Train Graphic
Great Western Passengers' Forum Great Western Coffee Shop - [home] and [about]
Read about the forum [here].
Register and contribute [here] - it's free.
 today - First Bath Bus panel
today - Consultation end - Angel Road
26/11/2018 - TransWilts Board and Members
26/11/2018 - Bath Clean Air consult ends
28/11/2018 - Melksham RUG
28/11/2018 - WECA Scrutiny
Random Image
Train Running @GWR Twitter Acronyms/Abbreviations Station Comparator Rail News GWR co. site Site Style 1 2 3 4 Chat on off
November 21, 2018, 11:59:17 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most liked recent subjects
[141] Four track for Filton Bank - ongoing discussion
[49] The line to the Severn Tunnel. Future use for the area it pass...
[22] When did the last slammers leave?
[19] Worcestershire Parkway Station project - ongoing discussion
[17] Metrowest Status
[13] MetroBus
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
 on: Today at 11:58:43 am 
Started by chuffed - Last post by Dispatch Box
Hmm... don't get me wrong, 'Tony' is a decent-enough name, but it doesn't have quite the same ring as 'Remodel Bristol East Junction, Now!'...

I thought the shutdown over Christmas was to remodel the layout a bit.

 on: Today at 11:33:36 am 
Started by grahame - Last post by Red Squirrel
Worth looking at this document for a bit of local colour; it refers to a new station on Filton Bank which, at 1:75, is (I think) steeper than the line past Aztec West:

The existing gradient for all three station locations on the Filton Bank is very steep (1 in 76 or 1.33%). Group standard GI/RT/7016 states that: “ Wherever possible, platforms shall be located on track with an average gradient not steeper than 1 in 500. It is permissible for platforms to be located on track with average gradients steeper than 1 in 500 provided trains are not planned to terminate or reverse at the platform” . This is guidance rather than a definitive requirement, but 1:75 is still is considered too steep for a new station to be developed on. Guidance note GI/GN7616 provides further information for consideration of risks associated with proposing platforms relating to horizontal curvature and longitudinal gradients.

Vertical track positioning can be adjusted through track lifts and earthworks to re ‐ profile gradients. However, as the provision of a 1:500 platform gradient would lead to excessive gradients on either side of the station, it was decided to target a station gradient of 1:220 (0.45%). This is consistent with a station gradient deviation granted for (the reopened) Corby station (Certificate number 07/182/DGN). Designs using this 1:220 gradient are much more likely to be accepted by Network Rail (NR) even though still requiring some deviation from guidance in the group standards. They do however lead to significant works in terms of Permanent Way and track drainage, signalling, earthworks and electrification.

It would be possible to seek deviations from standards for the existing (much steeper) gradient through the station, which would reduce the requirement for Permanent Way works and their associated costs, but this is considered unlikely to be practical that such a deviation would be granted. Costs have therefore only been developed for designs producing a 1:220 gradient through the station sites.

It should be considered that failing to achieve a derogation that the 1:220 gradient through a station is acceptable could significantly change the requirements at each station, and thus would require re ‐ assessment of the assumptions in this report.

 on: Today at 11:20:57 am 
Started by grahame - Last post by WelshBluebird
Is there a reason the problem is so much worse than previous years?
I am sure ATW used to be affected by this too, but not to this extent surely?

 on: Today at 11:19:58 am 
Started by grahame - Last post by stuving
A new station site there might be a bit difficult due to track gradients.  I need to do a bit of looking up to see what the latest rules are (unless anybody beats me to it).

1 in 100 iirc. S&T.

From GI/GN7616 iss 2 (2014):
4.2.1  The mandatory requirement for vertical track alignment through station platforms was G withdrawn in issue four of GI/RT7016, based on work carried out to support deviations against issue two of GI/RT7016 for specific stations and the findings of RSSB Research Report T815 entitled ‘Limits of vertical track alignment through station platforms’.
G 4.2.2  For many years it had been considered good practice in GB to locate platforms on gradients not steeper than 1:260, except where geographic constraints made this unavoidable. This requirement was later changed to refer to a gradient of 1:500, possibly because of a shift from plain bearings to roller bearings across all rolling stock.
G 4.2.3  In the circumstances where the Infrastructure TSIs impose limiting gradients through passenger platforms (see G 4.2.11 and G 4.2.12), the limit is 2.5 mm/m - that is, 1:400.
G 4.2.4  However, there are many platforms on the GB network that are located on gradients steeper than 1:400 and of those, a significant number are on gradients steeper than 1:100. These platforms continue to accommodate a range of train services without having operational constraints on their use imposed because of track gradient.

