Uckfield Lewes line to re-open?

[Lord Bracknell]

I assumed that the new services were being factored in around Eurostar services and weren't reducing its capacity. I'm curious how that will go, seeing as it is the first time there has been trains of that speed running domestic services in this country.

There's more than enough spare capacity on the high speed line to accommodate extra trains, other than Eurostars.

Personally, I would have liked to have seen a network of direct European services running beyond London to destinations such as Cardiff, Manchester, Glasgow and Edinburgh. Thanks to the UK's insistence on managing border controls as if we were an island, those services won't happen, which is a shame.

With commuter trains taking 35 minutes between Ashford and London, this could have a huge impact on the economy of the Ashford area (and even Hastings / Rye).

 

[Ernest]

It will be interesting to see what happens in 5 years time when all the Southern franchises expire and whether the old Southern Region will reappear as one super sized franchise and then some sort of line rebuilding/reopening might be part of the franchise condition.

 

[bigc]

With commuter trains taking 35 minutes between Ashford and London, this could have a huge impact on the economy of the Ashford area (and even Hastings / Rye).

God knows Hastings needs it. It has been hamstrung really by its poor transport links to London for years.

Rye would be a nice place to visit from London if you could go on HS1 to Ashford then jump on the Marshlink line. I walked from Hastings to Rye back in April and it was certainly one of the prettiest stops on my coastal walk from Brighton so far.

 

[bigc]

It will be interesting to see what happens in 5 years time when all the Southern franchises expire and whether the old Southern Region will reappear as one super sized franchise and then some sort of line rebuilding/reopening might be part of the franchise condition.

Network SouthEast all over again?

 

[Gully]

It is difficult to see how any new franchise could increase capacity on services, if that was a challenge, without increasing rail track mileage. The old chestnuts of having longer trains (more carriages) and double decker services are often dismissed because of the costs of expanding stations and loading gauges in tunnels...that is to say far too costly. The next alternative would be track widening, more lines, like they do on motorway bottlenecks...again far too costly.

I think this is a problem that needs to be addressed, with diminishing stocks of fossil fuels and an increasing cost of exploiting what remains, it is clear that demands on public transport will also increase.

 

[bigc]

It is difficult to see how any new franchise could increase capacity on services, if that was a challenge, without increasing rail track mileage. The old chestnuts of having longer trains (more carriages) and double decker services are often dismissed because of the costs of expanding stations and loading gauges in tunnels...that is to say far too costly. The next alternative would be track widening, more lines, like they do on motorway bottlenecks...again far too costly.

I think this is a problem that needs to be addressed, with diminishing stocks of fossil fuels and an increasing cost of exploiting what remains, it is clear that demands on public transport will also increase.

It's quite the challenge, is it not?

I think it was British Bulldog who said even if you increase capacity, there simply won't be the capacity in the London terminals to cope with all the added passengers.

 

[Gully]

It's quite the challenge, is it not?

I think it was British Bulldog who said even if you increase capacity, there simply won't be the capacity in the London terminals to cope with all the added passengers.

That is the crux of the matter, it is probably harder to expand the nearer to London that you get, where lines are already used to capacity. What it needs is some real inventiveness to get more people on trains, maybe taking new lines underground, or even building tracks above those that exist already...not easy unless you really want radical change.

 

[bigc]

That is the crux of the matter, it is probably harder to expand the nearer to London that you get, where lines are already used to capacity. What it needs is some real inventiveness to get more people on trains, maybe taking new lines underground, or even building tracks above those that exist already...not easy unless you really want radical change.

That was my thinking, I think we need to be as radical as the Victorians were when they first built the railways back in the 1830s-50s.

 

[Seagull73]

God knows Hastings needs it. It has been hamstrung really by its poor transport links to London for years.

Rye would be a nice place to visit from London if you could go on HS1 to Ashford then jump on the Marshlink line. I walked from Hastings to Rye back in April and it was certainly one of the prettiest stops on my coastal walk from Brighton so far.

Eastbourne is worse off than Hastings for transport links.

 

[bigc]

Eastbourne is worse off than Hastings for transport links.

But surely Eastbourne benefits from being closer to Brighton then Hastings is?

 

[adrian29uk]

I feels sorry for anyone who uses the train. I am thinking of getting the train up to Luton over the weekends, but it's more expensive, and more hassle than the car. I thought the idea was to encourage people to use more public transport.

 

[Seagull73]

I feels sorry for anyone who uses the train. I am thinking of getting the train up to Luton over the weekends, but it's more expensive, and more hassle than the car. I thought the idea was to encourage people to use more public transport.

Quite. I commute from Eastbourne to Brighton every day by car. Not easy to park, but still far less hassle and, might I say, a darn sight cheaper than using the train.

 

[beorhthelm]

What it needs is some real inventiveness to get more people on trains,

no what we really need to do is reduce the amount of commuting necessary, espacially in the peak hours. people traveling 50miles to work is a dumb idea in the first place, but thats where the work is. my company doesnt need to be in central london, in fact it only moved there from Harrow a few years ago. no idea why, prestige i suppose. too many people living too far from their place of work for various reasons. no idea how you solve this, but it wont be addressed untill it is recognised.

That was my thinking, I think we need to be as radical as the Victorians were when they first built the railways back in the 1830s-50s.

not radical so much as no nimbys, you wanted a railway you built it, its progress.

 

[Seagull73]

But surely Eastbourne benefits from being closer to Brighton then Hastings is?

No it's quite the opposite to be honest. Brighton has the London links, Hastings is the link to the Eurostar. Eastbourne does ok, but not as well as Hastings.

I agree with you about Hastings needing regeneration, but currently it's just a shit-hole. Nothing to do with inadequate transport links.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

I feels sorry for anyone who uses the train. I am thinking of getting the train up to Luton over the weekends, but it's more expensive, and more hassle than the car. I thought the idea was to encourage people to use more public transport.

The hassle is mainly down to the fact that big money is being spent on improving the line and no through trains are running at weekends.

That's the dilemma ... improving services comes at a cost. One of the costs is that potential new passengers jump to the conclusion that "rail is more hassle than the car".

As if driving to and from Brighton or Luton at weekends is "hassle free". It isn't.

 

[Seagull73]

too many people living too far from their place of work for various reasons. no idea how you solve this, but it wont be addressed untill it is recognised.

It won't be recognised, because it is a way of life in this country, and many others in Europe. That kind of thing opens up debates like property prices and road links, to name but two.

The transport issue needs addressing, because the location piece never will be.

 

[British Bulldog]

It's quite the challenge, is it not?

I think it was British Bulldog who said even if you increase capacity, there simply won't be the capacity in the London terminals to cope with all the added passengers.

The shortage of pathways in and out of terminus stations is a problem we've had for years and unless they build new lines and terminus stations in London it's a problem we're stuck with, I dont work the London terminus stations myself but i'm in regular contact with people who do and they get the same problems that we do with Brighton station in that it only takes one train not to leave when it should do or a platform taken out of use and it causes a knock on effect that can last for hours because of the tight station workings. In recent years when TOC's like Southern have talked about increasing services to and from London they hav'nt really increased it in terms of trains running in and out of the terminus stations, What they do is have more trains splitting and attatching in other area's to increase the services on lines such as the east coast, west coast and arun valley. An example of it being we used to run an hourly service to and from Victoria to Eastbourne and Littlehampton so to double the services they still only run the 2 trains an hour in and out of Victoria but the trains split and attatch at Haywards Heath giving you 2 trains an hour between Haywards Heath and Eastbourne/Littlehampton. The same practice happens at Horsham for the Arun Valley services as well as Purley for the Tattenham/Caterham services and Redhill for Brighton/ Horsham/Reigate/Tonbridge services. The big draw back of this practice is it rely's on a lot of crew changes and at times of disruption train crew's have a bad habit of going missing so you just end up with more crewless trains blocking platforms and adding to the service disruption you allready had.

 

[Giant Seagull]

Don't think it'll ever happen....it will cost far too much money with new bridges having to be built and then there's the problem of getting the line into Lewes railway station as the old route has now been well and truly built on !!!!

Thery would use the same line that goes from Lewes to Haywards Heath, i think the old line diverted to Uckfield at Offham.

 

[Gully]

That was my thinking, I think we need to be as radical as the Victorians were when they first built the railways back in the 1830s-50s.

This is also where part of the problem lies, the current rail network was largely built by the Victorians during a time when it was required to perform in a fairly different manner than today, it was also often the quickest or only alternative for moving freight and people around the country. As a result much of the infrastructure would be better off being replaced, rather than maintained at a cost or constantly repaired, but there appears to be neither the finance nor the will to do this.

I remember someone once telling me that the easiest, and cheapest, way to move coal around the country was by canal. I have to admit that I found it hard to believe, but if you know that you will require a certain tonnage of a material at a certain location every week then the supply is constant and the speed or route it travels to get there is probably irrelevant...I think it was the Victorians who came up with that theory.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

It won't be recognised, because it is a way of life in this country, and many others in Europe. That kind of thing opens up debates like property prices and road links, to name but two.

The transport issue needs addressing, because the location piece never will be.

Very true.

I've said that the economy of Ashford will be transformed, once commuting to London in 35 minutes becomes possible.

People will move from London to Ashford because it's cheaper to live in Ashford and pay for the rail travel (even at "premium fares"). House prices in Ashford will rise. The locals will be squeezed out of the housing market and have to move somewhere cheaper (ie somewhere without a decent train service). But local jobs will still be in Ashford. So the quiet roads around Ashford will become full of traffic driving to work.