Reading Station improvements

[whole diary]

[paul7575]

The diagram may show it like that (not saying its wrong of course), but train planning information does refer to them as 'DFR' and 'UFM', suggesting Up and Down directions. I guess you could say the railway is full of inconsistencies!

Is there still a strange feature in RTT^» (Real Time Trains - website) that changes the line name abbreviations for services as they happen, because a quick check of trains into P11 from the Westbury direction has them marked 'UFM' if they are yet to run, but 'DM^▸ (Dilton Marsh)' if they are in the past.

However, I think 'DM' in this context is not referring to the Down Main?

IIRC^▸ ('if I recall/remember/read correctly') someone posted a while back that these odd abbreviations for lines are a known issue with the current data RTT uses?

Paul

[rower40]

Reminder to everyone.

Looking at reply no #3006, the track and signalling diagrams that Industry Insider provided the proper names for the feeder lines are: Reading Feeder Main and Reading Feeder  Relief, no Up or Down.

The diagram may show it like that (not saying its wrong of course), but train planning information does refer to them as 'DFR' and 'UFM', suggesting Up and Down directions. I guess you could say the railway is full of inconsistencies!

The decision to remove the designation "Up" from the Feeder Main line, and "Down" from the Feeder Relief line, came after the 3-letter line codes at Reading and Oxford Road Junction had already been chosen and specified in various Train Planning systems.  Similarly, "FVL" is just a line code for the Festival Line, applicable at the previous timing point - Reading station in the down direction, and Reading West Junction or Reading High Level Junction in the up direction.

[stuving]

And today ... pretty well all the trains coming up from Reading West have used P11 - including when P10 is occupied. So that does all work. And one (1A85) came into P10 at 15:49 while P11 was occupied - just showing off that that works too, I guess.

[bobm]

I quite often come into Reading on 1A85 (12:56 from PLY^» (Plymouth - next trains) to PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains)) and in the past it has made good progress up the Berks & Hants only to be held at Reading West (or worse Southcote Junction) and arrived late.  Now more often than not, since the works at Christmas and Easter, it has gone in unchecked.

Notice today that despite the on time arrival it did then depart 5 late...

[SandTEngineer]

NR^» (Network Rail - home page) has published some aerial views of the post Easter 2015 work here: https://mobile.twitter.com/networkrailgwrm

[Gordon the Blue Engine]

Back on an old hobby horse, sorry.

It will come as no surprise to Tilehurst/Pangbourne/Goring/Cholsey commuters that the completion of the new layout west of Reading has made little difference to the congestion on the RL^s between Reading and Didcot.  Yesterday I caught 2N30, 1153 Reading ^ Pangbourne.  We left on time and then stopped at a Red at Reading West J.  The Driver made the familiar announcement that a freight train was being crossed over in front of us.  We were 5L at Pangbourne.

The offending freight was 444V from Hams Hall ^ Soton.  It had left 100 minutes late.  Now I would have thought that in a situation like this it should have been held until the next available Q path, but I^ve noticed that freights, whether running early or late, just seem to ^blag^ it.  So my point is that freights should run to a proper path, or else signallers get put in impossible situations re regulation and punctuality suffers.

[rower40]

Back on an old hobby horse, sorry.

It will come as no surprise to Tilehurst/Pangbourne/Goring/Cholsey commuters that the completion of the new layout west of Reading has made little difference to the congestion on the RL^s between Reading and Didcot. 

There's one noticeable improvement.  Train 'A' is allowed into Tilehurst Platform 4 (Up Relief) at the same time as train 'B' is being routed from Up Main to Up Relief over Tilehurst East Junction.  Previously, the overlap of the signal at the end of platform 4 extended over the points on the junction, so if an Up Main to Up Relief train (an HST^▸ (High Speed Train (Inter City class 43 125 units)), say, that needed to use a high-numbered platform at Reading) was late, then the Up stopper would have to wait outside Tilehurst station.

If a train is going to be delayed, then it might as well be in a platform!

[paul7575]

Now I would have thought that in a situation like this it should have been held until the next available Q path, but I^ve noticed that freights, whether running early or late, just seem to ^blag^ it.  So my point is that freights should run to a proper path, or else signallers get put in impossible situations re regulation and punctuality suffers.

Of course that shouldn't have happened, because as announced by NR^» (Network Rail - home page) in their farcical Easter Monday press releases, freight trains through Reading had just had 'new tracks installed', and are now 'completely separated' from passenger trains:

At Reading new freight lines were installed that will completely separate passenger and freight services for the first time, removing the delays that were previously experienced when some passenger services had to wait for slower freight trains to pass through before commencing their journeys.
http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/better-rail-journeys-for-thousands-of-passengers-each-year-after-major-improvement-work-on-the-western-route-is-completed-on-time

NR PR^▸ (Public Relations) are completely disconnected from reality - producing dumbed down information for the benefit of the dumbed down press that just repeats it without question...

Paul

[W5tRailfinder]

Network Rail have just re-released their timelapse video of the Easter work at Reading.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZjCpv5JT6A&list=PL7FD65AF6C9A22BE4

As anybody with half a brain can see that this is the relaying of the relief lines and the re-modelling of Reading West Junction.

