|
Title: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: CJB666 on August 18, 2015, 23:35:24 Yet again there was disruption this evening 'until the end of service' due to signalling failures. This has been going on for weeks, if not months, if not years.
There is a developing thread at uk.railway https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/uk.railway/xZ4VJ0b-woo (https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/uk.railway/xZ4VJ0b-woo) I opined on tonight's fiasco: [q]This obviously affects the Heathrow Express - the most expensive train in Europe, and the Heathrow Connect. I wonder how many intending airline passengers have missed their flights - with all the horrendous consequences of missed connections, missed departing cruise ships, cancelled accommodations, etc., etc. And I bet that their were no FGW / NR / HAL management on the concourse at Paddington. In fact Heathrow Airport Ltd. NEVER responds with visible management at Paddington to such emergencies, despite the fact that their trains - HEX and HConn - also form shuttle services between the Terminals at Heathrow. Bustitution or cabstitution are NEVER arranged for airline passengers from Paddington. All that tends to happen is that HConn terminate or FGW trains stop at Hayes & Harlngton and passengers are told to catch the 140 bus which invariably requires an Oyster card to use. John McDonnell (Lab) the MP for Hayes & Harlington also travels on this line. I expect that he is fully aware of the disruptions. This line, its services, and its crap signalling are not fit for purpose.[/q] CJB Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: JayMac on August 19, 2015, 00:23:26 I wouldn't say it was an emergency. No life or death involved.
There is also a well developed thread on this forum. http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=14689.885 Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: NickB on August 19, 2015, 08:26:47 It is totally crap though. And by my recollection 2015 has brought more regular problems than previous years.
Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: ChrisB on August 19, 2015, 09:06:45 Indeed, and we know why - disturbing seriously old cables buried for decades while piling for electrification causes these cables to fail....
Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: CJB666 on August 19, 2015, 12:35:39 I wouldn't say it was an emergency. No life or death involved. There is also a well developed thread on this forum. http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=14689.885 Yes - a well developed thread but FGW-centric. No-one mentions the impact on passengers heading for Heathrow when the HEX and HConn are cancelled. And no contingency arrangements are ever made by HAL to get them to the Airport to catch their flights. At Paddington there might be a few FGW / NR staff to placate passengers delayed by cancellations etc. But there is NEVER any HAL staff to advise as to how to get to the Airport when their trains are cancelled. All of my emails to HAL are ignored. How on earth can they justify a third runway at Heathrow when they can't even run a couple of simple 'out and back' train services for the runways they have. CJB Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: ChrisB on August 19, 2015, 12:42:41 I wouldn't say it was an emergency. No life or death involved. There is also a well developed thread on this forum. http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=14689.885 Yes - a well developed thread but FGW-centric. That clue would be in the Board's title, then? Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: tom m on August 19, 2015, 12:46:34 I think that is being rather unfair to HEX as they are as much at the mercy of Network Rail as FGW are. Other than take on the infrastructure themselves what else can they do? Both FGW and HEX are bound by the fragmented rail system we now find ourselves in today.
In my opinion its the whole fragmented rail system that is not fit for purpose. Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: ChrisB on August 19, 2015, 12:54:17 Quite. Agree wholeheartedly.
Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: chrisr_75 on August 19, 2015, 13:44:01 This obviously affects the Heathrow Express - the most expensive train in Europe, and the Heathrow Connect. I wonder how many intending airline passengers have missed their flights - with all the horrendous consequences of missed connections, missed departing cruise ships, cancelled accommodations, etc., etc. Bustitution or cabstitution are NEVER arranged for airline passengers from Paddington. All that tends to happen is that HConn terminate or FGW trains stop at Hayes & Harlngton and passengers are told to catch the 140 bus which invariably requires an Oyster card to use. John McDonnell (Lab) the MP for Hayes & Harlington also travels on this line. I expect that he is fully aware of the disruptions. This line, its services, and its crap signalling are not fit for purpose.[/q] CJB There ARE alternatives from central London - Piccadilly line has reached Heathrow since 1977 and takes around 50-60 minutes from central London, depending on destination terminal, and there are a plethora of coach services from Victoria. If sufficient time had been allowed for arriving at the airport as per the airline requirements, then no-one would've missed any flights if they had to take an alternative form of transport from central London, or continued their onward journey by bus from H&H or West Drayton. Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: didcotdean on August 20, 2015, 11:08:46 During the 2014/15 financial year there were 411 signal faults between Oxford and London according to day's BBC Oxford report (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-33995240), a 22% increase on the previous year.
Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: ChrisB on August 20, 2015, 11:15:31 The kit is getting steadily older, and is now also being disturbed by the piling for electrification. I don't think any of us are surprised by this?
THe comments about prices going up but services not getting better....well, they will, as staff get annual pay rises which have to be paid for & I suspect are a very % of the total cost of running railways Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: SandTEngineer on August 20, 2015, 11:21:38 Hang on a minute :(
The signalling equipment between Didcot and Paddington is now some of the most up to date on the network. The reason it probably keeps failing is that maintence has been cut back so far that its exceeding historic norms that previously kept it going. This is entirely NRs fault and nothing to do with age ::) :P Some of the mechanical signalling equipment in Cornwall is now over 100 years old and I managed to keep it going when I had the honour of looking after it some years ago ;) If you maintain it properly it will continue to give sterling service. Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: ChrisB on August 20, 2015, 11:26:25 So Didcot now controls *all* Pad-DID?
Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: SandTEngineer on August 20, 2015, 11:27:35 So Didcot now controls *all* Pad-DID? Yes. All controlled from Thames Valley Signalling Centre at Didcot (with the Oxford, Swindon and Bristol areas to be added within the next year or so). Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: bobm on August 20, 2015, 11:32:41 How much of the equipment has been replaced though? Where it is controlled from has changed but what about trackside?
Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: grahame on August 20, 2015, 11:36:44 THe comments about prices going up but services not getting better....well, they will, as staff get annual pay rises which have to be paid for & I suspect are a very % of the total cost of running railways There's a lot of elements. I would love to see a current split ... of every ^100 paid for tickets ... how much goes on * TOC Employee costs (wages, + NI) * Train Lease Charges * Train Maintenance * Fuel for the trains * Station maintenance * Offices and office supplies * Payments to other TOCs for delaying their trains (and how much is earned back through the delay system?) * Repayment to passengers as compensation * Buses and taxis to stand in when the train ain't there * ATOC and National Rail costs * Network Access Charges * Government franchise payments * Supporting HQ company * Bidding for the next n years of franchise * Shareholder dividends As trains get older and older, beyond original budgeted life, logic suggests that provision cost is lower and either leasing charges should drop, or someone's making more money. And our trains are all diesel at the moment. Hasn't the cost of oil dropped. So wages aren't everything. Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: SandTEngineer on August 20, 2015, 11:39:25 How much of the equipment has been replaced though? Where it is controlled from has changed but what about trackside? The only things that haven't been replaced are some signals (although most are now being updated to LED types) and some point operating machines. All of the interlocking and associated trackside equipment has been replaced with modern electronic kit and TVSC is of very up to date construction and has recently been enhanced. The oldest stretch is Paddington to Stockley Bridge Junction (near Hayes) but this only dates from the mid-1990s so not that old in historic signalling terms and the technology is virtually the same as that recently installed in the Reading and Slough areas. Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: ChrisB on August 20, 2015, 11:40:04 Cost of oil has dropped, but most companies will hedge their supplies, and I doubt the lower prices are featuring yet. Possibly once next year comes around, but this year's supply would have been hedged at the start of the year =- or even back last year.
Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: ChrisB on August 20, 2015, 11:43:02 How much of the equipment has been replaced though? Where it is controlled from has changed but what about trackside? The only things that haven't been replaced are some signals (although most are now being updated to LED types) and some point operating machines. All of the interlocking and associated trackside equipment has been replaced with modern electronic kit and TVSC is of very up to date construction and has recently been enhanced. Only this year though? That huge long failure around Slough that went for several days? That was this year - and caused by faulty chips, no?....Improvements this year aren't included in those figures in the report.... Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: SandTEngineer on August 20, 2015, 13:39:29 How much of the equipment has been replaced though? Where it is controlled from has changed but what about trackside? The only things that haven't been replaced are some signals (although most are now being updated to LED types) and some point operating machines. All of the interlocking and associated trackside equipment has been replaced with modern electronic kit and TVSC is of very up to date construction and has recently been enhanced. Only this year though? That huge long failure around Slough that went for several days? That was this year - and caused by faulty chips, no?....Improvements this year aren't included in those figures in the report.... Well the majority of the repeat failures I have been observing over the past few years have been in the inner London area of the patch. I can only recall Reading failing once in that time. Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: ellendune on August 20, 2015, 18:42:17 I have heard it said previously that Railtrack did the re-signalling from Paddington to Stockley Bridge on the cheap or at least badly and that was the reason for many of the problems. Is this true and how many of the current signal failures are down to this section?
Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: SandTEngineer on August 20, 2015, 22:27:17 I have heard it said previously that Railtrack did the re-signalling from Paddington to Stockley Bridge on the cheap or at least badly and that was the reason for many of the problems. Is this true and how many of the current signal failures are down to this section? If I remember correctly it was designed by BR before privatisation but installed and commissioned by Railtrack. Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: Electric train on August 20, 2015, 22:31:20 I have heard it said previously that Railtrack did the re-signalling from Paddington to Stockley Bridge on the cheap or at least badly and that was the reason for many of the problems. Is this true and how many of the current signal failures are down to this section? Not quiet true, designed by BR and like many things in BR in 1980 & 90's done to a budget, its easy to forget the signalling was done at the same time as the Padd remodelling early 90's so the kit is getting on for 30 years. Although I believe the problems are more cabling based than equipment, there is a lot of extensive works going on in the Stockley Park area and other areas where cables are not "put to bed" there have also been some issues with the signalling power supplies. The failures are frustrating but as S & T Engineer has mentioned Maintenance Staff have been paired down to the bone, rapid reaction is a van with a 56 mph speed limiter fitted and the teams may have to travel 20 miles to get to where the failure is Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: stuving on April 27, 2016, 23:03:03 The BBC have been covering this as new work, though I presume it's just another block of what was expected.
From Network Rail (http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/network-rail-awards-contracts-worth-gbp-90m-to-increase-capacity-and-improve-reliability-between-london-and-reading): Quote Network Rail awards contracts worth ^90m to increase capacity and improve reliability of railway between London and Reading Wednesday 27 Apr 2016
Both contracts have been awarded under existing Network Rail framework agreements which allow suppliers to invest in the skills and resources needed to deliver large projects efficiently. A ^79m contract with Alstom is for the final stage of the full re-signalling of the Great Western Main Line between Reading and Paddington in the west of London. The contract covers the design, manufacture, supply, installation, testing and commissioning of a state-of-the-art train control system. The signalling work, which is already well underway, will allow Transport for London^s Elizabeth line trains to operate on that section of the railway along with other services on the Great Western Main Line. The ^11m contract awarded to Amey for signalling power works between Paddington and Hayes & Harlington includes replacement of obsolete power supplies and crucially, fully resilient new supplies for the signalling equipment. This enables the system to be automatically supplied from separate supplies in the event of a power failure anywhere between two points. This drastically reduces train delays whilst maximising reliability for trains on the approach to and from Paddington. The planned upgrade of the signalling on the Great Western Main Line is being carried out by Network Rail as part of the Railway Upgrade Plan and is also a key enhancement required by Crossrail. Network Rail is a key partner in delivering the Crossrail project and is responsible for the design, development and delivery of the parts of the route that are on the existing rail network. Matthew Steele, Crossrail Programme Director at Network Rail, said: ^This is a vital step in the delivery of a bigger, better, more reliable railway for London and the South East. By ensuring the new trains can run seamlessly amongst existing rail services and by building in resilience at the outset, we increase the capacity and reliability of the railway meaning that passengers benefit from quicker and easier journeys they can depend upon. To deliver this work in the safest and most efficient way possible, we need to make the most of the huge potential within our supply chain so we look forward to continuing our close collaboration with Alstom and Amey in the delivery of these crucial elements of the Great Western Main Line upgrade and our preparation for Elizabeth line services.^ Crossrail will be known as the Elizabeth line from December 2018 when services start running through central London. The full route will open in 2019. Brand new trains will allow passengers in west London and Berkshire to travel right through central London and all the way out to Essex, reducing journey times and making it quicker and easier for people to get to a range of destinations across London and the South East. Power fed independently from two sources is good for reliability. Even better would be to keep the whole signalling installation - cables, boxes, comms to Didcot, as well as power - separate and well apart for the two two-track halves of the railway. Have they done that too? Not from what I've seen. Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: BerkshireBugsy on April 28, 2016, 06:40:56 I suspect that I am going to get flamed for this but here goes anyway! I'm going to focus on the delays which occur towards the eastern end of the Reading to Paddington stretch only because that is fairly local to me.
