|
|
Post by snoggle on Mar 14, 2016 1:00:17 GMT
What's the history and reasoning behind the Watford special fare zone? Its all to do with the fact that WCML express trains operated by Virgin call there. Watford Junction is little unusual in that respect, because on other main lines InterCity services have their first / last calls a lot further out (Stevenage, Luton & Reading) Basically at a station where multiple operators call, the revenues to a common destination (in the case Central London) have to be split up amongst them, with the most frequent operator generally getting the most money. Also if Watford was fully absorbed into the zonal fare structure the London Midlands fares would have to come down by quite a large amount However the DfT let the Virgin and London Midland franchise on the basis that there would be no change (other than inflation) to the fares income they would receive (if it did alter then the company would be able to challenge the 'premiums' they had to share with HM Treasury under the Franchise agreement). As such the only way TfL could get Oyster acceptance at Watford was to create a special zone which ensured that the the fares and the distribution of monies to the other parties was not changed by Oyster. This will be repeated when Oyster will be available to Reading and Gatwick in the future, as the DfT have taken great care to protect their financial position. Consequently Oyster will NOT always be the cheapest option outside the GLA area and the fares revenue on DfT franchised operators does not suffer from Oyster acceptance. It is worth repeating that TfL are bound by an agreement with the DfT that they cannot make fare changes which create anomolies where TOCs have the lead pricing role. This is why PAYG fares differ to some extent on the West Anglia and Shenfield routes. Watford Junction is in the same position. It is also the case that TfL have had to financially compensate Abellio Greater Anglia in respect of Stratford moving to Z23 and also in respect of WAML stations being incorporated into the TfL West Anglia PAYG tariff rather than remaining on the National Rail PAYG tariff. All this special pleading by daft MPs outside the zonal area completely ignores all of these financial movements and I really do not see why people in Watford should have their fares cut with money out of the TfL budget. We've been "done over" by the Chancellor in respect of the revenue grant going completely so there's no largesse to splash around. Worse both Herts and Essex are trying to dump their funding contributions for TfL contracted cross boundary bus services but Herts and Essex residents are screaming for the Mayor to stump up the cash. Excuse me? Go and get your own councils to maintain their funding or lose the services - it's as simple as that. Finally it is also worth noting that the potential fares freeze proposals from one Mayoral candidate are very likely to come under severe pressure from the DfT and Secretary of State because National Rail fares at places like Shenfield, Broxbourne and Watford Junction (and later Reading) will continue to rise by RPI thus creating a wider "step" between the TfL tariff and other fares at or across boundaries. Furthermore the funding compensation arrangements will also increase every year that TfL fares remain static. At some point that Mayoral candidate (if elected in May) and TfL will be held to be in breach of the obligations they are tied in to. That will bring on the pains rather nastily - something tells me a fares crunch might just arise in late 2019 just before Crossrail fully opens and only, oh dear, 6 months before the 2020 Mayoral Election. What a time to have to break your manifesto pledge.    |
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Mar 14, 2016 21:41:19 GMT
Finally it is also worth noting that the potential fares freeze proposals from one Mayoral candidate are very likely to come under severe pressure from the DfT and Secretary of State because National Rail fares at places like Shenfield, Broxbourne and Watford Junction (and later Reading) will continue to rise by RPI thus creating a wider "step" between the TfL tariff and other fares at or across boundaries. Furthermore the funding compensation arrangements will also increase every year that TfL fares remain static. At some point that Mayoral candidate (if elected in May) and TfL will be held to be in breach of the obligations they are tied in to. That will bring on the pains rather nastily - something tells me a fares crunch might just arise in late 2019 just before Crossrail fully opens and only, oh dear, 6 months before the 2020 Mayoral Election. What a time to have to break your manifesto pledge. I would have been more impressed if the promise was to start narrowing the difference in fares so that over time (8 years / two Mayoral terms?) the difference did not exist. Especially not in zones 2 upwards. However I also realise that the only way the DfT would sanction this would be through TfL raising its fares to the same as the DfT, and from the pov of the passengers who pay fares at the lower TfL rates this would be about as welcome as turkeys voting in favour of Christmas! Maybe to help compensate TfL could minimise any increases in zone 1, possibly even in time ending the premium, as here there are few instances of different fares between TfL and other railways. Ending the premium would also help balance the fares more equitably. The fares differential does need resolving... I see it as being manifestly unfair that London's passengers are charged different fares simply because TfL runs their trains rather than a mainline TOC. This anomaly does not exist for Travelcard holders. One benefit of this change would be that passengers would not choose the southern section of the Northern Line simply because it is cheaper... thereby possibly reducing overcrowding. As for whats being promised in the Mayoral election, if the fares freeze does come to pass but only applies to services where TfL sets the fare then might we see Bromley taking action again, as they did against KL when he was head of the GLC and cut fares? Maybe we need to "wait and see" who wins the Mayoral vote, the state of the economy at the time of the Mayoral election... and the result of a different vote towards the end of June, as this too will likely affect London's economy and hence funds the Mayor has or does not have to play with fares. Simon |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2016 20:37:31 GMT
If there is someone out there who reads local Watford news .... is there any local comment on closure of the "old" Watford Station and effects on services?
There was a "valued-engineered" (whatever that means) report in 2011 that referred to possibility of the "old" station being used for stabling trains but Google cannot find any references to that being finally knocked on the head.
If you had bought a house because it was near Watford Met then you might feel miffed to have to walk past an empty train to get to Cassiobridge or Croxley. There are currently about 10tph morning peak from Watford a couple of which seem to stop at Moor Park to connect with a London bound Amersham service. If empty trains are kept at Watford Met does that imply peak trains start at Croxley and how would those trains affect f.o.s. from WJ/WHS which would need platform space at WJ alongside Euston DC trains.
Have any Watford locals suggested a Watford Met to Ricky service? (or WJ to Amersham via Croxley and Ricky?)
|
|
|
|
Post by peterc on Apr 2, 2016 0:05:59 GMT
I don't know about people in Watford but WJ to Ricky and points west has been suggested in Chesham and Amersham.
I think that there would be a demand for a North Curve service to the town centre as Watford is a major destination but where the stock would come from is another matter.
I haven't heard of any changes to the plan of using Watford Met for stabling but other people here will have more up to date knowledge.
|
|
|
|
Post by njr001 on Apr 2, 2016 8:55:41 GMT
I asked about the use of the North Curve at one of the consultations that took place some years ago and was amazed to find that he hadn't been considered in any detail.
Given the current peak hour car traffic down the Chorleywood Road into Ricky and onward in the direction of Watford if some these people could be persuaded to use 'The Met' a peak hour service would be viable. Also direct access Chorleywood and Ricky areas etc. to Watford's hospital would be very useful.
(Possibly Biased opinion of a Ricky Resident)
|
|
|
|
Post by thc on Apr 2, 2016 9:15:29 GMT
NJR/atlastrack, spend some time going through this thread or the comments on the London Reconnections article on the Croxley Rail Link and you'll see that both the continued use of the existing Watford Met station and the use of the North Curve have both been evaluated and, in the case of the latter, ruled out for now. It's all there if you care to look.
THC
|
|
|
|
Post by thc on Apr 2, 2016 9:17:26 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2016 11:21:41 GMT
Thank you THC - very useful - and puzzled as to why Google couldn't find this.
If trains are stabled at Watford Met then one presumes that they would reverse on the way to Croxley in order to reach WJ/WHS.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Apr 2, 2016 13:25:32 GMT
If trains are stabled at Watford Met then one presumes that they would reverse on the way to Croxley in order to reach WJ/WHS. I would've thought trains starting from Watford stabling roads would either run to Rickmansworth/Amersham/Chesham via north curve or continue SB towards Harrow etc. First trains to Watford Junction would probably come from the Rickmansworth direction. Drivers bringing trains into service would either travel by staff taxi or an empty train arrival. |
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Apr 2, 2016 19:51:08 GMT
There will always be a reluctance by TfL to use the North Curve. There is more likelihood of a Chiltern Watford - Milton Keynes via Aylesbury service in due course than TfL taking up frequent service rights. If it didn't already exist, it wouldn't be built today, and that's always a good starting point when looking at potential new services. HOWEVER, this could be a very worthwhile venture for Chiltern in a few years from now, and I shall watch with interest.
|
|
londoner
thinking on '73 stock
Posts: 480 
|
Post by londoner on Apr 3, 2016 0:18:14 GMT
There will always be a reluctance by TfL to use the North Curve. There is more likelihood of a Chiltern Watford - Milton Keynes via Aylesbury service in due course than TfL taking up frequent service rights. If it didn't already exist, it wouldn't be built today, and that's always a good starting point when looking at potential new services. HOWEVER, this could be a very worthwhile venture for Chiltern in a few years from now, and I shall watch with interest. The route from Oxford to Milton Keynes/ Bedford (and thus linking from Aylesbury to Milton Keynes) has already been approved if I understand it correctly. www.eastwestrail.org.uk/east-west-rail-route/# So Aylesbury to Milton Keynes demand would be met. People from Watford would simply use Midland services or Virgin. Demand to go via Aylesbury would be small. If anything, it would probably make more sense to just recommence Chiltern Railway services at Moor Park. That would be a relatively simple compromise to allow quicker interchange for Watford users onto the Chiltern line and not require terminating facilities for Chiltern trains. |
|
|
|
Post by thc on Apr 3, 2016 6:22:20 GMT
So Aylesbury to Milton Keynes demand would be met. People from Watford would simply use Midland services or Virgin. Demand to go via Aylesbury would be small. If anything, it would probably make more sense to just recommence Chiltern Railway services at Moor Park. That would be a relatively simple compromise to allow quicker interchange for Watford users onto the Chiltern line and not require terminating facilities for Chiltern trains. from June 2015 contains an Appendix 2, that is a letter of 30 March 2015 from the DfT to the GLA. Condition f) on page 2 states: “Transport for London will assess in good faith and agree with the Department, by the end of April 2015, the viability of the infrastructure accepting the operation of national rail DMUs (Class 165, 168, 170 and 172 up to six-cars in length), recognising DfT and stakeholders have a longer term aspirations for a service of 2 train per hour from Watford Junction to Rickmansworth, Aylesbury (and beyond). Transport for London will adopt any minor design modifications arising from the agreed viability assessment as part of the Croxley Rail Link project. Note: condition f) is subject to consultation between TfL and DfT.” (my bold) A service from Watford Junction over the north curve to points beyond Amersham therefore appears to be an official aspiration. THC |
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Apr 3, 2016 7:36:52 GMT
I wonder what the outcome was, given the deadline was a year ago.
Also class 172 is not authorised to run on the Metropolitan line on its own or leading in a longer formation with 165/168s as class 172s are not fitted with tripcocks.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,762
|
Post by Chris M on Apr 3, 2016 10:48:49 GMT
Also class 172 is not authorised to run on the Metropolitan line on its own or leading in a longer formation with 165/168s as class 172s are not fitted with tripcocks. When (if) the SSR is resignalled that restriction will probably no longer be required. |
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Apr 3, 2016 13:29:10 GMT
The ATP on Metropolitan for Chiltern post resignalling is, I understand, intended to retain tripcock/trianstip.
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Apr 3, 2016 13:58:01 GMT
Thank you THC, you are, as always, correct
@ Londoner
You state "So Aylesbury to Milton Keynes demand would be met" because Oxford - Cambridge will be re-opened. Please, how does this serve Aylesbury??
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Apr 3, 2016 14:43:12 GMT
Thank you THC, you are, as always, correct @ Londoner You state "So Aylesbury to Milton Keynes demand would be met" because Oxford - Cambridge will be re-opened. Please, how does this serve Aylesbury?? Happy to be corrected but I believe East West Rail phase 2 includes reinstatement of the line from Aylesbury Parkway up to the Bicester - Bletchley section of EWR. I think Phase 1 refers to the current scheme to link Oxford into the Chiltern Main Line. www.eastwestrail.org.uk/east-west-rail-route/ |
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Apr 3, 2016 15:06:18 GMT
@ snoggle, yes, it does.
But the Oxford - Cambridge does not serve Aylesbury as was implied earlier. But actually, London binliner trains do use the line from Aylesbury Parkway up to Calvert. What I was getting at is that Oxford - Milton Keynes is one thing and Aylesbury - Milton Keynes will be an entirely separate service, sharing the Calvert - Bletchley track
|
|
londoner
thinking on '73 stock
Posts: 480
|
Post by londoner on Apr 3, 2016 17:42:47 GMT
Thank you THC, you are, as always, correct @ Londoner You state "So Aylesbury to Milton Keynes demand would be met" because Oxford - Cambridge will be re-opened. Please, how does this serve Aylesbury?? I posted a link to the route map, where Aylesbury will be linked to Milton Keynes. The route is all in green so I lumped it all together as "one". The Aylesbury branch, up further reading, appears part of phase 2 however which I don't know if it has been improved or not. Whether you want to call it a separate line, or a branch is neither here or there with regards to what point I was trying to make. Regards Paul |
|
|
|
Post by philthetube on Apr 4, 2016 6:52:37 GMT
Also class 172 is not authorised to run on the Metropolitan line on its own or leading in a longer formation with 165/168s as class 172s are not fitted with tripcocks. When (if) the SSR is resignalled that restriction will probably no longer be required. If tripcocks are not required some other form of protection will have to be installed as Chiltern trains will still be manually driven with colour light signals. |
|
|
|
Post by philthetube on Apr 4, 2016 6:55:47 GMT
It would be interesting to know how many journeys are currently made between Watford and points between Rickmansworth and Aylesbury, I suspect quite a few, and would certainly be much highte but for the location of Watford Met and the 13 mins connection at Moor Park, (two changes if going north of Amersham).
