[News] Brighton commuters to face 18 days of closures for engineering work

happypig · Jan 10, 2018

Beach Hut said:
Same with me, now commute one day a week, if the option to WFH was withdrawn I would retire

Me three. I've not been in to the office since April 2016. Fortunately my boss is of the opinion that work is something you do, not somewhere you go.

I wonder how many commuters are willing and able to WFH once or twice a week but are prevented from doing so by insecure managers who want to be able to see their little domain. If 20% of train users could work from home, that would go a long way to easing the overcrowding on the trains.
It really needs government to encourage firms to embrace changes like this.

Uter · Jan 10, 2018

A1X said:
If they re-opened Lewes - Uckfield (and electrified it) and opened a chord to allow passage from Angmering to Arundel and the line to Horsham without reversing at Littlehampton then it would help drastically in these situations.

BML2 is a waste of money and doesn't address 95% of the issues faced by the BML.

An Arundel chord was investigated by Network Rail in the 2015 Sussex Area Route Study. It came to the conclusion that it did not offer good value for money and was not recommended to be taken forward. The main reasons were passengers would still have a 50 minute time penalty and only one platform at Brighton can accommodate 12 car trains arriving from the West Coastway route and hence only 2 trains per hour could be diverted via Horsham and the Arundel chord.

I would suggest though that if it's being used as a diversionary route then surely the time penalty should be against the alternative available in times of disruption, i.e. getting a replacement bus, not with the normal timetable. I have no idea why only one platform at Brighton can accommodate 12 car trains. Even though the buffers at platform 1 are about 20 yards further forward than for platform 2 I am sure they are both long enough. The report is silent on which platform it is that cannot be used and the technical reason behind it and what it would cost to rectify this which suggests there was little appetite for it. I can only guess it might have something to do with the curvature of the platform.

https://cdn.networkrail.co.uk/wp-co...-East-Route-Sussex-Area-Route-Study-FINAL.pdf

Plus of course it would open up the possibility of direct Brighton to Horsham/Crawley trains, e.g. by extending the Brighton/West Worthing services, which would make commuting between the Worthing area and Horsham/Crawley by train much more attractive. There would probably be some push back due to extended level crossing down times, but I still think it would be worth it.

The red pepper kid · Jan 10, 2018

Sussexscots said:
, perhaps the club should approach the FA and ask that they avoid scheduling home fixtures for those weekends in the absence of susustainable transport.

NO NO NO should be timed NOT to disrupt our fans travelling away, WHO CARES ABOUT AWAY FANS visiting us for gods sake

dazzer6666 · Jan 10, 2018

Gwylan said:
This is an anonymous survey so that doesn't apply in this case.

I'm staggered by the more than three hours - that would make Newcastle commutable from London.

I couldn't hack the Brighton commute so I work from home, some of the distances people travel are crazy,

We've got quite a few in our office (Canary Wharf) that commute from places like Birmingham, Southampton and North/East of Cambridge, 2-2.5 hours not uncommon. Home working is becoming more and more prevalent now though - only a matter of time before we start to get larger numbers of people permanently home based I think.

Sent from my E5823 using Tapatalk

Uter · Jan 10, 2018

Madafwo said:
Put a flying junction in for the line from Lewes at Wivelsfield so you can have trains heading to Brighton while a train comes over from Lewes without blocking the BML heading south.

You mean like this? Don't get too excited. Pencilled in for Control Period 7 (2024-2029)

blue'n'white · Jan 10, 2018

I've said for some years that, although it would be a major pain, if Southern or Network Rail were to close the London to Brighton line for 6 months as long as they gave plenty of warning and arranged alternative travel people would be relatively understanding IF Network Rail guaranteed that the trains would run properly and to time when the line reopened.
For years they've closed Redhill to London at Christmas and sometimes at Easter for "signalling works" and then what happens immediately the line reopens - you guessed it "signalling problems".
Close the whole system down for a significant period and do all the repairs that need doing rather than mucking about doing little bits here and there.

Madafwo · Jan 10, 2018

Uter said:
You mean like this? Don't get too excited. Pencilled in for Control Period 7 (2024-2029)

I knew it had been discussed, wasn't sure if it had been included in any plans yet.