I know there were periods when the delays due to signalling problems can be frustrating and trying. I agree 100% it's not life threatening but I think if I had to travel and suffer these delays on a frequent basis it would do my head in. But for a moment lets take the effect on passengers out of the equation for the moment and ask what the long term answer is from a technical perspective? Shut down the railway, rip out the whole lot and replace it with brand new equipment? I suspect that isn't a weekend job :) I would like to hear from anyone on here that has some quick fix answers to these problems. I do hear about signalling delays even when I am not travelling but I don't post about them - I will leave others to do that. I totally understand that there are customers on here that have a bad experience of travelling by train in our region to start with. I'm mainly thinking of overcrowded trains here and accept that adding delays into the mix is a recipe for dissatisfaction but - to misquote something someone once said to me it is easier to be critical than correct; So having had a moan about moaning my question is "does anyone have a good idea as to how this can be fixed?" So my level headed posting today was done from the comfort of my own home knowing I do not have to battle with any form of public transport today. My opinion could well change in the next month or so when I have to start commuting from Thatcham to London on a daily basis! To those members of this forum who either work on infrastructure for a TOC I may not like the experience I get from rail travel from time to time but I appreciate your hard work. In closing what some may see as this pointless ramble I would like to add that I appreciate those who work to ensure our safety on the rail network. My rail journey often takes me past Ufton Nervet where a number of people lost their lives over a decade ago. I as I pass the memorial near the crossing I often think "there but for the grace of God..." (not that I'm a religious person!). I guess what I could have said when I started this post is "come on members, give these guys a break" I'll get my coat.. Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: ellendune on April 28, 2016, 07:49:24 So is the signalling contract replacing the (1990's) signalling between Paddington and Hayes and Harlington as well (presumably the area that previously came under Slough New), or is it replacing the older signalling from there to Ruscombe that previously came under Slough Panel?
Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: SandTEngineer on April 28, 2016, 10:18:51 Its only enhancing the existing signalling not replacing it completely. The interlocking data is being rewritten to iron out some of the things that didn't quite work as originally expected and to eliminate some of the post Ladbroke Grove deficiencies. Its also about adding the two additional depot approach tracks between Westborne Park and the new Crossrail depot at Old Oak Common and simplifying the connections to the existing GWR and Heathrow Express depots. The new Crossrail Old Oak Common depot signalling is a separate contract with Atkins and interfaces at Mitre Bridge.
Interesting to note that when complete there will be four separate depots at Old Oak Common; GWR, Heathrow Express, Crossrail and IEP and that three of them get wiped out when HS2 comes along ::) :P Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: ChrisB on April 28, 2016, 10:28:37 I thought IEP was at North Pole depot?
Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: SandTEngineer on April 28, 2016, 10:30:45 I thought IEP was at North Pole depot? Yes, but I still count that as Old Oak Common (its only on the otherside of the fence of the GWML). Modified my post a little bit as the IEP depot will hopefully not be affected. Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: ellendune on April 28, 2016, 10:35:32 Interesting to note that when complete there will be four separate depots at Old Oak Common; GWR, Heathrow Express, Crossrail and IEP and that three of them get wiped out when HS2 comes along ::) :P Which one will remain after HS2? Crossrail or North Pole?Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: SandTEngineer on April 28, 2016, 10:37:21 Interesting to note that when complete there will be four separate depots at Old Oak Common; GWR, Heathrow Express, Crossrail and IEP and that three of them get wiped out when HS2 comes along ::) :P Which one will remain after HS2? Crossrail or North Pole?From the preliminary plans I have seen only North Pole IEP depot will remain. Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: paul7575 on April 28, 2016, 12:12:57 Doesn't "a state-of-the-art train control system", (as mentioned in the NR release) include the ETCS overlay then? Isn't that part of the requirement for Crossrail on the mainline, as well as to overcome the lack of TPWS into Heathrow?
