Kent Route Utilisation Strategy

[chapelwood]

The final strategy has now been published, together with all the responses to the consultation on the draft.
www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/rus%20documents/route%20utilisation%20strategies/kent/kent%20rus.pdf
I haven't had time for more than the most cursory skim, bu the document will be worth reading, and commenting on.
Chapelwood

[trainplanner]

Good Morning All,

As per Chapelwoods recommendation i have reviewed the above document, and a couple of points still come to mind:

FIrstly, Network Rail acknowldge the fact that many people have commented on the lack of real options, other then shoving people over onto HS1, but admit that this may for the moment be the only practical option. This would suggest that NR have again been limited to considering timetable tweaks, and only any major track changes that are already permitted in existing ongoing projects.

It is noted in the consultation that the appropriate balence of high speed, mainline and suburban services shoudl be maintained, which is a view Medway unitary Authority holds, but one THe DFT seems intent on ignoring.

IT is suggested that to improve the high speed service that some suburban trains will have to be removed to permit access over rochester bridge junction.

They confirm that todays level of cannon street services can be maintained (22tph) but that this fails to address the issues of overcrowding that must surely exist on these trains.

Further changes suggested include:

Terminating the charring cross stoppers at rochester to free paths through medway to extend the high speed services to start back at faversham.

Extending the ebsfleet only services to start back at either ashford, maidstone west or strood,

Rochester station is proposed to be moved, possibly towards london to make a better connection with Rochester high street, but that extenal funding would be required.

The issue that still continues to perplex me, is why the RUS documents are continuing to suggest the extension of High Speed Services through MEdway is the Answer to overcrowding, when clearly as identified by other posters on this site, that the trains are not being used by people on the north kent lines!!

How have peoples commutes been??

Regards

TP

[trainplanner]

Also i do believe that as far as the high speed services are concerned, the services should run down the medway valley line to maidstone (and the Charring cross stoppers connect at strood)and that only the existing through services from the coast should operate, the rochester stoppers should be re routed.

Again the Kent Rus fails to deliver any meaningful changes, to reduce congestion and overcrowding, as they have ruled out anything which requires major track and signalling changes.

Regards

TP

[busman]

All so having a quick scan through, they seem to think having as many train 12 coaches long as possible and the signaling upgrade to make the leeway better and the changes to Rochester station and i note they mention Gillingam as well to upgrade the turn back facilities will fix a lot issue I have my doubts. many of these features are years away.

Looking at one of the tables even before HHS timetable changes the amount of standing over the 20min limit was to me unacceptable.

[trainplanner]

Re-reading the document over lunch, the following are things that Network need to undertake to provide additional capacity on the Chatham lines:

Extend all platforms on the South eastern side of the station to provide 12 car lengths,
Provide passing loops or 4 track sections between Sole street and Swanley,
Build a second bridge over the River Medway,
Provide four tracks from the River bridge to Fort Pitt Tunnel.
Provide a dedicated single track connection from The Sheerness line to Sittingbourne station, to remove trains from the main lines.

Peoples thoughts??

Regards

TP

[chapelwood]

Best value for the High Speed trains to St Pancras will be achieved if, in the peaks, they run full without being overcrowded, as this will take as many passengers as possible off overcrowded classic lines, or off the roads. But we must object to the tendency to force people on to the High Speed trains by making services on the classic routes unattractive.

So, extend the Rochester terminators to Faversham if the existing Faversham High Speed trains become overcrowded, but I don't think they are at present. Extend the Ebbsfleet terminators to Ashford, if the existing Ashford trains are overcrowded - I gather they are loading well, but are by no means overcrowded. Running High Speed trains to Maidstone West could be attractive, especially if a fast bus link from Snodland to Kings Hill is provided. There's also a good case for fast bus links from Walderslade, Lords Wood, Wigmore and Park Wood to Ebbsfleet, as these housing areas are close to the M2 but remote from the railway through the Medway Towns

I can't see that significant extra track on the Chatham Main Line is affordable, and I doubt that making all eight Chatham side platforms at Victoria is practicable - but five long platforms ought to be plenty for the 12-car trains that use the station. I am not convinced by the Strategy document's analysis about 12-car trains on the Maidstone East line, but a good way of doing this would be for 12-car trains from Victoria to split into fast and slow portions at Swanley, as used to happen once upon a time. They are recommending something similar at Tunbridge Wells for the Hastings line.

[O.V.S.Bulleid]

I have also read the Kent RUS and have to agree that it is very disappointing. Some elements I can understand but the reliance on using services to North London to cope with an increase in traffic will simply not work as it is impossible to get anywhere near tube platforms now.

One thing that they have suggested is that the issue of premium fares should be re-examined. This shows that some thought has been given to finding ways in which passengers can be encouraged to change terminals. Whether this diversion will match the development of workplaces across the capital is anyones guess - but mine is that it won't.

An area that some people may wish to comment on is the plan to move Tonbridge services to Cannon Street over to Blackfriars, along with expanded services from Maidstone. For those using the Chatham Line or travel from East Kent, I have to ask if the emphasis for the Tonbridge and Maidstone services remain as direct to "Southern" terminals then why should the Chatham and East Kent services are be expanded to a terminal that has one of the highest ratio of arriving passengers using the underground to complete their journeys - that is completely illogical until well into the delivery period, by which time changes in technology may have had a dampening effect on peak travel anyway.

Trainplanner mentioned no four-tracking through the Medway Underground and this is simply because they would never find a viable business case to build them. What might be interesting would be the building of a short stretch of new line from the east end of the CTRL Medway Viaduct to a point east of Newington, following the M2 for a distance and with a station near Junction 3 near Walderslade and convenient for Maidstone. This might make the journey time to North London only 20 minutes or so and Sittingbourne only 35 minutes.

I wholeheartedly support Trainplanner in having a third track between Eastern jn and Sittingbourne. The other option that may be less expensive but less effective would be to make both lines bi-directional.

Yours sincerely
O.V.S.Bulleid

[Ryan Webb]

Re: extra track between Eastern Jn and Sittingbourne - that would be a good idea, if done Southeastern can't give the excuse of running no trains on the Sheerness Line when it's a bit frosty outside as "we don't want to risk moving the points" like they did late last year and earlier this month. No trains for a week!

[genehuntisking]

Jan 25, 2010 19:21:40 GMT Ryan Webb said:

Re: extra track between Eastern Jn and Sittingbourne - that would be a good idea, if done Southeastern can't give the excuse of running no trains on the Sheerness Line when it's a bit frosty outside as "we don't want to risk moving the points" like they did late last year and earlier this month. No trains for a week!

In fairness, points and signaling are a Network Rail issue. For better or for worse they decided to focus what limited ground staff they had on making sure The Chatham line ran, at the expense of The Sheerness branch. The theory being that one man at Gillingham would be better utilized to keep things going over Rochester Bridge Jn than watching that all coming grinding to a halt due to being down at Sittingbourne.

Having more staff out on the ground is a whole different issue to effectively deploying those that you do have.

The Gene Genie

[sibodkent]

Jan 25, 2010 18:40:54 GMT O.V.S.Bulleid said:

I have also read the Kent RUS and have to agree that it is very disappointing. Some elements I can understand but the reliance on using services to North London to cope with an increase in traffic will simply not work as it is impossible to get anywhere near tube platforms now.

Dear Mr Bulleid,

I am not entirely sure what you mean by this?

It is extremely easy to access all platforms from the Domestic high speed platforms, in fact there is direct escalator and lift access to the northern ticket hall at St Pancras/Kings Cross.

Traditionally one had to walk to the far end of St Pancras and cross the road to Kings Cross to gain access, but since late november, early December, this was no longer necessary.

Anyone can get to the Victora, Picadilly and Northern line platforms all within a few minutes walk, and the new escalators and ticket hall are far from crowded even in peak time.

The walking time to any of the lines is much reduced as a result.

[busman]

What might be interesting would be the building of a short stretch of new line from the east end of the CTRL Medway Viaduct to a point east of Newington, following the M2 for a distance and with a station near Junction 3 near Walderslade and convenient for Maidstone"

Dear Mr Bulleid,

Maybe a more viable alternative would to run a link from the line around the cuxton area and connect to the HSS line there, cutting out the slow progress via Strood and Gravesend. And possibley a station around there, near the M2/A2


Regards

Busman

[O.V.S.Bulleid]

sibodkent sir,

Reports to me suggest that not the distance to the platforms is a problem but actually getting onto them - and then trains are a problem. Most reports that I get suggest 25 to 30 minutes to get to either Cannon St (Bank) or Victoria at high peak.

busman sir,

I may be wrong but I think that we may be talking about the same sort of solution. My view is that continuing along the Ashford Line from Ebbsfleet, across the Medway Viaduct would be the approach. At the east end of the viaduct a connection on each side could rise along the valley to a point beneath Junction 3 of the M2/A229 where the two lines would then be parallel to a park and ride station that would be close to both Walderslade and with access to both M2/A229. This might be the voltage changeover point after which the route would continue by the M2 before heading north-east towards the Newington High St/Boyces Hill area (or indeed - if no houses in the way - to become the two centre tracks through Newington Station.

It has just struck me that the vacated area between tracks east of Rainham might then provide space for a turnback siding if additional trains are to run via the Medway Underground.

Yours sincerely
O.V.S.Bulleid

[busman]

Jan 26, 2010 16:16:00 GMT O.V.S.Bulleid said:

sibodkent sir,

Reports to me suggest that not the distance to the platforms is a problem but actually getting onto them - and then trains are a problem. Most reports that I get suggest 25 to 30 minutes to get to either Cannon St (Bank) or Victoria at high peak.

busman sir,

I may be wrong but I think that we may be talking about the same sort of solution. My view is that continuing along the Ashford Line from Ebbsfleet, across the Medway Viaduct would be the approach. At the east end of the viaduct a connection on each side could rise along the valley to a point beneath Junction 3 of the M2/A229 where the two lines would then be parallel to a park and ride station that would be close to both Walderslade and with access to both M2/A229. This might be the voltage changeover point after which the route would continue by the M2 before heading north-east towards the Newington High St/Boyces Hill area (or indeed - if no houses in the way - to become the two centre tracks through Newington Station.

It has just struck me that the vacated area between tracks east of Rainham might then provide space for a turnback siding if additional trains are to run via the Medway Underground.

Yours sincerely
O.V.S.Bulleid

Dear Mr Bulleid,

Not quite: I was thinking of a cheaper option to run the link of the climb out of strood up the Sole street bank and to link to the HSS line at the West end of the Viaduct. Little further for people to go, but still on the M2/A2 link. All so possibly more space for building the station and car park and hopefully bus interchange along the line of the M2/A2 road. The commuter timed trains could all so possibly miss out the Ebbsfleet stop just the Asford trains stopping there to try and make service a little faster and maybe more tempting for the users form the Medaway towns and Faversham.

Regards

Busman

[O.V.S.Bulleid]

busman sir,

I think that I understand what you say but if I understand correctly the route via Gravesend - Strood would effectively form a loop from the main CTRL. If that is correct then the journey times for beyond Strood would take as long (or longer) than now - and the passengers to/from Medway and stations to Thanet are those with the least benefit compared to "Southern" termini.

My suggestion could also benefit services from Victoria and Cannon Street if they turned left at Fawkham Juntion and proceeded to Southfleet Junction and onwards via the M2/A229 parkway station. I wouldn't necessarily suggest this as, given the removal of premium fares the ambition of moving passengers away to North London might tempt some extra passengers who already travel from London termini by tube to switch routes. This isn't a majority but may create enough space on classic services to continue matching seats to passenger demand.

Yours sincerely
O.V.S.Bulleid

[sibodkent]

Jan 26, 2010 16:16:00 GMT O.V.S.Bulleid said:

sibodkent sir,

Reports to me suggest that not the distance to the platforms is a problem but actually getting onto them - and then trains are a problem. Most reports that I get suggest 25 to 30 minutes to get to either Cannon St (Bank) or Victoria at high peak.

From my experience, this is worst case scenario.

As an example, it takes under 10 minutes for me to travel from my seat on the HS1 train to the exit of the Piccadilly line at St Pancras.

Though the rather conservative TFL website quotes between 19 and 25 minutes for the journey to Canon Street.