Uter · Jan 10, 2018

blue'n'white said:
I've said for some years that, although it would be a major pain, if Southern or Network Rail were to close the London to Brighton line for 6 months as long as they gave plenty of warning and arranged alternative travel people would be relatively understanding IF Network Rail guaranteed that the trains would run properly and to time when the line reopened.
For years they've closed Redhill to London at Christmas and sometimes at Easter for "signalling works" and then what happens immediately the line reopens - you guessed it "signalling problems".
Close the whole system down for a significant period and do all the repairs that need doing rather than mucking about doing little bits here and there.

Longer closures are obviously a more efficient way of working, but I cannot see that closing the line for months would ever be acceptable. A large proportion of tourists arrive by train and many of them would choose to go elsewhere or not travel at all rather than endure a replacement bus service. It could have a devastating impact on the local economy. There was some research done recently that looked into people's attitudes to replacement bus services. I forget the actual figures, but most people would opt to stay on a diverted train rather than take a replacement bus even if the train took significantly longer. And for people encumbered with luggage or with mobility issues a replacement bus is really not a choice at all.

That said, it's usually a much more cost-effective option to devote your resources to make an existing line more resilient rather than to plough funds into a diversionary route. Investing in boring things like flood prevention and bi-directional signalling are never going to be as sexy as opening up new diversionary routes, so there is always going to be pressure to do the latter. And even when you do invest in resilience measures most passengers will never realise they are benefitting on days where the line would otherwise be closed had this investment not happened.

Uter · Jan 10, 2018

Madafwo said:
I knew it had been discussed, wasn't sure if it had been included in any plans yet.

That was from the 2015 route study. Actually it says to be developed in CP7, so if it happens at all it probably wouldn't commence until CP8. These are very early plans and are unlikely to happen if demand growth slows as the stuff planned for CP6 would probably be sufficient to cope with demand.

I think the Victoria stuff is happening which is basically to address the problem of poor platform utilisation. The Windmill Bridge/East Croydon plans are well developed, but as yet not funded. I think this will happen, but my guess is that there will be a significant over-station development to help pay for it. I think all the other things are aspirational at the moment and dependent on future demand.

kevo · Jan 10, 2018

A1X said:
If they re-opened Lewes - Uckfield (and electrified it) and opened a chord to allow passage from Angmering to Arundel and the line to Horsham without reversing at Littlehampton then it would help drastically in these situations.

BML2 is a waste of money and doesn't address 95% of the issues faced by the BML.

I agree that BML2 is possibly too ambtious. They just need to reopen the Lewes-Uckfield line (none of it has been developed on) and upgrade that route so there is a good alternative when the BML is down.

Boys 9d · Jan 10, 2018

Uter said:
An Arundel chord was investigated by Network Rail in the 2015 Sussex Area Route Study. It came to the conclusion that it did not offer good value for money and was not recommended to be taken forward. The main reasons were passengers would still have a 50 minute time penalty and only one platform at Brighton can accommodate 12 car trains arriving from the West Coastway route and hence only 2 trains per hour could be diverted via Horsham and the Arundel chord. would make commuting between the Worthing area and Horsham/Crawley by train much more attractive.

It seems that these sort of investigations only consider passengers starting and finishing their journeys at Brighton. I am sure that many originate from stations along the West Coastway. As regards platform availability at Brighton, why can't trains terminate at Hove or Worthing both of which have three platforms. An imaginative use of these stations might lead to less trains needed on the BML which at present use the Prestonville Spur between Preston Park and Hove.

The Large One · Jan 10, 2018

A1X said:
If they re-opened Lewes - Uckfield (and electrified it) and opened a chord to allow passage from Angmering to Arundel and the line to Horsham without reversing at Littlehampton then it would help drastically in these situations.

BML2 is a waste of money and doesn't address 95% of the issues faced by the BML.

What are the 95% of those situations?

What are the 5% it does alleviate?

The Large One · Jan 10, 2018

kevo said:
I agree that BML2 is possibly too ambtious. They just need to reopen the Lewes-Uckfield line (none of it has been developed on) and upgrade that route so there is a good alternative when the BML is down.

Not true. The Lewes end has been built upon, and they would need to either re-route it or knockdown the civic buildings and private housing built on its route.

Uter · Jan 10, 2018

Boys 9d said:
It seems that these sort of investigations only consider passengers starting and finishing their journeys at Brighton. I am sure that many originate from stations along the West Coastway. As regards platform availability at Brighton, why can't trains terminate at Hove or Worthing both of which have three platforms. An imaginative use of these stations might lead to less trains needed on the BML which at present use the Prestonville Spur between Preston Park and Hove.

Very good point. There would be no need to continue all trains to Brighton and terminating them short at Hove or Worthing would surely mean more than 2 tph could go via Arundel in times of disruption. And is the impediment to having 2 platforms at Brighton handling 12 car trains insurmountable? The fact that this isn't even discussed makes me suspect the conclusion was predetermined.

The Large One · Jan 10, 2018

Uter said:
Very good point. There would be no need to continue all trains to Brighton and terminating them short at Hove or Worthing would surely mean more than 2 tph could go via Arundel in times of disruption. And is the impediment to having 2 platforms at Brighton handling 12 car trains insurmountable? The fact that this isn't even discussed makes me suspect the conclusion was predetermined.

The main problems of more trains per hour is a not-dissimilar one to certain sections on BML; there are only two lines - one up, one down. A fast train can only ever be as fast as the slow or semi-fast trains ahead of it.

Plus not all stations along the West Coastway can handle 12 carriages.

Blue Valkyrie · Jan 10, 2018

Sussexscots said:
Scheduled for October 2018 and February 2019 Half term breaks according to the Guardian. That being the case, perhaps the club should approach the FA and ask that they avoid scheduling home fixtures for those weekends in the absence of susustainable transport.

Major pain in the erky but given the number of delays and problems attributable to the creaking, antediluvian infrastructure it definitely needs doing.

I'm sure the PL will schedule the 2 league games v Palace for those weeks :lolol:

Commander · Jan 10, 2018

Gwylan said:
Funnily enough, I'm working with a recruitment company at the moment analysing some data. Nearly 40% of employees would be willing to travel more than an hour to work and 4% would be happy to travel more than three hours.

Wouldn't suit me, but you'd be surprised how long people would be willing to travel. And that's across a range of different job sectors.

I run a recruitment company and I can tell you that those people are wrong. They might think that they are willing to do that now, but they won't be after a couple of months of doing it. I see it all the time.

A1X · Jan 10, 2018

The Large One said:
What are the 95% of those situations?

What are the 5% it does alleviate?

The 5% being people travelling from Brighton. And possibly Lewes.

The 95% being the people travelling from anywhere north of Brighton, or whose trains join the BML north of Preston Park coming from (e.g.) Hove, Haywards Heath, Littlehampton, Bognor, Portsmouth, Southampton, Eastbourne, Worthing, Horsham, Reigate, Tonbridge, Crawley etc. Doesn't do an awful lot for them as people will still need trains from Brighton to the likes of Gatwick, so no serious reduction in trains just by sending them via. Uckfield.

Gwylan · Jan 10, 2018

Commander said:
I run a recruitment company and I can tell you that those people are wrong. They might think that they are willing to do that now, but they won't be after a couple of months of doing it. I see it all the time.

Maybe. They were also asked how long their current commute is and 23% said more than an hour - nearly half the total that said they'd be prepared to commute for that length of time, but still pretty hefty.
Not many commuting for more than three hours though.

And surely it depends on salary. I gave up the London job because I hated the commute but if I were offered a six-figure salary, I'd be up at 5.00 in the morning again ready for the delights of SASTA

Commander · Jan 10, 2018

Gwylan said:
Maybe. They were also asked how long their current commute is and 23% said more than an hour - nearly half the total that said they'd be prepared to commute for that length of time, but still pretty hefty.
Not many commuting for more than three hours though.

And surely it depends on salary. I gave up the London job because I hated the commute but if I were offered a six-figure salary, I'd be up at 5.00 in the morning again ready for the delights of SASTA

It depends on salary for a period of time. Then even that becomes irrelevant, unless they are foolish enough to trap themselves by adjusting their lifestyle to fit the higher salary.

Usually, anyway. Some people can do it indefinitely.

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[News] Brighton commuters to face 18 days of closures for engineering work

Staring at the rude boys

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

I'm probably being facetious.

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Who's Next?

Who's Next?

Well-known member

Who's Next?

Not seen such Bravery!

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Share this page