Cotswold Line redoubling: 2008 - 2011

[whole diary]

[IanL]

At Hanborough, if you look carefully the space for the second track, the old platform and on the far side of it a bay siding are still there hiding under the greenery.

[stebbo]

On the Oxford signalling I'm only recalling what was said way back when. I'm not an engineering expert but I agree the electrification works should sort this.

Also, when one talks of the optimum crossing point being around Ascott, I also recall that it was said, way back when, that the greatest need was to redouble from Evesham to Norton. Also, it was said, I believe, that the Worcester area signalling needs radical updating. Again, I'm not an engineering expert but from my memory of this (not having ventured beyond Evesham for quite a few years) I'd agree.

But agreed, the whole line needs to be redoubled. I think most members of this site were hopeful that the redoubling so far done is merely a good start.

[SandTEngineer]

There is nothing really wrong with the signalling at Worcester.  I know that mechanical systems might appear to be 'old fashioned' but mechanical signalling can be, and is, a lot more flexible than modern colour-light signalling in station areas.  What really needs sorting at Worcester is the re-instatement of double line working between Shrub Hill and Henwick (which would be a fairly simple job to achieve).

[Adrian the Rock]

There is nothing really wrong with the signalling at Worcester.  I know that mechanical systems might appear to be 'old fashioned' but mechanical signalling can be, and is, a lot more flexible than modern colour-light signalling in station areas.  What really needs sorting at Worcester is the re-instatement of double line working between Shrub Hill and Henwick (which would be a fairly simple job to achieve).

That would actually be a much bigger job than redoubling to Evesham.  It would entail restating Rainbow Hill Jn; it wouldn't really be worth doubling from SH to there as that section would be really short, so one would want to have a facing crossover between Foregate St and RHJ so trains from Malvern/Hereford can get to the SH line.  The same crossover would also allow terminating trains from Birmingham to continue running into P2 at FS as they do now and those from or London/Oxford/Bristol/etc to do the same using either platform.

But to make this work you'd need to address the present anomaly whereby the signal (HK5) reading from FS P1 to SH is controlled by Henwick but the one opposite it, (TJ20) from FS P2 towards Tunnel Jn, is controlled by the latter.  Without a full Worcester resignalling, it probably makes most sense for Henwick to control all of the FS area through to RHJ (inclusive).  With the layout as envisaged above, this would require signalled moves for:

• SH line to P1
• SH line to P2
• TJ line to P1
• SH line to P2
• P1 to SH
• P2 to TJ
• P2 to SH

ie a total of seven routes in place of the one currently worked from Henwick (HK5), plus two more if you add routes directly from FS into the up siding at Henwick.  In addition there would be two extra sets of points, to/from the SH branch and the facing crossover.

And, if you were doing this, it would also be sensible to resolve the situation of Henwick's down homes being so far in rear of the level crossing and yet not having distant/repeater arms for the down starter which must be almost a mile beyond them.  Ideally these should be replaced with 4-aspect signals, with additional 3-aspect ones a short distance before the LC^▸ (Level Crossing).  But this would add two further signalled routes.

At the moment there are only seven free spaces in Henwick's 25-lever frame.  One more lever could be freed up as an acceptance lever from TJ would no longer be needed.  So only the most the basic version could be squeezed in at all, even if you could get the required new levers manufactured and a very significant re-locking of the frame done.  (More levers could be freed if you decided to abolish either or both of the existing crossovers at Henwick, but that would come at the cost of significantly less flexible layouts and entail even more signal/locking changes.)

In practice, therefore, a new panel would be all but essential, and once it's decided to go for a panel one may as well resignal the whole Henwick area.  The latter would at least be a useful stage work on the step towards full Worcester resignalling.

[I am assuming the block sections would be TCB^▸ (Track Circuit Block) from TJ to RHJ (because Henwick won't see trains' tail lamps until/unless they run on towards Malvern); the other direction could be AB because TJ can see the tail lamps as trains pass; and RHJ-SH would continue worked by acceptance levers as the single-line section from SH is currently.  Another point one would have to consider is whether it makes sense to have a separate new signal at RHJ on the line from SH, or whether the signals controlling the routes into the FS platforms shouldn't somehow be combined with SH75 on the Shrub Hill down advanced starting bracket.]

[SandTEngineer]

.......well in the S&T^▸ (Signalling and Telegraph) industry we call that suggestion 'scope creep' (on a large scale)

There are easier, and much less costly ways of making the change.

[ellendune]

.......well in the S&T^▸ (Signalling and Telegraph) industry we call that suggestion 'scope creep' (on a large scale)

There are easier, and much less costly ways of making the change.

Not just in the S&T Industry

[Adrian the Rock]

.......well in the S&T^▸ (Signalling and Telegraph) industry we call that suggestion 'scope creep' (on a large scale)

There are easier, and much less costly ways of making the change.

Such as...?

[Btline]

A few years ago, when the plans came out for the redoubling, I made the point that the sections of track being done were wrong and would not end delays. As usual, I was shouted down but unsurprisingly I have been proven correct.

Trains passed at Evesham prior to redoubling. Therefore, the best section to do to would be Pershore - Honeybourne as this would allow a 20 minute delay to not affect the passing service.
Trains are still passing at Evesham and Northbound trains are still being held up by late running southbound services as they were before!

People have confirmed above that there is no half hourly timetable that can be fitted onto the line without trains passing near the ends of the long double track section. There should be two separate double track sections that act as large dynamic loops.

The journey times have not been cut despite promises at the time. That is why I abandoned the line a year and a half ago and moved (which is why I am not a frequent member anymore). Whenever I travel on the line back to Worcestershire, the trains look empty and Thames Turbos keep turning up.

The attitude of FGW^▸ (First Great Western) - waiting for electrification and Reading to be completed is no good enough and I expect that commuters wil desert the line in their droves to Oxford Parkway in a few years time. Cheaper, more reliable, quicker, more frequent.

[martvw]

Perhaps when the redoubling of the south Cotswold line is complete the workforce could move on to the north Cotswold line, and extend the redoubling, if only on the north Evesham to Norton section!!

[ellendune]

Perhaps when the redoubling of the south Cotswold line is complete the workforce could move on to the north Cotswold line, and extend the redoubling, if only on the north Evesham to Norton section!!

It is not a matter of deployment of a workforce. Projects must be paid for. This is done by including them in an investment programme that then must be funded. The continued redoubling of the North Cotswold line isn't even in an investment programme yet so far as I am aware, let alone one that has been allocated any funding.

These are contractors some of whom will do work outside the railway industry at times.  If the contractors are not needed in the rail industry they may end up working on a road contract.

[stebbo]

Trains on the north Cotswold line seem pretty busy to me. The 1552 from Paddington to Worcester is always heaving well beyond Oxford, although if it reverted to an HST^▸ (High Speed Train) that might change.

I personally can't see passengers from anywhere west of Hanborough going to Kidlington for the Chiltern service as it'll take them hours in the car to get to the station. Maybe that's just me - I hate sitting in traffic jams

[Btline]

Remember that you've got Warwick Parkway and Banbury stations too.

Banbury - London is now 10 minutes quicker than Oxford to London (despite being much further), with more comfortable seating, air conditioning. Plus more reliable, etc.

Warwick Parkway is now 1 hr 15 minutes to London.
Heck - the peak Kidderminster trains can do it in 2 hours 10 minutes! (removing 5 min performance time at Stourbridge)

Which company has the 125 mph 4 track railway?

[FellowTraveller]

Perhaps when the redoubling of the south Cotswold line is complete the workforce could move on to the north Cotswold line, and extend the redoubling, if only on the north Evesham to Norton section!!

The continued redoubling of the North Cotswold line isn't even in an investment programme yet so far as I am aware, let alone one that has been allocated any funding.

I guess this is the salient point. It isn't on any plan currently.

But agreed, the whole line needs to be redoubled. I think most members of this site were hopeful that the redoubling so far done is merely a good start.

I think we are indeed agreed and just hope that someone somewhere is taking note! (If you are, would you care to offer some small words of encouragement that it might happen in the next decade!!)

Trains on the north Cotswold line seem pretty busy to me. The 1552 from Paddington to Worcester is always heaving well beyond Oxford, although if it reverted to an HST^▸ (High Speed Train) that might change.

I personally can't see passengers from anywhere west of Hanborough going to Kidlington for the Chiltern service as it'll take them hours in the car to get to the station. Maybe that's just me - I hate sitting in traffic jams

Agreed on both counts. Trains to London from Kingham always seem very busy excepting the first of the day. It is simply too far/long a journey/unpredictable by car to Kidlington. If I'm going to drive, I might as well drive to Hammersmith and pick up TfL^» (Transport for London - about). Avoiding this is why I take the train in the first place.

[Btline]

Why would you drive to Hammersmith?
According to Google maps, the drive to Banbury is ~ 30 mins from Kingham, Morton in Marsh and Chipping Norton.

With the train taking just 50 minutes from Banbury...
Rather shocking that the journey time difference is so small!

That is similar to the 30 minutes it takes to get to Warwick Parkway from Evesham and Honeybourne (which people now do on a regular basis), but on quieter roads. Some commuters even drive from SHROPSHIRE to Warwick Parkway.

[stebbo]

Knowing the roads around Evesham/Stratford, I would be reluctant to allow only 30 minutes to drive from Evesham to Warwick Parkway. And I'm sure people do drive from Shropshire - if they had a decent rail service, perhaps they wouldn't.

Of course, one might expect the Banbury to Marylebone route to be fast. Originally built as an express route for the GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) and GCR^» (Gloucester - next trains) and recently redoubled in its entirety it's nice and modern. And no nasty bottlenecks like Reading or Airport Junction to worry about or the odd freight train or two or the fact that Marylebone is not as rammed as Paddington. Of course, if they'd reinstated the through lines at Gerrards Cross, Beaconsfield and others, Chiltern could go even faster.