NR Anglia Route Study

[Edwin_m]

Liverpool Street is a more convenient station for the City and Canary Wharf and some commuters in particular would be inconvenienced by having to change at Cambridge or get the Tube across from Kings Cross.  Since peak extras are needed, extending some of the Liverpool Street ones to/from Kings Lynn is a sensible move even though it complicates the train operator map a bit. 

[Ravenser]

From a container industry perspective , in 2007 British port capacity was at breaking point. Gateway and modest enhancements coupled to the recession and limited import growth have floated us off the rocks , but anything like a return to the 15% pa growth rates of the Westbound Far East trade in the 1990s and up to 2007 will rapidly absorb capacity.

 

Thus far London Gateway is pulling business away from Thamesport and Tilbury not Felixstowe.

 

Historically Far East trade vessels have never gone via Panama unless they had no choice. Only in 1967-74 when the Suez Canal was shut have Far East services gone via Panama. So I think "ultra-Panamax" is a red herring. This is before we come to the Stationmaster's point that the entire  Europe ME Gulf trade is served as a wayport call on vessels going somewhere else - mostly the Far East with a supplement on the India-Pakistan trade. The Gulf is basically a one way trade - you balance up your flows by doing Europe - FE + Europe ME eastbound, and FE-Europe WB , and evacuating the empties from the Gulf direct into China for your China export business. Even then the services are westbound dominant in TEU terms

 

As the Stationmaster points out , services call a selection of N European ports : normally Hamburg/Benelux /UK . Liverpool is completely the wrong side of the country for that kind of rotation , which is why a majority even of Transatlantic services call at the usual suspects in SE England. Effectively Gateway will draw off future growth from Felixstowe (and Southampton)rather than reducing existing throughput . I suspect the idea behind switching the container traffic north via Haugley and Ely is the potential capacity constraint between Manor Park and Stratford as Gateway builds up . What seems to be in there at the moment is India/Pakistan , and a US loop or two. I would expect Felixstowe to continue growing - just not dramatically

 

I'm curious where they're going to put the loop north of Witham. Neither Kelvedon nor Marks Tey is really suitable , and having in the past wasted 5 minutes admiring the mortal remains of Chelmsford Goods or even in the  distant past tucked in the loop at Ingatestone , looping passenger trains away from stations doesn't seem terribly attragtive

[Suzie]

Witham has always worked well as a loop where a stopper leaves Liverpool Street eight minutes before the fast service and stops in platform 4 at Witham to be overtaken by the non-stopper going through platform 3. Even if stopping train frequencies north of Witham increased to below ten minute intervals the looping would need to happen in the Shenfield - Chelmsford area and not beyond Witham. It should not be hard to add extra platforms at Kelvedon - Marks Tey would be tricky, but perhaps the reason for making a new loop is to reduce the need to have trains standing in stations to increase platform capacity - much cheaper to build a new loop than add platforms. In practice it is hard to see how the capacity problem is going to be fully alleviated without four-tracking from Shenfield to at least Witham and probably Colchester - at some point someone is going to have to bite the bullet or rationing by ticket cost will have to increase to a far greater extent than it is already.

[Joseph_Pestell]

At the time the Cambridge-King's Lynn electrification was authorised and it was proposed that the main service to London from King's Lynn would be to King's Cross, BR gave assurances (which I seem to recall may have been in exchange for financial and / or political support for the scheme?) that they would continue to provide at least some through trains to Liverpool Street, and ever since there has indeed been a token service of a few 'peak' trains in each direction.  I suspect this was more a sop to emotional attachment of local people to Liverpool Street as the traditional London terminus for that part of the world rather than in response to any real demand that couldn't be better served by King's Cross...

 

I have no idea how many people in Kings Lynn and Ely work in The City or Canary Wharf. But for them, even allowing for a slower journey on the GE route south from Cambridge, they are still going to gain in time and effort by comparison with going via the battleground that is Kings Cross in the peak hour.

[Gwiwer]

Passengers from Kings Lynn and points to Cambridge who work in the City of London will opt for which ever route serves their needs best and as such the traffic will be split.  Remember that Thameslink services to Cambridge are not far away meaning the scrummage at Platform 9¾ can be avoided with many travelling direct to City Thameslink instead.

 

Those who may work in the Darklands (née Isle of Dogs) may also find the Thameslink option preferable if they can change at London Bridge onto the Jubilee Line.  Via the GE it's a bit fussy having to back-track via Bethnal Green to Stratford (by either tube or local train) or a hike over to Tower Gateway thence DLR

[Mike Storey]

Passengers from Kings Lynn and points to Cambridge who work in the City of London will opt for which ever route serves their needs best and as such the traffic will be split.  Remember that Thameslink services to Cambridge are not far away meaning the scrummage at Platform 9¾ can be avoided with many travelling direct to City Thameslink instead.