In a recent blog on the Open Train Times website, Peter Hicks the developer has announced that he is just about to start work on the Reading map. He has just released the Banbury to Didcot Parkway map on the Cotswold menu.

http://www.opentraintimes.com/maps

[paul7575]

Network Rail have just re-released their timelapse video of the Easter work at Reading.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZjCpv5JT6A&list=PL7FD65AF6C9A22BE4

As anybody with half a brain can see that this is the relaying of the relief lines and the re-modelling of Reading West Junction.

A sneaky way of getting rid of the valid comment from someone (not me though) on the first version that explained how the title and description were misleading.

I can't be bothered to sign up just to leave a comment unfortunately...

Paul

[Louis94]

The diagram may show it like that (not saying its wrong of course), but train planning information does refer to them as 'DFR' and 'UFM', suggesting Up and Down directions. I guess you could say the railway is full of inconsistencies!

Is there still a strange feature in RTT^» (Real Time Trains - website) that changes the line name abbreviations for services as they happen, because a quick check of trains into P11 from the Westbury direction has them marked 'UFM' if they are yet to run, but 'DM^▸ (Dilton Marsh)' if they are in the past.

However, I think 'DM' in this context is not referring to the Down Main?

IIRC^▸ ('if I recall/remember/read correctly') someone posted a while back that these odd abbreviations for lines are a known issue with the current data RTT uses?

Paul

Sorry didn't see this, the 'UFM' you refer to, if the train is still to pass through Reading, is the booked line. The 'DM' you are referring to is what happens when a Trust report is used instead of a Train Describer triggered report - Trust is known to be far from accurate with regards to line and path indications.

If you hover over the time in question you can identify if it is a TD or Trust triggered report.

Train Describer data to translate the movements to meaningful arrival and departure times is not available for the Reading area at the present time because of the recent re-signalling - it is waiting for someone to go to the area to record time of trains arriving and departing the station in various scenarios - oh and that will most likely be me at some point!

[paul7575]

Sorry didn't see this, the 'UFM' you refer to, if the train is still to pass through Reading, is the booked line. The 'DM^▸ (Dilton Marsh)' you are referring to is what happens when a Trust report is used instead of a Train Describer triggered report - Trust is known to be far from accurate with regards to line and path indications.

Thanks for taking the trouble to follow up.  So it seems to be a temporary issue that is known about which is what I thought I'd heard before.

Paul

[Louis94]

Sorry didn't see this, the 'UFM' you refer to, if the train is still to pass through Reading, is the booked line. The 'DM^▸ (Dilton Marsh)' you are referring to is what happens when a Trust report is used instead of a Train Describer triggered report - Trust is known to be far from accurate with regards to line and path indications.

Thanks for taking the trouble to follow up.  So it seems to be a temporary issue that is known about which is what I thought I'd heard before.

Paul

Indeed, I am going to be going to the area to collect data next weekend. However when that data reaches the public eye on RTT^» (Real Time Trains - website) I am not sure about - it will be released with the next version of RTT, which I hope will be released by the summer, although this isn't entirely within my control!

[Adelante_CCT]

Just had confirmation that both the 40mph restriction on the Down Relief until Scours Lane, and the 60mph restriction on the mains from Scours Lane over the viaduct and through Platforms 9/10 to Reading New Junction, are planned to be raised later in the year at probably in September at 'Stage Q' of the scheme.

The Down Relief Line is to be raised to 80mph and rumours that the main lines over the viaduct will be 100mph - though I'll believe that when I see the signs go up! 

According to this article http://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/rail-news/piecing-together-the-reading-puzzle
it claims the lines over the viaduct will be 125mph with P9/10 being 100mph.

[jane s]

Back on an old hobby horse, sorry.

It will come as no surprise to Tilehurst/Pangbourne/Goring/Cholsey commuters that the completion of the new layout west of Reading has made little difference to the congestion on the RL^s between Reading and Didcot.  Yesterday I caught 2N30, 1153 Reading ^ Pangbourne.  We left on time and then stopped at a Red at Reading West J.  The Driver made the familiar announcement that a freight train was being crossed over in front of us.  We were 5L at Pangbourne.

The offending freight was 444V from Hams Hall ^ Soton.  It had left 100 minutes late.  Now I would have thought that in a situation like this it should have been held until the next available Q path, but I^ve noticed that freights, whether running early or late, just seem to ^blag^ it.  So my point is that freights should run to a proper path, or else signallers get put in impossible situations re regulation and punctuality suffers.

Yes this is one of my hobby horses too! In particular the 19:19 from Reading to Tilehurst is nearly always delayed by a freight train. Since the 19:27 is generally right behind it, surely no freight train should EVER be allowed to hold this first train up? It would make much more sense for the freight train to be made to wait until the 19:19 has left and therefore widen this already ridiculously small gap, instead of almost completely closing it?

I too had thought that the new track layout would have solved this problem, but it hasn't changed a thing. :-(