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
Current Train Running @GWR Twitter Feed Acronyms/Abbreviations Station Comparator Rail News GWR co. site Site Style 1 2 3 4
June 29, 2017, 01:29:07 AM *
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 ... 9 10 [11]
  Print  
Author Topic: Oxford Station - improvements, incidents and events (merged topic)  (Read 106318 times)
IndustryInsider
TransWilts Member
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5668


View Profile
« Reply #150 on: May 16, 2016, 08:13:01 PM »

If & when the up loop platform opens (& it is on plans I've seen) another renumber will be necessary...and platform 5 will appear first on the down loop

I'm not sure it will be - the plans I've seen indicate that the up loop platform is merely an extension of bay Platform 2, what was Platform 3 until today.  And yes to Platform 5 being the down loop.
Logged

To view my cab run over the new Reading Viaduct as well as a relief line cab ride at Reading just after Platforms 12-15 opened and my 'before and after' video comparison of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/1
ChrisB
TransWilts Member
Hero Member
******
Posts: 8232


View Profile Email
« Reply #151 on: May 16, 2016, 09:43:10 PM »

Yes, that's possible...but isn't Chiltern meant to be getting 2 bay platforms?...
Logged
IndustryInsider
TransWilts Member
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5668


View Profile
« Reply #152 on: May 17, 2016, 05:11:48 AM »

I think it was originally, but the likelihood of Chiltern and EW Rail services terminating at Oxford in the longer term looks slim, and so having two north facing bay is enough - the existing one and a new one.  Then if the new platform 2 eventually becomes a through platform then that's still available to them if needed.
Logged

To view my cab run over the new Reading Viaduct as well as a relief line cab ride at Reading just after Platforms 12-15 opened and my 'before and after' video comparison of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/1
ellendune
TransWilts Member
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2482


View Profile
« Reply #153 on: June 15, 2017, 11:52:50 PM »

Further details of the Oxford Station Masterplan have been published  http://www.oxfordwestend.co.uk/Direct/Loresexhibitiongraphics.pdf
Logged
paul7755
TransWilts Member
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4168


View Profile
« Reply #154 on: June 16, 2017, 12:28:05 PM »

Further details of the Oxford Station Masterplan have been published  http://www.oxfordwestend.co.uk/Direct/Loresexhibitiongraphics.pdf

I've seen that before, it's a 2014 pdf.    Quite possible to have changed since then, I'd have thought?

Paul
Logged
ellendune
TransWilts Member
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2482


View Profile
« Reply #155 on: June 16, 2017, 01:58:37 PM »


I've seen that before, it's a 2014 pdf.    Quite possible to have changed since then, I'd have thought?

Paul

Sorry was trying to be helpful and not put in a link to something behind a paywall.

Try this http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/15341633.RAILWAY_STATION_REVAMP__Oxford_s_full__masterplan__finally_revealed/
Logged
Gordon the Blue Engine
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 516


View Profile
« Reply #156 on: June 17, 2017, 04:43:52 PM »

I hope that if any platforms are likely to be occupied by more than 1 train at a time – quite likely I would have thought with terminators coming in from the north and the south – then the platforms will be properly signalled for this with mid platform signals etc.  Unlike Reading. 
Logged
SandTEngineer
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1363


Somewhere in the far Southwest


View Profile
« Reply #157 on: June 17, 2017, 05:30:40 PM »

I hope that if any platforms are likely to be occupied by more than 1 train at a time – quite likely I would have thought with terminators coming in from the north and the south – then the platforms will be properly signalled for this with mid platform signals etc.  Unlike Reading.
They won't be. Normal platform sharing arrangements using 'Calling On' aspects on the platform protecting stop signals are being provided.
Logged

Out of this nettle, Danger, we pluck this flower, Safety.
[Henry IV, Part 1, Act 2, Scene 3]
Gordon the Blue Engine
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 516


View Profile
« Reply #158 on: June 17, 2017, 06:14:57 PM »

OK, but Group Standard GK/RT0044 “Guidance on Permissive Working” states:

"2.2.1    Facilities for signalling a passenger train on to an occupied line shall only be provided where all of the following apply:
                a) It is a platform line.
                b) The purpose is for platform sharing and / or joining trains.
                c) There is no reasonably practicable alternative method of working which presents less risk."

Para c) acknowledges that signalling a passenger train on to an occupied line (ie permissive working) carries a risk.  I would have thought that for a new layout with new signalling it would be difficult for NR to claim “there is no reasonably practicable alternative method of working which presents less risk”. 
Logged
ChrisB
TransWilts Member
Hero Member
******
Posts: 8232


View Profile Email
« Reply #159 on: June 17, 2017, 07:17:05 PM »

So very poor integrated transport requiring those with mobility problems to have to negotiate their way to Becket Street (no current plans for pick up in front of the new station. Only pedestrians and cyclists get that bonus
Logged
SandTEngineer
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1363


Somewhere in the far Southwest


View Profile
« Reply #160 on: June 17, 2017, 08:16:59 PM »

OK, but Group Standard GK/RT0044 “Guidance on Permissive Working” states:

"2.2.1    Facilities for signalling a passenger train on to an occupied line shall only be provided where all of the following apply:
                a) It is a platform line.
                b) The purpose is for platform sharing and / or joining trains.
                c) There is no reasonably practicable alternative method of working which presents less risk."

Para c) acknowledges that signalling a passenger train on to an occupied line (ie permissive working) carries a risk.  I would have thought that for a new layout with new signalling it would be difficult for NR to claim “there is no reasonably practicable alternative method of working which presents less risk”.
I think you have mis-understood that.  It means that permissive working itself should not implemented unless there is no alternative, not that alternative signalling should be arranged to permit it. In truth it is suggesting that there should be additional platforms that are not shared.

I can think of lots of recent schemes that comply with the standard but don't have intermediate platform signals.  Out of interest Bristol Temple Meads will have intermediate platform signals but that is probably due to the length of the platforms which are in effect two operationally separate platforms and will therefore be separated by signals.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2017, 08:33:47 PM by SandTEngineer » Logged

Out of this nettle, Danger, we pluck this flower, Safety.
[Henry IV, Part 1, Act 2, Scene 3]
Gordon the Blue Engine
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 516


View Profile
« Reply #161 on: June 18, 2017, 10:41:19 AM »

We are interpreting this extract differently, others can come to their own conclusions.  The fact is that permissive working carries risks which can be avoided if fixed signals are provided, and providing fixed signals at new build stage is relatively easy. 

NB the Sprinter/HST collision at Plymouth last year, the RAIB Report on which was published in February.
Logged
SandTEngineer
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1363


Somewhere in the far Southwest


View Profile
« Reply #162 on: June 18, 2017, 03:02:52 PM »

We are interpreting this extract differently, others can come to their own conclusions.  The fact is that permissive working carries risks which can be avoided if fixed signals are provided, and providing fixed signals at new build stage is relatively easy. 

NB the Sprinter/HST collision at Plymouth last year, the RAIB Report on which was published in February.
Fixed mid-platform signals would not have reduced the risk as part of that collision.  The HST was stood well past the platform mid-point so the DMU would have still been signalled into an occupied platform by a 'Calling On' aspect.
Logged

Out of this nettle, Danger, we pluck this flower, Safety.
[Henry IV, Part 1, Act 2, Scene 3]
Gordon the Blue Engine
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 516


View Profile
« Reply #163 on: June 19, 2017, 08:57:03 AM »

The point I was making is that permissive working carries risks which do not exist with fixed signals.  Permissive working is sometimes necessary eg coupling up but my view is that where it can be avoided it should be.  If there had been a mid-platform signal and the first train couldn't fit behind (like the HST at Plymouth), then I contend that a second train should not normally be allowed in permissively from the other end.  If the first train had been a 3 car Sprinter from the London end, it could have sat behind a mid-platform signal and the Sprinter from Cornwall could have been safely let in to the platform under fixed signals.

Fixed signals, especially nowadays with TPWS etc, provide a safeguard against human error: these safeguards do not exist with permissive working, hence the wording in the Group Standard.

I think I've said all I want to say on this topic, S&TE I'm happy if you have the last word.  Off to the seaside for a few days so I'll leave arguments behind.

Sorry about delayed response – BBQ yesterday and I don’t email, post messages etc when I’ve been drinking! 

3rd sentence edited for clarity
« Last Edit: June 19, 2017, 09:14:31 AM by Gordon the Blue Engine » Logged
SandTEngineer
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1363


Somewhere in the far Southwest


View Profile
« Reply #164 on: June 19, 2017, 09:57:15 AM »

Enjoy your break.  Don't think I have any further points to add to those I have already made Wink
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 ... 9 10 [11]
  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