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.
Random Image
Train Running @GWR Twitter Acronyms/Abbreviations Station Comparator Rail News GWR co. site Site Style 1 2 3 4 Chat on off
August 19, 2017, 04:02:47 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
Author Topic: Oxford Road and Southcote Junctions Grade Seperation  (Read 1926 times)
stuving
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2443


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: April 06, 2017, 01:09:59 PM »

And another point arising from the Wessex Route Study, while I'm at it. It says there that the extra multi-modal path - the one that does the camel's-back thing to the junction - would have to be routed via Laverstoke and Andover anyway. There are capacity issues via Winchester, related to the length of twin-track that you'd be expecting trains of dissimilar speeds to share. So there is muttering (p 98) about extra loops, including a pair four miles long around Micheldever - but only to meet the 2043 requirement (i.e. CP10).

But if the Basingstoke grade separation - needed sooner - can't be done, or can't be approved due to its cost, wouldn't that change the arguments about where some of those container trains should be routed further north?
Logged
Gordon the Blue Engine
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 529


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: April 06, 2017, 01:57:12 PM »

Grade separation is the ultimate ďnice to haveĒ solution to increase capacity and timetable robustness at flat junctions.  Iím not convinced that grade separation at Southcote J, which would be difficult and thus expensive, is necessary.  My modest idea to have reversible working on both lines between Reading Station and Southcote J, plus a new trailing crossover just west of Southcote J, would provide extra pathing opportunities at modest cost.   There must be many busier junction that work quite happily being flat Ė although long slow freights do complicate the comparison.

I think Basingstoke has a stronger case for grade separation.  My solution, not yet developed to Oxonhutch standards, is to double the flyover at Worting Junction, and then to add/ rearrange the tracks through Basingstoke so that southbound FLís can stay north of the Southampton MLís, go over the widened flyover, and then join the Southampton Down Line south of Worting Junction.

Worting J is in open country so land take would be easier.
Logged
paul7755
TransWilts Member
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4224


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: April 06, 2017, 02:14:47 PM »

Having said that about the empty space around Basingstoke station, it occurred to me that I don't have (and can't find) any recent maps or images to check for encroachments. But I can think of two I've heard about - the ROC just to the north and Basingstoke Campus on the junction triangle.

The relatively new signal building (known as Basingstoke New) alongside P5 (so immediately north of the station) is only temporary, it will all be moved into the ROC in due course.   The future ROC is the main function contained in the Basingstoke Campus, the training etc is the sideline.  The Campus is well away from any track.

But I think NR are trying to do far too much in the station area with the proposals in the Wessex route study.  I suggest they would be far better running the pair of Reading lines west of the station through two full length platforms, and sorting out the grade separation of the down line of that pair somewhere between Basingstoke and Working Jn. There's no real need for it to be at or near the existing flyover - doing it further east may allow it to descend between the two existing down lines which would possibly be more flexible.  The up line would just be a normal junction off the existing up slow.

If they still want a bay for Reading stoppers, then move it onto the other side of the existing platform.  Then the existing bay becomes P6, and a new up line towards Reading a P7.   Then leave the existing junction alone for reversionary routes during maintenance.

Paul
« Last Edit: April 06, 2017, 02:25:50 PM by paul7755 » Logged
Gordon the Blue Engine
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 529


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: April 06, 2017, 06:13:31 PM »

Yes, I think Paul 7755 and I have come up with the same key proposal, which is to run the Reading lines independently through Basingstoke station, and then to put in a grade separated junction to the west.  Whether you go for widening the flyover at Worting J or by some other grade separation between there and Basingstoke station is a detail which can follow later - exactly what you do would involve modelling of the options against the present and planned timetables.

(The layout north of East Croydon emerged from a project done by some management trainees in the 1970's, who came up with various ideas - there were quite a few - on grade separation and where various line went, and they modelled as above.)
Logged
paul7755
TransWilts Member
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4224


View Profile
« Reply #19 on: April 07, 2017, 10:57:47 AM »

[Re Basingstoke]

Another question is whether you have to remove every flat crossing move whatsoever.

If the up and down Reading lines ran through the station (what I suggested might be P6 and P7), would you really need an up direction passenger platform anyway?   Up direction XC services that currently pass through P4, (and are the majority of P4 services over the course of the day), could continue to do so using the existing route - they'd only have to be timed to cross with any down freights coming from Reading. 

Another suggestion to deal with the trains that terminate at Basingstoke, once down XC services are out of the picture over on a new through P6, then how about using P1 as the main through platform for down direction trains and putting the terminating trains in P2, from where they can return onto the up fast?

Paul

« Last Edit: April 07, 2017, 11:43:39 AM by paul7755 » 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 [2]
  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