Talk:Thameslink
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| See also: WikiProject Trains to do list | |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. (assessment comments) |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale within the Trains WikiProject. |
 |
This article is maintained by WikiProject UK Railways. |
The unofficial guide to Thameslink, by Ben Samuel: -Because the privatised company get hand-outs from the government, tickets are checked about once a year. -The official policy on bicycles is they are not allowed at peak times, but you can get on at Blackfriars without any complaints, but avoid King's Cross. Be sure to reverse into the carriage for a rapid exit.
Contents |
[edit] Franchise
"Govia acquired the franchise from 2 March 1997 for seven years and a day." - This would suggest that the franchise expired on 3 March 2004. Does anyone know if it was renewed or granted to someone else. And for how long? MrWeeble 9 July 2005 14:23 (UTC)
The franchise was extended for approx 2 years as is often the case with the rail contacts. Govia have since lost the contact and this is reflected in the page. --M at 11:52, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Map
Thameslink/Temp, as-is, or Wikipedia:Image recreation requests? Ojw 19:28, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Unclear
The tunnel was re-opened to passengers after 50 years in 1988 and the network in May 1990.
Not sure I understand the second half of this. Mrsteviec 23:46, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
- My guess is that when the tunnel reopened services were run by the existing train division (from recollection South Eastern lines and South London lines - Network South East was divided up by routes) and it may not have been until 1990 that an explicit "Thameslink" division was created with clear services. Timrollpickering 12:25, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Franchises
I've made a few edits to this section which I think makes the situation slightly clearer. Also added a link to the DfT announcement of the franchise decision. When I have the time I am going to make a bigger edit to this page to make it overall a bit easier to read. I also think that it would be best to make clear the distinction between Thameslink (the BR project to re-open the Snow Hill tunnel and create cross-London services, and the name for those services) and Thameslink (the train operating company). Doownyl32 21:56, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- I think it would probably be best if the information on Thameslink (the line) and Thameslink (the company) was divided among two articles, especially given that the latter will soon be handing the former over to First Capital Connect. David Arthur 20:05, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
-
- That makes sense, perhaps Thameslink (train operating company) should be split off as I can't think of a good diambig name for the other (Thameslink (British Rail)?). Thryduulf 14:15, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- I would leave the line as Thameslink, since the line has had that name continuously through the British Rail era, the Govia era, and presumably the First era as well (I haven’t heard of any proposals to re-name City Thameslink and Kings Cross Thameslink stations); the line is, after all, the namesake of the private company, so I think it should be given priority. Thameslink (train operating company) sounds good, and matches the form of One (train operating company). David Arthur 21:08, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] How many passengers can the trains hold?
In the Rolling Stock section it states that the trains are "rated to hold 284 or 314 passengers". What does this mean? Under what circumstances is it 284 passengers, and under what circumstances is it 314 passengers? --A bit iffy 08:53, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
- This page gives lots of details on the different configurations, but the refurbished Thameslink sets (Classes 319/3 and 319/4) apparently are either 308 standard class or 12 first class + 277 standard = 289. Thryduulf 10:12, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
First Capital Connect agree, but for some odd reason they describe the 319/2s and not the 319/0s, which is the wrong way round. I've sent a message to them and hopefully they'll rectify it. Edvid 11:32, 21st November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Rebranding spat
One to watch out for:
There's currently an interesting dispute between First Capital Connect and Transport for London about FCC's over vigorous rebranding of "Thameslink" and also "Great Northern" (even, in some places, obliterating part of the names of City Thameslink and King's Cross Thameslink) and also the Great Northern routes. TfL aren't too happy about all this since it was done rather arbitarily without consultation (and is very confusing for rail users since the two routes share some stations). It's quite possible the name Thameslink may come back into wider use for the route - passengers are very used to it and FCC's current naming is a recipe for confusion (especially if other stakeholders refuse to play ball at stations like Moorgate and Farringdon). Timrollpickering 23:49, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Thameslink Programme
Given that a separate article on the Thameslink Programme was created recently, I believe that all the information on the Thameslink article (under the heading Thameslink Programme (Thameslink 2000)) should be transferred to its article namesake. Edvid 03:50, 31st October 2006 (UTC)
Maybe not all the information. Some needs to stay as a summary otherwise not everyone will know what this article is on about. Simply south 11:40, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
- I agree - keep just a few summary sentences.A bit iffy 12:06, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Looks like the feedback is quite positive, if limited - I'll make the changes next Monday unless anyone else would like to put forward any other suggestions. Edvid 11:10, 13th November 2006 (UTC)
