Thanks for your post AE. I had not properly read this section of the RUS (or maybe I was concentrating on other sections), but it highlight some of the problems with the document as a whole.

There is a simple solution to this, while work is going on the build a flyover and NXG is being made disabled accessible, make the platforms longer. I am sure the space exists to do this and in fact it is not in NXG or any other station on the line that lengthening platforms would be a problem, it is specifically at London Bridge (details are found on page 130-131, assessment option 4.3). The wisdom of increasing the length of trains through Forest Hill is recognised, but with the loss of platforms at London Bridge due to Thameslink expansion we will be left with trains only using platforms 14-16 which are too short. Surely it would not be difficult to lengthen these platforms at London Bridge (there is clearly room to do this).

Additional stops would make trains go slower, but that would not effect the ability to run at the same frequency (14tph during the peak), afterall they are planning to run 14tph on the slow lines with even more additional stops.

Only by a couple of minutes and it would not need to be for all 14 tph, just some would provide a useful interchange for people travelling from East London to Gatwick or South East London to Kings Cross/St Pancras and other destinations (especially with the introduction of more Thameslink trains).

Their claim is that there will be too many people on ELL in the morning to allow people from the fast trains to get on, and that there will be too many people on the fast trains in the evening to allow people to change from the ELL. This makes little sense as there would still be the same number of people wishing to travel to/from beyond Croyon whichever route they take.

It is also worth noting that the prediction is that ELL will be overcrowded, presumably even with the additional trains recommended by option 2.3 (page 112). Option 2.3 actually states that

So what does this tell us about overcrowding on the line from Forest Hill to Sydenham? That it will continue to be overcrowded (possibly worse than today) by the reduction in services from Forest Hill.

It is still good that we are getting the East London Line coming to Forest Hill, but the decisions Network Rail are taking on other services in South London show a real lack of imagination or care for passengers from South London.