Robin, of course that is the one caveat to that sentence. The bridge and steps at LB should definitely be improved from an accessibility point of view (and may very well be with the complete redevelopment of London Bridge over the next few years). But on it's own it's not a strong enough reason to retain a service.

Following this argument, it was easy to get from Forest Hill to Whitechapel by simple getting off the train at New X and catching the ELL there. Why bother spending all this money to extend the line for a seemless service? Well, because it's a pain to get off and hang around, it becomes more convenient, and perceptions change, and people use it more.

People are less likely to want to get back from Central London at midnight if they have to hang around London Bridge to change. End of story, I'm afraid.

That's why I said most. Access issues for those who are less able to change is a completely different issue.

If people are put off going to central London just because they have to 'hang around' at London Bridge on the way home then whatever they're going for can't be that exciting. I must say, you portray it in its worst light for maximum effect - 'hang around' - the trains from Charing Cross to London Bridge are about every 3 minutes - so if you plan your journey properly there's no need to hang around at all!

It's true going into CHX from LBG is simple (disregarding the steps accessibility question). Platform 6 is fantastic with trains to CHX all the time.
Going the other way is the issue - there aren't trains going to FOH every 3 minutes. So the journey into town isn't massively affected by the loss of a direct service, but the journey back is.

Hanging around is precisely the problem. I travel frequently in the winter from Waterloo to HOP in the evening 8:00-9:00pm and it is easy and pleasant to aim at one of the two trains an hour from Charing Cross.

The late night change at London Bridge is not too much fun when it's cold and miserable and the change, well timed or not, will add between 5 and 10 minutes to the journey - about a 30-60% increase in journey time.

It will be a disincentive to go to the RFH, BFI or NT if, to get the train home, one has to schlep up to Waterloo East and then change and schlep over the footbridge at London Bridge.

The cutting of the direct trains to Charing Cross is a distinct diminution in service.

At 22:00 hours on a weekday, there are as many trains foinf from London Bridge to Charing cross as there are going from Charing Cross to London Bridge - about one every three or four minutes. So you should be able to time a train from Charing Cross to get you to London Bridge so that you don't have to hang around.

Which is probably why they're stopping the services. You make it sound like you've been asked to walk home!

Hi jon14, you make cutting services sound like fun!

An extra 5/10 minutes journey at the end of an evening certainly won't deter me from going to the RFH, BFI or NT.

Even with the existing service, we often just hop on the first train to London Bridge and change if we haven't timed it right for the direct service - the direct trains from CX or WE are only every half hour so it often makes sense to get the first available train to LB and pick up the 54/24 Victoria service to get home - it often makes the journey quicker than if we'd hung around CX for the direct train.

That's the whole point, though, isn't it? And the reason why, as I've said, millions is being spent on the seamless service that avoids change at NX on the ELL. Cos I don't want to have to 'plan my journey' so it's seamless. My heart sinks when I've had a few lagers in Soho (having had a very nice night, thank you very much, and well worth the visit!) and find the trains are cancelled and I have to change at London Bridge.

Clearly none of you go out socialising in Soho or you know what I meant

Of course I'll survive, but it's a pain in the ****. And there's no reason why the services shouldn't continue, or at least some of them.

What is? That it's easier and quicker to go to London Bridge and change than it is to wait for the direct service?

To be honest Cellar Door, I travel from Charing Cross every day and it would, I admit, make my life easier if I could just sit on the train and not walk up and down some steps at London Bridge. But that's all it would be - a little bit easier. Nowhere near this:

There are loads of things in life that can, and should, make your heart sink, but in the great scheme of things this reason just sounds so pathetic, doesn't it?

Seriously, I would've thought that the forum could unite around opposing the cutting of a well-used popular service that many would miss.

It appears not.

Of course it does - in the great scheme of things.
But the issue here is a rather useful direct service from the West End back to Forest Hill and surely opinions given should be seen in this context, rather than bringing the undisputed woes of the world in as comparison.

I am sooooooooooooooooo with you on this. I'm off to London's Glittering West End tonight. And if I get to Charing Cross and discover something like this. Then the CCTV cameras will catch me voicing this word - "F***".

Ok, fair enough - in all honesty I hardly ever use the direct services from Charing Cross, so I'm probably not the best placed to comment. I'd probably be annoyed if I was you.

But if I was the traian company, I might think it wasn't causing too much disruption to get people to change at London Bridge - just like everybody has to do all day, including rush hour.

The fact is, direct services don't save you that much time or that much effort. It just makes getting home a bit easier in my experience. Actually, if I'm honest, the best thing about it is that the train is always empty and you get a seat at Charing Cross, unlike London Bridge when it seems like every man and his dog wants to get on.

Nothing pathetic about it. I know there's a direct train from CX at around 11ish and around 1130ish. I'm there for either. Those trains are well used. It's not quicker to change at London Bridge under these circumstances. Nor is it convenient.

It's quite simple. A journey that was one stage is now going to be two.

That's a shame.

You've clearly had a bad day, Jon, if you're arguing the toss over such a simple issue, and being rather unpleasant about it to boot.

I'm off to enjoy the bit of sun

Thats what I love about this forum. We have a climate camp on Blackheath tellus that the end is nighg, negative equity, and mass unemployment among the young.

But give us a local issue - no matter how big or small - we can show as much passion as anyone on earth. Love it

For what its worth while I think the loss of the service will be inconvenient, I feel there are more important things to campaing about on our local lne and station such as step free access, better facilities (toilets and a shop) and improved shelters

It was AMFM that said changing often makes the journey quicker than waiting for the direct train - and you said 'that's the whole point'.

And as I acknowledged above, you have every right to be annoyed by it if you use the services often.

My point was simply that from a train company's point of view, it might not seem too inconvinient to get people to change (as most people have to every day).

Unpleasant? Where?

Sorry about the spelling typing on a very small screen!

I think the real problem is the fact that they are making small cuts now but what's to say that further down the line, Southern won't just say: Oh they're on the Tube now, so someone else's problem?

You've clearly had a bad day, JohnC, to be arguing the toss over such a simple and straigh forward issue!