Cotswold Line - 2018 cancellation and amendments log

[whole diary]

[Dispatch Box]

GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) or any operator running to a timetable are caught between a rock and a hard place when a train's running late - especially where single track is involved - whether to inconvenience passengers on the current service by terminating it short of booked destination, or inconveniencing others on trains if the late running means it's going to get in the way and knock on effects continuing perhaps for hours or until close of service.

Solutions?  Sort out delays and run trains much better to time, and these problems will be reduced as a consequence.  Other possible solutions (scheduling fewer trains, providing spares so there's something to send back even if an incoming service is late, easing schedules, denying train use to slow-to-board people) are rather unattractive.

Personal favourite annoyance ... late (or even early) running freight train in the way.  Not thrilled when reliability goes to pot because of problems on other lines either and 'we' get used for diverted passenger trains which take up the capacity - without even the courtesy of stopping at the stations where they have removed services for many hours.

I Have a solution, continue redoubling Cotswold line to Wolvercot and Norton junctions, then the trains will improve, not many miles of track left to redouble?.

[JontyMort]

Even redoubling just from Wolvercot to Hanborough and Norton to Worcestershire Parkway (the latter being a few hundred yards) would probably be enough. In particular, Parkway will not succeed if this isn't done, because late-running trains from Evesham will stop trains leaving Shrub Hill for Parkway, which in turn will mess up connections for Bristol and the south-west via the Midland.

[Dispatch Box]

I Thought all of the line had been redoubled, Just leaving the ends that I mentioned. Network Rail have just had a big boost on money for cp6, so maybe they will be done.

[JontyMort]

Yes, the ones I mentioned are parts of the sections you mentioned.

[Dispatch Box]

Will mean Norton and Wolvercot junctions needing relaying, Norton being resignalled.

I Think the token instrument in Norton junction signalbox slows down trains. As the signalman needs to walk to a platform to hand to driver.

[JontyMort]

In practice I don't think that happens, since trains pass Norton box at speed in the up direction. In the down direction it is quite slow, since the junction itself is single lead off the up line, so down trains currently have to take the crossover just north of the junction.

You are right that the junction needs relaying as a proper double junction (and so does Wolvercot).

[Dispatch Box]

I have just looked at my book, it says in there, There is EKT block to Moreton in Marsh, AB to Shrub Hill, TCB^▸ (Track Circuit Block) To Gloucester. The book shows a picture of the signallman handing token to a driver.

[IndustryInsider]

No tokens have been used since the redoubling in 2011.  Down trains have to slow to 25mph over the crossover though, whilst up trains can take it at a far more respectable 70mph.

The North Cotswold Line Taskforce recommendations are due (overdue?) to be published which should give a clearer indication as to what’s likely to be improved first.

See my post here as to what I think should be done:  http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=20393.0

[JontyMort]

Thanks for posting that link - as a newbie I hadn't seen it before. Very interesting. Obviously your idea of redoubling Evesham to Pershore, coupled with a much faster crossover at Norton for down trains, gets round the nightmare of two stops in the Evesham-Norton section. If reliability can be improved to the extent of getting down trains away from Evesham on time, then my concern about Parkway is reduced.

IETs^▸ (Intercity Express Train) should improve dwell times, and the selective platform extensions will help too. But it is embarrassing that the Shipton stop on the 2148 HST^▸ (High Speed Train) from London takes longer than the Reading stop, and that cannot be solely down to the stock. Surely it ought to be possible for the train manager to say "I shall be at  the door in Coach X, and if you want to get off you will be there also", and just open one door (cutting the stop to 30 seconds).

Finally - and I declare an interest here as a Worcester-based traveller - if your suggestion of a second path per hour (at some times of day) bears fruit, then we'll find out if GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) is serious about the western end of the line. Paddington to Worcester is still slower than the fastest train in 1923. To improve this would mean running non-stop to Oxford, then Charlbury, Kingham, Moreton, Evesham... Whether the traffic is there to justify that is far from clear.

[martyjon]

Redouble the whole line and be done with it.

FT reporting another £1 billion sought for Crossrail and opening may be put back to 2020, so why not a few hundred million for the Cotswold line, Oh! that's not London, forget it.

Where stations need a second platform do we always have to have a footbridge, why not use the wonders of todays tunnel boring technology and bore subways to connect the new platform at such locations where practical.

[charles_uk]

Finally - and I declare an interest here as a Worcester-based traveller - if your suggestion of a second path per hour (at some times of day) bears fruit, then we'll find out if GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) is serious about the western end of the line. Paddington to Worcester is still slower than the fastest train in 1923. To improve this would mean running non-stop to Oxford, then Charlbury, Kingham, Moreton, Evesham... Whether the traffic is there to justify that is far from clear.

I'll also declare an interest - and I appreciate this is all just wishful thinking - but I would take issue with your choice of Kingham over Hanborough given the latter station is far more heavily used!

[JontyMort]

Interesting. I had always assumed that Kingham (for Chipping Norton) was more used, but I suppose Hanborough is the railhead for Witney and Woodstock.

I had Hanborough down for the "all stations" service terminating at Moreton-in-Marsh 

As you say, it is all pure fantasy and we shall continue to drive to Warwick Parkway.

[charles_uk]

Interesting. I had always assumed that Kingham (for Chipping Norton) was more used, but I suppose Hanborough is the railhead for Witney and Woodstock.

We digress from the purpose of this thread, but Hanborough was actually the second busiest station between Oxford and Worcester a couple of years ago but has fallen back a bit since Oxford Parkway opened. The figures for 2017-18 should be out very soon but for 2016-17 Hanborough had passenger figures of 239K against Kingham's 184K.

[Witham Bobby]

I Thought all of the line had been redoubled, Just leaving the ends that I mentioned. Network Rail have just had a big boost on money for cp6, so maybe they will be done.

Yes, the ones I mentioned are parts of the sections you mentioned.

Will mean Norton and Wolvercot junctions needing relaying, Norton being resignalled.


I Think the token instrument in Norton junction signalbox slows down trains. As the signalman needs to walk to a platform to hand to driver.

The Evesham to Norton Junction single-line section, which had been controlled under the Electric Train Token Regulations since the ridiculous singling of the line in 1973, became the Evesham West Junction to Norton Junction controlled by Acceptance "levers" in 2011, with the re-signalling and partial re-doubling of the route.  Unfortunately the single line along this section remains single, along with all the trouble that causes.  (I say "levers", because the one in Evesham box is a button, I believe)

[charles_uk]

Bringing things back on topic:

07:10 Moreton-in-Marsh to London Paddington due 08:51 will be started from Oxford.
It will no longer call at Moreton-in-Marsh, Kingham, Charlbury and Hanborough.
This is due to a safety inspection of the track earlier today.
Last Updated:11/12/2018 06:23

[Later comment] The outward run to Moreton-in-Marsh arrived at Oxford only a few minutes late and there were no significant delays with the services coming off the single track at Wolvercote Junction at that time. I'm wondering whether this was a different way of managing the late running 05:28 Hereford to Paddington instead of running it fast from MIM to Oxford, and leaving passengers at Charlbury and Hanborough to catch the 07:10 MIM:PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains) which would also have been delayed by the late running.