Westbury - engineering works from 24th December 2024 for 30 days

[whole diary]

[IndustryInsider]

So... the work involved in making passive provision to return that Westbury platform to use... what might that involve and are there varying degrees of what might be done? At the least, if the winter 2024-25 work will be making it more difficult, it may be possible at this stage to at least avoid *that* outcome.

Is it making it more difficult?  Isn't passive provision already there?

AFAICT^▸ (as far as I can tell) it needs building the platform out to the alignment of the current Up Reception Line, and then making any necessary upgrades so that loop is suitable for passenger trains.  That sort of thing includes mainline signals (which it already has) and suitable routings from them (which there already are).  You might need catch points installed on some of the sidings that feed onto it, and IIRC^▸ (if I recall/remember/read correctly) correctly there's a tight radius curve at the western end which would probably need easing as units are currently banned from using it.  Then, finally, you need to persuade the current freight operators that having it as a passenger platform won't affect their operation.

Do the works involve making any of those objectives more difficult?  If not then the current state of passive provision is maintained.

[grahame]

AFAICT^▸ (as far as I can tell) it needs building the platform out to the alignment of the current Up Reception Line, and then making any necessary upgrades so that loop is suitable for passenger trains. ...

Do the works involve making any of those objectives more difficult?  If not then the current state of passive provision is maintained.

I have heard three ways discussed.   Building the platform out to the track is one.  A second is adding an extra loop back in.  And the third is to create single ended platform in which trains line the hourly extended "Bedwyn"s  and the hourly Swindons can be reversed.   Without extra track, I would expect loads of "cheap"s from both the freight operators who would loose a loop and with it s valuable resource in case anything was early or late.   And the passenger operators would have access only t times that there wasn't freight about.

[grahame]

From a contact at Network Rail to WWRUG^» (West Wiltshire Rail Users Group - about)

Thanks for your patience and apologies for my delayed response.
 
There will be a positive benefit to train performance as we are increasing the line speed through the main part of the junction and removing several existing operational restrictions as part of the project. The work does allow for passive provision of the additional track to bring the fourth platform into future use.

[Mark A]

This is very positive news, thanks for unearthing it. (Also, it's the sort of detail that deserves to go into industry press releases on this forthcoming work)

Mark

[DaveHarries]

[..] And the third is to create single ended platform in which trains line the hourly extended "Bedwyn"s  [...]

A good idea which might well allow for additional trains for Pewsey. I presume that, should these come in, the express services from London to Westbury, Devon & Cornwall will run fast from Newbury / Bedwyn to Westbury with the extended Bedwyn's providing the calls for Pewsey?

What impact is this closure likely to have on long distance London - Devon/Cornwall services?

Probably none other than variations in the timetable to take account for bypassing, rather than calling at, Westbury.

As a side point to this I see that the engineering works section of GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway)'s website mentions other work coming up before this lengthy closure of the Westbury station area:

- 11th to 14th November: Theale to Westbury
- 10th to 12th December: Newbury to Westbury

I would imagine that trains between Devon & Cornwall and London Paddington would divert via. Melksham with the Bedwyn services filling the gaps on the Bedwyn - Reading route.

Dave

[grahame]

[..] And the third is to create single ended platform in which trains line the hourly extended "Bedwyn"s  [...]

A good idea which might well allow for additional trains for Pewsey. I presume that, should these come in, the express services from London to Westbury, Devon & Cornwall will run fast from Newbury / Bedwyn to Westbury with the extended Bedwyn's providing the calls for Pewsey?

Careful consideration between the options needed.   Having the fourth platform as a bay would greatly reduced its flexibility.   Having it put in by extending the platform out to the freight loop would reduce any capacity gain; the freight loop is well used.   Adding an extra through track the best solution but almost certainly more expensive.   

With extended electrification - surely coming in the next decade (??) - Hungerford, Kintbury, Bedwyh, Burbage, Pewsey, Devizes Gateway and Bratton & Edington will be served by the hourly outer commuter train from Paddington to Westbury (and perhaps Frome - so Westbury needs a through platform)

[bradshaw]

This can be a useful source of information. You will need to scroll down to reach the Westbury work.
Advance notices of Westbury
http://www.gensheet.co.uk/EAS2025/WW%20S7.pdf

The site also covers all NR^» (Network Rail - home page) areas
http://www.gensheet.co.uk/ROTR.htm

[Mark A]

Love the mention (page 57) of a 'WESTBURY TEMPORARY PLATFORM ON HAWKERIDGE LOOP (GW720) (*TO BE CONFIRMED*)'

(It wasn't confirmed but please please please railways, it's fine to invest the in the restoration of a permanent platform 4 for Westbury)

Mark

[Clan Line]

(It wasn't confirmed but please please please railways, it's fine to invest the in the restoration of a permanent platform 4 for Westbury)

Mark

I have to wonder what that would cost now ! In Rail magazine back in 2015 a cost of £10.5 million was then quoted to reopen the closed platform at Westbury. Of course the "new" platform would have to be called Platform 1 (as it used to be) - then all the other platforms would have to be renumbered (again !!) ..............another million quid for that ??

