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 - GWR Stakeholder Conference
tomorrow - Digital Railway - Swindon
tomorrow - Owl Auction - Bath
18/10/2018 - Friends of Bridgwater Station
18/10/2018 - TW NorthWest / Liverpool
22/10/2018 - ACoRP board nominations close
Random Image
Train Running @GWR Twitter Acronyms/Abbreviations Station Comparator Rail News GWR co. site Site Style 1 2 3 4 Chat on off
October 16, 2018, 04:12:36 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
[117] Railway bridges struck by road vehicles - merged topic, ongoin...
[114] Four track for Filton Bank - ongoing discussion
[49] Bristol's Temple Gate layout change planned in 21m revamp
[27] Newly restored "Flying Scotsman" back in service - o...
[23] Carnival parades & safety at them
[19] Closure threat - Bristol Railway
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: What does "Passive Provision" mean?  (Read 4128 times)
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 22080



View Profile WWW Email
« on: March 03, 2017, 03:05:01 pm »

I understood that "passive provision for xxx" meant that works being done would be done in such a way that they made allowances for xxx to be done in the future and didn't add obstacles to be added to get in the way of the future.



It looks to me that this trunking will get it the way if loop is added to serve the third platform at Chippenham (the HST is sitting at the current platform. 

Is this just a temporary installation, have we been sold a "pup" in the promise of passive provision, or have I misunderstood what "passive provision" means?
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Member of Melksham Rail User Group, on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest and some more things besides
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 9680


View Profile Email
« Reply #1 on: March 03, 2017, 03:08:51 pm »

The way the trunking moves towards the platform on the right makes me think that is provisioning. Otherwise it would simply carry on in the arc that you can see
Logged
Four Track, Now!
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3758


I know nothing. Really.


View Profile Email
« Reply #2 on: March 03, 2017, 03:14:08 pm »

I don't think the example above contradicts the principle of "passive provision" because that trunking isn't a substantial impediment. It may be that the cabinet it leads to would need to be moved if the loop happens, and can stay there at zero cost until then.

However, I found a better demonstration of the principle in my former home town of Blackpool. This set of points appears to lead to nowhere:



It was installed, along with others further along the track turning towards the same direction, at the time the tramway was updated in 2011-12. The idea was to leave "passive provision" for the reinstatement of the link to Blackpool North station, lost 80 years ago, along Talbot Road. Should the work be approved, it can be done with hardly any disruption to the running of the existing tramway. The cost was negligible in the overall project budget, certainly when compared to what it would have cost later.

In one sense, it should be seen as "active provision", IMHO. It served as a reminder that there was a case being made for the new link, and that one of the obstacles had been removed, rather than no new obstacles had been added. I am happy to say it was successful - the plans have been approved, the funding secured, and once the legal niceties have been dealt with, work should start later this year.

See also a post on a forum about the project.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2017, 04:59:16 pm by Four Track, Now! » Logged

Now, please!
SandTEngineer
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2325


In a Linemans Hut in the far Southwest


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: March 03, 2017, 03:41:32 pm »

Its only GRP cable route on concrete supporting legs with a few cables in it.  The business case probably said it will be cheaper to demolish it all and start again if needed  Roll Eyes Tongue
Logged

Out of this nettle, Danger, we pluck this flower, Safety.
[Henry IV, Part 1, Act 2, Scene 3]
Tim
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2732


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: March 03, 2017, 03:50:14 pm »

You are right to raise the question.  There may have been a failure on passive provision here.  Although it looks like a very minor one.

The blue lid is a drainage inspection cover which makes me wonder if that drainage may need to be moved too?  If that is the case then "passive provision" wrt the trunking might be simple sticking it in a position to make moving the drainage easiest.  
Logged
SandTEngineer
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2325


In a Linemans Hut in the far Southwest


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: March 03, 2017, 04:19:01 pm »

You are right to raise the question.  There may have been a failure on passive provision here.  Although it looks like a very minor one.

The blue lid is a drainage inspection cover which makes me wonder if that drainage may need to be moved too?  If that is the case then "passive provision" wrt the trunking might be simple sticking it in a position to make moving the drainage easiest.  

....but passive provision costs money now, and how many times have we seen in the past where passive provision is made and it never (never) happens or things get changed in the interim period?  Ultimately, there may not be funding available in the first project to think forward like that, and if initially there was, its quite likely that it would be identified as a potential saving during the GRIP development process and eliminated from the scope accordingly.
Logged

Out of this nettle, Danger, we pluck this flower, Safety.
[Henry IV, Part 1, Act 2, Scene 3]
ellendune
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2982


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: March 03, 2017, 04:57:11 pm »

I think you have to balance the additional cost now with the additional cost later.  Trunking is not that expensive to move. Putting a structure there might be a bit different. 
Logged
Tim
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2732


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: March 03, 2017, 06:46:39 pm »


....but passive provision costs money now, and how many times have we seen in the past where passive provision is made and it never (never) happens or things get changed in the interim period?  Ultimately, there may not be funding available in the first project to think forward like that, and if initially there was, its quite likely that it would be identified as a potential saving during the GRIP development process and eliminated from the scope accordingly.

I completely agree with that as a general point.  But in Graham's example I am not sure that putting the trunking out of the way a few feet further to the right would have cost any more. 
Logged
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

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 www.gwr.com 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