Campaign to reopen Didcot to Southampton railway

[whole diary]

[TonyK]

Instead of Lundy, you could go via Instow, Barnstaple, Woody Bay to Ilfracombe, then over the Severn Barrage. Should be popular with almost nobody, so stands a chance.

[chuffed]

As we seem to have drifted into fantasy land , how about a third Severn crossing from Royal Portbury dock with a service station on Denny island ....that may get some people scratching their heads.....and joining the present M4 just west of the present  M4 toll booths so we English  don't have to pay for the privilege of entering the Principality? I suppose it might be mistaken by pilots who are more used to landing in San Francisco, as the runway for Severnside airport. Trouble is , if you whisper these crackpot schemes to those in the DafT  corridors of power, they actually then go ahead and build them!

[grahame]

Shall we bring ourselves a little back on track ... we appear to have slid on from the unlikely (but then re-opening of the Waverley route was unlikely at the time it was ripped up) to the impractical.   Let's just keep one eye open to the thoughts that the promoters of these unlikely schemes may turn out to be (a) more farsighted than we are and (b) readers of the forum!

[ellendune]

Having read one of the links on their website which reviews the trackbed between Didcot and Newbury (http://www.geograph.org.uk/article/The-DidcotNewbury-and-Southampton-Line), it seems that more of the North Section has survived than I had thought.

However I think that south of Newbury most of it is under the A34.

The new viaduct at Reading is designed to provide additional capacity on this route.  A restored DN&S would need a flyover junction at Didcot as well as a new route from Newbury southwards.

Once Reading is done surely the capacity problems are Didcot to Oxford and the route from Basingstoke through Winchester to Eastliegh. The promoters correctly identify the alternative route for this section as from Salisbury through Romsey.  If there is capacity between Whitchurch and Salisbury then surely an improvement between Basingstoke and the Junction between the Salisbury/Winchester lines (sorry forgotten its name) would be much cheaper than reopening the DN&S to Newbury and a new route from Newbury to Whitchurch.

[paul7575]

Once Reading is done surely the capacity problems are Didcot to Oxford and the route from Basingstoke through Winchester to Eastliegh. The promoters correctly identify the alternative route for this section as from Salisbury through Romsey.  If there is capacity between Whitchurch and Salisbury then surely an improvement between Basingstoke and the Junction between the Salisbury/Winchester lines (sorry forgotten its name) would be much cheaper than reopening the DN&S to Newbury and a new route from Newbury to Whitchurch.

There is capacity for at least 2 freights per hour from Basingstoke to Southampton via Andover, Laverstock (Salisbury) and Romsey, it's covered in the South Hants freight section of the London and SE  RUS^▸ (Route Utilisation Strategy) (page 217). West of Basingstoke station the line is already four tracked as far as Worting Junction.  (Worting Jn provides the fast/slow crossovers and Battledown flyover provides the necessary grade separation of the Up Southampton route.)

They already have plans to put in an up direction freight loop just west of Basingstoke station to allow long freight trains to be regulated there.  The future pinch point will therefore be routeing down direction freights over the flat junction at Basingstoke station's east end, and I believe there's a solution in mind for this, involving a bypass line on the north side of the station, alongside the Reading bay platform.

I think they'll manage without the DNS^▸ (Domain name service)...

Paul

[John R]

And there's also the option of running via Warminster, Westbury, Melksham and Swindon. Upgrading that route would be a lot cheaper, and indeed, still appears to be a viable option given the relatively light passenger use between Southampton and Westbury, and onwards to Chippenham. The loss of Didcot coal traffic will have released many slots on the only heavily used section between Wootton Bassett and Didcot.

[grahame]

And there's also the option of running via Warminster, Westbury, Melksham and Swindon.

For the cost of 3 or 4 miles of the DNS^▸ (Domain name service) (and not the difficult miles), you'll redouble Thingley to Bradford, add a fourth platform at Westbury, resignal the Warmsinter - Salisbury section which has very long headways on it, add extra track at Romsey so that the passenger train turnback isn't done on the main line (arrangement like Bedwyn?) and bring the fourth through platform at Salisbury back into use.  You may need layby / loop resilience increasing - Salibsury, Westbury, Swindon are obvious candidates.  Chippenham would be another if it weren't for all those car parks!

