Great Western Coffee Shop

Journey by Journey => London to the Cotswolds => Topic started by: grahame on April 25, 2020, 10:35:48



Title: Signalling at Worcestershire Parkway
Post by: grahame on April 25, 2020, 10:35:48
Question for the signalling experts - can a train arriving from Worcester Shrub Hill in passenger service terminate at Worcestershire Parkway and return in passenger service back into Worcester?


Title: Re: Signalling at Worcestershire Parkway
Post by: IndustryInsider on April 25, 2020, 13:49:28
Question for the signalling experts - can a train arriving from Worcester Shrub Hill in passenger service terminate at Worcestershire Parkway and return in passenger service back into Worcester?

I expect it could, but only if a pilotman was provided.  In the same way that passenger trains from the west can and have terminated and started back from Hanborough when there's engineering work taking place east of Hanborough.


Title: Re: Signalling at Worcestershire Parkway
Post by: grahame on April 25, 2020, 13:55:33
Question for the signalling experts - can a train arriving from Worcester Shrub Hill in passenger service terminate at Worcestershire Parkway and return in passenger service back into Worcester?

I expect it could, but only if a pilotman was provided.  In the same way that passenger trains from the west can and have terminated and started back from Hanborough when there's engineering work taking place east of Hanborough.

So not something it's signalled for in daily traffic then - thanks.


Title: Re: Signalling at Worcestershire Parkway
Post by: Oxonhutch on April 25, 2020, 15:11:43
I expect it could, but only if a pilotman was provided.  In the same way that passenger trains from the west can and have terminated and started back from Hanborough when there's engineering work taking place east of Hanborough.

In the Hanborough case, does the pilotman talk the driver past the Morton-in-Marsh Up Starter?


Title: Re: Signalling at Worcestershire Parkway
Post by: IndustryInsider on April 25, 2020, 15:17:30
I expect it could, but only if a pilotman was provided.  In the same way that passenger trains from the west can and have terminated and started back from Hanborough when there's engineering work taking place east of Hanborough.

In the Hanborough case, does the pilotman talk the driver past the Morton-in-Marsh Up Starter?

It's Ascott box that controls the area, not Moreton.  But, IIRC, the pilotman does indeed talk the driver past the signal at Charlbury with the signallers authority.  Then at Hanborough the pilotman obtains authority for the return journey.


Title: Re: Signalling at Worcestershire Parkway
Post by: SandTEngineer on April 25, 2020, 15:47:29
Just to clarify.  To turn a train back in a signalled single line section where there is no signal provided at the reversing location generally requires PILOTMAN (or should that be PILOTPERSON) working.


Title: Re: Signalling at Worcestershire Parkway
Post by: eightf48544 on April 26, 2020, 11:00:54
Ideally  the Cotswold line should have been redoubled at least part way to Pershore. Worcestershire Parkway  High level then having two platforms.This would alow an Oxford bound train to clear Norton jn whilst waitng the single line. With the appropriate signalling i.e making the Cotswold lines bi-directional trains could be turned round from both directions

But that would have cost too much .


Title: Re: Signalling at Worcestershire Parkway
Post by: ellendune on April 26, 2020, 12:36:11
Just to clarify.  To turn a train back in a signalled single line section where there is no signal provided at the reversing location generally requires PILOTMAN (or should that be PILOTPERSON) working.
Why not just pilot - oh I see it is used to mean a pilot engine. 


Title: Re: Signalling at Worcestershire Parkway
Post by: JontyMort on April 26, 2020, 13:12:06
Ideally  the Cotswold line should have been redoubled at least part way to Pershore. Worcestershire Parkway  High level then having two platforms.This would alow an Oxford bound train to clear Norton jn whilst waitng the single line. With the appropriate signalling i.e making the Cotswold lines bi-directional trains could be turned round from both directions


Specifically, by allowing an up train into Parkway even if it were going to be delayed there by a late-running train from Evesham, it would have made connections towards Cheltenham and Bristol much more resilient.

It certainly should have been re-doubled between Norton Junction and Parkway - a ridiculously short chainage. Talk about ships and ha’p’orths of tar.


