Please ridicule my silly idea

[whole diary]

[Tim]

As for walking across the railway bridge at Worcester, there is/was a walkway below the railway level accessible by steps inside two of the bridge supports but closed off in the late 1950s - early 1960s. 

I didn't know that, perhaps that is what BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) opened for use in times of flooding and that pedestrains never actually walked on the tracks
.  I shall ask the big man next timeI see him)

[Not from Brighton]

I believe the problem with Worcester improvements is that there are too many different parties involved for a consensus to ever be reached.
The problem is that Worcester is on the periphery of everyone's plans with the exception of the local politicians none of whom have enough power to take any action.
Network rail aren't interested in Worcester as the main line doesn't go through the city. London Midland's focus is Birmingham and Worcester is literally the end of the line for them. FGW^▸ (First Great Western)'s only concern is getting trains into and out of Paddington on time and any Worcester problems are easily smoothed out by Cotswold timetable slack.
In time's gone by local people would have invested in railways knowing that the transport improvements would be good for business. Currently Worcester City Council can't even afford to empty its own litter bins let alone sort out the city's transport infrastructure.

I fear that nothing will ever be done.

[Btline]

I gather that the next river bridge to be built in Worcester is a footpath one at Diglis.  The County Council have further plans for road bridges at the end of Hylton Road (at McDonald's) and for the northern bypass, both of which seem an excellent idea, but neither of which has any money.  The Southern bypass road and river Severn bridge were designed to be a dual carriageway, but lack of money meant that the bridge could not be afforded and so much of the dual carriageway was not built, the land required, at least, has been protected for possible future dualing if money can ever be found for (what will have to be) a replacement bridge.  The people responsible in the County Council continue to be very angry that money from central government was refused for this much needed scheme.

As for walking across the railway bridge at Worcester, there is/was a walkway below the railway level accessible by steps inside two of the bridge supports but closed off in the late 1950s - early 1960s.  The Sabrina footpath bridge was a late replacement.

Worcester needs a major railway plan and a lot of money to fund it. but this is not likely to happen before 2020+ when the signaling system is said to be replaced.  There is however an idea gaining momentum with London Midland to re-instate a set of points etc. east of Foregate Street so that both platforms can be more fully utilised as this will allow some increase in the frequency of trains that can run between Malvern and Foregate Street, this being, currently, the most pressing bottleneck and thorn in the side when trains arrive late at Worcester and have to be signaled into or through Foregate Street. 

Yes, Worcester could also do with a second city centre road bridge. However, this WOULD cause an additional bottleneck near the racecourse, and make the road layouts very complicated. The Southern bypass bridge is too narrow for a dual carriageway. Therefore I think the priority must be for a new road from Rushwick to Claines (the remaining gap). It must be dual carriageway standard, with 2 lanes crossing the Severn. After this, the next priority must be dualling the remaining part of the ring road.

Do LM^▸ (London Midland - recent franchise) actually have proper plans for a set of points? I would have thought that the signalling would have to change so much, it would not be considered until after the resignalling.

[Don]

Yes, Worcester could also do with a second city centre road bridge. However, this WOULD cause an additional bottleneck near the racecourse, and make the road layouts very complicated. The Southern bypass bridge is too narrow for a dual carriageway. Therefore I think the priority must be for a new road from Rushwick to Claines (the remaining gap). It must be dual carriageway standard, with 2 lanes crossing the Severn. After this, the next priority must be dualling the remaining part of the ring road.

A new bridge in central Worcester from McDonald's to the Severn View Hotel is planned by the Council which is actually on the site of a former bridge. In the main it is designed to replace the existing bridge - They are talking about pedestrian use east bound and bus lane and cars from Deansway westbound.  The new bridge would then easily handle traffic to and from Castle Street.

The Southern bypass bridge is only single carriageway, Worcester CC could not afford a dual carriageway version and so the roads to the bridge in both directions were only built as single despite owning enough land in order to make dual.  It was found impossible to build a bridge there that could be widened at a later date and so to get a dual carriageway bridge the current bridge will need to be replaced at an impossible cost.   

I agree the only option now to reduce the traffic is to build the northern bypass, but no doubt, the pot will not be big enough for a dual carriageway river bridge.

Do LM^▸ (London Midland - recent franchise) actually have proper plans for a set of points? I would have thought that the signalling would have to change so much, it would not be considered until after the resignalling.

There are, I believe, a set of rough plans and costings running around which London Midland are doing the maths on, although the overall picture includes looking at the timetable post Bromsgrove. The existing signaling used to have this layout so it is considered possible to put it back without too much difficulty.  So the ball is in London Midlands court as to whether it will be useful enough to be worth the cost, but as has already been mentioned, Worcester is at the edge of London Midland's area and not that important.

Other than this, and given that all government money seems likely to be spent on electrification a long way from Worcester, the only hope for change is the planned resignaling when the existing layout will be changed.  But don't hold your breath for when that will take place, current plans to put Worcester's signaling system into Satley, Birmingham in around 2020ish are very liable for change / putting back / or abandonment.  There is a growing realisation that Worcester may well be the last place in the country with GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) signals outside the preservation movement.

[Not from Brighton]

Perhaps the city's railways will become a tourist attraction: "Come see the quaint city of Worcester with it's antiquated railways, see how the locals struggle to find a train running on time, marvel at their simple lives".

Or worse, perhaps the entire city will get listed as "a unique example of 19th century life" and thus banned forever from doing anything at all, ever...

[Mookiemoo]

Perhaps the city's railways will become a tourist attraction: "Come see the quaint city of Worcester with it's antiquated railways, see how the locals struggle to find a train running on time, marvel at their simple lives".

Or worse, perhaps the entire city will get listed as "a unique example of 19th century life" and thus banned forever from doing anything at all, ever...

I commute from there to the Thames valley ever day - not so much of the antiquated

[willc]

If someone wants to stump up the money, then I'm sure you could put in a crossover or two and the necessary signals - after all, they did manage to put in the reversing arrangements for Cotswold Line services at Foregate Street not that long ago and they aren't short of spare levers in the signalboxes these days. Probably more straightforward to do something here than at Oxford, with its ageing electronics.

There's a diagram with the current Worcester track and signalling layout and lots of pictures of the area for those not familiar with it here http://www.roscalen.com/signals/Worcester/index.htm

[Nostalgic]

 I think that you're rather overlooking Network Rail's undoubted talent for creating a massive job out of a seemingly straightforward task.

[inspector_blakey]

And then my mind led me to a strange place, I thought, "Worcester could never afford trams, could the buses share the route of the railway?".

I'm a bit slow on the uptake here, but would this invention help...? I'm sure it could be adapted for a bus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsit-g18GSg

[Not from Brighton]

I WANT ONE! It would make car journeys from where I live in St Johns to the motorway much quicker!!!

What kind of license do you need?

[Don]

I WANT ONE! It would make car journeys from where I live in St Johns to the motorway much quicker!!!

What kind of license do you need?

Well for starters, I'd say a license from the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about). 

[Not from Brighton]

Ok, I've seen the council's bus related plans. They intend to move the traffic ques from the city to the outskirts using magic, then bypass them using bus lanes (which are cheaper to build out in the sticks).

Still think it would be better to make more use of the railway...