Paul Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: SandTEngineer on April 28, 2016, 12:18:55 Doesn't "a state-of-the-art train control system", (as mentioned in the NR release) include the ETCS overlay then? Isn't that part of the requirement for Crossrail on the mainline, as well as to overcome the lack of TPWS into Heathrow? Paul As far as I am aware no ETCS is being installed at this stage. That's why the Crossrail (sorry, Elizabeth Line) tunnels are being fitted with enhanced TPWS in the interim. I think that (personal opinion) ETCS is a loooooong way from being implemented in the UK ::) :P Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: ellendune on April 28, 2016, 12:52:42 From the preliminary plans I have seen only North Pole IEP depot will remain. Isn't that a bit short sighted given that they are only just building the cross rail depot? Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: SandTEngineer on April 28, 2016, 15:06:03 From the preliminary plans I have seen only North Pole IEP depot will remain. Isn't that a bit short sighted given that they are only just building the cross rail depot? Yes, but this is the Modern Day Railway we are talking about......... ::) :P Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: SandTEngineer on April 28, 2016, 15:46:24 The next two major signalling commissionings are scheduled for Xmas/New Year 2016/2017 (Stage K) and Xmas/New Year 2017/2018 (Stage M).
Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: Electric train on April 28, 2016, 18:24:38 The Crossrail (or should we say the Elizabeth linen ;D )depot remains post HS2 it has been shifted slightly north to allow foe HS2, the reason the original Crossrail depot at Romford could not be built hence OOC is the major depot with something like 80% of the stock berthing / being maintained there every night.
The GWR depot HST shed will demise as the Hitachi trains come in, HEX is destined for Langley under HS2 plans or the old Eurostar heavy maintenance shed in North Pole. The other part of the Signalling works announced was awarded to Amey for signalling power, reading the press releases it would seem it is to upgrade the current single end radial feeds to dual end feed with an auto reconfig system. I am on a training course soon for one of the suppliers of auto reconfig ............. its all very "beam me up Scottie" ;D Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: TaplowGreen on April 28, 2016, 21:18:07 The next two major signalling commissionings are scheduled for Xmas/New Year 2016/2017 (Stage K) and Xmas/New Year 2017/2018 (Stage M). ......I take it that means yet more Christmases with huge disruption then?Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: ellendune on April 28, 2016, 21:42:49 The next two major signalling commissionings are scheduled for Xmas/New Year 2016/2017 (Stage K) and Xmas/New Year 2017/2018 (Stage M). ......I take it that means yet more Christmases with huge disruption then?Would you prefer - disruption to be at a time when even more people would be inconvenienced? or - they do not do the work so we still have signalling that is not fit for purpose and no capacity for improved services Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: SandTEngineer on April 28, 2016, 22:07:27 The Crossrail (or should we say the Elizabeth linen ;D )depot remains post HS2 ......mmm. Not on the plans I have seen :P Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: IndustryInsider on April 29, 2016, 01:08:06 ......I take it that means yet more Christmases with huge disruption then? Yes, and most Bank Holidays as well until the early 2020s I should imagine. There's quite a lot of work going on... Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: TaplowGreen on April 29, 2016, 12:24:10 The next two major signalling commissionings are scheduled for Xmas/New Year 2016/2017 (Stage K) and Xmas/New Year 2017/2018 (Stage M). ......I take it that means yet more Christmases with huge disruption then?Would you prefer - disruption to be at a time when even more people would be inconvenienced? or - they do not do the work so we still have signalling that is not fit for purpose and no capacity for improved services Obviously not...........although I do wonder when "Manana, manana" on signalling, electrification, capacity, delays etc etc is going to end (if ever). I remember reading a suggestion on another thread that maybe it would be better to pick a week in August when traffic tends to be a lot quieter due to hols and closing down/doing the work then - giving 6 months notice -most peoples holidays are a movable feast so they can work around it, Christmas is not.............I can appreciate GWR may be reluctant for this to happen (it'd involve giving up fare income, whereas work taking place on Christmas Day/Boxing Day costs them nothing), and I'm sure it would be far from universally popular, but 7 days/nights without interruption would give an opportunity for huge amounts of work to be done in one "hit"? Any thoughts? Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: IndustryInsider on April 29, 2016, 14:13:17 There have been and will be several week long blockades during the quieter times whilst the GWML electrification takes place, along with other works. The Banbury/Hinksey blockades this summer are upcoming examples.
