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 15, 2018, 10:06:33 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
[28] A fitting tribute to a worthy winner of Le Tour
[26] Is it better in the East?
[25] Fare basket to increase by 3%
[23] TransWilts Community Rail Partnership
[22] How long should it take to clear a failed train off a running ...
[18] "Significant Disruption"
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Paddington platform 9 closed 08/08/2018  (Read 711 times)
martyjon
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 983


View Profile
« on: August 08, 2018, 05:58:38 am »

JourneyCheck informing that platform 9 at PAD is closed some services being terminated at Reading, mainly Bedwyn services when I checked.
Logged
a-driver
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 632


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: August 08, 2018, 07:54:56 am »

JourneyCheck informing that platform 9 at PAD is closed some services being terminated at Reading, mainly Bedwyn services when I checked.

Defective longitudinal timbers on Platform 9.
Logged
bignosemac
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 15779


Question everything.


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: August 08, 2018, 08:00:14 am »

This time the fault was spotted before a train fell off.  Wink
Logged

Former FGW/GWR regular passenger. No more. Despicable company.
onthecushions
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 594


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: August 08, 2018, 10:34:23 am »


Well spotted.

Could have been a repeat of:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-42078931

One wonders whether such track bases are laterally weak, compared with a conventional sleeper/cross-tie?

OTC
Logged
bignosemac
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 15779


Question everything.


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: August 08, 2018, 11:41:07 am »

Begs the question whether the inspection regime is still failing.

Should it not be proactive, finding and fixing faults during quiet hours, rather than reactive and shutting a platform through a weekday rush hour?
Logged

Former FGW/GWR regular passenger. No more. Despicable company.
Oxonhutch
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 463



View Profile
« Reply #5 on: August 08, 2018, 01:41:30 pm »

I saw it being inspected around lunchtime on Monday by a lone NR engineer, so I assume the closure was as a result of this activity. I was surprised at the time as OpenTimeTrains did not show the track as blocked.
Logged
bignosemac
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 15779


Question everything.


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: August 08, 2018, 09:36:09 pm »

OTT maps did show the line into P9 as 'SHUT' earlier in the day.
Logged

Former FGW/GWR regular passenger. No more. Despicable company.
bobm
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6773



View Profile
« Reply #7 on: August 09, 2018, 05:48:58 am »

Repair work is continuing with the hope Platform 9 can be reopened towards the end of the morning peak.
Logged
dviner
Full Member
***
Posts: 79


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: August 09, 2018, 07:28:12 pm »

Begs the question whether the inspection regime is still failing.

Should it not be proactive, finding and fixing faults during quiet hours, rather than reactive and shutting a platform through a weekday rush hour?

Well, it looks as though the amount of work required in order to fix the fault would have exceeded any available "quiet hours", so disruption was on the cards. If that's the case, then you just have to bite the bullet and get on with it.
Logged
bignosemac
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 15779


Question everything.


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: August 09, 2018, 08:37:34 pm »

I appreciate its the modern way that such relatively minor works require all sorts of assessments, costings, briefings, etc. All checked and doubled checked. And not least, available staff to do the job.

But, just for comparison. In 1892, 117 miles of GWR broad gauge track, across the network, including main and branch lines, was converted to standard gauge in one weekend. Work started after the last express from Paddington to the west on Friday night, and was completed in time for the first Monday morning express.

Now surely, despite modern requirements, a short defective length of track and its supporting timbers can be identified and replaced in one overnight possession. Its not as if the fault was in a difficult hard to access location.
Logged

Former FGW/GWR regular passenger. No more. Despicable company.
ellendune
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2917


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: August 10, 2018, 09:23:25 am »

If you read about some of the preparations carried out in advance of the 1892 works I think they would have significantly compromised the safety of passengers and I am surprised there were no accidents in the days or weeks either side. I recall reading that ballast was dug out, alternate cross timbers cut. I hope there were speed limits in force.
Logged
Electric train
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2944


The future is 25,000 Volts a.c.


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: August 12, 2018, 08:56:35 am »

I appreciate its the modern way that such relatively minor works require all sorts of assessments, costings, briefings, etc. All checked and doubled checked. And not least, available staff to do the job.

But, just for comparison. In 1892, 117 miles of GWR broad gauge track, across the network, including main and branch lines, was converted to standard gauge in one weekend. Work started after the last express from Paddington to the west on Friday night, and was completed in time for the first Monday morning express.

Now surely, despite modern requirements, a short defective length of track and its supporting timbers can be identified and replaced in one overnight possession. Its not as if the fault was in a difficult hard to access location.


In 1892 there was little or no regard for the safety of track workers, things were only slightly better for the safety of passengers.   In the last 6 or so years a process called Adjacent Line On (ALO) has been brought in.  This requires certain safety measure to be in place to protect both passage of trains on an adjacent line and of the staff working on the line closed to traffic.  In the situation such as Platform 9 at Padd you could not meet the ALO requirements with platform 10 open.


Funding of such repairs is not a major issue, every Route Asset Manager has a "Reactionary Works Budget" also Route Managieing Directors can authorise overspends in such circumstances.
Logged

Mark Carne 26 June 2015 - "The challenges of delivering myriad improvement projects while still running a railway seven days a week were simply overwhelming".
SandTEngineer
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2157


In a Linemans Hut in the far Southwest


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: August 12, 2018, 09:35:59 am »

We seem to be discussing this in two seperate threads.

ET, what I have commented on elsewhere is why the track was allowed to get so bad in the first place?  Surely the infrastructure inspection regieme should have picked it up, and planning taken place to undertake the work in a timely manner, been to the forefront of NRs responsibilities?
« Last Edit: August 12, 2018, 12:43:38 pm by SandTEngineer » Logged

Out of this nettle, Danger, we pluck this flower, Safety.
[Henry IV, Part 1, Act 2, Scene 3]
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