I don't think that will convince the residents of Blackheath http://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/474161...ts_trains/

Even after stealing our slots to Charing Cross and getting a new terminus, South Eastern is not able to provide the same level of service for all their passengers in London. However, my friends in Kent are delighted.

I'm looking forward to the ELL opening as it will give us more options getting about London (although most routes are more convoluted than our existing LB/ChX service - they really missed a trick by not linking it to the Central Line).

Anyhoos, just found this e-newspaper that follows the ELL progress and related news: http://www.eastlondonlines.co.uk/2009/11...commuters/

Petition storms through 2300...

This was the response I got from Jim Dowd MP end of October. Glad that he is on the case, particularly when he is not well himself.


Thank you for your e-mail regarding the decisions to withdraw the off-peak direct service from Charing Cross to Forest Hill and Sydenham from December and reduce off peak and evening peak services on the line from May 2010. I am most concerned about these and have made representations to the Secretary of State for Transport, Southern Trains, Network Rail and the Office of the Rail Regulator. I apologise that you have not had a detailed reply sooner but I am currently recovering from a major operation which has caused some inevitable delays.

Having campaigned for the introduction of the East London Line extension (London Overground) over the past 35 years I am delighted that it is due to commence operation next year. This will be a major boost to travel options in our area and a real benefit to commuters - already London Overground have taken over the stations along the route. However, I fully understand the genuine concerns many local people have about reductions in Southern rail services. I have highlighted this issue in my 2009 Parliamentary Report, recently delivered to constituents, and have met representatives of the Sydenham and Forest Hill Societies to discuss their specific concerns.

Last week I joined Sir Steve Bullock (Mayor of Lewisham), Len Duvall (Lewisham and Greenwich GLA Assembly Member), Lewisham Councillors of all Parties and local residents groups in signing an open letter to the South London Press and Sadiq Khan (Transport Minister) urging him to meet us on behalf of local rail travellers.

I hope that this is helpful and should I obtain further information, I will contact you again.

Although I'm away and haven't been able to help (or seen the leaflet!), it looks like excellent work has been done.

Has there been any leafleting of stations further down the line - or anything at Charing Cross in the evening when the people actually using the service to get home could be reached?

Has anyone suggested that all fast trains heading south should additionally stop at New Cross Gate. Then at least us LB commuters would be able to take advantage of the ELL when going home in the evening

I have suggested this, particularly at the Meet the Managers session. Southern's response was that the 2 minutes it would take to stop the train and speed up and slow down could not be fitted into the timetables on the fast line. However, I am not convinced by this argument from Southern. I have not noticed trains on the fast lines every 2 minutes, and it would only take 2 trains per hour to make this stop to allow the same level of service between London Bridge and New Cross Gate.

The problem is this might be slightly inconvenient for their preferred passengers who pay more for they tickets to Surrey and give the money to Southern rather than buying their tickets at TfL stations in South London.

Can anyone direct me to information about proposed journey times on the East London Line? I can't find details on the TFL site. Thanks

This option of some trains stopping at NXG would also be great at reducing overcrowding at London Bridge. It would allow Surrey commuters travelling to the Docklands to change at NXG and thus reduce passenger numbers at London Bridge. Given that the cuts we are facing are due to the 'need to reduce overcrowding at London Bridge', this would help.

Sadly, in my view - and as Michael suggests - main line trains will not be allowed to stop at NXG, as Surrey Commuters would then be able to avoid zone 1 and reduce Southern's revenue...

I may be thick, but I can't fathom the revenue arrangements that are often referred to here...

Is it really the case that, if I buy a ticket from a station operated by a particular company. it is that company which gets ALL the revenue, regardless of my destination?

http://londonist.com/2009/11/payg_on_nat...firmed.php

2600

Still low if there are indeed 15,000 daily users of the line.

Let us hope that Southern keeps ignoring Michael's suggestion that trains to and from East Croydon/ Surrey and LB stop at NXG.

If this happened the four-train ELL would be swamped with far more passengers than it could possibly cope with. It might marginally lessen crowding at LB but it would make the ELL totally unworkable for local commuters.

And it crucially wouldn't reduce the number of trains calling at LB - the same number of trains would still run there using up all the same "paths" as they do now.

Please stop this campaign Michael. It's certainly not in the interests of local rail travellers.

Nasaroc:
"Let us hope that Southern keeps ignoring Michael's suggestion that trains to and from East Croydon/ Surrey and LB stop at NXG."

I don't see the problem with additional trains from London Bridge stopping at NXG as that would only help us local commuters. I agree that trains heading to London Bridge from East Croydon/Surrey stopping at NXG would not be a good idea though.

Also... I suppose there is already a sort of choice in that you could travel to New Cross and then walk to NXG (if you really wanted to) to make the connection to the ELL.

There will be 8 trains an hour travelling in each direction through NXG. Each train will have 4 carriages. I don't see a problem of overcrowding on these trains. Carry on with your campaign, Michael.

On ELLX of course.

Thanks Gaz.
I would also point out that while there are 6tph stopping at NXG (and FH) in the morning, there will only be 4tph in the evening. My recommendation is to increase this to 6tph as is the case today.

With regards to the effect on ELL services, I cannot see many people whose destination is Surrey switching from the Jubilee Line to ELL and then to their fast trains, rather than a single interchange at London Bridge. The only Surrey commuters this would benefit would be coming directly from Shoreditch - Wapping, and they will probably want to use the service as far as Canada Water anyway. So I do not see how this "would make the ELL totally unworkable for local commuters".


Even if I were proposing morning stopping services at NXG I do not see the problem. All the people from FH and other stops on the line will already be on the ELL train (a few might even have seats), so the Surrey commuters will have to squeeze in to any remaining space. I find it unlikely that Surrey commuters who are destined for the Jubilee line will chose to take three trains rather than two, so they will continue to London Bridge. The only additional passengers who will join the train at NXG will be destined for Wapping - Shoreditch. Again, this is not a huge number of people and I don't have a problem with them using 'our line' to access these stations.

What I don't understand is why Nasaroc brings this up again now. I can't remember the last time we were discussing the additional stopping trains and I still don't understand what the concerns are.

Michael, how do you know that Shoreditch (ie CITY!)-bound commuters from Forest Hill is 'not a huge number of people' ? Can you enlighten me of what definitive research you are using to make this claim?
..... and can you also clarify, in relation to a previous post, as to whether you (and Forest Hill Society) are sticking by the suggestion to reduce ELL/Overground services to maintain the staus quo of LB bound trains please?
You seemed to say earlier that this wasn't the FHsoc position but the quote you gave to South London Press indicates otherwise:

" Forest Hill Society member Michael Abrahams said:

?I think the most realistic way to get the trains back would be to simply cut a couple of the ELL trains in the evening peak.

?The connection to London Bridge is far more important to commuters than getting to and from Shoreditch and Canada Water.? "

All seems a bit odd to me, when i think getting more (and better) choice on travelling to the city and linking with the London Underground system is far more important..... but that's probably just me, isn't it??!?

The ultimate issue is that the ELL was not supposed to effect rail services.

It seems that it directly is, or is being used as an excuse for cutting LB/CHX services.

Michael - As Chair of the FHS you also wrote in the FHS Newsletter that you believed that fighting to maintain six trains per hour during the day was not important. Here is what you said about daytime cuts:

"This is not a disaster as it is relatively recently that these services were increased to 6 per hour, and at off peak they are not entirely full."

[There have in fact been 6tph off peak for over 10 years but let that pass]

Your current position seems to be:

1. Stop "fast" trains at NXG
2. Cancel two of the hourly ELL trains
3. Don't bother fighting to maintain our existing off-peak services - they are not important

I believe strongly that all three of the above are totally unacceptable. I stood outside a station last week handing out leaflets because I believed that I was fighting to maintain existing services - not helping to dismantle them.

Are these the positions of the FHS or the campaign? Could you clarify please?