Reading Station improvements

[whole diary]

[James]

I was once told by a signaller in the old Reading panel that, if at all possible, they would give a freight off the B&H^▸ (Berks and Hants - railway line from Reading to Taunton via Westbury) a clear run from Southcote Junction through the station to the up relief. The reason being that, if they stopped it, it would take so long to restart that the delays would be far greater than simply giving it a clear road. Thus the reason why so many down main class 1s were held at the old platform 4 whilst an up stone train was allowed across Reading West junction in front of them, and why all of this money is being spent to eliminate such conflicts. Its clear to me that the provision of a flyover/diveunder will make a huge difference, whatever the gradients, and whatever the need to give a clear run. The days of class 1s being held at Reading for an up stone train will be no more! Job done.

All so worth saying that the discussion on here about how things will be done ("I suppose it will all work out in the end") could not be further from the truth. Every operation will have been planned in the finest detail. In the offices of the former Post Office sorting office on Vastern Road, there is a large, multi-disciplinary team, consisting of engineers and planners from all of the parties (NR^» (Network Rail - home page), FGW^▸ (First Great Western) and all of the contractors) that has planned every step in minute detail. Every operation will have been walked though and risk assessed. There is a team of professionals at work here who, so far, have delivered ever stage on time and, according to NR, to budget. To suggest that "they haven't thought of that" or that this is a "rushed job" is, frankly, ridiculous.

Oxman you are perfectly entitled to your opinion, however what i write is my own opinion and we need to agree on that, if you know what i mean. I am sure, that network rail and officials do a good anaylsis of how the railway around Reading should be built.
Obviously they know alot more about it than what we know (the non rail workers) however it is wrong if it has been said on this forum that the platform 11/10 or other areas needs to hurry up. It takes time to complete everything, and yes i understand network rail workers are under pressure every day, but people need to understand what is done is done, and theys nothing else in which you can do or say (if your not involved in the actual construction) and thats it. Also i am not suggesting people shouldnt post they opinions as all opinions are good, however some opinions cannot be taken on board, as like i said that part of the construction is or is going to be constructed in the near future..

[grahame]

Oxman you are perfectly entitled to your opinion, however what i write is my own opinion and we need to agree on that, if you know what i mean. I am sure, that network rail and officials do a good anaylsis of how the railway around Reading should be built.

James, from my personal (non-railman) experience, I can assure you that the amount of analysis that goes in before any changes / improvements are made is huge.   Where possible, multiple pieces of analysis are done and checked that they all end up pointing in the same direction, and "proof" is requested / required that every aspect of the scheme will work - the ducks will all line up.  That's certainly what I've seen just on the one small rail project to which I've been making a small contribution.

Obviously they know alot more about it than what we know (the non rail workers) ...

I have been highly impressed, and continue to be, by the professionalism of almost everyone in the rail industry, a number of whom are very much valued members of our Coffee Shop community, and help keep us informed here.  There are a huge number of technicalities and details I don't know about and never will (I would have to give up my day job to have the time to understand even a little of it) but I often find myself reassured that things have indeed been considered when others bring them up and professionals answer.  At times, this consideration and the reasons for decisions may not be immediately obvious to the newcomer though!

[James]

Oxman you are perfectly entitled to your opinion, however what i write is my own opinion and we need to agree on that, if you know what i mean. I am sure, that network rail and officials do a good anaylsis of how the railway around Reading should be built.

James, from my personal (non-railman) experience, I can assure you that the amount of analysis that goes in before any changes / improvements are made is huge.   Where possible, multiple pieces of analysis are done and checked that they all end up pointing in the same direction, and "proof" is requested / required that every aspect of the scheme will work - the ducks will all line up.  That's certainly what I've seen just on the one small rail project to which I've been making a small contribution.

Obviously they know alot more about it than what we know (the non rail workers) ...

I have been highly impressed, and continue to be, by the professionalism of almost everyone in the rail industry, a number of whom are very much valued members of our Coffee Shop community, and help keep us informed here.  There are a huge number of technicalities and details I don't know about and never will (I would have to give up my day job to have the time to understand even a little of it) but I often find myself reassured that things have indeed been considered when others bring them up and professionals answer.  At times, this consideration and the reasons for decisions may not be immediately obvious to the newcomer though!

Cheers for that Grahame. Thats most interesting and enlighting. This also obviously includes myself, and i have alot to learn as well (as you say time is not always on your side to read all that railway info) but i will try my best to read about projects as throughly as possible and railway workers experiences who build this impressive railway to get an idea of the overall grand scheme of this before posting anything, that is of constructive influence.

[SandTEngineer]

Thanks Grahame.  As one of those professionals who posts on here and try's to give some of the answers its quite off putting when all you get back sometimes is criticism

[Gordon the Blue Engine]

All so worth saying that the discussion on here about how things will be done ("I suppose it will all work out in the end") could not be further from the truth. Every operation will have been planned in the finest detail. In the offices of the former Post Office sorting office on Vastern Road, there is a large, multi-disciplinary team, consisting of engineers and planners from all of the parties (NR^» (Network Rail - home page), FGW^▸ (First Great Western) and all of the contractors) that has planned every step in minute detail. Every operation will have been walked though and risk assessed. There is a team of professionals at work here who, so far, have delivered ever stage on time and, according to NR, to budget. To suggest that "they haven't thought of that" or that this is a "rushed job" is, frankly, ridiculous.

I too was a professional railwayman for 31 years, and I agree with you that a lot of hard work goes into planning and delivering projects like Reading.  But that isn't to say that everything runs silkily smooth and that things don't get overlooked and that mistakes don't get made - as I've said earlier, FGW now acknowledge mistakes on some aspects of the station design (see the Summer Reading Station News). 

More significant is the issue of dividing P's 12-15 into A and B.  If this had been the plan at the outset presumably they would have been properly signalled as per the Group Standard.  I therefore suspect that the A and B idea came in after the initial signalling design, which resulted in the rather odd Rear Clear Board arrangements which we've discussed ad nauseam before.

So I for one am not questioning the hard work going on at ground level, but I wonder whether the right level of experience and expertise has always been available, particularly in the early stages of the project.

edit:  P12, not P11

[ironstone11]

I

One slight problem I've heard about teh "Freight Line" is due its gradient and curvature it is unlikely even a 59 could restart a heavy stone train if stopped by signals. So freight trains will nee a clear run from Reading West into the station.

Interesting to compare with the new Acton layout, where the freight lines into the yard will be kept relatively flat, and it's the passenger lines that go up and down. 

I am puzzled as to why it is assumed that the feeder freight lines will be anything but relatively flat. In the case of the Festival line and the freight feeder they emerge from the north side of their respective viaduct boxes and immediately join the relief lines which must be at the same levels.

The drawings show the feeder freight line on an embankment, culvert and access bridge, so the intention must have been for it to meet the relief lines at the correct level. I think the only lines with significant gradients are the Festival and Up/Down Main on the viaduct.  So the principle is the same as at Acton with the passenger line going up and down, except that here it's a flyover rather than a diveunder.

[Electric train]

So I for one am not questioning the hard work going on at ground level, but I wonder whether the right level of experience and expertise has always been available, particularly in the early stages of the project.

I expect the right experience and expertise were there at the feasibility, AIP (acceptance in principle) for those stages, often its not until a detailed design is worked on and full modelling is done and these are presented to Op's and maintenance they can come up with a "if you could" there are very few people around (if any) that has the ability to see full functionality when something is conceptual in a virtual 3D model

[stuving]

I am puzzled as to why it is assumed that the feeder freight lines will be anything but relatively flat. In the case of the Festival line and the freight feeder they emerge from the north side of their respective viaduct boxes and immediately join the relief lines which must be at the same levels.

The drawings show the feeder freight line on an embankment, culvert and access bridge, so the intention must have been for it to meet the relief lines at the correct level. I think the only lines with significant gradients are the Festival and Up/Down Main on the viaduct.  So the principle is the same as at Acton with the passenger line going up and down, except that here it's a flyover rather than a diveunder.

The few drawings that I can find with elevations marked appear to have a datum about 100 m below Ordnance (ODN). I guess that's a site-wide standard, possibly derived from GPS. They show the ground falling a couple of metres from Caversham Road to Little John's Lane, with a few local variations between (but none of this can be called natural).

In general, the land here is all on the flood plain, so it is pretty flat. The existing railway is on an embankment high enough to pass over the roads, which is too low to pass over a railway. The planning statement says the feeder lines under their box are "virtually at grade", but what grade that means is unclear. On the elevations they are about 2 m above flood plain level. The relief lines will be at existing embankment height, so there will be some 4 m height to gain - though unfortunately the elevations do not extend to Caversham road.

The statement also describes the height of the new line, but by reference to the existing line - which is confusing, as the existing embankment continues well out to the West. It says the new line is still rising as it goes westward over the feeder lines box and is 9 m above the existing embankment level at its highest, which seems a lot.

(Corrected reference to statement)

[Oxman]

If you look at camera 3 of Reading01 on Lobster vision you can see that a queuing system has been set up inside the works compound to handle the returning crowd of festival goers. Should make interesting viewing tomorrow morning.

[Gordon the Blue Engine]

So I for one am not questioning the hard work going on at ground level, but I wonder whether the right level of experience and expertise has always been available, particularly in the early stages of the project.

I expect the right experience and expertise were there at the feasibility, AIP (acceptance in principle) for those stages, often its not until a detailed design is worked on and full modelling is done and these are presented to Op's and maintenance they can come up with a "if you could" there are very few people around (if any) that has the ability to see full functionality when something is conceptual in a virtual 3D model

Where I come from the AIP process is a quantitative check by a chartered engineer on the detailed engineering design to make sure that the structure (in this case to pass one pair of running lines over some others) complies with engineering good practice and standards etc and is thus safe for its intended purpose.

I suppose what I keep going on about is the high level spec for the whole project, which I'm sure did not include the acceptability of heavy freights having to take a "run" at the flyunder to ensure that they didn't run the risk of not being able to restart if they saw a Red light half way through.

The project may be being delivered on time and to budget, the question is whether the project was defined correctly.

[SandTEngineer]

OK here are gradients from Theale to Reading station (extracted from the signalling plan dated November 2010):

F=Falling Gradient in direction of Travel
R=Rising Gradient in Direction of Travel
O/B=Overbridge
U/B=Underbridge
m=Metres

Theale to Reading Station Via Westbury Lines

Theale Staion to Burghfield Road O/B
691F Average

Burghfield Road O/B to Southcote Junction
323R for 1447m

Southcote Junction to Bath Road O/B
323R for 692m

Bath Road O/B to Reading West Station Platform (Middle)
307F for 735m

Reading West Station Platform (Middle) to Reading Station (Via Westbury Lines)

5822F for 22m to Oxford Road U/B
671R for 38m Over Oxford Road O/B to Oxford Road Junction Points
330F for 112m
194F for 150m
250F for 472m to Reading Triangle Upper Points
110F for 42m
147R for 73m
304F for 40m to Westbury Junction (Main Line Side)
LEVEL to Reading Station (Main Line Side)
LEVEL through Reading Station Platforms

Oxford Road Junction to Reading Station (via Down Reading Feeder Relief)

330F for 219m
90F for 264m (Passing under the Mains Flyover)
106R for 287m
730R for 195m to Westbury Junction (Relief Line Side)
LEVEL to Reading Station (Relief Line Side)
LEVEL through Reading Station Platforms

Oxford Road Junction to Reading Station (via Up Reading Feeder Main)

330F for 139m
112F for 84m
90F for 260m (Passing under the Mains Flyover)
150R for 482m to Westbury Junction (Main Line Side)
LEVEL to Reading Station (Main Line Side)
LEVEL through Reading Station Platforms

Health Warning: This data is extracted from a copy of the signalling plan that is 3 years old and may therefore not fully represent the arrangements currently being constructed.  It is therefore listed as a guide only.


I^ll put the Main Line in a separate post.

[stuving]

Oxford Road Junction to Reading Station (via Down Reading Feeder Relief)

330F for 219m
90F for 264m (Passing under the Mains Flyover)
106R for 287m
730R for 195m to Westbury Junction (Relief Line Side)
LEVEL to Reading Station (Relief Line Side)
LEVEL through Reading Station Platforms

Oxford Road Junction to Reading Station (via Up Reading Feeder Main)

330F for 139m
112F for 84m
90F for 260m (Passing under the Mains Flyover)
150R for 482m to Westbury Junction (Main Line Side)
LEVEL to Reading Station (Main Line Side)
LEVEL through Reading Station Platforms

Thanks for that, S&TE - I've not quoted it all, obviously.

So the 1/90 you referred to is the down slope from Oxford Road onto the flood plain, and it's 1/106 up to the relief lines on their embankment. That's steeper than the rise on the other feeder line as it has to join the releif lines further west to access all platforms.

Now, how long is a 4800 tonne train going to be ... and how much weight would be on the up slope at once?

[stuving]

That's steeper than the rise on the other feeder line as it has to join the releif lines further west to access all platforms.

Having looked at the plan, I'm not sure that's true. Both feeder lines appear to have a West and an East connection onto their respective main line, and at about the same place.  From a quick look at Google earth, I think the 482 m distance would be to the East connection - the rise to the West one would be steeper. That fits with the two-slope profile for the Feeder Relief, but not so obviously for the Feeder Main.

[SandTEngineer]

The connection to the Down Relief is 139m West of that to the Up Main (Platforms No.10, 11 and 12).

[stuving]

There's been a lot of activity joining up the West end of  P11, visible by zooming into the left-hand edge of the picture from camera 02/2. It's hard to make out, especially with a ballast train on P9, but the rail crane has been there presumably to move the pieces of track.