POLL: Should Boris take charge of London rail services

[whole diary]

[Btline]

Boris wants the keys to London's suburban railways. Would a single operator (Overground) make the system more consistent and smart?

[JayMac]

I kinda see where you are coming from Btline, but option 1 is pretty vague. Where do you draw the 'line'? What of services that are predominantly geared toward London commuters but extend into the shires?

London-Reading/Berks/Oxon (FGW^▸ (First Great Western))
London-South East (Southern, Southeastern, SWT^▸ (South West Trains))
London-Suffolk/Cambs (FCC^▸ (First Capital Connect), GA^▸ (Greater Anglia))
London-Luton (FCC)
London-Aylesbury (Chiltern)
London-Watford/Herts (London Midland)

Should the good folk of Berks, Oxon, Suffolk, Kent, Surrey, Sussex, Beds, Cambs, Bucks and Herts have their train services controlled by the Mayor of London? Someone for whom they have no say in deciding upon at the ballot box?

Do we have train services that are controlled by TfL^» (Transport for London - about) as far as the 'Greater London' boundary but then change to franchised TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) control for the remainder of their journey?

[Southern Stag]

I like the idea in theory but the problem is how it works operationally. The current London Underground operations are quite nice as they are all within London and separating them from the previous Silverlink franchise was relatively easy as it was done at the time of a reorganisation of the franchise map. Splitting off services from FGW^▸ (First Great Western) would be much harder, operationally all the FGW LTV^▸ (London [and] Thames Valley) services are interlinked but would Boris want control of trains out to Oxford and Bedwyn. Crossrail is going to be an LO style concession rather than a traditional franchise. Perhaps giving the West Ealing-Greenford shuttle services to LO would make sense, provided there were some 172s available, perhaps by electrification of GOBLIN. Willesden would be a more logical depot for the units than Reading once the 165s and 166s aren't the mainstay of the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) relief lines. It's only a short little trip around London, and pathing shouldn't even be a problem at the start and end of service.

[JayMac]

Now, one simple solution would be a super franchise for all 'commuter' heavy rail radiating out of London.

Maybe call it Network SouthEast. 

[Btline]

I was meaning just for (inner) London suburban services, which terminate in Greater London (or just outside if on a branch).

e.g. As far as Heathrow on FGW^▸ (First Great Western), to Shepperton, Hampton Court, Dorking, Chessington South on SWT^▸ (South West Trains) etc.

NSE^▸ (Network South East) expanded well out of London and it would not be appropraite for Boris to have the keys.

[JayMac]

But then you are in to the logistics of providing the services only to the 'border'.

It wouldn't, in my opinion, be very good for services to have to turn round merely because they have reached a political boundary. That wouldn't be very good, not least for rolling stock and 'pathing' utilisation.

There is something to be said for including only services that, as now, terminate in Greater London but the issues around rolling stock would probably preclude that. As an example, if a unit on the Greenford service fails, another can be called up from the pool of 165s used by FGW^▸ (First Great Western). Your idea Btline would, I fear, lead to a need for much more rolling stock with the associated needs of more depots, staff etc.

If TfL^» (Transport for London - about) control services to the boundary on various lines there would be huge expense in providing the necessary rolling stock. Rolling stock that could not then be shuffled around to provide services to the surrounding counties.

[eightf48544]

It could work on some lines partcularly ex Southern lines. On the Southeastern you have Dartford, Hayes and Orpington as terminii for the stoppers. On the Brighton you already have Overground to West Croydon and Crystal Palace and shortly Clapham Junction via South London Line so he could take teh equivalent services from Victoria. Waterloo as Btline says you have the 3 terminal stations plus the Kingston and and Houslow loops. Weybridge via Staines  Windsor and Reading could  still be SWT^▸ (South West Trains) or successor as would Epsoms and Guidford New Line.

GMWL is a problem as Croossrail has shown as apart from Greenford there is no natural terminus for TV trains until Reading. hopefully they won't build the turn back sidings at Maidenhead for Crossrail now the wires are going through Reading.

Marylebone it would be possible for him to take Ayesbury services throughout via Amersham maybe even continue the electrifcation from AMersham. Although Whther passengers would want to travel in an S class all thet way is another matter. That would give extra paltform space at Marybone vacated by the Ayesbury trains. but whether he should take them via High Wycombe is another matter. Solves the 172 tripcock problem but gives Chiltern a problem with the depot as there won't be enough capacity from Prices Risborugh to Aylesbury to get all the units back at night.

MML^» (Midland Main Line. - about) you have Thameslink so does he take that?

Kings Cross well Thameslink is due to be connected some time, not sure where they will terminate.

Crossrail takes out to Shenfield so I suppose he could take out to Bishops Stortford on the Cambridge line. Chingford and Enfield obviously fit in.

Given the success of LOREL it could work but how much of that was down to Ken? He got the EL extend to the North London and out to West Croydon and Crystal Palace and the extension to Clapham Jn must have been planned under Ken although Boris took credit by placing the last Pandrol!

[Btline]

You're right, the whole LO project is due to Ken, Boris has done nothing for railways so far.

Will Crossrail be operated by TFL^▸ (Transport for London) or will it be a separate franchise? First Crossrail?

[Southern Stag]

It's going to be a concession, the same as London Overground is. So it will actually be run by a private operator but TfL^» (Transport for London - about) will set the fares and the like.

[Btline]

Good, so it will be branded in TFL^▸ (Transport for London) font. A nice consistent appearance.

Will it be signed Crossrail? I thought it would be better as Overground or Thames Valley (to distinguish it from Crossrail 2 when it opens).

[JayMac]

Lets not forget that the new super-duper Thameslink franchise is shortly to be tendered. This will subsume nearly all current FCC^▸ (First Capital Connect) and Southern services, with those left hived off to other TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company). It may also include some Southeastern services.

The combined Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern franchise (known as ^the combined franchise^) would bring together the services currently operated by two franchisees: First Capital Connect (FCC), in 2013 and from July 2015 Southern (including Gatwick Express). However, final decisions have yet to be made on whether all Great Northern services (currently run by FCC) will be included in the new franchise since some may be transferred to the next InterCity East Coast franchise. The combined franchise will also include a number of services now delivered by Southeastern, to be added in 2014 and 2018.

The DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) has, as yet, not mentioned any plans to hive off some of the existing FCC/Southern/Southeastern to TfL^» (Transport for London - about)/LOROL^▸ (London Overground Railway Operations Ltd). Boris may well like to have some of these services that operate wholly in Greater London, but that'd be the DfT's call. Remembering that the DfT will want a franchise that is attractive to bidders, as well as one that will pay a decent premium to the national government. Losing lucrative commuter flows to TfL may not be desirable in the DfT's eyes.

[broadgage]

I dont see why lines that are entirely or almost entirely within London should not be run by TFL^▸ (Transport for London).
They have done reasonably well so far.

My main concern would be with long distance services that primarily serve customers well outside London, but have one or two stops within London.
There would no doubt be political pressure to optimise these services for inner London voters, to the detriment of those from furthur afield, who would get no political voice in the matter.