I would imagine the main reason that week long blockades are not chosen for these Crossrail works is the fact that the London end of the network is extremely busy even during the summer holidays. It would prove very unpopular - even if you were to persuade (or 'force' as the press would no doubt describe it) a hefty percentage of commuters to take their holidays on a given week. Added to that, the weekend tourism traffic would be badly hit, and bus replacements would be required in huge amounts. Another reason is that these works are staged very carefully. During the Christmas blockades, infrastructure that is commissioned has had months of enabling works that couldn't be completed in, say, a week blockade anyway. So, in other words, I'm not sure that much more extra work could take place in many examples. Sure, other works take place during that window of opportunity, but the big reason for the blockade is often pretty much completed during the year and then commissioned during the two day break when no trains run - an extra few days would make little difference. Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: grahame on April 29, 2016, 14:14:01 I remember reading a suggestion on another thread that maybe it would be better to pick a week in August when traffic tends to be a lot quieter due to hols and closing down/doing the work then - giving 6 months notice -most peoples holidays are a movable feast so they can work around it, Christmas is not.............I can appreciate GWR may be reluctant for this to happen (it'd involve giving up fare income, whereas work taking place on Christmas Day/Boxing Day costs them nothing), and I'm sure it would be far from universally popular, but 7 days/nights without interruption would give an opportunity for huge amounts of work to be done in one "hit"? Any thoughts? What's interesting is that this is exactly what they did last summer - Chippenham to Bath was closed for six weeks (Trowbridge to Bath for 4 of those weeks too). Bath to Bristol was shut for 10 days earlier this month, the Severn Tunnel shuts for a number of weeks in September / October, and it's not unusual for Devon / Cornwall branches to be closed for a week (or even 2) for major works. However, I wonder at the resources (people, equipment, logistical capacity) to handle a sustained closure for a week of London - Reading. Yesterday was GWR's stakeholder conference - that's where Great Western update the local authorities, LEPs, etc on where they are and where they're going. Mark Langham, Network Rail Western Route MD was showing how performance slipped last summer / early autumn - mainly due to London - Reading issues; on his arrival at that point, an extra budget was put in place to keep the current system running properly / customers looked after during the upgrades. The supporting graphs showed a dramatic improvement after that date. One of the questions from the audience asked about the reliance on this single line from Reading into London, and about the provision of a second route. Answers related how additional robustness is planned from the current works, with steps being taken giving an increased capacity, including looking forward to the digital railway. Late in the answer, comment was made telling the audience of a future potential (for engineering / emergency only from the tone of the answer) via the west curve at Didcot and Oxford Parkway - into Paddington via the Chiltern line. Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: paul7575 on April 29, 2016, 14:32:28 Reading to Waterloo is also always available in extremis, and of course it is getting gauge cleared for IEPs...
Paul Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: Tim on April 29, 2016, 14:57:20 Reading to Waterloo is also always available in extremis, and of course it is getting gauge cleared for IEPs... Paul I didn't know that, but pleased to hear it. With Western accesses to Heathrow complete there may be another in extremis route to London (or at least to the Piccadilly line) as well. Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: ChrisB on May 03, 2016, 08:46:48 The Chiltern Line to Paddington is full with no additional paths in the peaks, so would be used only in extreme emergency - and until the single line Ruislip/Paddington is dualled, that can only cope with 2tph each way at a max in any case.
Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: Oxonhutch on May 03, 2016, 12:52:57 The Chiltern Line to Paddington is full with no additional paths in the peaks, so would be used only in extreme emergency - and until the single line Ruislip/Paddington is dualled, that can only cope with 2tph each way at a max in any case. ... and the whole route from South Ruislip to Old Oak Common is threatened by HS2 surface work (vent/access shafts etc.) even though HS2 will be tunnelled beneath it. Title: Re: Signalling & Services Between Paddington & Reading Not Fit For Purpose Post by: eightf48544 on May 03, 2016, 15:28:29 ... and the whole route from South Ruislip to Old Oak Common is threatened by HS2 surface work (vent/access shafts etc.) even though HS2 will be tunnelled beneath it. I've never understood why HS2 should effectivly nullify what should be a thriving line. If you electrify the route at least to Greenford and round the loop to West Ealing and Hayes you have away of turning Heathrow and Crossrail sets to even out tyre wear on the Heathrow branch.You could also run a couple of Crossrail tph round to West Ealing with an interchange station at North Acton instead of them terminating at Westbourne Park. 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 |