|
|
|
|
Post by geriatrix on Apr 4, 2016 8:41:35 GMT
Well, there is an hourly (Mon-Sat daytime) bus service from central Watford to Amersham via Ricky, Chorleywood, and Chalfont. Its the 336 operated by Carousel. I've used it a few times and it was lightly loaded. I would certainly use the bus service in preference to taking a bus from Central Watford to Watford Met, followed by a train to Moor Park, a 13min wait, and a train to Amersham. Whilst I'd love to think there was a huge demand from the good people of Amersham and Watford to be able to visit each other by train, I do rather doubt that it exists. And once East-West is up and running, and connected to Aylesbury, that would be a satisfactory link from Watford to Aylesbury and stations north of Amersham.
|
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Apr 4, 2016 9:24:28 GMT
once East-West is up and running, and connected to Aylesbury, that would be a satisfactory link from Watford to Aylesbury and stations north of Amersham. Really? To use East-West from Watford to Aylesbury would mean going via Bletchley- about 60 miles, compared with only about 30 miles via Moor Park. For Amersham the approximate distances are 75 via Bletchley and 15 via Moor Park. |
|
|
|
Post by geriatrix on Apr 4, 2016 9:51:21 GMT
Yes, it's a long way round, so, all things considered the bus is probably the best option. :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by knap on Apr 4, 2016 13:04:14 GMT
Well, there is an hourly (Mon-Sat daytime) bus service from central Watford to Amersham via Ricky, Chorleywood, and Chalfont. Its the 336 operated by Carousel. I've used it a few times and it was lightly loaded. I The 336 is a very old bus route. I used it in the 1960s to go to school on! I believe the service was more frequent then. The current hourly service is slow, very rarely keeps to time and does not run in the evenings or Sunday. As such although I use it sometimes today it's not great. A more frequent reliable train service may generate more use and take some people from their cars |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2016 15:25:32 GMT
I think that we could have a separate thread on East-West Trains and likely impact on cross-London travel. If people really want to get from Reading to Cambridge are they really going via Oxford and Bedford or via Elizabeth Line and KX?
Cassiobury Park residents are going to need something done with W30 bus which exists for workers in Ascot Road who will have Cassiobridge station
|
|
|
|
Post by peterc on Apr 4, 2016 16:11:10 GMT
The 336 has all the same issues with congestion as driving into Watford in the peaks.
An MK to WJ service via Aylesbury wouldn't be relevant for end to end journeys, the point would be to provide more journey options from the Ricky - Aylesbury corridor to the major employment and shopping centres at both ends.
|
|
|
|
Post by trt on Apr 4, 2016 16:57:45 GMT
I think that we could have a separate thread on East-West Trains and likely impact on cross-London travel. If people really want to get from Reading to Cambridge are they really going via Oxford and Bedford or via Elizabeth Line and KX? Cassiobury Park residents are going to need something done with W30 bus which exists for workers in Ascot Road who will have Cassiobridge station That bus is diabolical. Runs only occasionally except during the peak. |
|
|
|
Post by phil on Apr 4, 2016 19:25:30 GMT
The ATP on Metropolitan for Chiltern post resignalling is, I understand, intended to retain tripcock/trianstip. Though if it gets to the situation where Tripcocks are only being kept for Chiltern (LU having migrated to a replacement system) then Chiltern / the rolling stock owners might also retro fit the LU system to avoid paying LU to keep the Tripcock system (for which LU would otherwise have scrapped) in good order. |
|
towerman
My status is now now widower
Posts: 2,969
|
Post by towerman on Apr 29, 2016 10:52:57 GMT
What will happen to the trains that currently stable at Watford Station?
|
|
