Why does the East London Line still run to both New Cross and New Cross Gate? I’ve googled the general history of the route, and these stations were links to different companies once-upon-a-time. But how come it hasn’t been rationalised? Doesn’t it cause extra costs for LU to run to both stations, rather than just one?
Transport for London’s site says this
So the Underground has served both since 1876.
New Cross and New Cross Gate are on different railway lines, the former operated by South Eastern Trains and the latter by Southern Railway. From New Cross you can get to the likes of Abbey Wood for Thamesmead, Bexleyheath, Catford Bridge, Dartford, Gravesend, Orpington, Sevenoaks, Sidcup and Woolwich and from New Cross Gate the destinations include Caterham, Croydon, Crystal Palace, Forest Hill, Norwood Junction, Purley, Sydenham, and Tattenham Corner.
From what I can remember of the labyrinthine arrangements on the railways these days, TfL currently own and operate both the New Crosses and charge South Eastern and Southern for the privilege of stopping there. In addition, TfL require them to cough up an annual sum towards the day-to-day running costs of the stations, covering basic repairs and maintenance, staff costs, utility bills etc. But there has been a long-running dispute about how much that should be (it was frozen at the time of national rail privatisation in May 1994).
The East London Line is due for a major upgrade soon and will re-integrate with the national rail system.
I am NOT a trainspotter, by the way. I just happened to work closely with the rail industry…
I didn’t realise that TfL owned that stations - I’d presumed they were Network Rail. And yes, I can see how the TOCs would be annoyed by the retention of a decade-old financial arrangement.
So I guess I can refine my question, to how TfL (or LUL or whoever it was at the time) came to own these, when they were never primarily Underground stations?
(I’m not a trainspotter, just a general inquisitive geek who had an hour to kill in New Cross at the weekend ;p )
Now you’re asking!
Given the current system, I have to assume that both stations were already in the ownership of London Regional Transport (as it was then) when the property provisions of the Railways Act 1993 came into force on the 1st of April 1994. If they had been owned by the British Railways Board on that date, ownership would simply have passed to Railtrack.
Property matters on the railway in Great Britain are an absolute nightmare. The lawyers are still reaping the rewards of the complete balls-up inflicted upon the industry back in '94.
More specific googling on LRT gives the text of the East London Line Extension Act. Hmmmm. I’m not that interested…
Still, I guess I understand the situation - by an accident of history the stations became tube-owned, so there was a vested interest in maintaining services to both. If anyone else can elaborate or correct, that would be welcome 
Is there any rhyme or reason to the naming system for the stations in the London Underground? I understand naming stations for nearby landmarks (Green Park, etc.) But Aldwich? King’s Cross? St. Pancras?
Did the original builders just pull names out their butts when there weren’t good nearby landmarks?
:smack:
[Coughs an embarrassing cough]
During a very bad night’s “sleep”, I mulled this question over and must correct my earlier assertion that TfL owned and oprated both New Cross and New Cross Gate.
From the deepest recesses of my so-called memory I dredged up a conversation with someone from TfL’s Contracts section. He was complaining about broken windows not being fixed at New Cross and also about staff costs incurred by TfL at New Cross Gate whenever there is disruption Charing Cross is closed not being covered by the national rail contribution.
Which leads me to conclude that:
TfL operate New Cross Gate
South Eastern Trains operate New Cross.
Sorry for the earlier confusion!
As an indication of how bonkers the system is, there is one station which is operated by a company whose trains do not even call there! Anyone guess which?
King’s Cross and St. Pancras are named after nearby railway stations.
I believe the Church of St Prancas is nearby to the station of the same name.
Aldwytch comes from Old Wytch St.
It’s a novel excuse for the stations being shitholes, I suppose.
Bugger me, this is going to be annoying…let me think…
As for naming of station, yes, there’s AFAIK always a locality connection (King’s Cross is actually the name of that part of London). Any you want to know, post 'em here and we’ll see what we can do 
Uhh, make that Aldwych and Old Wych. Nothing about witches (wych = port, which makes since the Thames is nearby to Aldwych).
The point is moot however, since the Piccadilly line station is now closed.
The name’s revived in the planned tram route running down to Elephant & Castle and Peckham.
Cool
The station of which I spoke earlier is Lockerbie, which is operated by ScotRail but only Virgin CrossCountry services call there.
Some clot at OPRAF had the bright idea that the CrossCountry franchise would be the only one, apart from Gatwick Express (which is now to be abolished), which would not be responsible for operating any stations.
I was thinking it might be Scotrail, but I wouldn’t have gone for a mainline station! Nice bit of pointless trivia
Heh. I worked at OPRAF during the original round of rail franchising. While I can’t take any credit for what stations went where, it doesn’t surprise me that this sort of thing happened; the pressure by the (then-Conservative) government to get as much of the network flogged off before the election was enormous. Odd things were done for reasons that seemed perfectly sensible at the time.
But yes, the East London Line is becoming part of a London Orbital; apart from the New Cross/New Cross Gate services (the latter being extended to Crystal Palace and East Croydon) there will be a new link to Peckham Rye and around to Clapham Junction, hooking up to the West London Line through Olympia and the North London Line around the Dalston, and thence a new link to the East London Line again. Last I heard this was all on track (so to speak).
The Thameslink 2000 (ha!) refurbishment continues on apace, although I don’t think the issue of Borough Market was ever properly resolved. Crossrail will go ahead if the political will lasts. And if Ken stays in office we may eventually see some of those promised tramlines (Croydon tramlink is brilliant, BTW). Nobody will be able to afford to travel, mind you, but London will have better transport nonetheless.
OTOH, the Chelsea-Hackney line is almost certainly dead, and the East-West line connecting Oxford and Cambridge (thus creating a London bypass) is more or less permanently stalled.
I thought the Oxford-Cambridge route was back in the offing?
Online sources (such as this) alternatively give the meaning of “port” and “village” to the word wych.
-wych/-wick/-wich/-wyke etc has a multitude of meanings: