Network Rail Evaluating The Potential For Container Freight Route Via Melksham

[whole diary]

[Lee]

From the Network Rail Strategic Business Plan Update (Page 24 of the link below) :
http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/StrategicBusinessPlan/RoutePlans/2008/Route%2013%20-%20Great%20Western%20Main%20Line.pdf

To meet the challenge of increased growth in freight from the Southampton ports to the Midlands, the north of England and Scotland, we shall be re-evaluating elements of the former SRA^» (Strategic Rail Authority - about) Southampton ^ West Coast freight upgrade ^ capacity study, which included W10 gauge provision and revised layout options for Reading West Junction, including grade separation, upgrading and linking existing freight loops and providing additional loops at or between Didcot and Oxford. We are also evaluating the potential for an alternative route via Salisbury and Melksham to accommodate forecast growth.

[grahame]

From the Network Rail Strategic Business Plan Update (Page 24 of the link below) :
http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/StrategicBusinessPlan/RoutePlans/2008/Route%2013%20-%20Great%20Western%20Main%20Line.pdf

We are also evaluating the potential for an alternative route via Salisbury and Melksham to accommodate forecast growth.

Only right that they look at all options. 

I note the front cover



and hope that the "You" in the headline is a generic "You " for anyone who wishes to travel on the rail network served by, and connection to, the West main line.

[Lee]

Further quote from the Network Rail Strategic Business Plan Update (Page 11 of the link below.)
http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/StrategicBusinessPlan/RoutePlans/2008/Route%204%20-%20Wessex%20Routes.pdf

The W10 gauge enhancement scheme on Route 3 between Southampton and the West Coast Main Line has now been granted Transport Innovation Fund (TIF^▸ (Transport Innovation Fund)) funding. This is likely to encourage growth in container traffic from Southampton, but if a suitable diversionary route is not provided then such growth could well be choked off given the increasing usage of 9^ 6^ containers. Providing a W10 route via Laverstock (and thence via Andover or via Melksham) is therefore seen as crucial, not only to cater for freight growth, but also to ensure robust performance for all operators in the event that the main W10 route on Route 3 is blocked for any reason. Clearing the route via Melksham would avoid the need for trains to travel via Reading.

In other words, even with the W10 gauge enhancement scheme in place on the main route between Southampton and the West Coast Main Line, Network Rail do not think that this will be enough to accomodate the forecast growth in container traffic from Southampton. They therefore propose to route some of this extra traffic over an alternative route, which would also act as a diversionary route for the main W10 cleared route.

The route via Melksham is the front-runner, because clearing it would avoid the need for trains to travel via Reading.

[devon_metro]

"Platform 1 for the container service to Trafford Park"

[Btline]

Would redoubling need to take place (assuming a decent passenger service has started)?

[grahame]

Would redoubling need to take place (assuming a decent passenger service has started)?

That's a very tough question, but (ball park figures) there is current capacity for one train each way, alternating, per hour - so over 18 hours that's 36 journeys.  Add a coupl of extra signals and let co-ordinaye the freight with the passengers, and that could go up to around 60 journeys.

Currently there are 4 passenger journeys, leaving 56 paths free for freight before you double. After December, there will (we hope) by 12 passenger journeys, and I'm going to project that up to 20 (train every 2 hours, from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m.), leaving 40 for freight, in 5 years time with just extra signals.   

It's when you want to start running three trains each way every hour that things start to get to the "gawd - this needs to be double" stage although it would be wise to add refuge loops (say) at Thingley and Bradford Junctions well before that so that a degree of further robustness if provided.  The Business Plan calls for such extra loops between Didcot and Oxford, and it would be natural to put in more on the Chippenham to Trowbridge section.

[devon_metro]

Increase of services on the transwilts at such a level would warrant increases in capacity between Thingly Jn and Swindon as HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) travel at 125mph whilst the units potter along at 75!

[Jim]

Increase of services on the transwilts at such a level would warrant increases in capacity between Thingly Jn and Swindon as HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) travel at 125mph whilst the units potter along at 75!

You mean the153's in the 5trains a day TT went that fast

[Jim]

Would redoubling need to take place (assuming a decent passenger service has started)?

That's a very tough question, but (ball park figures) there is current capacity for one train each way, alternating, per hour - so over 18 hours that's 36 journeys.  Add a coupl of extra signals and let co-ordinaye the freight with the passengers, and that could go up to around 60 journeys.

Currently there are 4 passenger journeys, leaving 56 paths free for freight before you double. After December, there will (we hope) by 12 passenger journeys, and I'm going to project that up to 20 (train every 2 hours, from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m.), leaving 40 for freight, in 5 years time with just extra signals.   

It's when you want to start running three trains each way every hour that things start to get to the "gawd - this needs to be double" stage although it would be wise to add refuge loops (say) at Thingley and Bradford Junctions well before that so that a degree of further robustness if provided.  The Business Plan calls for such extra loops between Didcot and Oxford, and it would be natural to put in more on the Chippenham to Trowbridge section.

Well - I look forward to seeing where the plan to put those loops!