Not sure i'm arguing the toss about anything - and i've had a great day!

It's not really about whether or not you find it a hassle to change at London Bridge - clearly it's better to have a direct service than not - but about the bigger picture. Let's look beyond "me, me, me" (or "Forest Hill, Forest Hill, Forest Hill"!) to what works best overall. It's the search for the best overall solution which is driving the proposal to cut the direct service to Charing X, not just Network Rail and Southern just saying "s*d it - no point to that service, they can just change".

Yes there is the capacity there at present but it's congested and subject to delays. In future there will be a hell of a lot more trains going through there on the greatly expanded Thameslink network - potentially including trains on this line! Yet still people are focussing on minor inconveniences to themselves

But for those of you who think this is worth a big battle, here's a letter to Jim to copy and paste.
-------------------------------------
Jim Dowd MP
House of Commons

Dear Jim,

Please can you Fix It for me to have a moon, on a stick.

FH Resident

PS Can you also Fix It for us to have a high street like Lordship Lane?

JohnC - read Nevermodern's last response to me, when I dared to suggest that although the stopping of direct services was inconvinient, it wasn't the end of the world!

Ah! consider myself castigated

Absolutely. That's what I was trying to say - a minor inconvinience. But anyway, stop arguing the toss over such a simple and straightforward issue!

Now then, now then, now then, hilltop, there's no need for that! Goodness gracious!

I'm sure the system could cope with a couple of direct trains to Forest Hill at the end of the night. And it's not me, me, me, it's the tonnes of people who use the service up and down the line, and not just from Forest Hill.

Now we'll have no direct line into central london at all.

And it's not pie in the sky, moon on a stick, hilltop. It's a service we've got now and are losing needlessly.

Entirely different to wishing we had a high street like East Dulwich or...indeed... waiting in vain for that moon on a stick to arrive from Amazon

jon14 wrote

hilltopgeneral wrote

This sounds likes 'let's leave it to the experts, who, unlike us humble folk, can see the Big Picture.' Don't agree - we pay for the services, let's lobby for what we want them to be.

johnc wrote:

Possibly, but don't let's make the best the enemy of the good.

robin orton wrote:

Fine. Trust you'll be undertaking a thorough study of the network and the needs of all users?

Cuts were going to be much greater to services into London Bridge until Network Rail were pressured.

Thank goodness the so-called 'me, me, me' attitude prevailed and they were reversed

I think there's a distinction to be drawn there and that that's not a case of "me, me, me" as running trains along "your" line doesn't have that much of an impact on others. That was more a question of how many trains you can and should continue sending down the line once there are so many extra ELL services using it.

While one needs to be aware of the wider picture, surely the point of a localised forum is to discuss and champion the needs/desires/aspirations of the locality rather than suppress these in deference to the greater scheme of things.

Or am I on the wrong sort of forum?

Yes, those trains which would have been greatly reduced because of some objective, failsafe, Networkrail-knows-best survey on national needs..

..trains which were then INcreased because of local pressure DESPITE that survey.

There's no one correct solution here. And to suggest Network Rail knows THE answer flies in the face of our recent experience.

I can accept your argument that the problem lies with 'at grade crossings' HTG, but we are talking about off-peak services here, not peak time services. Surely it's possible to have your cake and eat it in this instance?

On the charing cross route, if there isn't firm evidence that there is greater use of southeastern evening services than those run by southern, I don't understand the logic behind network rail's decision. In any case, the station copes with a much higher train density in rush hour just fine.

On another subject, can anyone explain to me why the train service to forest hill isn't working right now, yet southern is able to maintain a service to places south of norwood junction, with trains running on the tracks through forest hill?

Can someone confirm the exact date the direct trains from Charing Cross will stop. I could not find anything on the Southern website. Thanks.

I would've thought that this is not the sort of thing they would be publicising widely and thus no sign of it on their website!

The current National Rail timetable runs from Sunday 17 May to Saturday 12 December, so I would expect the next timetable to start on 13 December 2009

Frankly, I don't see anything wrong with taking a "me, me, me" attitude towards the issue - after all, it is "me" who pays for the pleasure of taking this often late, unreliable and already overpriced, pay-as-you-go-we-don't-do service.

And no, the earth will not stand still if the through service doesn't continue. But as it happens, it is the one service I am most grateful for. I use Southern to and from the office most days, but frequently also take one of the late trains after 10.30 from Charing X. Being able to get on the train there rather than going to London Bridge is a real advantage as especially the last 2 trains out of London Bridge can get very crowded. I have on occasion been unable to get on the train. Having to wait around for another half hour on the freezing platform 5 after 11pm is not the most fun experience. I'll probably use the car to go to the West End in the evening more frequently. Not the desired effect, I'm sure!

Was it Beaker from the Muppet Show that used to say in a nervous, high-pitched squeak "me, me, me" after Dr. Bunsen Honeydew would somehow cause him to be electrocuted or blown up?