Train GraphicClick on the map to explore geographics
 
I need help
FAQ
Emergency
About .
Travel & transport from BBC stories as at 12:55 28 Mar 2024
* Man held over stabbing in front of train passengers
- How do I renew my UK passport and what is the 10-year rule?
- Easter travel warning as millions set to hit roads
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 02/06/24 - Summer Timetable starts
17/08/24 - Bus to Imber
27/09/25 - 200 years of passenger trains

On this day
28th Mar (1992)
MOD Kineton tour, branch line society (*)

Train RunningCancelled
11:16 London Paddington to Cardiff Central
11:23 Weston-Super-Mare to London Paddington
11:30 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads
11:50 Cardiff Central to London Paddington
Additional 12:07 Bristol Temple Meads to Gloucester
12:15 London Paddington to Cardiff Central
12:17 Westbury to Swindon
12:30 London Paddington to Weston-Super-Mare
13:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington
13:15 Swindon to Westbury
13:26 Weston-Super-Mare to London Paddington
14:19 Westbury to Swindon
15:14 Swindon to Westbury
Short Run
08:03 London Paddington to Penzance
09:30 Weymouth to Gloucester
10:35 London Paddington to Exeter St Davids
10:55 Paignton to London Paddington
11:23 Portsmouth Harbour to Cardiff Central
11:41 Bristol Temple Meads to Salisbury
11:48 London Paddington to Carmarthen
12:03 London Paddington to Penzance
12:12 Salisbury to Bristol Temple Meads
12:32 Exeter Central to Okehampton
12:46 Avonmouth to Weston-Super-Mare
13:03 London Paddington to Plymouth
13:07 Salisbury to Bristol Temple Meads
13:10 Gloucester to Weymouth
13:26 Okehampton to Exeter Central
16:19 Carmarthen to London Paddington
Delayed
09:37 London Paddington to Paignton
10:04 London Paddington to Penzance
10:23 Portsmouth Harbour to Cardiff Central
11:29 Weymouth to Gloucester
11:30 Cardiff Central to Portsmouth Harbour
12:27 Okehampton to Exeter Central
12:28 Plymouth to Gunnislake
12:30 Cardiff Central to Portsmouth Harbour
14:30 Cardiff Central to Portsmouth Harbour
PollsOpen and recent polls
Closed 2024-03-25 Easter Escape - to where?
Abbreviation pageAcronymns and abbreviations
Stn ComparatorStation Comparator
Rail newsNews Now - live rail news feed
Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
March 28, 2024, 13:05:46 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most recently liked subjects
[151] West Wiltshire Bus Changes April 2024
[85] would you like your own LIVE train station departure board?
[58] Return of the BRUTE?
[49] If not HS2 to Manchester, how will traffic be carried?
[46] Infrastructure problems in Thames Valley causing disruption el...
[36] Reversing Beeching - bring heritage and freight lines into the...
 
News: the Great Western Coffee Shop ... keeping you up to date with travel around the South West
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: What does "Passive Provision" mean?  (Read 10954 times)
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40690



View Profile WWW Email
« on: March 03, 2017, 15:05:01 »

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 (High Speed Train) 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, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 12334


View Profile Email
« Reply #1 on: March 03, 2017, 15:08:51 »

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
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6435


The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: March 03, 2017, 15:14:08 »

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 (in my humble opinion). 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, 16:59:16 by Four Track, Now! » Logged

Now, please!
SandTEngineer
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3485


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: March 03, 2017, 15:41:32 »

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
Tim
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2738


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: March 03, 2017, 15:50:14 »

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
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3485


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: March 03, 2017, 16:19:01 »

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 (Guide to Railway Investment Projects) development process and eliminated from the scope accordingly.
Logged
ellendune
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4452


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: March 03, 2017, 16:57:11 »

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: 2738


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: March 03, 2017, 18:46:39 »


....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 (Guide to Railway Investment Projects) 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 customers 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 to report). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page