Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Does anyone know to what extent the proposed changes to the Denmark Hill route to Victoria/London Bridge will impact on the service from Peckham Rye to either Victoria and or London Bridge? I'm moving to the area very soon and still trying to get to grips with the various routes available. I've tried contacting the rail operators but without much luck!

I'm struggling to find the site, but it's on t'interweb somewhere about proposals to mitigate the loss of the Victoria-London Bridge service.


Basically enough extra journey's will be put on to compensate for the loss in the victoria direction, but I seem to recall London Bridge from Denmark hill may be more of a pain. I think Peckham to LB will again be ok though.


I'll keep looking anyhoo.

doesn't this say that the impact on peckham rye will be minimal as there are already other (and better) lines going to victoria and london bridge? problem comes if you want to go denmark hill to LB, in which case you will have to change at peckham rye.
I think we've been through all this before in other threads but, as I understood it, prior to the ELL extension Phase 2 opening there will be a reduction in Peckham Rye services to London Bridge. And I don't think Phase 2 has budgetary approval yet.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Let them go bust.  Enact emergency legislation to ensure that the water still flows and the rest of the network operates. Why should we care what happens to the investors.  Have no idea could or would this work, and where next. And the workers will still be needed whoever runs the show.
    • I think you might mean 'repossession' rather than 'reprocessing'.  
    • I think this is a bit of a myth.  It's true that some of the current owners are pension funds (chiefly the Ontario Universities') but they're global outfits, big enough to know what they're about. As for ordinary UK pension funds, they mostly invest in publicly-tradeable stocks, which Thames no longer is (it's a private limited company, not a PLC), so even those that lazily track the markets by buying everything in the index won't be exposed as Thames isn't in any index. In other words, it's a lot less complicated than Thames, the Government or innumerable consultancies and PR outfits would like you to believe. In case, incidentally, the idea of a cooperative offends any delicate Thatcherite sensibilities, I'd argue that it fits the Thatcherite vision of a stakeholding democracy much better than selling tradeable shares to the public very cheaply. The public, despite their blessable cottons, are too easily tempted by the small but easy win (which is how they sold off their own building societies, preparing the ground for the credit crunch and then the crash) and, as became obvious after every privatisation before or since, their modest stakes inevitably end up in the hands of financial engineers whose only priority is to siphon off the assets and leave the husk to either go bankrupt or get "rescued" by the taxpayers (who thus get to pay twice for nothing). The root of that is the concept of "limited liability" which makes it all possible, but even the most nauseating free-market optimist would struggle to predict the demise of that.  
    • Repossession? Oh no, that's really sad 😢 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...