MarkE

Blah Blah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I am impressed that a helipad can be constructed > in just one weekend. This weekend is just for the erection of a tower crane that will facilitate the construction of the helipad. Doubtless at some stage in the future, once the construction is complete, there'll be a further road closure in order that the tower crane can be dismantled.

There is a sleeve on the bus stop sign at Denmark Hill explaining that the stop is shut on certain days, and to read the literature attached to the post. Didn't read the detail, mind, as was about to hop on a bus, but the fact that it'll be shut seems to imply that the diversion will cut out Champion Hill entirely.

It'll only appear as 'new' if you, yourself, haven't read it. Because you posted a message yourself, it won't appear as 'new' to you, but will to everyone else.

17:51 out of London Bridge to Peckham and East Dulwich just had to reroute to New Cross Gate and detrain due to a train stuck on the points at South Bermondsey. Suspect nothing will be going through there any time soon, in either direction.

Don't seem able to view the pdf, James, unless it's something i'm doing wrong. Have tried on a pc and a mobile... Is the file available on the Southwark website anywhere?

@Renata, I'm a recent overspill from EDW - the frequency having dropped due to South Bermondsey terminations and regular holdups queuing into London Bridge have pushed me away. I used to get the Denmark Hill thameslink service once every few weeks, somewhere in the 8:00-8:30 timeslot, and always managed to get on. The last two weeks there have always been some poor souls (occasionally me) left on the platform unable to squeeze on. The crush on the services lightens a little bit by Elephant and Castle, but is still pretty bad right through to Blackfriars.

40 is definitely running more or less a regular service, but it is busy. Probably worth heading to the library first and joining it empty

Currently sat on a 40 having departed LL. There are a few of them and occasional 185s, but not a lot else.

BigED Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > From the article I saw on the Independent website, > London Central was not listed as one of the > affected companies which should mean that the 37 > and 185 are running as normal. But I wouldn't > bank on it. And I suspect they might be quite > busy. And slow. Not that I have any alternative detail to the contrary, but the tfl website does include London Central (perhaps mistakenly): https://tfl.gov.uk/campaign/bus-strike

63 and 363 are both operated by London Central, a subdivision of Go Ahead who are on the list to strike. 40 (Abellio), 176 (Arriva) and 185 (also London Central) are also set to be affected. I'm not clear on what proportion of drivers are UNITE members, but I guess forewarned is forearmed...

JimH Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What the hell is wrong with the signals and what > the hell is congestion at London Bridge? From what I can tell as a layperson, they've changed some of the track layout, so that some of the tracks that used to be used for outbound are now for inbound, and the other way around too. Previously you'd see a single track gap between inbound trains from South Bermondsey and the others (where the outbound train from London Bridge ran to South Bermondsey), whereas now they run side-by-side. This affects where the trains crossover tracks, nearer to the station, and for whatever reason they haven't sussed the sequencing to allow them to do it safely, which creates time delays all round.

Peckhamgatecrasher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Surely the easiest/cheapest thing to do would be > to ban right turns from Lordship Lane into Dulwich > Grove except for buses. The near misses I have > had/seen, all come from cars speeding right to > buck the traffic lights. This was my thinking too. I'd even consider encouraging traffic at Goose Green roundabout to go down Spurling Road (switch the one-way) in order to loop round for EDG, although that was presumably shut off back in the day for a good reason. But then it seems like a lot of hassle to allow for the bus to take that right turn but nobody else, given as it's only the 37 and there are only about six of them a week. Rerouting the 37 feels like taking a sledgehammer to a nut, but it's not unfeasible (taking it via Townley Road, for example wouldn't be outrageous). The danger, it seems to me, stems from those turning right off LL onto EDG, and the key must be encouraging those away, again possibly as far as Townley if they want the Village, Herne Hill and beyond. Those wanting to get to the local area can use the side streets, and you put off rat runners by turning EDG into a no through road after Melbourne Grove (which would also aid that ridiculous junction). James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi worldwiser, > A three way signalled junction has been considered > and modelled a number of times. It sounds so > easy. > But such a junction would need to remove all > parking on Lordship Lane for 100m north and south > to effectively create 2 lanes both ways. This feels like a red herring to me. It would be desirable to have two lanes both ways, but by no means necessary. Particularly if the southbound traffic had preferential phasing over the northbound. It feels like if a signalled junction was desired enough, a way could be found. There would be inevitable consequences, but if the outcome is desireable enough, they would surely be worth it?

The 40 is fantastic, but even last week when there was very little traffic, it took 55 mins from Monument to Lordship Lane. It's a real alternative on the way into the city in the morning as the section from Camberwell Green to Elephant & Castle is manageable, but on the way back even a delayed train still wins every time, for me.

BrandNewGuy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Not really. If six buses an hour take two hours to > complete the route rather than one hour, they > still pass your stop about every ten minutes, > right? That only works if you double the number of buses servicing that route. Otherwise you'll have an hour-long gap between 60-minute spells of regular buses. So if it is taking twice as long, you'll need twice as many buses to maintain the old frequency. Which, one suspects, isn't happening.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > MarkE Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > I just checked with the people at the > Thameslink > > Programme and they've confirmed that this is > > indeed the case - from January, Platforms 8 and > 9 > > will be out of action, as will the steps to the > > footbridge from Platform 8, meaning that to get > to > > 1-7 will require routing out of the station and > > then back in (without being charged twice for > your > > PAYG journey). > > That is so ridiculous, it's *almost* funny. So > things set to get significantly worse then > basically. I'm surprised that they've not been willing/able to set up a temporary bridge, but given the volumes transferring between platforms perhaps it was considered impractical. I actually would rather the solution they're going with than squeezing through the gap at Platform 8 which is already quite crushed at times. The next phase (Christmas to Easter) is also the beginning of the blockade, and in fact Platforms 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 will all be shut and there'll be no connection to Charing Cross.

MarkE Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > One downside is that presumably their next phase > will shut off Platforms 8 and 9, meaning that the > footbridge will go out of action. I just checked with the people at the Thameslink Programme and they've confirmed that this is indeed the case - from January, Platforms 8 and 9 will be out of action, as will the steps to the footbridge from Platform 8, meaning that to get to 1-7 will require routing out of the station and then back in (without being charged twice for your PAYG journey).

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If you think things are going to get better in > Jan/Feb, you've got another thing coming... I have to say that I am anticipating some improvements, more or less to the state things were in before August (i.e. not perfect but much more reliable). With the out-of-action platforms 10-11 at LBG becoming accessible to trains again, this ought to reduce the squeeze on the junctions for the other platforms 12-15, which should reduce delays queuing for platforms at London Bridge. Additionally, the sectioned off area that causes people congestion between the ticket barriers and Platforms 12-15, will be removed and improve the flow of foot traffic in that area, hopefully meaning that Platform 15 will clear quicker on some occasions - it's been bedlam recently. http://uhoun19qey9384ovv24t33c1.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/September-14-london-bridge-map.pdf One downside is that presumably their next phase will shut off Platforms 8 and 9, meaning that the footbridge will go out of action.

Is there a dedicated form on the Southwark website where I can 'have my say'? Link on the list of consultations just runs through to that pdf as far as I can tell... Ta

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo! Sure there are genuine reasons that it's for the best, but it'll be such a shame to walk past and not see it.

Sorry! As I said, unless you put Oyster readers on the trains themselves (as there are on the buses), you'd not know how a passenger travelled. And that, in itself, would doubtless lead to a lot more fare evasion and lost revenue. There's also the perspective that requiring a customer to apply for their refund means you're less likely to have to pay out as much as you would if it were automated. There's a big incentive for the TOCs not to be proactive!

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The Oyster card tracks your journey (i.e. where > and when you get on and where and when you get > off). It should therefore be possible to calculate > when a refund is due because of late running > trains. Not sure that's particularly viable. Here's an example - this morning because I was running late I took the train from ED to Peckham Rye and then changed to get to City Thameslink. I was lucky enough to catch a late-running service from Peckham on an already tight interchange - by rights I should have been waiting another half an hour for my connection. Other days I've gone from ED south to Tulse Hill and then switched for a train to City Thameslink. If, say, the Tulse Hill route was running late, but I went via Peckham Rye and missed an optimistic connection, whose fault is that - Southern's or mine? There are countless more examples of this - unless you had Oyster readers on the trains themselves, you'll never know the intention of the traveller in order to refund them appropriately.

Think you're giving them too much credit here - it would be far too difficult for them to know which route you took, or that you weren't waiting to travel with a friend etc.

Pretty sure it was all a knock-on from a much earlier issue. 17:25 from LBG was cancelled so I dashed across in the vain hope that I could make the 17:10 in case it was late running - it was but departed from Platform 8, which goes to show quite how screwed up everything was.

They seem to have got a better handle on managing delayed trains lately, though. At least when they're severely delayed they get cancelled early - definitely worth keeping an eye on the National Rail website or app. This morning, for instance, they ran the 8:20 direct to London Bridge without calling at Peckham Rye, Queen's Road Peckham or South Bermondsey. Still only arrived into London Bridge at 8:40 due to queueing from South Bermondsey onwards. Roll the dice, check ahead, plan to be early.

Sweptwind Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This London Reconnections article explains the > situation (specifically the section on 'Platform > Capacity' and 'In September the pain started to be > felt') and suggests it will be continuing for > some time to come until the Thameslink work is > completed: > > http://www.londonreconnections.com/2014/study-suss > ex-part-6-approaches-london-bridge/ Fascinating article, thanks for sharing the link.