First Group win South West franchise

[jim.snowdon]

Also found via the Southern Electric Group Facebook page.  

 

Informative piece and it raises as many questions as it answers.  One it does not specifically raise but begs asking is that it correctly states platforms 1-4 were built to accommodate 8 coaches plus a steam loco at each end (incoming and outgoing) and were shortened to 8-car length.  But were the steam coaches originally shorter than those subsequently in use?  In other words, whilst not denying that the platforms were in fact cut back to accommodate 8x63' coaching stock (or thereabouts) did they ever hold that plus two locos or were they of a length which would hold, say, 8x50-something footers and the locos?

When steam was still in use on the South Western's suburban services, carriage lengths were rather shorter than we are used to today - less than 50', with 42' and 48' being common. An 8-car train plus two steam locos would have been shorter than a modern day 8-car electric.

 

Jim

 

Jim

[Gwiwer]

Pretty much as I thought Jim, thank you, based upon my ex-LSWR coaches being placed alongside a 2Bil unit, so just how much change those platforms went through over he earlier part of C20 is not perhaps as significant as the article suggests.  

[stewartingram]

Where?  None that I have yet seen.  STW, CLJ, WAT and points in between.

Plenty at Waterloo yesterday.

 

Stewart

[John M Upton]

Most of the Clapham platform staff on the South Western side were sporting their new SWR branded high vis this morning with only one exception still valiantly flying the flag for SWT...

[The Stationmaster]

London Reconnections has an article on the works being done at Waterloo:

 

https://www.londonreconnections.com/2017/back-future-relengthening-shortening-waterloo/

 

I don't know who wrote that but I couldn't stop sniggering and laughing at the gross inaccuracies in the pieces about Waterloo International - the idiot couldn't even get the numbers right (the basic planned service was two flights of 2 trains in each direction per hour = 4 arrivals and 4 departures per hour = 8tph, not 6, and it was more in the peaks)  but some of the other comments about it are also way off the mark, especially the bit about it only being temporary until St Pancras opened which is another total nonsense as the original intention was for both to be served by Eurostar in order to achieve a better coverage of the various routes into London (hence the inadequate number of International platforms at St Pancras).  If the twit couldn't get that right - like some stuff I've seen in the past on that blog or whatever it is - reading the rest would be a waste of time.

Edited August 22, 2017 by The Stationmaster

[Siberian Snooper]

I've seen on a map (can't remember the date) that the low number platforms were linked to the Charing X line in the vicinity of Waterloo East. This made them a lot longer before they were cut back to where they are now.

[Foulounoux]

I don't know who wrote that but I couldn't stop sniggering and laughing at the gross inaccuracies in the pieces about Waterloo International - the idiot couldn't even get the numbers right (the basic planned service was two flights of 2 trains in each direction per hour = 4 arrivals and 4 departures per hour = 8tph, not 6, and it was more in the peaks)  but some of the other comments about it are also way off the mark, especially the bit about it only being temporary until St Pancras opened which is another total nonsense as the original intention was for both to be served by Eurostar in order to achieve a better coverage of the various routes into London (hence the inadequate number of International platforms at St Pancras).  If the twit couldn't get that right - like some stuff I've seen in the past on that blog or whatever it is - reading the rest would be a waste of time.

r

 

A bit unfair as reading the comments below the article the author admits editing erroneously added the temporary wording

 

And until its descent into just a Friday reading list I found it a useful discussion forum

 

Colin

[Coryton]

Fully agree, ALWAYS stop where it is supposed to.

 

I live at the end of a short single track branch (you might just be able to guess where from my username).

 

During the day there is just time for a train to get down the branch, sit for 4 minutes then turn back again before the next train comes onto the single track.

 

If a train is delayed and nothing is cancelled, trains are going to be late for the rest of the day on the branch (until the service goes hourly in the evening), with a knock-on effect on other routes. (There is nowhere for a train to sit waiting to get onto the branch that isn't in the way of other trains).

 

So the only sensible options are to cancel a train, turn it back short of the end, or skip stops in one direction. Skipping stops has the least impact - people have to ride to the end and back (or vice versa) to get to intermediate stations but they get there - the only people it seriously impacts are the small number making journeys between two stations on the branch.

 

So I really can't agree that skipping stops is always a bad thing. Though I might be a bit biased since I live at the last station...

[Southernman46]

I've seen on a map (can't remember the date) that the low number platforms were linked to the Charing X line in the vicinity of Waterloo East. This made them a lot longer before they were cut back to where they are now.

Nooo - just one line through the main arch area (between 1864 - 1923) from approx. where platform 10 now is, the original platforms 2 & 3 extended to the back wall of the station in the same area - the station looks nothing like it did - was massively re-build in 1923. Edited August 22, 2017 by Southernman46

[Siberian Snooper]

It would appear that there were two long platforms with a through line, the platform roads converge on the through line just before exiting the East end of the station, at least they did in 1893.

 

 

Extract from the NLS map.

 

 

[PaulRhB]

It would appear that there were two long platforms with a through line, the platform roads converge on the through line just before exiting the East end of the station, at least they did in 1893.

 

Waterloo 1893.png

 

Extract from the NLS map.

Thanks for that, I've overlaid it on the current google map just to compare the footprints and it's very interesting what's changed.

[Joseph_Pestell]

Three (main) changes since that map. It would be even more informative to see a bit further south and the station approaches.

 

The 1923 rebuild though, as we can see, moved the low number platforms (5-8), all served by EMUs further back from Waterloo Road. Current platforms 1-4 did not exist at all, being on the site of houses in Holmes Terrace.

Edited August 23, 2017 by Joseph_Pestell

[Oakydoke]

Thanks for that, I've overlaid it on the current google map just to compare the footprints and it's very interesting what's changed.

Virtually everything changed when the station was rebuilt from the previous collection of adjoining stations. Edited August 23, 2017 by Oakydoke

[PaulRhB]

Virtually everything changed when the station was rebuilt from the previous collection of adjoining stations.

Yes I'd seen photos but it's hard to understand the extent of the alterations without an overlaid map. Just goes to show the power of the railways to gain favour to allow them to demolish large areas, imagine that under modern planning law

[petethemole]

Southampton University seems to manage. Te key is to acquire the land. They have compulsory purchase rights over any property that comes on the market within a certain area. They use the houses for offices etc. or the sites for car parking until they have a big enough combined plot to redevelop. They also bought and demolished two local pubs, now car parks.

[John M Upton]

There is an old bridge that still can be seen crossing Waterloo Road, was this part of that through line on that map?

[The Stationmaster]

There is an old bridge that still can be seen crossing Waterloo Road, was this part of that through line on that map?

 

The upper bit is the footbridge to Waterloo East but as I understand things it's more or less on the alignment of the earlier rail link between the two stations so presumably the girder bridge is a remnant of the original link.

When steam was still in use on the South Western's suburban services, carriage lengths were rather shorter than we are used to today - less than 50', with 42' and 48' being common. An 8-car train plus two steam locos would have been shorter than a modern day 8-car electric.

 

Jim

 

Jim

 

Alan Jackson quotes the following island platform lengths in ''London's Termini following the 1920s rebuilding -

 

Platform 1 & 2  696ft & 695ft,

Platform 3 & 4  683 ft & 685ft,

Platform 5 & 6  720ft & 725 ft 

 

Platform 7 & 8  728ft & 735ft

Platform 9 & 10 756ft & 765ft

 

Jackson doesn't mention any later extensions of platforms on this side of the station.  However the most recent edition of Quail gives some rather different platform lengths suggesting only 8 chains (528ft)  for Platforms 1 - 4; 11 chains (726ft) for 5 & 6; 12 chains (792ft) for 7 & 8; no figure quoted for 9 & 10 but drawn slightly shorter than 7 & 8,  In my experience Quail is usually fairly accurate although errors do sometimes occur and mention is made of individual platform lengths being affected by the position of buffer stops plus there has of course been two major resignallings - the latter with many layout alterations - since the 1920s platforms were brought into use.  Incidentally the length of the former Eurostar platforms is given accurately.

[Zomboid]

Before the rebuild, 1-4 could take 8x 20m carriages, but with no room for anything else. As 20m is very close to 1 chain, the platforms being 8 chains long is entirely believable. They were definitely not 9 chains long, anyway.

[lapford34102]

 

he low number platforms were linked to the Charing X line in the vicinity of Waterloo East

Crossrail 4 anybody ?

 

Sorry. too much time on my hands.....

 

Stu

[Oakydoke]

This link leads to a photo of the railway bridge coming out of Waterloo towards Waterloo East.....

 

http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/bus-outside-waterloo-station-london-c-1900-the-bus-news-photo/90747556?#bus-outside-waterloo-station-london-c-1900-the-bus-advertising-coal-picture-id90747556

 

...and one taken in recent times....