I suspect you might need to do something on the main line to the west of Didcot due to the speed differential of the freight and passenger trains;  to the west and south of Royal Wootton Bassett you're probably set for 2 to 4 passenger trains and 2 to 4 freight trains in each direction each hour. ERTMS^▸ (European Rail Traffic Management System.) may increase capacity too, but if you're looking at more trains even than this, it may indeed be a (re)newed route that provides a solution.

[John R]

And you forgot electrify of course. (The current diversionary route via Laverstock isn't going to be much use once the "Electric Spine" is in place, even with the current work to increase clearances on it.)

West of Didcot is interesting. There used to be another set of loops until a few years ago when they were abolished and replaced by a second set in a more practical position, but I presume they could be relatively easily reinstated. However, loops almost certainly mean the freights have to stop and start, which increases energy consumption significantly. So a route that could give a reliable journey with fewer stops would be more attractive to the freight operator. Not sure whether that would be via Basingstoke or Westbury.

[bobm]

West of Didcot is interesting. There used to be another set of loops until a few years ago when they were abolished and replaced by a second set in a more practical position, but I presume they could be relatively easily reinstated.

Which loops were they - the ones at Uffington or were there ones near where the Milton Trading Estate is now before the Wantage Road/Challow ones?

[ellendune]

And you forgot electrify of course. (The current diversionary route via Laverstock isn't going to be much use once the "Electric Spine" is in place, even with the current work to increase clearances on it.)

I am assuming we are just waiting for a later stage of electrification.

West of Didcot is interesting. There used to be another set of loops until a few years ago when they were abolished and replaced by a second set in a more practical position, but I presume they could be relatively easily reinstated. However, loops almost certainly mean the freights have to stop and start, which increases energy consumption significantly. So a route that could give a reliable journey with fewer stops would be more attractive to the freight operator. Not sure whether that would be via Basingstoke or Westbury.

The Wantage to Challow loop was reinstated in the '90s.  There was a Shrivenham loop that was quite long as well.  It is these long loops that allow freight trains not to have to stop.  Ultimately I suspect all of the line from Didcot to Swindon will be 4 tracked except for perhaps a short section through Steventon.  This was the GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) plan in the 1930's, they just never got to finish it.

[John R]

West of Didcot is interesting. There used to be another set of loops until a few years ago when they were abolished and replaced by a second set in a more practical position, but I presume they could be relatively easily reinstated.

Which loops were they - the ones at Uffington or were there ones near where the Milton Trading Estate is now before the Wantage Road/Challow ones?

I'm thinking of the ones at Uffington, which were removed sometime around the mid 90s after construction of the Challow loops.

[bobm]

I remember trying to find a vantage point to photograph the loops after a trip to White Horse Hill.

If memory serves wasn't Uffington once the boundary between the old Reading Panel box and the one at Swindon?

[TonyK]

Shall we bring ourselves a little back on track ... we appear to have slid on from the unlikely (but then re-opening of the Waverley route was unlikely at the time it was ripped up) to the impractical.   Let's just keep one eye open to the thoughts that the promoters of these unlikely schemes may turn out to be (a) more farsighted than we are and (b) readers of the forum!

Sorry, Sir.

[grahame]

http://www.basingstokegazette.co.uk/news/11324957._/?

THE re-opening of a long-lost Hampshire railway, which runs through Whitchurch, has come a small step closer, following a public meeting.

Fifteen people attended the meeting in Newbury, organised by Didcot, Newbury & Southampton Railway Revival (DNSRR).

The restored railway would improve transport links in the Didcot-Winchester corridor and provide additional capacity for freight traffic between Southampton and the Midlands.

At Oxford, it would also link to East West Rail, currently under construction, giving simple access to Aylesbury, Milton Keynes, and Bedford, and, eventually, to Cambridge.

[article continues with some detail]

[Red Squirrel]

...the mood at the meeting was generally supportive.

There were fifteen people there, and they were generally supportive...