Train GraphicClick on the map to explore geographics
 
I need help
FAQ
Emergency
About .
No recent travel & transport from BBC stories as at 17:15 01 May 2025
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 05/05/25 - Walk to Pilning
10/05/25 - BRTA Westbury
10/05/25 - Model Railway Show, Calne
13/05/25 - Melksham TUG / AGM

On this day
1st May (1964)
Helicopter service from Penzance to Scilly Isles starts (link)

Train RunningCancelled
16:00 Cardiff Central to Taunton
16:47 Bristol Temple Meads to Warminster
16:59 Gatwick Airport to Reading
16:59 Basingstoke to Reading
17:00 Oxford to London Paddington
17:15 Reading to Basingstoke
17:20 Basingstoke to Reading
17:38 Reading to Basingstoke
17:50 Gloucester to Salisbury
17:53 Basingstoke to Reading
17:57 Reading to Basingstoke
18:17 Basingstoke to Reading
18:29 Warminster to Bristol Temple Meads
18:32 Reading to Basingstoke
18:37 Basingstoke to Reading
18:54 Reading to Gatwick Airport
19:05 Reading to Basingstoke
19:07 Basingstoke to Reading
19:25 Reading to Basingstoke
20:11 Salisbury to Bristol Temple Meads
20:29 Gatwick Airport to Reading
Short Run
15:54 Reading to Gatwick Airport
16:30 London Paddington to Taunton
16:46 Avonmouth to Weston-Super-Mare
17:29 Gatwick Airport to Reading
17:30 London Paddington to Taunton
18:10 Taunton to Cardiff Central
Delayed
13:48 London Paddington to Carmarthen
14:48 London Paddington to Swansea
15:28 Weston-Super-Mare to London Paddington
15:30 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington
16:18 London Paddington to Carmarthen
16:22 Swansea to London Paddington
16:35 Didcot Parkway to Banbury
17:00 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads
Abbreviation pageAcronymns and abbreviations
Stn ComparatorStation Comparator
Rail newsNews Now - live rail news feed
Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
May 01, 2025, 17:15:07 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most recently liked subjects
[143] Steam excursion - except there's much more diesel than steam!
[89] Brighton Belle - merged topics
[77] Cash payments for transport services
[75] "Save the Last Remaining British Rail Hovercraft from Destruct...
[56] Station Jim’s whereabouts
[36] May Timetable Change
 
News: the Great Western Coffee Shop ... keeping you up to date with travel around the South West
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 46 47 [48] 49 50 ... 176
  Print  
Author Topic: Great Western Main Line electrification - ongoing discussion  (Read 1218083 times)
eightf48544
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4574


View Profile Email
« Reply #705 on: May 17, 2011, 18:40:08 »

When steam still reigned supreme GW» (Great Western - used as an abbreviation for the area / lines under the Great Western franchise, as opposed to FGW which includes "First", the company operating them too. For tickets - about) outside cylinder locos such as Halls and Granges were banned form Salisbury to Easleigh and Southampton whilst they were cleared for Reading to Bournemouth and Portsmouth (via Botley).

Something to do with tight clearance by platfoms. Hence GW engines were taken off at Salisbury and an ancient T9 took their place. If you lucky you might have got a West Country.
Logged
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 13350


View Profile Email
« Reply #706 on: May 18, 2011, 09:12:12 »

It's a matter of clearance - and paying for platforms / bridges / possibly tunnels to be altered.

There was mention of the possibility of turbos to Westbury during the next Reading blockade, so that may be where they start.
Logged
Rhydgaled
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1500


View Profile WWW
« Reply #707 on: May 19, 2011, 01:21:24 »

I've often wondered what the problem with the 165/166s is when it comes to gauge clearance. They seem to operate on a fairly wide cross section of routes at the moment. What's the main issue regarding them working further afield?

Personally, I think I'd file it under railway myths. 

As has been discussed fairly regularly elsewhere, there is a world of difference between 'can't be cleared' and 'hasn't been cleared yet'. 

Paul
165/166s are supposedly slightly wider than other stock. I've found the following material that may be helpful to this discussion:

Note particularly:
Quote
The Class 166 has the most limited alternative deployment because of its wider body profile. The Class 166 was built for use on Great Western routes, historically built to a wider gauge
From the maps, (if I'm interpereting them correctly) it looks like a small area east and north of Newcastle could be a suitable location for deployment (picked that one out because it isn't in the GW» (Great Western - used as an abbreviation for the area / lines under the Great Western franchise, as opposed to FGW which includes "First", the company operating them too. For tickets - about) region and may help Northern replace Pacers). I'd suggest putting them on Bristol - Taunton myself (after electrifcation, which might split CDF» (Cardiff - next trains) - Taunton at Bristol) but the maps seem to suggest they will not fit on that route.
Logged

----------------------------
Don't DOO (Driver-Only Operation (that is, trains which operate without carrying a guard)) it, keep the guard (but it probably wouldn't be a bad idea if the driver unlocked the doors on arrival at calling points).
IndustryInsider
Data Manager
Hero Member
******
Posts: 10456


View Profile
« Reply #708 on: May 19, 2011, 02:09:38 »

Interesting links, Rhydgaled, thanks.

Though one thing struck me, and that's how many more routes are suddenly opened up to Turbos (and other traction) should these 10% or less structures be modified.  All sorts of opportunities are then opened up such are sending them to ATW (Arriva Trains Wales (former Train Operating Company)) to work the Aberystwyth services leading to 158's being transferred to strengthen Pompey to Cardiff services. Just an example by the way! 

Though, forgive me for being a little pessimistic on the accuracy of the report, but I'm at a bit of a loss as to why the route profile of 165's is different to 166's though?  And how come Turbos have visited Weymouth and Llandudno over the years on excursion trains, when all routes to those destinations are, according to the diagrams, red for no-go?  Anyone?
Logged

To view my GWML (Great Western Main Line) 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/
Electric train
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4532


The future is 25000 Volts AC 750V DC has its place


View Profile
« Reply #709 on: May 19, 2011, 08:16:28 »

Though, forgive me for being a little pessimistic on the accuracy of the report, but I'm at a bit of a loss as to why the route profile of 165's is different to 166's though?  And how come Turbos have visited Weymouth and Llandudno over the years on excursion trains, when all routes to those destinations are, according to the diagrams, red for no-go?  Anyone?
It might be they are cleared at reduced speed that may be ok for an excursion but not acceptable for normal service.

Not all the 165/6's will be released post the TV (Thames Valley, or TeleVision, depending on context) area GWML (Great Western Main Line) electrification the branches (Greenford, Windsor, Marlow, Henley) will remain diesel like wise North Downs, Reading Basingstoke, beyond Newbury to Great Bedwin, I would guess perhaps 50% of the fleet will remain in the TV area.
Logged

Starship just experienced what we call a rapid unscheduled disassembly, or a RUD, during ascent,”
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 13350


View Profile Email
« Reply #710 on: May 19, 2011, 09:35:54 »

Indeed, along with 15 or so HSTs (High Speed Train (Inter City class 43 125 units)) to run the PLY» (Plymouth - next trains)/PNZ services.

It's the cost of platform & bridge clearance that is the concern. With zero money in the coffers to do this, it again goes back to the DfT» (Department for Transport - about) to 'allow' these costs to be offset within a project.

For example, the Reading re-modelling might be used to get clearances for turbos to run beyond Bedwyn.....if the HST was proving to be expensive to run & not carrying many passengers.
Logged
Zoe
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 754


View Profile
« Reply #711 on: May 19, 2011, 09:54:33 »

For example, the Reading re-modelling might be used to get clearances for turbos to run beyond Bedwyn
165s/166s are already cleared as far as Castle Cary.
Logged
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 13350


View Profile Email
« Reply #712 on: May 19, 2011, 09:59:34 »

Indeed, they could go further....
Logged
Zoe
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 754


View Profile
« Reply #713 on: May 19, 2011, 10:04:16 »

Indeed, they could go further....
Not sure you'd get them through the Dawlish tunnels though so would rule out use in the Westcountry even though they would be suitable for regional services there.
Logged
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 13350


View Profile Email
« Reply #714 on: May 19, 2011, 10:10:38 »

Tunnels & bridges would need work, indeed.
Logged
Tim
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2738


View Profile
« Reply #715 on: May 19, 2011, 11:49:02 »

Interesting links, Rhydgaled, thanks.
I'm at a bit of a loss as to why the route profile of 165's is different to 166's though? 

Only thing I can think of is that the 166s have "sticking out" bits of air conditioning units?  Or does the extra weight of the air con units (at the top of the train making them a bit top heavy?) cause them to sit lower on their suspension or bounce about the track a bit more?
Logged
Andrew1939 from West Oxon
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 535


View Profile Email
« Reply #716 on: May 19, 2011, 16:54:24 »

I recall that many years ago the Class 165/6 Thames Turbos were sometimes sent to Eastleigh for some maintenance work that could not be carried out at Reading. It was necessary to remove all the steps at the carriage doors as they would otherwise have fouled some platforms on the way to Eastleigh. Of course it was possible to do this because they were running empty stock out of service.
CLPG» (Cotswold Line Promotion Group - about) also ran a charter train from Thames Trains using a Class 166 Turbo on 14 June 1997 to Weymouth and I don't recall any clearance problems for that trip. There is a picture of the Turbo at weymouth station at http://www.clpg.co.uk/sptrns3.htm
Logged
paul7575
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5347


View Profile
« Reply #717 on: May 19, 2011, 17:17:06 »

The point I was trying to make (when mentioning Redhill - Selhurst and Guildford - Woking - Basingstoke) is that infrastructure problems may not be anything like as much of a stopper as some people believe.  The above routes are presumably not built to GW» (Great Western - used as an abbreviation for the area / lines under the Great Western franchise, as opposed to FGW which includes "First", the company operating them too. For tickets - about) greater clearances - but was any physical work done to clear the stock?  None that I heard of.

Removing stop boards used to be required for 442s en route to Ilford on the NLL (North London line) - but it could be anything between one platform edge or all of them, as an example.

Paul
Logged
ChrisB
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 13350


View Profile Email
« Reply #718 on: May 19, 2011, 17:18:36 »

PLatform edges, bridges & tunnels are the likely problems
Logged
bobm
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 10240



View Profile
« Reply #719 on: May 19, 2011, 17:39:44 »

Don't HSTs (High Speed Train (Inter City class 43 125 units)) have a problem when diverted onto the Reading-Waterloo line. I remember reading somewhere that they had issues with some platform edges. Not sure what they did about it.
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 ... 46 47 [48] 49 50 ... 176
  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 customers 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 via admin@railcustomer.info. Full legal statement (here).

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page