Earlier this year, Xeneta’s port and service analysis reviewed persistent congestion at London Gateway, after several container services diverted away during periods of disruption. Those pressures unfolded alongside wider strain across Northern European ports following extended Cape of Good Hope routings.
Since then, the port has continued to operate under challenging conditions. Capacity losses, service changes and fluctuating reliability have shaped its competitive position against Southampton and Felixstowe, neither of which remained immune to disruption.
Construction and congestion pressures
One key factor has been the ongoing berth expansion project at London Gateway. Work on the long-term development began in May 2025 and is expected to add significant capacity once completed later this decade. In the interim, however, reduced working areas and longer vessel handling times have added pressure to operations.
At the same time, larger vessels on Asia–Europe services required more berth time after rerouting around Africa. As a result, congestion levels remained elevated from late 2024 into early 2025. Conditions worsened further when IT disruptions, power outages and a rail incident during mid-year created container backlogs and longer vessel queues.
Reliability improves, but at a cost
Paradoxically, reliability improved sharply during the height of disruption. On-time arrivals increased and average delays narrowed during the summer months. This improvement did not reflect smoother operations. Instead, it followed widespread service omissions and temporary withdrawals.
As carriers reduced calls, congestion eased quickly. However, that relief came with heavy losses in available capacity. Year-to-date figures show millions of TEU removed from planned schedules, far exceeding capacity losses recorded in previous years.
Service reductions reshape port activity
From mid-year onward, structural service changes reduced the number of container strings calling at London Gateway. Several services initially diverted on a temporary basis later extended those changes into future schedules.
Some operators adopted dual-port strategies to manage risk. Others repeatedly omitted London Gateway while retaining alternative UK calls. These adjustments steadily reduced the port’s share of planned services and limited its recovery potential once congestion eased.
Competitive impact across UK ports
Diversions affected neighbouring ports in different ways. Southampton absorbed a significant share of rerouted volumes but experienced rising congestion during peak months. Felixstowe, with greater handling capacity, avoided prolonged congestion but continued to record longer average delays.
Despite these differences, reliability challenges persisted across all three ports. Felixstowe showed the lowest congestion but the longest delays. Southampton achieved comparatively stronger on-time performance. London Gateway improved reliability only after capacity reductions limited traffic flows.
Capacity, reliability and confidence
The year demonstrated that reduced congestion does not automatically restore confidence. Service omissions lowered pressure in the short term, yet they also weakened network stability and long-term planning certainty.
Capacity losses, shifting rotations and uneven recovery underline the complex relationship between congestion, reliability and carrier strategy. Even as conditions stabilised at times, service confidence remained fragile when volumes returned or new disruptions emerged.
Did you subscribe to our daily Newsletter?
It’s Free — Click here to Subscribe!
Source: Xeneta