 

Those who may work in the Darklands (née Isle of Dogs) may also find the Thameslink option preferable if they can change at London Bridge onto the Jubilee Line.  Via the GE it's a bit fussy having to back-track via Bethnal Green to Stratford (by either tube or local train) or a hike over to Tower Gateway thence DLR

 

Having suffered the Northern to Jubilee change at London Bridge for three years fairly recently, I think it much more likely that people using Thameslink will change at Farringdon on to the Crossrail service direct to Canary Wharf. This could become the future hell-hole.....

[Glorious NSE]

I suspect the idea behind switching the container traffic north via Haugley and Ely is the potential capacity constraint between Manor Park and Stratford as Gateway builds up .

 

I believe the eventual intention is that as much as possible GEML trains will run via Stratford, the NLL and Camden, and Thamesport/Gateway/HS1 trains will run via an electrified GOBLIN and the Kensal Green chord - so the theory is much reduced conflicts in that area once the GOBLIN is electrified.

 

In practice, any trains from Thameside to the ECML (not many at present) will still need to cross the GEML and go via Stratford - and non-intermodal freight will continue to need to use a mix of routes, so not quite as neat and tidy, still, it should be less conflict than at present...

 

Cracking some of the conflicts at Gospel Oak (space to refuge freights without blocking in the passenger trains!) as per the document will make a huge difference I think.

[Edwin_m]

Passengers from Kings Lynn and points to Cambridge who work in the City of London will opt for which ever route serves their needs best and as such the traffic will be split.  Remember that Thameslink services to Cambridge are not far away meaning the scrummage at Platform 9¾ can be avoided with many travelling direct to City Thameslink instead.

 

Those who may work in the Darklands (née Isle of Dogs) may also find the Thameslink option preferable if they can change at London Bridge onto the Jubilee Line.  Via the GE it's a bit fussy having to back-track via Bethnal Green to Stratford (by either tube or local train) or a hike over to Tower Gateway thence DLR

However, as well as not running from Kings Lynn, the Thameslink trains will form the slower services from Cambridge to Kings Cross (or St Pancras) and will also have less comfortable interiors.  I can't see many people using them from that far out. 

[Gwiwer]

Thames link will provide the slower service option, yes, but may choose to compete on fares from those stations where customers have a choice.  In some cases they may not have that choice.

 

It's a parallel to the scenario on the Brighton line where Thameslink effectively replaced the stopping Brighton - London (Victoria and London Bridge) trains south of Gatwick Airport.  Southern found themselves no longer offering the main (or indeed any) service from numerous of "their" stations including Preston Park, Hassock, Burgess Hill, Wivelsfield and Balcombe.  As the timetable evolved and possibly in order to appease customer demands Southern then added stops at most of these stations to the east and west coast trains rather than Brighton ones.  

 

Increasing traffic levels meant that those trains also were required to lose a few minutes in order to maximise available pathways so we now have the situation where a Littlehampton - Victoria train stops at almost all stations (not the former "halts") to Haywards Heath though does little business at any of the main line calls.  Southern still does not serve Balcombe other than with one or two trains in order to keep some ticket revenue.

 

It is possible that the same scenario would play out on the GNR Cambridge route as traffic builds and more trains are somehow squeezed in.

[Fenman]

Thames link will provide the slower service option, yes, but may choose to compete on fares from those stations where customers have a choice. In some cases they may not have that choice.

 

It's a parallel to the scenario on the Brighton line where Thameslink effectively replaced the stopping Brighton - London (Victoria and London Bridge) trains south of Gatwick Airport. ...

 

It is possible that the same scenario would play out on the GNR Cambridge route as traffic builds and more trains are somehow squeezed in.

As you wrote, it's possible, but seems to me unlikely.

 

Firstly, Thameslink and Great Northern are both part of the same franchise: why would they compete to abstract revenue from each other?

 

Secondly, peak Lynn-London services take 1'50", which seems a bit too much for daily commuting in any numbers (my experience on the evening peak-hours Liverpool Street to Lynn service is that it pretty much empties at Ely. It's not unusual for me to have a carriage to myself by the time the train gets to Lynn, or to share with a lone person or two who got on at a local stop).

 

That may change: GN is promising to shave 10 minutes off the London-Cambridge timings, and maybe a similar amount on the northern section. Frequency is planned to double on the northern section too, from hourly to half-hourly. This may stimulate more longer-distance commuting. But these are the King's Cross services, not the Liverpool Street ones - the latter still have to navigate the clogged lines into London. Though, as now, if you work in the eastern part of The City they may remain a better option than the new Thameslink services.

 

Paul

[PhilJ W]

The residents of Ely i'm sure would love to get rid of that crossing by the station...

 

 

But would they love the replacement bridge, it'd be massive. Unless a tunnel was dug and somehow prevented from flooding?

There was a similar situation at Rainham when they built the CTRL. An underpass was installed and has had no problems AFAIK despite being on marshy ground.