Obviously the guide goes on at greater length than that...and suggests that the TSI limit of 1 in 400 only applies to specially built new, proper HS, lines (i.e. > 250 km/hr).

 on: Today at 11:05:34 am 
Started by chuffed - Last post by stuving
It seems as if Filton Abbey Wood now has 2 platforms with bi-directional signalling.

While watching the live map at Bristol Temple Meads this morning I noticed 2U12 (0925 St. James Park - Cardiff Central, which left Bristol Temple Meads at 1121hrs) use Platform 2 (not Platform 3 as booked) then cross over to the Newport-bound lines.

2U12 is booked for the Fast lines all the way to Filton Abbey Wood, rather than the relief lines, so clearly Platform 2 at Filton Abbey Wood, once usable only by trains to Bristol Parkway, can now be used for Cardiff-bound trains also. A good idea which should partly remove the need for bus replacement services between Bristol and Severn Tunnel Junction / Newport when works are taking place on Filton Bank because the trains for South Wales can use the neighbouring tracks if they are open.


I'm surprised that you're surprised! A train on the Up Filton Main can only go via FIT P2, there are no points offering any other choice. SandTE's pictures show P2 as bidirectional, and from what he has said P1 is signalled for trains to leave in the Up direction after reversing but not to enter from the Up Filton Main.

When you pointed out previously that the WTT was still showing paths and platforms for the old track arrangement, I didn't twig that would include ones that are now physically impossible. But they are all still there - most northbound trains for south Wales are shown using P3, and none using P4. OK, one can understand that if it makes sense not to update the WTT (leaving aside why that might be). But what flummoxes me a bit is that RTT and OTT both show yesterday's 2U12 as actually using P3 (i.e. in bold or as "as booked").

 on: Today at 10:59:02 am 
Started by grahame - Last post by paul7755
I though the last true everyday slam door stock on SWT were the 4VEPs for the Lymington branch Now worked by diesels as the newer electric units take too long to reboot on reversal.
The rebooting time problem was solved years ago, otherwise the 450s wouldn’t have been operating at weekends ever since the VEPs left.  They’ll be 450s 7/7 from the December timetable change. The 158s were used during the week to allow the 450s to be used for mainline capacity.


 on: Today at 10:58:30 am 
Started by chuffed - Last post by metalrail
I think I'll call it "Game Over".

Or...  you could go back to your original user name...  bear with me here!

To get Bristol electrified, they want to remodel Bristol East Junction, which would also involve
Laying new tracks into the Midland Shed, which would also involve
Removing Bristol Panel Box, which would also involve
Transferring signalling from Bristol South to Cogload junction to TVSC or elsewhere, which would also involve
Additional signalling to be introduced to allow more stopping services at BMT & PSN and the re-opened Portishead line, which would also involve
Four Tracks, Now! to be reintroduced from Bristol West Junction to Parson Street Junction!

Go on, you know you want to!  Wink

 on: Today at 10:52:28 am 
Started by grahame - Last post by Western Pathfinder
A new station site there might be a bit difficult due to track gradients.  I need to do a bit of looking up to see what the latest rules are (unless anybody beats me to it).

1 in 100 iirc. S&T.

 on: Today at 10:52:25 am 
Started by Worcester_Passenger - Last post by martyjon
Looks like they can't even pay the compensation on time!
Thanks for getting in touch
Following an increase in customer contact, we are busier than normal atthe moment. We will respond as soon as we can, but if you are claiming compensation for a delayed journey this might take up to 14 days.

Still waiting for a claim I made following a cancelled London to Bristol service on June 16th.

 on: Today at 10:49:21 am 
Started by Worcester_Passenger - Last post by DavidT
Looks like they can't even pay the compensation on time!
Thanks for getting in touch
Following an increase in customer contact, we are busier than normal atthe moment. We will respond as soon as we can, but if you are claiming compensation for a delayed journey this might take up to 14 days.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants