Line Capacity - single line.

[whole diary]

[grahame]

What a lovely reminder of just how much traffic can pass through the TransWilts.   A Bank Holiday Monday so a few of the earlier trains not running, but a pretty full general Monday to Firdy service all around otherwise - except that there's engineering works on the Berks and Hants, so lots of long distance expresses passing through.

Scheduled (see http://atrebatia.info/reminder_20170501.pdf ), we have
- 13 TransWilts regional services
- 26 London to The West expresses
- 18 freight paths (I have single-counted those which are alternatives that would conflict if both ran)
I make that 57 paths!

32 regional trains paths + 20 freight paths looks comfortable then    ... clock face hourly regional service with trains passing fairly near the end of the single line, with a freight train in the gap left each hour.

[Adelante_CCT]

But, the 'normal' Monday to Friday freights are still on that list, such as the 08:17, 15:10, 16:17 etc which won't run (and also can't possibly run to those times without some sort of magic trick)

[grahame]

But, the 'normal' Monday to Friday freights are still on that list, such as the 08:17, 15:10, 16:17 etc which won't run (and also can't possibly run to those times without some sort of magic trick)

Good point; a closer look suggests that the could run at somewhat varied times and I suspect they're left in there as "notional" trains for which the timekeeping isn't quite so vital.

[grahame]

Diary note ... if it hasn't worked too well today, there may be extenuating circumstances!

Due to animals on the railway between Castle Cary and Westbury all lines are blocked.

Train services running through these stations may be delayed by up to 100 minutes or revised. Disruption is expected until 20:00 01/05

[grahame]

And I note

17:28 Warminster to Worcester Shrub Hill due 20:30 has been previously delayed, has been further delayed at Westbury and is now 11 minutes late.
This is due to the train departing late to maintain customer connections.

and

18:38 Westbury to Cheltenham Spa due 20:48 has been delayed at Westbury and is now 30 minutes late.
This is due to animals on the railway.

sensible to delay final trains ...

[Chris from Nailsea]

Lions, from Longleat, possibly?   

[trainer]

Lions, from Longleat, possibly?   

Just lion on the tracks you think?   

[Chris from Nailsea]

Purrrfectly benign - until you drive a train at them. 

[bobm]

For the record it was five cows and three calves.

[Chris from Nailsea]

Hmm.  Trackside fence maintenance not up to date, then?  Is that the fault of the farmer, or Network Rail? 

[Oxonhutch]

The railway company bears the burden, as we in the heritage sector know well. 

[stuving]

The railway company bears the burden, as we in the heritage sector know well. 

Maybe ... unless they escaped through another fence, onto a road, and then go onto the railway at a level crossing, perhaps?

In 2014 ORR^» (Office of Rail and Road formerly Office of Rail Regulation - about) held a consultation on updating a load of minor regulations on safety (i.e. those not covered by the main EU^» (European Union - about)-derived laws). Did you miss it? After several inputs on this topic, they decided not to change the rules on fencing. 

Their parting comment on it was:

We sent the final draft of the regulations and impact assessment  to the Department for Transport in June 2015 which will enable the regulations to be laid before Parliament. The regulations and impact assessment will now go through the Department's clearance processes and the effective date for the new regulations is expected to be in 2016. In the meantime we are preparing draft guidance to the regulations.

I can't find anything since then, not from ORR, nor DfT^» (Department for Transport - about), nor in The Safety Legislation Update from RSSB^▸ (Rail Safety and Standards Board). So it looks as if, either way, The Railway Safety (Miscellaneous Provisions) Regulations 1997 still apply:

Unauthorised access

3.—(1) So far as is reasonably practicable, a person in control of any infrastructure of a transport system to which this regulation applies shall ensure, where and to the extent necessary for safety, that unauthorised access to that infrastructure is prevented.

(2) In paragraph (1) “access” means access by any person not at work on the transport system or by any animal.

(3) This regulation applies to any transport system except that it does not apply to any part of such a system which—
(a)is within a harbour, harbour area, maintenance or goods depot; or
(b)is part of a factory, mine or quarry,

where access to the harbour, harbour area, maintenance or goods depot, factory, mine or quarry is adequately controlled.

(4) Breach of a duty imposed by this regulation shall not confer a right of action in any civil proceedings.

I'm not sure of the point, or the effect, of that final loopholeexclusion. Does it mean farmers have to do temporary repairs themselves to protect their stock? It should prompt them to report damage and pester the railway to do repairs, at least.

I suspect there may be a few cases where the boundary (e.g. a wall) is owned by the neighbouring property, for whatever reason, and upkeep is the neighbour's responsibility. But that would be the exception, as when the railways were built they had to protect (often influential landowners') livestock from their dangerous new-fangled train things.

[Oxonhutch]

I have been told that the actual boundary of the railway ownership is six feet on the outside (with respect to the railway) of each fence.  This is to allow the railway company access to both sides of the fence for the purposes of upkeep and repair. An interesting conundrum arises when someone plants their garden shed up hard against the railway fence line.

[chrisr_75]

I have been told that the actual boundary of the railway ownership is six feet on the outside (with respect to the railway) of each fence.  This is to allow the railway company access to both sides of the fence for the purposes of upkeep and repair. An interesting conundrum arises when someone plants their garden shed up hard against the railway fence line.

I've seen plenty people extend their gardens a fair distance well beyond the fence onto railway property...!

[stuving]

If you want the original version of the rules on fences, they are in The Railway Clauses (Consolidation) Act 1845 (or in full, "An  Act  for  consolidating  in  One  Net  certain  Provisions  usually  inserted  in  Acts  authorizing  the  making  of  Railways. [8th May 1845.]"). As it says, this standardised what was put in railway acts, based on what was by then standard practice. It stood until 1962, and has been revised several times since. What it said about fences, as well as other aspects of "accommodation" of neighbours, was this: