what happens when people see “their” train – it’s a mad push through whoever is in the way to get on it. That’s the psychology that exists and lengthening interchange times will just increase the determination to get *my* train. “I must get the 0831, I must get the 0831 must must must, death to anyone who gets in my way”. Sounds bonkers but people act like that.

    The impression I get so far is that the London Bridge platforms are not overly wide and certainly not near the escalators meaning you have natural pinchpoints that will become trouble spots every few minutes in the peaks.

    When I use redeveloped stations in countries like the Netherlands they seem to have got it right somehow – plenty of space, multiple entry and egress points on the platforms, lifts stairs and escalators where heights have to be overcome, decent wide platforms designed to cope with crowds and planned interchange between trains on opposite platforms. They have historical space constraints like we do but somehow they manage better and their sort of rail operation – frequent, long trains carrying lots of people is precisely the sort of railway the South East is becoming. We have much yet to learn.

52. Alan Griffiths,

    There is a direct link between platform 5 and the end of the DLR platforms so using the intermittent link between 3 and 3a won’t be shorter than that. The direct link is still longer than previously when it was simply across a narrow platform.

    For some reason the short passageway to platform 5 isn’t signposted when you get off the DLR. I can only presume it is because they don’t think people will catch the DLR to Stratford in order to go to Liverpool St.

53. Walthamstow Writer,

    There was an article on London Bridge in this month’s Modern Railways. One of the comments was that when planning they considered increasing the size of the station footprint but the costs would have been phenomenal. So basically they are putting 15 platforms – the absolute minimum number they need – in the space available.

    So it is back to all the old issues. Do you get it right which makes the scheme unaffordable and it never gets approval? Do you do what you can?

    I am not totally convinced by all this gloom and doom. Would that many people really want to get off at London Bridge? The main way to the Victoria line at Victoria is a single escalator. It is quite surprising how many people that escalator can shift in a short period of time. It is (or was) more than the trains could carry in the rush hour – northbound at any rate. Now I know Victoria Line trains are shorter but the come ever 105 seconds in the peaks – not 2½ minutes apart followed by 5 minutes apart which is what you will get on Thameslink at London Bridge.

54. @pop
    “the lack of capacity to the lower concourse at London Bridge is deliberate to avoid the concourse being swamped with a train load of passengers”
    The concourse will get swamped if it can’t clear one trainload before the next arrives. The best way of avoiding congestion in the station is making it as easy as possible to get out.
    We get this nonsense at Waterloo – closing an exit “because of congestion”, as well as being highly dangerous if there were an emergency, actually makes the concourse more crowded.
    Stopping people getting in is almost as bonkers – if you close one entrance but leave others open, people will still get onto the concourse, and if as a result of having to walk round they miss their train, they will spend more time on the concourse clogging it up.

55. @WW
    “the determination to get *my* train. “I must get the 0831, I must get the 0831 ”
    If the next train to your destination is at 0834, then yes it is silly. If it’s not until 0901, then yes, it is important to catch it (and it’s not my fault the timetabled connection between two 2tph services is only six minutes, and in practice often less)

56. timbeau,

    Stopping people getting in is almost as bonkers

    Well if they had done that at Medina 717 people who died might still be alive.

    There have been loads of precedents. Ibrox Park and Hillsborough show the importance of having appropriate crowd control as does Bethnal Green in wartime. It is a complex issue and very often the safest way to handle it often isn’t what the person on the ground determined to get the 0831 wants.

    I know this all may seem daft but if you ever had a chance to visit a control room and see cameras showing the situation in various places you will start to appreciate why the situation as it appears from one position on the ground isn’t necessarily giving a good picture of what is going on.

    If, having made their first cock-up, the staff at Finsbury Park after Christmas stopped people getting into the station when they could have done then there would have been a lot less distress as people who wanted to travel would have suffered a minor delay rather than a near-complete meltdown of services for a couple of hours.

57. @PoP: I am not totally convinced by all this gloom and doom

    It reminds me of the gloom and doom that preceded the opening of the rebuilt King’s Cross station.

    It’s worth being aware of the extensive pedestrian modelling made as part of the planning application (here, here, here, here, here) – it’s one thing to disagree with the conclusions that the modellers have made or argue that they didn’t make the right trade off between cost, capacity and different pedestrian flows, but it just isn’t true to say that these issues weren’t considered in detail when designing the station. And yes, one finding was that a proportion of passengers would stay on through trains who currently change from terminating trains. One thing I found interesting was that a higher proportion than I expected actually head south from the station.

    @timbeau: If it’s not until 0901, then yes, it is important to catch it

    Certainly an issue in the evening peak, but in the morning peak there will essentially be a constant stream of trains to each of the three inward destinations, so I doubt many passengers will be aiming for a specific train.

58. Anomnibus
    but when you get there, the more frequent trains will more than make up for that. Until … there’s a last-minute platform alteration (all too frequent, at least before the rebuild) & everyone has to scramble – not over the “Yorkie-Bar” bridge, but down all the escalators & up again, thus missing their train(s).
    Um.

    PoP
    But in what way is arrangements for passengers changing trains not fully thought out?
    Errr … the gating arrangements at the NW corner of the remaning platforms?
    Previously discussed in the pub, IIRC … & the predicted jams.
    As in King’s Cross (which you also mention) the “new” design is so “successful”, that, most of the time, they simply leave the gates open …
    As for your Paddington case, we all know that was due to lack of foresight, or they ran out of money.
    Either way it is a ridiculous go-round-the-houses farce.
    For pedestrian flows the main concern is that the platform is cleared before the next train arrives. Of course, if the new station cannot achieve that then there will be serious problems. As mentioned above, you mean? One or two down escalators, or a narrow end-exit from the terminating platforms?
    Could be very, very embarrassing, couldn’t it?
    I must admit, I really can’t make a prediction as to how it will actually work in practice.

    timbeau
    We used to have that at Liverpool St exit from the SSL lines – restricted exit lines & would you believe it … “tensabarrier” taped-off lanes …
    I & others, did our best to simply unsanap the tapes, since they were a trip/tangling hazard … until, suddenly, the practice stopped.

59. Re Greg,

    But there is much a lower chance of platform alterations in the future (post 2018).

    1. Most of key potentials for alteration will be on the same platform island i.e. down Charing cross services – you just walk across the platform island. The issues would likely be Down Cannon Street i.e. P1 to P2 changes (see note 2.) or southern terminating (see note 3.)

    2. The whole area will have Traffic Management Software (TMS) and be controlled from Three Bridges on a line basis (i.e. 4 groups: Cannon Street / Thameslink / Charing Cross / Southern Terminating) so there should be far fewer platform changes.

    3. There should be far fewer terminating platform changes when the works finish as there will be the 4th track and mostly local services. And you just run round the buffers like everyone does at the moment not up downstairs.

60. @ PoP – haven’t seen the MR article yet. We have touched on the “do something” vs “never do perfection” appraisal point before. I understand that having written plenty of business cases in my time and read even more of them. However we have also touched on the point that the underlying data quality used by NR has been poor and incomplete. We appear to have an acknowledgement in some quarters that the pace of change in demand and travel patterns is far greater than anyone imagined or hypothesised about. I accept we can’t accurately predict the future but I am concerned that we will have spent a massive amount of money and the end result “won’t work” (to some extent) from day one. It would be interesting to know just what sort of “out there” scenarios NR tested and evaluated for London Bridge and whether they are now worried that what seemed like lunacy as a scenario is going to become reality in 2018 or not long afterwards?

    I am going to disagree with you about your Victoria comparison. It only holds true if you consider having people queue for many minutes outside the LU station, inside the LU station and then wait for the 4th train to be an acceptable way of handling people. The escalator only copes because people are delayed in their access to it. LU clearly doesn’t consider that to be acceptable as it’s spending £800m to add lots more escalators, entrances, ticket hall space and connecting tunnels to remove that unacceptable level of queuing. It remains to be seen whether their lack of work at platform level was the right thing to do, notwithstanding a 36tph train service.

61. Walthamstow Writer,

    They hold people outside the station at Victoria because they can’t get on the trains and not because the escalator can’t cope. Or at least that used to be the case. Yes there would be spurts of arrivals that overwhelmed the ticket hall for a few minutes but I don’t think it was the case that northbound trains leave with space available yet the people couldn’t get to the platform because the escalator couldn’t cope. It may be true now with the more frequent service.

    More escalators would still be helpful because it would remove reliance on one critical escalator and mean that the escalators would not be so crowded (impossible to walk down). It would also mean that you could clear the platforms quicker of people leaving
    the station which would aid circulation and also evacuation in an emergency.

    So long as the escalators clear the platform before the next train comes the situation will not be too bad. One could wish for platforms to be cleared instantly but that tends not to happen nowadays. New Cross Gate has substantially been rebuilt recently yet in the evening rush hour there are delays getting up the footbridge from trains arriving from the south let alone from London. At Purley I can see my train waiting at another platform but know I will miss it because of the massive queues for the stairs.

    We are told London Bridge was designed for 90m passengers per year. It is currently around 56m passengers per year. If numbers went up by more than 50% you are at the point where you really should be thinking of building additional infrastructure because there is a limit, even with 12-car trains, ERTMS and everything else, to the throughput of trains that you could get through London Bridge.

62. @PoP
    Even allowing for more passengers staying on more through trains at London Bridge, the simple fact fact that you have just stated, that the new London Bridge was designed for 90m passengers a year, is the most worrying fact that I have heard about the rebuild project.

    For example, the Deputy Mayor is looking for an 80% increase in National Rail passenger volumes, to address London 2050 issues. If nothing else, this points quite urgently towards a Crossrail 3 (mentioned by Mike Brown at a London Assembly Transport Committee hearing on 8 July), or a Thameslink 2…

63. Jonathan Roberts,

    That’s my point. Once you are thinking beyond 90m per year then the station, track, trains etc all won’t be able to cope so a different solution will be necessary and you have to start thinking about Crossrail 3 or Thameslink 2. Actually, given the way passenger numbers are apparently increasing even during the rebuild of London Bridge we should start thinking about these now which is the point that you and Walthamstow Writer, Greg and many others clearly think.

    I think the gist of the project team thoughts were that if you are going above 90m then a rebuild of London Bridge station isn’t the solution.

64. @pop
    “Stopping people getting in is almost as bonkers”
    I take your point, but closing one entrance whilst doing nothing to stop people simply moving round to the next one, which leads to the same concourse, can simply make matters worse. That was not the situation at Hillsborough, (where the different entrances all led to different pens), or Medina (all converging on one entrance), or Ibrox (people were re-entering as other people were trying to leave).

    If they all lead to a common area, you only reduce congestion in that area by closing all entrances to it.

    @Ian J

    “Certainly [next train may be half an hour away] more of an issue in the evening peak but in the morning peak there will essentially be a constant stream of trains to each of the three inward destinations, so I doubt many passengers will be aiming for a specific train.”
    There is a significant contra-peak flow, and they have to fight their way against the incoming hordes.
    And my with-flow morning connection is to a train at 0828, with the next one at 0903, with a huge amount of churn as people surge off the just-arrived train. (It’s a bit easier at the moment as there are no tram passengers adding to the crowds)

65. Re PoP, JR and WW,

    See my recent comment in the Sussex Part 9 for demand modelling clangers.

    From what I understand at 90m PAX London Bridge will hit some Ped Flow bottlenecks in a few places but not all.

    However demand and capacity may not align for example:
    Beyond 90m LBG could take more PAX just very selectively for example SLL services going to 12car but that may not be where the demand is…
    Hence TfL CR3 comment and something lurking deeply hidden in their response to the draft of Sussex Study:

    We recognise that in the very long term, a further step-change in capacity will be needed, which could be in the form of a new line. Clearly an intervention of this magnitude would require a large amount of optioneering and development. The Route Study forecasts that this type of intervention will not be required for decades, but we believe it would be beneficial to identify at a very high level the potential options so that these can be considered when delivering interventions in the short to medium term.

    #passiveprovision

    Hmm CR4 or TL2 anyone?

66. I can’t see anything in the news about it this morning – but the ride in on the Hayes line was so smooth towards London Bridge I looked out the window to work out what was going on. I can only say for certain whatever else might have happened, we were crossing on the new bridge at Borough market – I worked in the area during its installation which must be nearly 5 years ago and Im sure before Xmas it didn’t have track. I’m wondering if a whole new line of track was commissioned over xmas. I have zero knowledge of London transport so can’t offer any intelligent analysis, but it seems a major milestone has been reached?

67. ben 4 January 2016 at 11:21

    “I’m wondering if a whole new line of track was commissioned over xmas”

    That was the recent target for the project. We’re all awaiting the official claims of how well it went.

68. The up and down Charing Cross lines now run through unopened platforms 7, 8 and 9, and over the new Borough viaduct, and are basically in their final configuration through the station except for the down loop track through future platform 6 which will be used temporarily by up Cannon Street trains following stage 3 track switches to be made in August.

    I don’t see any evidence of significant timekeeping problems on the new route, although you’d expect a few minutes here and there as drivers will exercise due caution for a few days.

69. The track was in place well in advance of the Christmas blockade…. The “only” bits left to do were to join the track at both ends.

    The restart would have been perfect except for a signal failure at Cannon Street this morning…

70. aha and thanks – I did wonder if we were passing through new platforms at LB or if hoarding had come down – Well I can say for certain the difference in vibration and noise all the way from Bermondsey was startling – it felt like a brand new train, and there was little of the familiar screeching over to waterloo east, during which speeds seemed a little higher as well, but that could have been my excitement.

71. My train from Blackheath went very smoothly along the new track past the still incomplete platforms this morning, and across the new bridge. Everything was running late — but, amazingly, my train was half empty. Perhaps people are taking a few extra days.

72. To Ben,
    You are right in everything that you have said. It is indeed a major milestone. It’s just rather overshadowed by the London Bridge Station work and the huge job at Bermondsey. They are all related.
    Now that they have moved the Charing Cross trains on to the new viaduct they will rebuild the tracks on the old viaduct. I expect they will strip right down to the old structure so that they can find and repair any defects. They have two years to do that but I expect they will do the stripping fairly early so that they have time to deal properly with anything that is revealed. Once the structure is all shipshape they will then lay new, separate tracks for the Thameslink trains which will no longer have to share with the Charing Cross services.
    To all,
    We know there is nice new shiny pair of tracks laid on the New Borough Viaduct. How far West has the track been replaced over the Christmas/New Year period? Is it just to the Southwark Street bridge or further?

73. Re Ray K,

    But they don’t have 2 years to sort the old viaduct as some of the old CHX track alignment (east of Borough Market Jn) will be needed from August for the temporarily relocated Cannon Street lines…

    The shops underneath the old viaduct in Borough Market have been temporarily relocated from this morning to allow access to the underside of the viaduct for 3 months (between Bedale Street and Borough High Street) to allow the the viaduct to be worked on.

    Very little track work was done during the blockade only the connections.
    Most of the track on the CHX lines has been replaced to just west of Ewer Street during the Summer and Autumn weekend blockades and the new track through the station was laid from November onwards.
    Charing Cross – to just east of London Bridge was resignalled and transferred from London Bridge to Three Bridges which was the major work during the blockade not the track.

74. Also, very little replaced east of London Bridge, basically only 500 metres east of the new platform ends. So that smooth ride all the way from Bermondsey is exactly the same as it has been for months!

    What has changed is that through the station, and all the way to Waterloo East, the insulated joints have been removed from plain track. The new track circuits don’t require them except through point work. This will improve the ride, and reduce noise. The track alignment is much better too.

75. The timelapse footage of the Blockade:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVk8ZCdWkKg&feature=youtu.be

76. Some other changes:

    – An extension to the canopy on platforms 1&2 has been built out of scaffolding at the country end
    – In the corridor just to the Shard side of the old ramp to the former platforms 5 & 6, the ceiling appears to have been lowered
    – Quite a lot of ballast has already been removed in the area where tracks 4 & 5 used to be near the station. That is the area where the pointwork was….

    Down at the diveunder end a cosiderable amout of further track laying has taken place. I wonder if this is in preparation for the August blockade?

77. Re Southern Heights,

    “Down at the diveunder end a cosiderable amout of further track laying has taken place. I wonder if this is in preparation for the August blockade?”

    Can usefully be done with out getting in the way at the moment (leaving it till later would make it harder). The first track laid doesn’t get used till mid 2017 (track 6) or 2018 (track 5), the track that will be laid later in 2016 (tracks 7+8 (& 9 on the 12 track section)) get used first.

78. 12 track section? I thought the viaduct was “only” 11 wide? Or is the a tiny bit of 12 tracks just before it splits into 3?

79. @ngh – thanks for the video link. Always interesting to see how stuff is done – loved the bit where you can see the platform hoarding going up and being painted (simple things please simple minds!). Also a tiny bit surprised to see Southern were running in but I guess that side of the station is done now and the engineering trains could get in via other means.

    I may have to treat myself to a ride to Hayes to ride over the new alignment and visit the land of myths, opposition and curved platforms in the borough of Bromley!

80. Re ngh
    Thank you for pointing out the work that had already been done before the blockade. I had not appreciated that the major blockade work was the resignalling. Nor had it occurred to me that resignalling could improve the track as explained by SFD.
    Thank you also for explaining that work will be done on the underside of the viaduct for 3 months between Bedale Street and Borough High Street. I understand that that will leave a further five months for them to work on the top of that section before it is required for the Cannon Street lines.
    Are there any constraints which will reduce the time available for work on the viaduct between Bedale Street and Dickens Junction?
    East of the station, will the newly laid tracks be available for use by engineering trains until required for timetabled services?

81. @southern heights
    twelve tracks by the time you reach the diveunder
    http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/uploads/monthly_03_2015/post-658-0-13865400-1426034834.png

    Somewhere in the unsearchable depths of the comments on one of the threads (maybe even his one!) was someone’s listing of the dates of construction of the various viaduct widenings

82. Re Ray K,

    You can see some old sections of track with insulated block joints being dismantled, separated and put on the scrap wagons in the video from 1:49 to 1:53.

    They will want the track down well before August as that is when the new signalling into Cannon Street is being commissioned as well as the tracks brought into service.

    Most of Bedale Street – Metropolitan B Jn where the Metropolitan Reversible line joins will be done between now and August too.
    Metropolitan Reversible line is in use till Easter ’17 so work along the section west from Met B Jn through Met Jn (where it goes 4-6 Tracks in future) through to Dickens Jn where to where it goes 6-7 tracks (2-3 Blackfriars tracks) is somewhat limited to what can be done before Easter ’17.

    The tracks east of the station – first ones to be installed (5-8) will be rather isolated, inaccessible (and unattached). 9 will be more useful and connected so expect that to get use for engineering trains before it will come into use as the Down Sussex slow on 27th December 2016 well before the other come into service in 2017.

    Re Timbeau / Southern Heights,

    Dive under thread for viaduct dates.
    11 to 12 track st Spa Road Jn 1mile from the buffers on the terminating platforms. Where the terminating approach track go 3 – 4 (the future down Sussex slow starts there) the tracks split 600m east of this.

    Platform 8 is being used for up services, 7 for down and 9 isn’t being used at the moment.

83. Can I just recommend viewing David Harvey’s five latest slow motion videos of the route through the station and over the new viaduct?

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/unravelled/with/24187700015/

84. @ Paul – seconded. I watched them earlier and found them a very useful update given I rarely use the main line at / through London Bridge. I like the way he was developed a technique for getting his camera outside through one of the opening hopper windows and is then dedicated / mad ? enough to travel in each direction to get a multiplicity of views.

85. Paul 5 January 2016 at 17:21

    Wow. That’s my joyride cancelled.

    I note that there are points between the Charing Cross up lines so that a train could pass through platform 9 although it did pass through platform 8.

    I note that the down train from Charing Cross passed through platform 7 and there is not only no track at platform 6, but as yet no points.

86. Re Alan G,

    The concrete underneath track 6 isn’t finished yet either!

    5+6 will get used for non stopping Cannon Street services from August ’16 to Easter ’17 so very sensible to keep them segregated (to avoid temporary signal interlocking etc.) so the points will get fitted some time between Easter ’17 and August ’17 (wooden sleepered track in place at the moment where they will go).

    As 7-9 will all need a bit more work I suspect which ones are used will be rotated.

87. Is it clear from the physical layout on the ground which is the normal Up line to Charing Cross and which is the loop? Or are they sufficiently similar in orientation that it doesn’t really matter?

    I ask because some of the schematics (linked previously) show the points and routes in a logical sort of ‘tube map style’, i.e. with every line horizontal or at 45 degrees, which don’t really give much of an idea of the lineup of the real life S&C layouts…

88. Search “From Shard” on Fl1ckr and I’m sure won’t be too long for a suitable photo from which you can make a judgement.

    Personally, I don’t think there’s going to be a “normal” versus “loop” – I see it as (in final config) as 2-up/2-down albeit one shared with Thameslink (not sure whether for normal ops or “pertabation.”) All seem to be “reversible” to back out trains in the down direction.

    However, I’m no expert in these matters.

89. According to the signals, platforms 7 and 8 get the ‘feathers’ while platforms 6 and 9 do not. This suggests that platforms 6 and 9 are the ‘main’ platforms – a bit surprisingly really.

90. ‘London Bridge Station Redevelopment January 2016 update’
    can be found at :-
    http://www.teamlondonbridge.co.uk/news-london-bridge-station-redevelopment-october-2015-updatezzznzzz.aspx?m=31&mi=261&pmi=&ms=

    A couple of items raise questions in my mind.
    ‘-The removal of a section of the remaining foot bridge will take place.’
    Was it considered unsafe to do this whilst the tracks below were in use?
    ‘Central girder removal & deck plate installation will take place during possession hours at track level above the Joiner Street area.’
    Would this be the girder which is visible between the two Cannon Street tracks and the recently vacated CHX track (which will become down Thameslink)?

91. The ‘normal’ route, as far as the points lay in the final layout is

    From line 8 up through platform 9
    From Down Ch X through platform 7.
    From line 7 there will be 4 routes available, the points will lay normal for a route into platform 7.

    However, it is all largely irrelevant, as in the final layout every signal on the approach to the station where there is a choice of routes will have a ‘theatre’ style route indicator (rather than feathers) which will be lit for the appropriate line for every movement.

    In summary, there will be no ‘normal’ route.

92. @Dave Cardboard
    “Personally, I don’t think there’s going to be a “normal” versus “loop” – I see it as (in final config) as 2-up/2-down albeit one shared with Thameslink (not sure whether for normal ops or “pertabation.”)”

    Given the down CX side will be beside the up TL route, how can they be shared efficiently ?

93. Re Stuart & Dave,

    CHX 2 up 2 down (peak use 14tph/ platform inc ECS)

    Blackfriars 1 up 1 down (peak use 16tph / platform)

    CST 1 up 1 reversible 1 down (peak use 14-16tph / platform inc ECS)

    No sharing malarchy as then you would have to turn off ATO in the TL core and start cancelling CHX services…
    Platform usage in tph terms nicely balanced anyway

94. I know this point has been made before. The main purpose of the two platforms in one direction is to enable a train to pull in to platform X before a train in platform Y has pulled out. This is most likely to be needed during the peaks but may, of course, be used at other times. The Thameslink timetable through LBG should not require this.
    The secondary use of the track arrangement at LBG is to cater for the times when a train sits down and blocks a platform. The provision of tracks through an alternative platform allow for at least some service to run.
    Outside of these very necessary requirements there is no reason to prefer one platform over another.
    I imagine that it is advisable to minimise the number of times that any set of points is switched in order to maximise the life of the mechanism. This would mean that points would be left set at the position required for the last train to pass until some other requirement arose.

95. Stuart, Dave and ngh,

    I think you are all taking about different things and confusing issues.

    I don’t think there was any suggestion of mixing services between the CX platforms [6-9], Thameslink[4 & 5] and Cannon St[1, 2 & 3]. The originally raised issue was which was the “main” Charing Cross Platform e.g. 8 v 9, 6 v 7.

    From a signalling perspective the “feathers” (white lights) traditionally diverge off the highest speed route. If this were to be the case, this may or may not be the platform most used in preference which may be down to other factors including the gap between the platform and train (both horizontally and vertically).

    As Sad Fat Dad says, a digital display giving the platform number (traditionally referred to as “theatre-type lights”) would be used at London Bridge as feathers would be almost meaningless and confusing.

    In practice, at least in the peak direction, I suspect trains will “flip-flop” from one platform to the other in sequence. Otherwise you largely destroy the benefit if the island platform serving two lines in the same direction.

    Another consideration may be that the platforms will be reversible in the event of a disrupted service. So it might be a good idea to have the outer platforms (6 & 9) as the “normal” ones leaving 7 & 8 available for conflict-free reversals.

    I am sure a lot of thought will go into this if it hasn’t already done so and there will be other factors involved that we will not even think of.

96. @ ngh
    Thanks for that explanation. Will platforms 3 and 6 be covered by ATO to cater for perturbation with a sat down train in 4 or 5 or would this cause a conflict of systems?

97. Ray K & ngh

    Yes platforms 3 and 6 will be covered by ETCS and ATO, although it is rather hoped they don’t have to be used in this manner very often.

98. Re Ray K,

    “I imagine that it is advisable to minimise the number of times that any set of points is switched in order to maximise the life of the mechanism. This would mean that points would be left set at the position required for the last train to pass until some other requirement arose.”

    The effective life of the points will probably be determined by wheel wear on the frog and switch ends in which case alternating between services will be helpful to even out the wear. The point motor etc is all relativity quick and easy to replace in comparison.

    PoP and quinlet,

    Also as there aren’t speed differences between Normal and Turnout directions in this case there isn’t one of the usual reasons for feathers when everything is complete.

99. On another topic – in the much referenced 2014 InfraRail presentation – Joiner Street bridge was due to be reconstructed over the Chrismas blockade. With usual caveats about the trusting information obtained in such “presentations” – anyone know if it happened…?

100. Re Dave,

     Change of plans a very long time ago – the existing bridge has been strengthened instead of replaced with most of the work done underneath much earlier in 2015 and just the topside work at Christmas.

101. Some work on Joiner Street Bridge is mentioned in the ‘London Bridge Station Redevelopment January 2016 update’ to which I referred in my 08:12 post this morning. I sounds like they intend to do some fairly drastic surgery this month. Perhaps the girder needs removing before they reroute the CST services in September.

102. Re Ray K,

     Weak Bridge is the fundamental problem, 2 new beams were put in underneath earlier in 2015 (above a major pedestrian throughfare see unravelled’s photos)
     Saturday & Sunday possessions every weekend in Jan to finish the job off.

103. Ngh, off topic, but is the drop in speed when accessing some platforms on the approach to East Croydon why junction indicators are used rather than theatre boxes? I’ve noticed that when for example accessing 6 and 5 on the down, the train is not checked down as the speed is a consistent 45 but when going into 4, 3, or 2, it is checked down to the relevant signal which clears on approach, as the speed drops from 45 to 25 across the points? Because as PoP says, they can indeed seem a bit confusing!

104. The use of junction indicators (feathers) vs an alphanumeric light box (theatre) has varied across the country and over the years.

     Convention now is to use the latter in complex route areas that are generally low speed. There is no requirement to use one type or other depending on the speed reduction required for the diverging route.

     What does change for a reduction of speed for the diverging route is the signalling arrangements on the approach. If the diverging route is more than 10mph slower than the main route, then some form of approach control is required. Essentially this restricts the aspects for a train approaching the junction for a diverging route (to red or yellow depending on the circumstances). In some areas flashing yellow aspects are used, and in a smaller number of circumstances a preliminary route indicator is used. Very rarely, you get a ‘splitting distant’. Airport junction in the GWML has one IIRC.

     You can still have feathers or theatre indicators at junctions where the speed in any direction is the same speed. This happens, for example, at Rugby on the WCML Down Fast, where it is 125mph to both Coventry and Nuneaton, and feathers are provided.

105. I would assume feathers are easier to see at a distance – or at least, the difference between on and off is easier than the difference between, say, 8 and 9.

106. Fascinating………I’d always know “feathers” as “harbour lights”!

107. Thanks for the replies and digression about which are the normal routes and which are the loops. Have noticed Opentraintimes has a signalling map of the revised layout (so far); and if the signal ID numerical sequences are anything to go by they agree well with SatFatDad’s confirmation that in the up direction P9 is logically the up line, and P7 the down:

     http://www.opentraintimes.com/maps/signalling/tl-lbg-1

108. @ngh: Platform 8 is being used for up services, 7 for down and 9 isn’t being used at the moment.

     Are you absolutely sure? I could have sworn I was going through track 8 in the down direction last night, The platform for 7 just appeared to be too far away…

109. @SH, Given the shortness of duration of a *moment* you could both be right. Perhaps the signallers are putting in some practice.
     On a more serious note. On 5th Jan at 21:58 ngh said :-
     ‘As 7-9 will all need a bit more work I suspect which ones are used will be rotated.’

110. Re SH and RK,

     Moment = all services that day until the time I wrote the comment. (and the previous day as it happened).

     They seem to rotate somewhere between every day – 2 days based on what has happened so far this week. As mentioned above by several people this should help bed everything in nicely, even up the wear while not cycling the moving parts too much.

111. On UK Rail Forums, someone – who sounds like they are “in the business” – commented that they are rotating traffic flows for the reasons speculated here – “bed in” new systems, even out wear, prevent rusty rails, etc. They also commented that P9 is still referred to as “up passenger loop.”

112. Just to enliven the informed, which is us, usually …
     What some other people think about London Bridge & other termini, too …
     Worth a quick skim, if nothing else.

113. One feature that is on its last legs is the passenger interchange bridge at country end of station which now only links joint platforms 1/2 to platform 3 .

     It seems big change will come in August when a large part of the new street level concourse opens .

     Given the lack of press coverage when Network Rail gets it right perhaps they need to look at newspaper adverts ?

114. @Melvyn: That is still required as it also provides an emergency exit in case of a fire in the normal cross passage. It leads into the old Southern Railway building….

115. There were plenty of adverts placed by NR in the run up to Xmas

116. Re GTR Driver,
     NR did indeed place plenty of adverts before Xmas. Those adverts were to get people to wake up to their intention to dig up the apple orchard.
     What Melvin suggests that NR do is to advertise the apples which result from the work. They do a little of this on their web site. They highlight just, well, the highlights. They need to give a better idea of what work has been done where, what the benefits of that work will be, and where it ties in with other work.
     Perhaps a whole new section of web site or indeed a separate site is needed. A single page adding the work done in the past week with each weeks record maintained to show that they work hard round the year.
     Currently, the National Rail website under the ‘Latest travel news’ banner emphasises disruption and delay. The ‘Cleared service disruptions’ has the same emphasis. NR need to do something to redress the balance. Once the ‘Good News’ site has been set up to counter the current ‘Bad News’ pages then the existence of that site could be advertised far and wide.

117. @ RayK – I doubt the public would be terribly interested in knowing that some ballast has been laid or some concrete poured to make a new column. Rail enthusiasts might be interested but let’s not confuse two different groups of users. My sense of things is that Network Rail are getting better at showing progress but its promotion is inevitably tied to the major milestones being achieved after a major possession. That’s just how it is unfortunately. I expect there will be a big push re London Bridge as we approach August when the first bit of the new “downstairs” station opens for business and SE services change.

     Passengers are much more interested in knowing their trains are on time and not cancelled. I expect there would be a cynicism overload if Network Rail went into over promotion mode – it might be seen as an attempt to distract people from other issues. In my view it is much better to be honest about things, not to overpromise and not to make claims about “everthing’s getting better” until there is confidence new assets are working properly. NR have had a bruising time over London Bridge when their claims about the new platforms were found wanting for a pile of reasons. Crossrail are generally considered to have a good PR team but they aren’t issuing updates every week despite having such a large volume of activity right across Greater London.

118. @WW,
     I agree with much of what you say. I cannot agree that NR’s ‘promotion is inevitably tied to the major milestones’. This is somebody’s decision. There is nothing inevitable about it.
     You rightly deplore the extremes of detail like ballast laying and of ‘over promotion mode’. As I pointed out, the current situation is that bad news is well promoted but good news of the everyday variety is either not mentioned or has to be dug for.
     Highways England gives equal emphasis to it’s major projects and it’s everyday resurfacing works etc.. They promote their work of resurfacing and drainage improvement as being for the comfort and convenience of road users. NR needs to do the something of the same. Ballasting and tamping are not ends in themselves. They improve the comfort of the passengers and maintain the line speed. Each promotion needs to assume that it will be read by somebody who has not been told this before. And the good news needs to be readily available and pointed to.
     The NR web site has a ‘Press’ section. It is short on news and mostly used by the rail press. Something better needs to be done and itself promoted. The good news needs to be put out there for the public to see.

119. @WW
     Even where there is not an important milestone, it is also vital to give out the message that progress is being made. Just as with roadworks where nobody seems to be active (because concrete is curing or similar) public and passengers need to be reminded that work towards the goal is still making headway, even when no physical changes will be experienced by passengers for weeks or months to come.

120. Does anyone have any idea as yet of when the August blockade will be and for how long?

     Once I know I will start to plan my summer holiday!

121. Perhaps a bit more good news would be helpful. But writing and publishing such stuff costs money, and there is probably not much of a budget for it. To return to the apples, a commercial apple grower would not waste money on advertising his apples if the state of the market meant that every apple was snapped up as soon as it was picked, due to a national apple shortage. The main beneficiary of the London Bridge work is the peak-hour commuter, and the last thing anyone wants or needs is enhanced demand for peak-hour commuting!

122. From this Southeastern website page, (scroll down to August 2016) it looks like through London Bridge services will be diverted over the Bank Holiday weekend, Charing Cross re-opening on the Tuesday and Cannon Street on the Friday.

123. Agree with Quinlet, NR were getting quite a bit of flack earlier in programme for why is or isn’t work being done at a particular time and the photos and video help to show it is 24hr site.

     i.e. “why can’t you finish the work quicker by working nights?”
     “We are doing work at nights” with links to photos and videos

     Re Southern Heights,
     August Blockade

     New timetable to begin on Sunday 28 August 2016.

     LBG – SE side closed over the August Bank Holiday (27 August – 29 August inclusive)

     On Tuesday 30 August – Thursday 1 September 2016 there will be no Cannon Street Services. After this date, Cannon Street services will not call at London Bridge.

     Charing Cross services will call at London Bridge from Tuesday 30 August 2016.

124. I recently visited Amsterdam and the Visitor Centre for the north-south Metro line under construction (2x original estimate and 5-7 years late!). They originally took what I might describe as the “normal UK public utility approach to publicity” – defensive, work behind closed doors, say nothing unless asked/challenged. After nearly being cancelled because of the cost increase/delay, and in response to a backlash to the disturbance of neighbours in a crowded/historic city, they decided to be truly open – hence the really well equipped Visitor Centre, web site and social media. They don’t make the mistake of deciding for the public what the public wants to hear; they keep their ear to the ground and respond to everyone’s wants.They have, as a result of this policy, published some incredible photos and have described some incredible civil engineering – and some of their tasks have made Crossrail look easy. NR would do well to emulate them. Crossrail is another example of proudly and pretty transparently publicising its work.

125. The New York MTA actively posts photos of it’s weekend work even if some are a bit reminiscent of catalogue poses ‘man pointing at cable box’ and ‘track section being lifted by crain’

     When it carries out its ‘fast track’ work where it closes a line(s) for an extended night period over 4 nights (Mon – Thur) the very next day it posts what work it has done – how many X feet of track it has replaced , Y lbs of rubbish removed and Z square feet of station area painted. They even say how many light bulbs and CCTV cameras and monitors it has replaced / cleaned.

     Now IMHO it matters not one jot how many people actually look at it but it does matter that it spends a little time and money on putting the info on its website – and the link is on the front page as well not hidden.

     I’m looking at the national rail enquires website for Sunday (was planing on going up to London) and all it says for the BML is ‘engineering work is taking place between …’

     Now now hard would it be to say what they are actually doing and why? e.g, ‘we are replacing the signals between X and Y which will lead to a more reliable service’ or ‘replacement of 3 miles of track between A and B which will lead to a smoother ride and when the project is complete shorter journey times’

     They know what work they are doing and they are already spending staff time putting the bland ‘engineering’ works on the website so another minute to type a little more text isn’t going to break the bank is it?

126. Chris C says “They know what work they are doing and they are already spending staff time putting the bland ‘engineering’ works on the website so another minute to type a little more text isn’t going to break the bank is it?”

     Maybe not. But publicity of this kind can misfire if it’s not thought through reasonably carefully, so I wouldn’t see it as a “zero cost” option. But yes, probably still worthwhile.

127. I tend to think that there is a broad constituency of non rail buff but still interested people out there, not least because after 5 years of commuting people do acquire some kind of interest in the something that they use twice a day five or more times a week. Londonist, Ian Visits and City Metric have transport subsections, and I can’t imagine they are only read by the subset of rail buffs.

     And in London in particular there are plenty of non-car drivers who have acquired an interest in transport, and engineering work because the engineering work stops them being able to travel easily some weekends.

128. The page TFL produce in Metro newspaper provides a good example of how information on both work to come and post weekend results whicg Network Rail could use as a basis .

     Here is an extract from Network Rail Christmas Report on its site :-

     Electrification

     Progressing the electrification programme was a key part of the upgrade work that took place on the Great Western Main Line this Christmas and New Year. Over 11,700 metres of new electrification wiring was installed as were 174 new masts, all in preparation for the arrival of the new fleet of faster, quieter, greener and longer electric trains.

     I know the figure for new electrification is not clear as to whether 11.7 km is all tracks or single track miles but it still shows how much progress was made something which could counter act the bad publicity electrification got last year .

     In fact I came across an item in a newspaper written this year which still reckoned that MML electrification was not taking place !

     A post Christmas , Easter and August BH report would help explain what happened during say a 10 day Christmas closure .

     It’s worth remembering that now Network Rail is back in the public sector it needs to publicise what it has done in order to ensure future funding if it’s to continue successful upgrade of the network.

129. Drivers eye view of the new up Charing Cross route through P8:

     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOLBV-Ha8ys&feature=youtu.be

130. @ Ngh – interesting but what a shame it is quite so speeded up! Actually being able to see the new platforms and what’s going on would have been nice. Pity Youtube only has a pause and not a “slow down” button.

131. Youtube Speed:- Click on the gearwheel for settings and speed is selectable between quarter and times two. Quarter speed is still fast.
     It’s a pity the video and the title are incongruent. The video shows LBG station and only half of the new viaduct. I was looking forward to seeing the West end of the viaduct when it finished.

132. Re publicity, I agree more could and should be done. But that does require a Client who wants to do it, and a decent budget to be provided for that purpose.

     TfL pay a not inconsiderable sum for their daily page in Metro, and I’ve been told (by someone who should know) that TfLs PR team has 10 times as many people in it than the whole of NRs. I’m not sure I believe that, but it does explain how TfL got away with presenting the new SSL resignalling contract (3years late and well over budget) as “Good News”

133. Re: Drivers Eye View Speed:

     Download the video, get hold of something like VLC or MPH-HT (Media Player Classic Home Theatre) and change the playback speed. The latter will let yo step through frame by frame if you like.

134. @ SFD – and there was me thinking that TfL got their Metro page free as part of the overall distribution deal for the London version being distributed on their network.

135. @SFD – There’s a frequent contributor to LR, who visits the Blue Posts on LR nights and who has his own website with photos and fine resolution videos at slowed-down speed of the LBG work as viewed from windows of service train saloons and who I’m sure would be grateful to accept a Network Rail shilling or two to be invited into the cab of whatever is on hand passing and record the scene from there.

136. @WW. I suspect you are correct re the TfL / Metro deal. Presumably NR has a similar arrangement, but takes the cash rather than a page in the paper. Ultimately the effect for TfL is the same, they forego cash for a page in the paper.

137. March 2016 works update available on Team London Bridge.
     http://www.teamlondonbridge.co.uk/news-london-bridge-station-redevelopment-october-2015-updatezzznzzz.aspx?m=31&mi=261&pmi=&ms=

138. http://www.facebook.com/bbcbusiness/videos/10153666610608129/
     is the first thing that I have seen of LBG for some time and the first from this far North. Are the hoardings just too effective to permit good views of what is happening or is there some other reason for the lack.
     This 360 deg. video raises questions. Looking towards St Thomas St. there is a noticeable lack of the much vaunted natural daylight. Is this an effect of the poor quality of the video, the effect of hoardings blocking the light or is it really dim down there?
     The most Easterly of the ‘B’ columns appears to have been completed along with the track beams to the side wall. have the foundations for the other columns been completed or would they be an obstruction at this stage?

139. @ Ray K – the place is far from finished. I imagine several areas where light could penetrate to lower levels are blocked off / sealed up. There is also no working lighting at low level from what I can see. We’ve only got 3.5 months to wait before half of it opens so I imagine the pressure is really on to get everything sorted.

     I would suggest the main article / video on the BBC website gives a far, far better view of the newer parts, including daylight, of the revamped station. The 360 degree thing is pretty useless.

     http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36225912

140. Re Ray K and WW,

     (Plenty of photos on their twitter feed)

     Should improve when the hoardings are removed especially the triangle in the middle between P9 and P10. The Daylight comes from northlights so looking south towards St Thomas Street won’t be as bright as looking north (Especially when the windows along St Thomas Street are boarded up and also the office on the concourse are in the way.)

     Staff start moving into the control room and offices above the new ticket office in the concourse at the end of the month. (And the current office space in the old SER offices get demolished)

     “B”columns – but they are the “C” columns…
     The country end has a short span of concrete decked rather than steel & concrete decked. The piling for the rest of the “C” columns has been done but anything above ground level would indeed get in the way of demolition in September onwards.

     The bank of 4 escalators from the current concourse to the tube are being closed at the end of June to allow the escalators be removed and work on the replacement quadripartite arches on the passageway between the new concourse and tube station to be completed.
     But there is an experimental closure this Wednesday (today) and Thursday rush hours so expect grumpy pax walking the long way round.

141. Err! Aren’t the Cannon Street services due to be routed over the ‘C’ columns from September to April?

142. Re Ray K

     Opps yes you are right – the danger of post whilst half asleep!

143. Another NR video of LBG. This time the new Control Office.
     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3wz22c4hu8
     It had not occurred to me that the cladding under the bridges was anything other than for appearance. Yet we are told (0.43 sec =/-) that it is there to deaden the sound of trains passing overhead.

144. Interesting video, shows the works are coming along well. Such a pity that the voices are almost inaudible yet the music blares out.

145. Good video and nice to see a better glimpse of the concourse area. How long before the control windows are covered over once the punters work out what it is and who is in there? You can imagine what might happen if there are delays and the concourse is filling with people.

146. Re WW,

     Or just make sure the retail establishments don’t sell anything that is solid enough and will have enough momentum to cause damage when thrown to first floor level!

147. From ex guards presumably. I’ve never known Southern commuters to do anything like that. At worst crawl under barriers perhaps in desperation.

148. Re Jim,

     I think WW and I were both being sarcastic…

149. @ Ngh – not really! I’ve seen far too many examples of “open” control rooms being designed and constructed and then being made as anonymous and invisible as possible by the operating staff. This is to ensure privacy and to avoid the “punters” being too distracting by gawping through / banging on the windows. It’s a classic case of the theory of the design being completely ignored by those who actually use the space. Pesky users and their human traits!

150. Re WW,

     The new control room is at first floor level above the ticket offices (which is at ground floor /street level) on the new concourse so there won’t be many “punters” banging on the windows unless they have a ladder etc.! (Platform level is circa at 2.75 floors)

151. @ Ngh – I know where it is from the video. Still won’t stop people sussing out what it is – especially as it’s on Youtube. It also won’t stop them, if they’re “annoyed” (ahem) enough, from standing and jeering and shouting if they’re all stuck downstairs and no trains upstairs. A few choruses of “oh why are we waiting” would probably sound lovely in the new wooden clad under track concert hall. 😉

152. Well hopefully once the programme is complete, there will be fewer delays.

153. Given that the office is described as secure. And given what that tends to mean these days. I suspect that it might be more resistant than most structures to anything available in the local retail outlets.
     I would also expect the window to be designed to reduce the transmission of sound. The concourse, being the size of Wembly football pitch, can hold the equivalent of a football crowd who can make quite a substantial amount of noise just by conversing and moving about. Perhaps that cladding is intended to deaden the sound of more than trains.

154. Josh
     Until it snows …..

155. Re Greg,

     The TL tracks should be in use 24/7 most weeks so there should be some resilience against snow effect service on some of the London Bridge services. When some of the services get out into the more exposed bits of Kent that is different matter. Lots of the de-icing kit seems to be based at Tonbridge (inc Sussex side) so you just have to hope that there was no scheduled engineering works overnight that preclude the trains running from Tonbridge towards your line!

156. @RayK
     “The concourse, being the size of Wembley football pitch, can hold the equivalent of a football crowd ”

     You couldn’t possibly get the entire 90,000 seating capacity of Wembley onto the pitch – which is the standard UEFA Category 4 size of 105m x 69m. (So the word “Wembley” is redundant in that claim anyway). Each person would have little more than the size of an A4 sheet of paper to stand on.

157. Re timbeau,

     And even less space & fewer people when you have added a ticket office, 14 stair / escalator banks, lifts, retail outlets, gatelines and help points. 1 person per A5/A6?

158. The suggested number of people was “a football crowd” – not a very specific number. (The juxtaposition of Wembley being mentioned nearby may have confused us somewhat). The football match I last went to had less than a dozen supporters freezing on the touchline. Your results may vary.

159. The commuters there are unlikely to attempt anything more violent than a sternly worded letter to the editor of The Times. Younger commuters currently prefer Twitter, but the effect is likely to be much the same: A collective venting of the spleen, but nothing more. By that time of day, you’re too knackered and running on fumes anyway.

     Commuters know full well they are powerless. It matters not one whit whose logo is on the side of the train: There’s no M&S-style option. No ads with unctuous voice-overs claiming “This isn’t just any old train! This is a Rolls-Royce Class 735 with luxury leather seats, designer lighting, and personal at-seat butler service.”

     You don’t even get a “Tesco’s Finest”. It’s all just the basic J. Tesco Mediocre Value Range service.

160. Little more than the size of an A4 sheet to stand on? Pah, that would seem like acres of space on SouthEastern after service perturbation.

161. I’m mildly disappointed that someone hasn’t worked out an approximate crowd number during a typical non-perturbed rush hour. In referring to a crowd i wanted to bring to mind typical crowd sounds and volumes. I would have referred to a shopping mall but then we have to consider the sounds of music. There will, of course, be announcements. I should think that they might present sufficient reason to soundproof the control room even without crowd noises.

162. Modern sports stadiums are often deliberately designed to be noisy, with lots of reflecting surfaces to echo the crowd’s noise back to it and create ‘atmosphere’. On the other hand in a station you would want to eliminate echoes that would make it hard to hear announcements.

163. @Ian J
     Thank you for that important observation. I can see how the elimination of echos would aid the zoning of announcements so that each set of passengers gets to hear what what is relevant to them without interference from other announcements.

164. The bank of 4 escalators from the current concourse to the passageway leading to the tube are being closed on Thursday 16th June to allow the escalators be removed and work on the replacement quadripartite arches on the passageway between the new concourse and tube station to be completed. The lift between the passageway and the current concourse is also closing on Sunday 26th June.
     The metal staircase (under an arch) is also being closed in peak hours.
     The alternative lift will be the Shard one and there are alternative step free walking routes.

     The existing gate line is also being shortened before the new concourse opening which won’t go down well with users particularly in the am peak… (they haven’t chosen to publicise this bit yet).

165. RayK: Zoned announcements maybe. But those with perfect hearing here may not appreciate just how much impact the acoustic quality of P.A. has on comprehension. I have only slight hearing loss, hardly affecting conversation, but there are many public announcements which I cannot understand, and those around me, who have understood, do not notice the degradation at all (and are quite surprised when I ask them what was said). But there are also some announcements which I do hear clearly – typically when the equipment is new and well-designed, and the announcer is well trained.

166. @ngh: “The metal staircase (under an arch) is also being closed in peak hours.“.

     Do you mean the staircase on the Tooley Street side?

167. @ngh How is one meant to get to the tube from the terminating platforms if the escalators and the Tooley St steps are being closed? The new concourse doesn’t open until later.

168. Re Southern Heights,

     Yes the one on the Tooley Street side under the Cannon Street track arches

     Re Toby,

     The official routes are:

     1. Shard Escalator(s?) from Jubilee in PM peak (tidal flow arrangements suggest both escalators set to up in evening peak?)
     2. The escalator next to the News UK building (other side of the pedestrian crossing that opened last year) for Northern Line
     3. Walk the long way round down the bus station ramp and back along Duke Hill / Tooley Street to Jubilee in AM peak

169. @ngh Thanks. Think I need to do a dry run sharpish! Reckon it’ll be the long walk round in the AM peak for me.

170. @Toby Chopra, @ngh: Map here. You’ll need to scroll down a bit….

171. That finally explains why they have gone to such trouble to create a second parallel walking route alongside the existing one – itself more or less parallel with the bus station – basically route 3 on the diagram.

172. Could we have a June/July “pre August changes update” please? Pretty please?

173. Old Buccaneer,

     Personally, I would love to provide one but I know nothing that is not already out there in the public domain. We could take some photos of the concourse when it opens.

     Incredibly, as far as I am aware, the South Eastern timetable following the August closures still isn’t published. That would tell us a lot and give a big clue as to 2018 plans on South Eastern side.

     Decent information is hard to come by. Take, for example, Abbey Wood Weekend Closures. The table is headed with that exact working and some weekends have green ticks and others have red crosses. Does a green tick mean yes the closure applies or that there is a train service?

     SouthEastern’s department of misinformation (speciality is maps) strikes again.

174. The web version of the national timetable available via NETWORK RAIL’s website since mid May includes before and after 29 August versions for all the tables in the Southeastern area.
     http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/3828.aspx
     AFAICS there has been no publicity yet…

175. Apologies that should have been separate dated versions as sections within each table…

176. PoP re: Abbey Wood closures: according to ‘National Rail Enquiries’ journey time at 1150 am on 11 June is 18 min and on 18 June 32 min, from Plumstead to Dartford. There’s a picture of a (red) bus on the train I looked up on the later date too. I deduce green => train.

     ‘Publicly available’ is not what it was.

177. Re PoP,

     There is plenty that is public but very well hidden and not joined up or explained…

     SE timetable – the draft certainly is available but It won’t tell a lot for the longer term as it is another fudge till the next fudge in August ’17 (Charing Cross services get 4 platforms at LBG) and the proper one in Dec ’17. The new franchise holder or DfT may have other ideas for 2018 timetables! The infrastructure changes mean it won’t be possible to see what the long term plan is as CHX is only 24tph max vs 28 long term and Cannon Street is 24tph passing through without stopping vs 22tph long term. There is net increase of 2 later on and more SE Blackfriars services.

     Quick Post August summary of service that could stop at LBG:

     Am peak:

     Up Charing Cross services:
     All 24tph Up Charing Cross services stop and alternate between platforms 8 and 9

     Down Services:
     All use P7
     10 stop
     10 pass in service (8 465/466/376 type stopping /semi fast distance services and just 2x 375 longer distance services)
     4 run ECS

     Pm peak:

     Is more spread out anyway so fewer tph but a longer peak overall
     All down services stop alternating between P7&8

     Of the 19tph up services between 1730 and 1830:
     18tph stop at P9, 1 tph passes (so similar potential performance to the old P6 at 18 stopping)

178. Paul – so just the 84MB zip file then? I’ve had a little play with the Southeastern website & rapidly lost the will to live. Makes me grateful I don’t live out that way.

179. Old Buccaneer,

     The fact that you had to conduct such an exercise to work out what is meant rather makes my point.

     ngh,

     “The draft is available …”

     There would still be a lot of clues. For instance, will we still see a 15 minute evening service alternating between Charing Cross and Cannon Street rather than the 30 minute one Charing Cross only pre not stopping at London Bridge? That on its own would be very revealing.

     Also, the appearance of 12-car metro trains to Charing Cross (or not).

     Paul,

     Thanks. It does not surprise me that the working timetables can be found but they are not an easy read so I generally try and avoid them unless I have good reason to look something up that cannot be deduced from either the public timetable or Journey Planner.

180. PoP: fully agree. There’s a single sentence explainer on the ‘London terminals weekend closures’ page which could so easily be copied across & lightly edited. Aargh!!

181. Re PoP,

     I think there may be dangers in reading to much into Aug TT changes.

     As Phase 2 of the electrification works for the 12 car lengthening project has got delayed as the ORR wouldn’t agree with NR’s costing (it wasn’t getting cheaper in line with NcNulty for ORR purposes but real competitive tendering based costing didn’t agree with McNulty!) so the increase in outer metro 12 car services* is much delayed till March 2019 with NR still suggesting that the big TT change is still scheduled for Dec 2018 after a year of bedding down at LBG as the extra space at Blackfriars bay platforms won’t be available till then. (Also happens to align with Crossrail Abbey Wood opening)

     * e.g. CHX – Gillingham via Abbey Wood and Blackheath and the slow CHX – Orpington – Tunbridge Wells being the main affected services (And sensible length Hastings Services!)

182. ngh,

     I think there may be dangers in reading to much into Aug TT changes.

     Fully understand but nevertheless there are some things that will give a clue and for some of the other things we can take into account current day reality. I agree that will leave a lot unanswered.

183. Re PoP,

     Evening services (and general off peak pattern)
     Taking Hayes as a detailed example the service is 4tph Charing Cross but not evenly spaced (19min/11min gaps). All stop at Lewisham for interchange (with CST services)

     Blackheath line gets 6 tph; 2 VIC and 4 CHX (2 then via Woolwich)

     Sidcup Line gets 6tph: 2 CHX and 2 CST

     Greenwich Line gets: 6/8tph; 6 CST (and 2 CHX via Blackheath)

     Grove Park Line gets 4tph; 2 CHX 2 CST

     Non-Hayes lines have fairly even spacing of services “via” London Bridge

184. Which rather suggest that these extra evening services will live on for evermore. If they were only temporary they could have got rid of them once Charing Cross trains stopped once again at London Bridge.

     All we need now is for a dose of reality and run them on Sundays as well.

185. Re PoP,

     The off peak looks fairly settled as it optimises the running of the CST-CST loop services avoiding Dartford. (50% loop CST services).

     Improved off peak was a direct award extension commitment…

     Sundays improvements – that would need there to be far less engineering work and bit of Tfl involvement? The last thing they want to have to do at the moment is deal with more altered or cancelled trains on Sundays due to the LBG rebuild.

     Presumably 12car on the CHX via Blackheath and Woolwich services from August would require the new Abbey Wood SE platform to be largely complete and open full length?

186. @poP
     “Paul, Thanks. It does not surprise me that the working timetables can be found”
     I think Paul was referring to the public timetable, which has been published (albeit (now only available as an 84MB download – individual tables no longer available)
     http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/eNRT/may16/Complete%20timetable%20-%20Separate%20PDFs.zip
     This does indeed show separate timetables before and after 28th August
     (Read Barry Doe’s report in today’s issue of Rail if you want to know how well the GBTT has been proof read!)

187. @ Timbeau – now let me guess what Mr Doe might have said? How about “not very well”? (proof read, that is). I expect that’s a somewhat toned down version. I think we reached the point a fair time ago that the NR timetable pdfs / printed books were not really to be trusted. A crying shame but there’s simply not the requisite attention being paid to those documents despite having volunteer checkers etc. The high volume of engineering works causes a lot of turbulence in the timetables – well that’s my perception (happy to be corrected by those who use trains more than I do).

188. And, as if by magic, the timetables appear!

189. In such circumstances I always look first to the Hayes timetable because it is easiest to follow.

     The rogue 07.43 Hayes – Charing Cross service now reverts to Cannon St as it should do (times have slightly changed).

     4tph right up to last train Mon-Sat.

     On Saturdays all trains go to Charing Cross (half call at Lewisham but none at St Johns or New Cross).

     On Sundays all trains (2tph) go to Cannon St! So no direct trains to London Bridge.

190. WW @ 1333

     I am not quite sure what goes on up in Milton Keynes but NR seem to have some difficulty in producing something in a timely manner for me to proofread, and then taking much notice of the feedback that I give. This time around, for example, I was given tables that included services along the sea wall between Dover and Folkestone only to discover that a totally different set of tables, that I had not seen, have been published. Things like seat reservations and catering trolley symbols reappear at each edition, despite South Eastern having long abolished these and me having reported them each time. However, it seems that much is driven by the Working Time Table (WTT) downloads they have to work with. Because someone has puts seat reservations as being available in the draft WTT it cannot, apparently, be removed from the public timetable.

     There is much that can be done with the National Timetable to make it more useful, but I sense that something is preventing the joined up thinking necessary to do it. There is certainly a struggle with the concept of trains that go round in loops as many in (the historic county of) Kent do.

191. There was a little bit of twitter argy-bargy this morning which may have, err, assisted in the (belated) appearance of those timetables today. They were previously promised by Southeastern “by May” and this morning Southeastern were still “working with NR to finalise them.” NR were claiming the ones on their site were final, but would not confirm this after being presented with the Southeastern claim.

192. I’d agree that Southeastern probably weren’t planning on releasing those timetables, it’s unusual to have such basic formatting and include train headcodes. These probably are what were presented to the various ‘stakeholders’ before the timetable is produced in the standard timetable book format closer to the time.

     The August 16 timetable does suggest the more frequent evening trains are here to stay. The Victoria – Orpington Weekday + Sat has 4tph after 9pm compared to the 2tph now. Technically there is one half hour gap between the last two trains, but that last train is an additional service. I presume due to the unconventional release of the timetable the accompanying press release hasn’t been written yet.

193. @ JB – sounds to me like Peter Hendy needs to go into “argy bargy” mode when he has a spare moment to deal with some small stuff rather than the big stuff which no doubt takes up nearly all his time. It’s clearly bonkers that you (and many others) are giving up your time only for your feedback to be wasted / ignored because there is some “immovable” rigidity in the system that means “things can’t be changed”. I don’t doubt that there is some amazing complexity and a shed load of interdependencies in the processes used to create a timetable but what’s the point of presenting “rubbish” to the travelling public? None!

194. Has the time come just to let go of the all lines rail timetable? Does anyone other than enthusiasts use it?

195. Ian J
     It’s SO USEFUL & I cannot trust many TOC’s tt’s because they all-too-often only show “their” trains not all trains.

196. Slight change to what you mentioned earlier, the Thameslink web-site now has a news item about the changes:

     To help reduce crowding in the Tube station the metal staircase will be closed during the morning peak.

     Note: This is the morning peak only….

Comments are closed.