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.
article index - [here]
 today - Building for People - TfNH
today - Melksham Hub - planning
04/04/2019 - Go-op Frome
06/04/2019 - RailFuture Severnside AGM
13/04/2019 - Long Rock Open Day
19/04/2019 - Easter Highlander
Random Image
Train Running @GWR Twitter Acronyms/Abbreviations Station Comparator Rail news GWR co. site Site Style 1 2 3 4 Chat on off
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
March 25, 2019, 04:35:38 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
[74] Where were Finn and I, 23rd March 2019?
[44] World's largest electric bus order
[41] The view from the bus operator
[23] Derailment at Laira Junction 23/03/2019
[22] Where does my time go - 24 minutes moving but 68 minute journe...
[14] Moving Victoria - not to Royal Oak but to somewhere else?
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 50 51 [52] 53 54 ... 56
  Print  
Author Topic: Cotswold Line - 2018 cancellation and amendments log  (Read 73697 times)
Dispatch Box
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 433


View Profile
« Reply #765 on: December 09, 2018, 01:52:46 pm »

GWR or any operator running to a timetable are caught between a rock and a hard place when a train's running late - especially where single track is involved - whether to inconvenience passengers on the current service by terminating it short of booked destination, or inconveniencing others on trains if the late running means it's going to get in the way and knock on effects continuing perhaps for hours or until close of service.

Solutions?  Sort out delays and run trains much better to time, and these problems will be reduced as a consequence.  Other possible solutions (scheduling fewer trains, providing spares so there's something to send back even if an incoming service is late, easing schedules, denying train use to slow-to-board people) are rather unattractive.

Personal favourite annoyance ... late (or even early) running freight train in the way.  Not thrilled when reliability goes to pot because of problems on other lines either and 'we' get used for diverted passenger trains which take up the capacity - without even the courtesy of stopping at the stations where they have removed services for many hours.

I Have a solution, continue redoubling Cotswold line to Wolvercot and Norton junctions, then the trains will improve, not many miles of track left to redouble?.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2018, 08:23:23 am by Richard Fairhurst » Logged
JontyMort
Full Member
***
Posts: 84


View Profile
« Reply #766 on: December 09, 2018, 02:02:09 pm »

Even redoubling just from Wolvercot to Hanborough and Norton to Worcestershire Parkway (the latter being a few hundred yards) would probably be enough. In particular, Parkway will not succeed if this isn't done, because late-running trains from Evesham will stop trains leaving Shrub Hill for Parkway, which in turn will mess up connections for Bristol and the south-west via the Midland.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2018, 08:23:39 am by Richard Fairhurst » Logged
Dispatch Box
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 433


View Profile
« Reply #767 on: December 09, 2018, 02:07:30 pm »

I Thought all of the line had been redoubled, Just leaving the ends that I mentioned. Network Rail have just had a big boost on money for cp6, so maybe they will be done.
Logged
JontyMort
Full Member
***
Posts: 84


View Profile
« Reply #768 on: December 09, 2018, 02:09:09 pm »

Yes, the ones I mentioned are parts of the sections you mentioned.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2018, 08:23:59 am by Richard Fairhurst » Logged
Dispatch Box
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 433


View Profile
« Reply #769 on: December 09, 2018, 02:13:12 pm »

Will mean Norton and Wolvercot junctions needing relaying, Norton being resignalled.

I Think the token instrument in Norton junction signalbox slows down trains. As the signalman needs to walk to a platform to hand to driver.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2018, 08:24:17 am by Richard Fairhurst » Logged
JontyMort
Full Member
***
Posts: 84


View Profile
« Reply #770 on: December 09, 2018, 02:46:27 pm »

In practice I don't think that happens, since trains pass Norton box at speed in the up direction. In the down direction it is quite slow, since the junction itself is single lead off the up line, so down trains currently have to take the crossover just north of the junction.

You are right that the junction needs relaying as a proper double junction (and so does Wolvercot).
« Last Edit: December 11, 2018, 08:24:32 am by Richard Fairhurst » Logged
Dispatch Box
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 433


View Profile
« Reply #771 on: December 09, 2018, 08:48:55 pm »

I have just looked at my book, it says in there, There is EKT block to Moreton in Marsh, AB to Shrub Hill, TCB To Gloucester. The book shows a picture of the signallman handing token to a driver.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2018, 08:24:47 am by Richard Fairhurst » Logged
IndustryInsider
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 7050


View Profile
« Reply #772 on: December 09, 2018, 10:05:45 pm »

No tokens have been used since the redoubling in 2011.  Down trains have to slow to 25mph over the crossover though, whilst up trains can take it at a far more respectable 70mph.

The North Cotswold Line Taskforce recommendations are due (overdue?) to be published which should give a clearer indication as to what’s likely to be improved first.

See my post here as to what I think should be done:  http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=20393.0
Logged

To view my cab run over the new Reading Viaduct as well as a relief line cab ride at Reading just after Platforms 12-15 opened and my 'before and after' video comparison of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/1
JontyMort
Full Member
***
Posts: 84


View Profile
« Reply #773 on: December 09, 2018, 11:23:03 pm »

Thanks for posting that link - as a newbie I hadn't seen it before. Very interesting. Obviously your idea of redoubling Evesham to Pershore, coupled with a much faster crossover at Norton for down trains, gets round the nightmare of two stops in the Evesham-Norton section. If reliability can be improved to the extent of getting down trains away from Evesham on time, then my concern about Parkway is reduced.

IETs should improve dwell times, and the selective platform extensions will help too. But it is embarrassing that the Shipton stop on the 2148 HST from London takes longer than the Reading stop, and that cannot be solely down to the stock. Surely it ought to be possible for the train manager to say "I shall be at  the door in Coach X, and if you want to get off you will be there also", and just open one door (cutting the stop to 30 seconds).

Finally - and I declare an interest here as a Worcester-based traveller - if your suggestion of a second path per hour (at some times of day) bears fruit, then we'll find out if GWR is serious about the western end of the line. Paddington to Worcester is still slower than the fastest train in 1923. To improve this would mean running non-stop to Oxford, then Charlbury, Kingham, Moreton, Evesham... Whether the traffic is there to justify that is far from clear.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2018, 08:25:02 am by Richard Fairhurst » Logged
martyjon
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1471


View Profile
« Reply #774 on: December 09, 2018, 11:46:43 pm »

Redouble the whole line and be done with it.

FT reporting another £1 billion sought for Crossrail and opening may be put back to 2020, so why not a few hundred million for the Cotswold line, Oh! that's not London, forget it.

Where stations need a second platform do we always have to have a footbridge, why not use the wonders of todays tunnel boring technology and bore subways to connect the new platform at such locations where practical.
Logged
charles_uk
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 473

thewalkingpage
View Profile
« Reply #775 on: December 10, 2018, 09:33:31 am »

Finally - and I declare an interest here as a Worcester-based traveller - if your suggestion of a second path per hour (at some times of day) bears fruit, then we'll find out if GWR is serious about the western end of the line. Paddington to Worcester is still slower than the fastest train in 1923. To improve this would mean running non-stop to Oxford, then Charlbury, Kingham, Moreton, Evesham... Whether the traffic is there to justify that is far from clear.

I'll also declare an interest - and I appreciate this is all just wishful thinking - but I would take issue with your choice of Kingham over Hanborough given the latter station is far more heavily used!
Logged
JontyMort
Full Member
***
Posts: 84


View Profile
« Reply #776 on: December 10, 2018, 10:07:46 am »

Interesting. I had always assumed that Kingham (for Chipping Norton) was more used, but I suppose Hanborough is the railhead for Witney and Woodstock.

I had Hanborough down for the "all stations" service terminating at Moreton-in-Marsh  Smiley

As you say, it is all pure fantasy and we shall continue to drive to Warwick Parkway.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2018, 08:25:19 am by Richard Fairhurst » Logged
charles_uk
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 473

thewalkingpage
View Profile
« Reply #777 on: December 10, 2018, 10:51:22 am »


Interesting. I had always assumed that Kingham (for Chipping Norton) was more used, but I suppose Hanborough is the railhead for Witney and Woodstock.


We digress from the purpose of this thread, but Hanborough was actually the second busiest station between Oxford and Worcester a couple of years ago but has fallen back a bit since Oxford Parkway opened. The figures for 2017-18 should be out very soon but for 2016-17 Hanborough had passenger figures of 239K against Kingham's 184K.
Logged
Witham Bobby
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 116



View Profile
« Reply #778 on: December 10, 2018, 04:55:27 pm »

I Thought all of the line had been redoubled, Just leaving the ends that I mentioned. Network Rail have just had a big boost on money for cp6, so maybe they will be done.

Yes, the ones I mentioned are parts of the sections you mentioned.


Will mean Norton and Wolvercot junctions needing relaying, Norton being resignalled.


I Think the token instrument in Norton junction signalbox slows down trains. As the signalman needs to walk to a platform to hand to driver.

The Evesham to Norton Junction single-line section, which had been controlled under the Electric Train Token Regulations since the ridiculous singling of the line in 1973, became the Evesham West Junction to Norton Junction controlled by Acceptance "levers" in 2011, with the re-signalling and partial re-doubling of the route.  Unfortunately the single line along this section remains single, along with all the trouble that causes.  (I say "levers", because the one in Evesham box is a button, I believe)
Logged
charles_uk
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 473

thewalkingpage
View Profile
« Reply #779 on: December 11, 2018, 08:06:39 am »

Bringing things back on topic:

Quote
07:10 Moreton-in-Marsh to London Paddington due 08:51 will be started from Oxford.
It will no longer call at Moreton-in-Marsh, Kingham, Charlbury and Hanborough.
This is due to a safety inspection of the track earlier today.
Last Updated:11/12/2018 06:23

[Later comment] The outward run to Moreton-in-Marsh arrived at Oxford only a few minutes late and there were no significant delays with the services coming off the single track at Wolvercote Junction at that time. I'm wondering whether this was a different way of managing the late running 05:28 Hereford to Paddington instead of running it fast from MIM to Oxford, and leaving passengers at Charlbury and Hanborough to catch the 07:10 MIM:PAD which would also have been delayed by the late running.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2018, 11:06:41 am by charles_uk » 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 ... 50 51 [52] 53 54 ... 56
  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