Title: Re: Signalling at Worcestershire Parkway
Post by: IndustryInsider on April 26, 2020, 13:35:09
If it were controlled by modern signalling that might have been a fairly straightforward task, but could Norton Junction signalbox deal with the extra signalling needed?  An extra platform at Worcestershire Parkway, on a steep embankment, would also have costed quite a bit extra.

Possibly one for the future, though judging by the North Cotswold Line Taskforce's recent report, it is more likely that Evesham to Pershore will be redoubled rather than Norton Junction to Pershore.


Title: Re: Signalling at Worcestershire Parkway
Post by: JontyMort on April 26, 2020, 14:24:09

Possibly one for the future, though judging by the North Cotswold Line Taskforce's recent report, it is more likely that Evesham to Pershore will be redoubled rather than Norton Junction to Pershore.

Yes, I’ve seen the report. But isn’t there a problem with the up platform at Pershore - sold off or something?


Title: Re: Signalling at Worcestershire Parkway
Post by: SandTEngineer on April 26, 2020, 17:15:11

Possibly one for the future, though judging by the North Cotswold Line Taskforce's recent report, it is more likely that Evesham to Pershore will be redoubled rather than Norton Junction to Pershore.

Yes, I’ve seen the report. But isn’t there a problem with the up platform at Pershore - sold off or something?

As I keep saying when these problems come up, there is always the PENRYN solution...... ;D


Title: Re: Signalling at Worcestershire Parkway
Post by: TonyN on April 26, 2020, 18:36:16
The land for the up platform at Pershore is still available but there is currently no access as the land behind the platform was sold off.
The current plan is to add a new car park on the up side at the east end of the station. A footbridge is available to link the car park but it is steps only no ramps or lifts.
Disabled parking would be on the existing small car park adjacent to the existing platform on the down side.

The problem with the task force proposal to double to just west of pershore is that there would then be a requirment to provide another footbridge with ramps or lifts.
Much cheaper to just keep the existing single platform and double to just east of the station.
No need for a passing loop so not realy a Penryn solution sorry S+TE


Title: Re: Signalling at Worcestershire Parkway
Post by: SandTEngineer on April 26, 2020, 19:11:13
The land for the up platform at Pershore is still available but there is currently no access as the land behind the platform was sold off.
The current plan is to add a new car park on the up side at the east end of the station. A footbridge is available to link the car park but it is steps only no ramps or lifts.
Disabled parking would be on the existing small car park adjacent to the existing platform on the down side.

The problem with the task force proposal to double to just west of pershore is that there would then be a requirment to provide another footbridge with ramps or lifts.
Much cheaper to just keep the existing single platform and double to just east of the station.
No need for a passing loop so not realy a Penryn solution sorry S+TE


Sorry, didn't make myself very clear.  No need to double track from Evesham, just install a PENRYN style passing loop at Pershore.  Much cheaper (at NR prices) I would estimate.


Title: Re: Signalling at Worcestershire Parkway
Post by: eightf48544 on April 27, 2020, 10:36:51
As I keep saying when these problems come up, there is always the PENRYN solution...... ;D

Or the even simpler Bad Dobran solution where trians meet head to head on the single platform! Less signalling units but the ORR would never allow it. I've a video taken at another station on the line of two trains meeting head on.

i should say there is a point between the trains to take one round the other.


Title: Re: Signalling at Worcestershire Parkway
Post by: grahame on April 27, 2020, 10:40:56
Or the even simpler Bad Dobran solution where trians meet head to head on the single platform! Less signalling units but the ORR would never allow it.

Ormskirk?   But then that precluded through running ... in effect two lines to the town that happen to terminate at the same station.     Use to be the same thing at Chippenham on what is now the platform used by Bristol and Westbury bound trains - though that was before the ORR days and there were other (through) platforms.



This page is printed from the "Coffee Shop" forum at http://gwr.passenger.chat which is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway. Views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that content provided contravenes our posting rules ( see http://railcustomer.info/1761 ). The forum is hosted by Well House Consultants - http://www.wellho.net