|
Bob_Blakey
|
 |
« on: November 14, 2019, 17:45:34 » |
|
Currently heading to London on 1L60 and have just departed Gillingham 23 minutes down due to an initial delay east of Axminster (late running GWR▸ divert) and subsequent conflicts. Reinforces my view that this important diversionary route urgently needs to be looked at in terms of redoubling.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JontyMort
|
|
« Reply #2 on: November 14, 2019, 20:37:16 » |
|
Currently heading to London on 1L60 and have just departed Gillingham 23 minutes down.
<snip>
This important diversionary route urgently needs to be looked at in terms of redoubling.
Agreed re re-doubling. At the risk of upsetting GW▸ sensitivities, it's surely more than a diversionary route - because it serves places worth stopping at (Andover, Salisbury, Sherborne, Yeovil). |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JayMac
|
|
« Reply #3 on: November 14, 2019, 20:40:03 » |
|
... and Templecombe.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for the rest of the day. Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
- Sir Terry Pratchett.
|
|
|
|
PhilWakely
|
|
« Reply #4 on: November 14, 2019, 20:57:30 » |
|
Agreed re re-doubling. At the risk of upsetting GW▸ sensitivities,.................
Replace GW with BR▸ (W) and you get precisely the reason why west of Salisbury was singled in the first place  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Bmblbzzz
|
|
« Reply #5 on: November 14, 2019, 22:35:28 » |
|
Agreed re re-doubling.
Wouldn't re re-doubling make it four tracks?  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Waiting at Pilning for the midnight sleeper to Prague.
|
|
|
|
JontyMort
|
|
« Reply #6 on: November 14, 2019, 23:40:16 » |
|
Agreed re re-doubling. At the risk of upsetting GW▸ sensitivities,.................
Replace GW with BR▸ (W) and you get precisely the reason why west of Salisbury was singled in the first place Exactly. Not invented here. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Fairhurst
|
|
« Reply #7 on: November 15, 2019, 10:54:41 » |
|
Replace GW▸ with BR▸ (W) and you get precisely the reason why west of Salisbury was singled in the first place Gerry Fiennes, in his terrific autobiography "I Tried to Run a Railway", says that the Salisbury route suffered because the local councils wouldn't fight for it, so BR(W) put its priorities elsewhere. (It's a superb book if you've not read it.) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
IndustryInsider
|
|
« Reply #8 on: November 15, 2019, 11:06:47 » |
|
I doubt full redoubling could ever be affordable, but an extension of some of the current double track sections, Axminster style, and a few extra signals so trains can be better flighted behind each other should be considered IMHO▸ .
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
To view my GWML▸ Electrification cab video 'before and after' video comparison, as well as other videos of the new layout at Reading and 'before and after' comparisons of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/ |
|
|
|
bradshaw
|
|
« Reply #9 on: November 15, 2019, 12:52:21 » |
|
P103 of his book has the detail (see attached photo).
Surely there are some fixes that would not be difficult to make. Extending the loop at Tisbury to the station, likewise at Templecombe. This would allow trains to carry out the station stops while waiting for another to pass.
Further improvements need an analysis of where the best crossing points need to be. Data from this week’s service might help in this. Do we need an extended loop at Chard towards Crewkerne? Recent building work in the ex-down goods yard plus the 1990s platform widening means that doubling the track through Crewkerne station itself is not an option.
A previous Wessex RUS▸ went into this and is available somewhere online.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Zoe
|
|
« Reply #10 on: November 15, 2019, 13:25:51 » |
|
Extending the loop at Tisbury to the station
That won't be easy to do since the land for the second platform was sold and I have heard that the sale included a covenant stating that a Compulsory Purchase Order would never be used to reacquire the land. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JayMac
|
|
« Reply #11 on: November 15, 2019, 15:11:45 » |
|
Won't be easy at Templecombe either. Whilst the south side (former down) platform face extension fitted in 2013 could be removed (built such to allow that) you'd need much work done to bring the former platform up to modern standards. What's left is very narrow and car park space would have to be sacrificed. The relatively new ticket office may need moving back too. Add to that the need for access to the upside if double track was reinstated. That realistically means a new footbridge with lifts.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for the rest of the day. Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
- Sir Terry Pratchett.
|
|
|
|
chopper1944
|
|
« Reply #12 on: November 15, 2019, 15:34:34 » |
|
The line between Exeter Central and Yeovil Junction needs to be two track all the way between. Two track between Yeovil Junction to Castle Cary should also be considered. The difficulties between Yeovil Junction to Salisbury of two tracks are probably insurmountable at present.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Zoe
|
|
« Reply #13 on: November 15, 2019, 15:45:15 » |
|
One issue between Exeter and Yeovil Junction is the M5 bridge which was only built for a single track.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Posts: 6438
The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!
|
|
« Reply #14 on: November 15, 2019, 16:43:45 » |
|
I hereby support this new campaign, and wish it every success!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Now, please!
|
|
|
|