Good job this bunch aren't running Wadworths 

[grahame]

(It wasn't confirmed but please please please railways, it's fine to invest the in the restoration of a permanent platform 4 for Westbury)

Mark

I have to wonder what that would cost now ! In Rail magazine back in 2015 a cost of £10.5 million was then quoted to reopen the closed platform at Westbury. Of course the "new" platform would have to be called Platform 1 (as it used to be) - then all the other platforms would have to be renumbered (again !!) ..............another million quid for that ??

Good job this bunch aren't running Wadworths 

I suspect it would be "Platform 0" as that is becoming common practise.

Sur le Continent, platforms are not necessarily numbered in geographic order. 

I can recall in Rouen the centre tracks on the main line are "1" and "2" with 3 to 6 (I think) on the two sides. 

A Quick change in Riga from platform 1 to platform 10 was just a step across, with main platforms numbered from 1 away from the station building, and 10 up as the north end bays.  And I recall bays in Koblenz adding 500 to the number.

In Poland, it's the physical platform numbers you are directed to, with track numbers either side.  On that scheme, Westbury would have just platform 1 and 2, with the centre main tracks numbered track 1 and track 2, and the side tracks numbered 3 and 4.   And on that basis the existing numbers could be left, with the newly re-instated track being "Platform 1, track 4" opposite "Platform 1, track 1"

[ReWind]

I’d be surprised if there wasn’t a big backlash from the freight operators with regards to turning the current down reception into a 4th passenger platform at Westbury.

The Merehead & Whatley freight quarry lines are single track, largely 20mph max speed.  The down reception is heavily used to stable inbound quarry trains out the way whilst an outbound quarry train travels down the single line from the quarries.  Taking this away & turning it into a passenger platform would mean those quarry trains having to sit on the main line and blocking that waiting for a path into the quarries.  Yes, time tabling & pathing can be altered to minimise this but we all know trains regularly run late & out of path. 

Not sure how much room there is for an additional track adjacent to the current down reception. 

[Witham Bobby]

I’d be surprised if there wasn’t a big backlash from the freight operators with regards to turning the current down reception into a 4th passenger platform at Westbury.

The Merehead & Whatley freight quarry lines are single track, largely 20mph max speed.  The down reception is heavily used to stable inbound quarry trains out the way whilst an outbound quarry train travels down the single line from the quarries.  Taking this away & turning it into a passenger platform would mean those quarry trains having to sit on the main line and blocking that waiting for a path into the quarries.  Yes, time tabling & pathing can be altered to minimise this but we all know trains regularly run late & out of path. 

Not sure how much room there is for an additional track adjacent to the current down reception. 

Before the 1985 resignalling, (the old) Platform 1 had a track, the Down Salisbury.  It was nominally a Down line, but was signalled so that trains could arrive and depart in either direction.  It was much used, even though there were fewer passenger trains in those days.  I surprises me that today's traffic can be managed without this useful bit of track

[grahame]

It surprises me that today's traffic can be managed without this useful bit of track

But it can ONLY be managed if everything is running to near-perfect time.  It feels almost routine to draw up outside and the "we are waiting for a platform" announcement is well know to passengers arriving into Westbury.

The move away from 1980s style loco and coaches trains has ease things, but it must be admitted just a tiny bit, for terminating trains / run rounds not required.  The fact that all the passenger trains are powered by diesel engines, now along the length of the train rather than in the middle, makes the platform quite unpleasant to wait on at times, especially where there's a terminating train - but that's another story that requires a move to a new motive power source such as electricity, or a move back to power vehicles on the train end.

[Clan Line]

Before the 1985 resignalling, (the old) Platform 1 had a track, the Down Salisbury.  It was nominally a Down line, but was signalled so that trains could arrive and depart in either direction.  It was much used, even though there were fewer passenger trains in those days.  I surprises me that today's traffic can be managed without this useful bit of track

I'm not going to say "I told you so"................but I, and plenty of others, did ! (was it really that long ago ?)

[stuving]

Sur le Continent, platforms are not necessarily numbered in geographic order. 

I can recall in Rouen the centre tracks on the main line are "1" and "2" with 3 to 6 (I think) on the two sides. 

Traditional French practice is (of course) very logical, just different! Quais (platforms) might have two faces, but one number or letter. Voies (tracks) were numbered. Recently, an illogical tendency to show the track number but call it e.g. "quai 3" has crept in.

Rouen (Rive Droite) is a case in point, as its two platforms are labelled A (for the two down lines) and B (for the up). Down lines always bear odd numbers; up lines even numbers. Indeed, pair (even) and impair (odd) mean up and down in this railway sense.

Further to that, standard practice requires that lines 1 and 2 are the down and up main lines. So at Rouen, on the south side the down loop line is voie 3, with voie 1 across quai A. next come voie 2, quai B, and voie 4. The non-platform line beyond that is voie 6, even since it is the up loop. Basically, if it's the down platfom loop it must be line 3.