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
February 23, 2018, 08:04:04 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: Network Rail - plans  (Read 556 times)
paul7755
TransWilts Member
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4353


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: February 13, 2018, 08:24:25 PM »

I thought the branches electrification had *all been cancelled? Seems Windsor & Henley still have a chance?
According to the regular CP 5 enhancement plans they were deferred until CP6.  Swansea was the only section explicitly cancelled.  Never stopped people assuming the worst of course...
Logged
stuving
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2928


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: February 13, 2018, 08:28:59 PM »

The telecomms plan is disappointing - it appears to exclude what they call "Extended use of telecoms infrastructure", which presumably covers the high-capacity links to trains.

I did find a suggestion that there have been problems with DOO we've not heard about. For a start, this item is listed under "Driver Operation Only (DOO) CCTV", and then:
Quote
There are currently issues with the supporting structures associated with DOO CCTV as a number have fallen over in public areas (Platforms). The funding would be making a large assumption that these asset could last a further 2 years however recent inspections and incidents point to this not being viable
Logged
bignosemac
TransWilts Member
Hero Member
******
Posts: 15209


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: February 13, 2018, 09:39:35 PM »

Inevitable once governments past and present committed to HS2.

If that colossal waste of money hadn't been green lighted then much more pressing major projects for the existing network could have been funded.

And no. I don't buy the capacity argument for HS2.
Logged

Lover of trains and all things rail related. That love and enjoyment has been severely dented in recent years by FGW/GWR.
eXPassenger
Full Member
***
Posts: 30


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: February 14, 2018, 10:20:10 AM »

One of the side effects of churning out so many words is that you write something like this and don't spot it in the proof-reading (from WRSP P 103):

Level crossing safety reduction and asset improvement programme:

and another item they missed was the date.  The sign-offs are at the end of January 2018 and the front cover of the Route Strategic Plan states "Version 7... 2nd February 2017".  Of course it may be an old document that they have just got around to signing.
Logged
bobm
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6213



View Profile
« Reply #19 on: February 14, 2018, 02:30:47 PM »

I don't buy the capacity argument for HS2.

The amount of money it is costing, you couldn't afford it.   Grin
Logged
Timmer
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4176


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: February 14, 2018, 02:58:52 PM »

And no. I don't buy the capacity argument for HS2.
I don't either when more could be done to develop the Chiltern mainline.
Logged
ChrisB
TransWilts Member
Hero Member
******
Posts: 9246


View Profile Email
« Reply #21 on: February 14, 2018, 04:33:37 PM »

HS2 will go further. and it's the WCML that is full, not the Chiltern line that serves different towns enroute. So of little help to the WCML....although Chilterns pax would really like it done!
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