|
paul7575
|
 |
« Reply #30 on: May 25, 2009, 20:51:35 » |
|
does anyone have information on the loop that was proposed at whimple? seems to have gone silent
I think to cut a long story short, it is only required if or when the new town at Cranbrook goes ahead, and gets its new station as part of the S.106 agreement, but as is usual in these schemes the station may only required once a certain number of houses are built. The loop will then allow for an enhanced service. But is the new town still going ahead in the recession, or is it on the furthest back burner... Paul |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Electric train
|
|
« Reply #31 on: May 25, 2009, 22:21:36 » |
|
The safety there is dubious, ive seen people working on the front of that green box with the doors open at about 11am, and when a train comes someone or 2 people stand in from of the box holding the doors open so that they dont hit the train, leaving a small gap between them and train...
And as soon as a train goes theyre back on the job so i doubt possession is given. Theres a train about every 2 hours each way, but hourly from about 6-10 in the evening.
It is also dependent on the line speed, line speed determines the distance staff and equipment need to be from the line when a train passes. Looking at the photo of the Locs (green boxes) I would have expected fencing (blue netlon or vortox) or a look Out / Site Warden while working in the track side of the locs the rear side is ok as the loc forms the fence. The other area where the machines are working I would have expected a fenced working area to form what is called a fence green zone. It is difficult to see from the few photos and no knowledge of the local area to work out exactly what the safe system of work has been established As I |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Starship just experienced what we call a rapid unscheduled disassembly, or a RUD, during ascent,”
|
|
|
|
6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01
|
|
« Reply #32 on: May 25, 2009, 22:24:58 » |
|
not sure of line speed but all trains stop here, at the two sites ( one within platform area and the other just past towards exeter) it is the team within the platform.. when the train is there they could spread there arms touch the platform with one and the train with the other
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
IndustryInsider
|
|
« Reply #33 on: May 26, 2009, 10:33:16 » |
|
Also, if a driver feels that the safety of lineside workers is being in any way compromised they will report it straight to Network Rail, so even if trains are only going through occasionally. If there were serious compromises being made, chances are they'd have been reported. The last thing a driver wants is to splat anyone in a HV vest!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
To view my GWML▸ Electrification cab video 'before and after' video comparison, as well as other videos of the new layout at Reading and 'before and after' comparisons of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/ |
|
|
|
|
|
John R
|
|
« Reply #35 on: July 10, 2009, 23:51:07 » |
|
Interesting to compare the photos from a few months ago. No wonder these projects are so expensive - we couldn't possibly reuse the old platform and retaining wall could we, when we can demolish it all and start again from scratch. (A similar thing is happening for the new platform at Severn Tunnel Junction.)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
eightf48544
|
|
« Reply #36 on: July 11, 2009, 11:04:02 » |
|
Interesting to compare the photos from a few months ago. No wonder these projects are so expensive - we couldn't possibly reuse the old platform and retaining wall could we, when we can demolish it all and start again from scratch. (A similar thing is happening for the new platform at Severn Tunnel Junction.)
A few thoughts. It maybe that the old platform edge would be out-of-gauge in relation to the new track alingment with the new standards so would have to be cut back in any case. Secondly it could be that after many years out of use with no maintenance the structure has deteriorated so cannot be be bought back into use without extensive repairs, in which case it's probably quicker and cheaper to renew. Many years ago I seem to be recall being told that old disused platfroms edges were cut back because by doing this BR▸ saved on rates. Never did verify its truth. It could be why places like Maidenhead Down Main and many other out of use plaforms were cut back. Whether it still applies I don't know. Axminister and Severn Tunnel platforms seem not to have been cut back. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Electric train
|
|
« Reply #37 on: July 11, 2009, 14:12:39 » |
|
Building new and not using the old platform structure possibly has a lot to do with gage and alignment, also there is a requirement now if a new platform is opened DDA» Act applies for things like step free access and ease of access to trains.
Also the old platform was how old? just think Axminster is getting a new structure built wth a life expectancy of a min 60 years before any major maintenance is done to it
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Starship just experienced what we call a rapid unscheduled disassembly, or a RUD, during ascent,”
|
|
|
|
paul7575
|
|
« Reply #38 on: July 14, 2009, 18:00:49 » |
|
I was in Axminster today, and asked the brickies why the old platform edge wasn't usable. Straightforward answer is, the current gauging clearances needed it moved back 300mm.
Makes sense if you consider that when it was last built, the typical rolling stock was probably 60 ft carriages. Also, if they are being sensible, new work on the route ought to be good for the 26m carriages of IEP▸ ?
Edit: couple of mobile phots (as attachments):
Paul
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: July 14, 2009, 21:54:12 by paul7755 »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
eightf48544
|
|
« Reply #40 on: August 31, 2009, 10:53:48 » |
|
Presumably the lift towers make it so tall.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Electric train
|
|
« Reply #41 on: August 31, 2009, 12:20:26 » |
|
Presumably the lift towers make it so tall.
Also all new structures are built standard for OHLE clearance. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Starship just experienced what we call a rapid unscheduled disassembly, or a RUD, during ascent,”
|
|
|
|
6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01
|
|
« Reply #42 on: August 31, 2009, 12:52:43 » |
|
Presumably the lift towers make it so tall.
Also all new structures are built standard for OHLE clearance. ahh makes sence! mind you were looking at way into the future arnt we |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
paul7575
|
|
« Reply #43 on: August 31, 2009, 15:20:57 » |
|
Presumably the lift towers make it so tall.
Definitely, but I think the viewpoint might possibly exaggerate the eventual height of the bridge deck. The left hand tower shows the relative dimensions. The footbridge floor is about half the overall height, the framework for the bridge 'landing' is in front of the lift tower on the down side view. You can make out the doorway opening into the lift shaft frame, the top of the door is about level with the top of the cherry picker to the left. I'd imagine the lift towers will be about a metre above the bridge top... Interesting that the up side steps will head off in the down direction, so most pax will end up half way down the platform - hopefully the 3 car stop marker will be positioned to account for that? Quite a lot of steelwork assembly done over the last 10 days or so then, I was last there a week past Saturday. Was surprised to see that all the original cable troughing (and cable) had been neatly laid along the new platform blockwork, I guess the new lineside cable route will be (as shown here) round the back of the platform... Paul |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Click on the map to explore geographics
