Train Graphic
Great Western Passengers' Forum
GWR advice during Coronavirus
Coffee Shop during Coronavirus
Please - Do NOT travel unless you have to!
Great Western Coffee Shop - [home] and [about]
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 tomorrow - CILT seminar - ONLINE
29/05/2020 - TWSW - Bristol Mayor - ONLINE
02/06/2020 - Tuesday Club - ONLINE
05/06/2020 - World Environment Day
Random Image
Train Running @GWR Twitter Acronyms/Abbreviations Station Comparator Rail news GWR co. site Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
May 27, 2020, 04:03:24 pm *
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
[301] DfT sifts 60 new rail plans
[84] Discussion 26.5.20 - what can we regain from the restart of pu...
[28] IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent pe...
[26] Opportunities to do more engineering while things are quiet
[24] Which UK network station has the best view? [DotD 25.5.20]
[23] Gloucester to Hereford via Ross on Wye
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
Author Topic: Gloucester Area Resignalling CP6  (Read 3317 times)
Charlie (in Gloucester)
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 390


View Profile
« on: November 13, 2018, 09:39:28 pm »

Was becoming off topic in the FTFB thread so moved here.

I was also told that Gloucester would go to West Midlands signalling centre rather than Didcot.

Apparently they considered bidirectional signalling at Cheltenham but decided against. Apparently at Gloucester platform 1 is not long enough for the nine cars even, but it is possible to move signals back on platform 2 and 1.

I would like to see the reverse time improvements because it promotes more trains to call at Gloucester. I have also noticed decreased use of Platform 1 recently with only Great Malverns using the platform. Use of platform 3 more would be great but rail travel is more focused towards Cheltenham now. Itís used under 8 times a day which is unfortunate.
Logged

We should be aiming towards a country where no matter where you are you can get around all day with an easy to use, affordable and modern transport system.
SandTEngineer
Data Manager
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3443


Retired in an S&T hut in the far Southwest


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: November 14, 2018, 11:24:44 am »

I was also told that Gloucester would go to West Midlands signalling centre rather than Didcot.

I did post in the F4T topic that there are some big NR boundary changes being planned that will put Gloucester and Cheltenham into the Midlands Territory.  TVSC is full and cannot accomodate any more territory without major building works (hence the talked about plan for Exeter Panel to become a ROC). I also think that NR are begining to realise that putting 'all your eggs in one basket' is asking for trouble if something serious was to happen.

Anyway, we need to wait and see once the CP6 plans are firmed up.
Logged

Out of this nettle, Danger, we pluck this flower, Safety.
[Henry IV, Part 1, Act 2, Scene 3]
Dispatch Box
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 433


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: November 14, 2018, 11:12:51 pm »

I Think the best and cheapest way to resignal Gloucester would be to convert the panel box into a ROC or small I.E.C.C. This would be more practical as the Horton Road crossing poses safety issues, with people as I was told by platform staff, jumping over barriers. So it needs a person high up in a building to oversee it. The work station in there could contain only 4 monitors and could be placed across the back wall. Then the panel would be ripped out and a nice desk housing all of the monitors for the crossings. I also can see that there is a large relay room underneath it which could house most of the control boxes and probably save on REB Cabinets.
Logged
ellendune
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3566


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: November 14, 2018, 11:21:59 pm »

I Think the best and cheapest way to resignal Gloucester would be to convert the panel box into a ROC or small I.E.C.C. This would be more practical as the Horton Road crossing poses safety issues, with people as I was told by platform staff, jumping over barriers. So it needs a person high up in a building to oversee it.

Really not sure a person up in the box would make much difference!

The work station in there could contain only 4 monitors and could be placed across the back wall. Then the panel would be ripped out and a nice desk housing all of the monitors for the crossings. I also can see that there is a large relay room underneath it which could house most of the control boxes and probably save on REB Cabinets.

But then all the old stuff would have to be ripped out before the new stuff can be installed.  That would be a very long blockade!
Logged
Dispatch Box
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 433


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: November 14, 2018, 11:28:19 pm »

Was becoming off topic in the FTFB thread so moved here.

I was also told that Gloucester would go to West Midlands signalling centre rather than Didcot.

Apparently they considered bidirectional signalling at Cheltenham but decided against. Apparently at Gloucester platform 1 is not long enough for the nine cars even, but it is possible to move signals back on platform 2 and 1.

I would like to see the reverse time improvements because it promotes more trains to call at Gloucester. I have also noticed decreased use of Platform 1 recently with only Great Malverns using the platform. Use of platform 3 more would be great but rail travel is more focused towards Cheltenham now. Itís used under 8 times a day which is unfortunate.


Platform 1, is used through the week but does not seem to be used on Saturdays.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2018, 12:08:21 pm by Dispatch Box » Logged
Dispatch Box
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 433


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: November 15, 2018, 12:10:47 pm »

I was also told that Gloucester would go to West Midlands signalling centre rather than Didcot.

I did post in the F4T topic that there are some big NR boundary changes being planned that will put Gloucester and Cheltenham into the Midlands Territory.  TVSC is full and cannot accomodate any more territory without major building works (hence the talked about plan for Exeter Panel to become a ROC). I also think that NR are begining to realise that putting 'all your eggs in one basket' is asking for trouble if something serious was to happen.

Anyway, we need to wait and see once the CP6 plans are firmed up.


Are you thinking then NR are wishing they had not built large signalling centres.
Logged
SandTEngineer
Data Manager
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3443


Retired in an S&T hut in the far Southwest


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: November 15, 2018, 12:20:29 pm »

I was also told that Gloucester would go to West Midlands signalling centre rather than Didcot.

I did post in the F4T topic that there are some big NR boundary changes being planned that will put Gloucester and Cheltenham into the Midlands Territory.  TVSC is full and cannot accomodate any more territory without major building works (hence the talked about plan for Exeter Panel to become a ROC). I also think that NR are begining to realise that putting 'all your eggs in one basket' is asking for trouble if something serious was to happen.

Anyway, we need to wait and see once the CP6 plans are firmed up.


Are you thinking then NR are wishing they had not built large signalling centres.

Yes.
Logged

Out of this nettle, Danger, we pluck this flower, Safety.
[Henry IV, Part 1, Act 2, Scene 3]
Dispatch Box
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 433


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: November 15, 2018, 01:01:35 pm »

I was also told that Gloucester would go to West Midlands signalling centre rather than Didcot.

I did post in the F4T topic that there are some big NR boundary changes being planned that will put Gloucester and Cheltenham into the Midlands Territory.  TVSC is full and cannot accomodate any more territory without major building works (hence the talked about plan for Exeter Panel to become a ROC). I also think that NR are begining to realise that putting 'all your eggs in one basket' is asking for trouble if something serious was to happen.

Anyway, we need to wait and see once the CP6 plans are firmed up.


Are you thinking then NR are wishing they had not built large signalling centres.

Yes.

Why, They are reliable and seem to work, the one TVSC As featured on Tv was a busy one. I suppose the signallers get fed when news comes from route control that someone is trying to comit suiside or trespassers.
Logged
ZoŽ
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 720


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: November 15, 2018, 03:44:57 pm »

According to the Strategic Plan published earlier this year, the CP6 resignalling schemes for Worcester, Gloucester and Cornwall have been deferred until CP7/8.

See page 65 of this document:  https://cdn.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Western-Route-Strategic-Plan.pdf
« Last Edit: November 16, 2018, 02:18:47 am by ZoŽ » Logged
Trowres
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 540


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: November 15, 2018, 06:58:42 pm »

TVSC is full and cannot accomodate any more territory without major building works (hence the talked about plan for Exeter Panel to become a ROC).

If the original plan was to have the whole Western route covered by TVSC, how come it isn't large enough?
Logged
Dispatch Box
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 433


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: November 15, 2018, 07:39:21 pm »

TVSC is full and cannot accomodate any more territory without major building works (hence the talked about plan for Exeter Panel to become a ROC).

If the original plan was to have the whole Western route covered by TVSC, how come it isn't large enough?

Sounds like bad planning.
Logged
ellendune
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3566


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: November 15, 2018, 09:07:53 pm »

TVSC is full and cannot accomodate any more territory without major building works (hence the talked about plan for Exeter Panel to become a ROC).

If the original plan was to have the whole Western route covered by TVSC, how come it isn't large enough?

Sounds like bad planning.

I don't think it was the original plan to have all the Western Route controlled from there - by which I mean the plan when it was built - that is why it is only called the Thames Valley Signalling Centre.  Then the plan changed and I thought they were planning to extend the building - always a tricky thing when it is a live installation.  So I guess they have now realised that and have scaled back their aspirations to match the capacity of the building. 
Logged
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4773


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: November 15, 2018, 11:52:48 pm »

I don't think it was the original plan to have all the Western Route controlled from there - by which I mean the plan when it was built - that is why it is only called the Thames Valley Signalling Centre.  Then the plan changed and I thought they were planning to extend the building - always a tricky thing when it is a live installation.  So I guess they have now realised that and have scaled back their aspirations to match the capacity of the building. 

I think there's a difference between what was initially planned - as in going to be done within the foreseeable and plannable future - and what was always intended as the final result. There are maps with the NR routes  (their management regions, one of which is "Western"), identified one to one with ROCs (excepting some historical anomalies). But the Western Route Plan of 2013 said:
Quote
Signalling migration synopsis
Thames Valley Signalling Centre (TVSC) was commissioned in December 2010 as part of the Reading area enhancement programme. The Route has developed a migration plan for the current Great Western Mainline Power Signal Boxes which sees control of the entire line between Paddington and Bristol, Oxford and Newbury move to TVSC by 2015.

That's signalling, but an ROC also holds the ECR (electric power), NR route, and TOC operations control functions. I suspect that these have ended up employing more people than was foreseen. And of course that "planned" may have assumed that if more space was needed 30 years later than some could be built.

And has someone wearing a "resilience" hat come along to NR's planners of control strategy and asked what the backup arrangements are - e.g. if a major fire puts an ROC out of action for months, how and to where will control of all functions be transferred to be operational the next day? That must be easier to do with more, smaller, control units, though obviously needs some spare capacity somewhere.
Logged
martyjon
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1890


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: November 16, 2018, 05:15:29 am »

And has someone wearing a "resilience" hat come along to NR's planners of control strategy and asked what the backup arrangements are - e.g. if a major fire puts an ROC out of action for months, how and to where will control of all functions be transferred to be operational the next day? That must be easier to do with more, smaller, control units, though obviously needs some spare capacity somewhere.


I remember a time when I was last at Weston-Super-Mare station, the platform staff hidey hole had a 'slave panel' in it at the entrance to said hidey hole which was in full view of the travelling public although not many of the travelling public ventured so far down the up platform to notice it, I wonder if its still there.
Logged
bobm
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 8118



View Profile
« Reply #14 on: November 16, 2018, 07:13:32 am »

I understand it has been removed, as has a similar one at Newbury.

The latter is now in the care of the Swindon Panel Preservation Society.
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

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page