 

http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-waterloo-road-approaching-one-of-waterloo-station-exits-34416483.html?pv=1&stamp=2&imageid=71209D98-E8DE-49A7-B6F2-757FF5129515&p=77837&n=0&orientation=0&pn=1&searchtype=0&IsFromSearch=1&srch=foo%3dbar%26st%3d0%26pn%3d1%26ps%3d100%26sortby%3d2%26resultview%3dsortbyPopular%26npgs%3d0%26qt%3dwaterloo%2520road%26qt_raw%3dwaterloo%2520road%26lic%3d3%26mr%3d0%26pr%3d0%26ot%3d0%26creative%3d%26ag%3d0%26hc%3d0%26pc%3d%26blackwhite%3d%26cutout%3d%26tbar%3d1%26et%3d0x000000000000000000000%26vp%3d0%26loc%3d0%26imgt%3d0%26dtfr%3d%26dtto%3d%26size%3d0xFF%26archive%3d1%26groupid%3d%26pseudoid%3d%26a%3d%26cdid%3d%26cdsrt%3d%26name%3d%26qn%3d%26apalib%3d0%26apalic%3d%26lightbox%3d%26gname%3d%26gtype%3d%26xstx%3d0%26simid%3d%26saveQry%3d%26editorial%3d1%26nu%3d%26t%3d%26edoptin%3d%26customgeoip%3d%26cap%3d1%26cbstore%3d1%26vd%3d0%26lb%3d%26fi%3d2%26edrf%3d

Edited August 23, 2017 by Oakydoke

[Joseph_Pestell]

In my teenage years (and perhaps a bit longer), the link between Waterloo SW and Waterloo E involved crossing the cab road and walking along a short length of the old platform on the connecting link before climbing a ramp which took one to the Waterloo E footbridge. Only in the 1980/90s that the higher level walkway was provided.

 

Last time I was at Waterloo with Dad (then 89), the lift was not working which made getting between the two stations much harder than it would have been in the old days. Progress!

[Peter Kazmierczak]

This link leads to a photo of the railway bridge coming out of Waterloo towards Waterloo East.....

 

http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/bus-outside-waterloo-station-london-c-1900-the-bus-news-photo/90747556?#bus-outside-waterloo-station-london-c-1900-the-bus-advertising-coal-picture-id90747556

 

...and one taken in recent times....

 

http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-waterloo-road-approaching-one-of-waterloo-station-exits-34416483.html?pv=1&stamp=2&imageid=71209D98-E8DE-49A7-B6F2-757FF5129515&p=77837&n=0&orientation=0&pn=1&searchtype=0&IsFromSearch=1&srch=foo%3dbar%26st%3d0%26pn%3d1%26ps%3d100%26sortby%3d2%26resultview%3dsortbyPopular%26npgs%3d0%26qt%3dwaterloo%20road%26qt_raw%3dwaterloo%20road%26lic%3d3%26mr%3d0%26pr%3d0%26ot%3d0%26creative%3d%26ag%3d0%26hc%3d0%26pc%3d%26blackwhite%3d%26cutout%3d%26tbar%3d1%26et%3d0x000000000000000000000%26vp%3d0%26loc%3d0%26imgt%3d0%26dtfr%3d%26dtto%3d%26size%3d0xFF%26archive%3d1%26groupid%3d%26pseudoid%3d%26a%3d%26cdid%3d%26cdsrt%3d%26name%3d%26qn%3d%26apalib%3d0%26apalic%3d%26lightbox%3d%26gname%3d%26gtype%3d%26xstx%3d0%26simid%3d%26saveQry%3d%26editorial%3d1%26nu%3d%26t%3d%26edoptin%3d%26customgeoip%3d%26cap%3d1%26cbstore%3d1%26vd%3d0%26lb%3d%26fi%3d2%26edrf%3d

No doubt about it; same bridge.

[Joseph_Pestell]

Crossrail 4 anybody ?

 

Sorry. too much time on my hands.....

 

Stu

 

You are not the first to suggest this. There is a Middleton Press book on the subject.

 

It would make a lot of sense in terms of improving the links from SW London to the City (Cannon St) and reducing the costs of terminating trains.

 

Largely superseded now by Thameslink "2000" with its obsession with serving London Bridge rather than the much more practical exchange station at Southwark.

[Southernman46]

 

Does anyone have any clue regarding the timescale for 442 reintroduction ?

Edited August 23, 2017 by Southernman46

[phil-b259]

You are not the first to suggest this. There is a Middleton Press book on the subject.

 

It would make a lot of sense in terms of improving the links from SW London to the City (Cannon St) and reducing the costs of terminating trains.

 

Largely superseded now by Thameslink "2000" with its obsession with serving London Bridge rather than the much more practical exchange station at Southwark.

 

Seriously, what have you been smoking / eating / drinking recently!

 

Just think about it for a moment - conflicting moves on the flat with every single London Bridge to Charing Cross service and withdrawing half of the South Eastern services to Cannon Street too to make room!

 

Please put down your crayons and take a good hard look at the real world practicalities before suggesting such nonsense.

 

The LSWR built their own private tube line to Bank precisely because of the practical difficulties and astronomical cost of getting closer to the City on the surface -  and the same is still true today unless you want to decimate SE services.