Places where the speed limit should be more/less?

[317663]

I was just wondering where there are any parts of the railway lines (I'm looking mostly at metro parts/surburban lines) that are either too slow, even at a level track and only just a slight curve (even straight), or the speed limit is too high, maybe the track's a bit bumpy at 75mph between Dorking/Horsham?
I was thinking as the line speed for Ashtead is 70mph, but leatherhead (On the straight) is 40 I believe, why are some speed limits like this? Is there lots of trains on that region?

Or carshalton, Perhaps, is it 50? I find the through-trains go through there slower than Hackbridge or Mitcham Eastfields. Or Belmont, Or Tolworth. Both are quite slow but straight/not much bumpy.

 

[142094]

To point out the obvious, the speed limit is there for a reason. Yes there will be places where speed limits could be higher (but would cost a great deal of money to improve the infrastructure to do so), but I very much doubt there are places where the limit should be lowered - if the speed shown no longer becomes safe then a temporary or emergency speed restriction is put in place.

 

[455driver]

On a lot of suburban routes the speed limits are irrelevant anyway because the trains dont get anywhere near it.

Whats this about Ashtead and Leatherhead, I am confused and I drive the route!

Oops I mean I used to drive the route!

 

[notadriver]

In my area there is a blanket speed limit of 60 mph within what happens the London travel card zonal area. I think this is too low and dates back to the steam era. Another way into London has had its speed limit reduced to 70 mph where it used to be 80 mph or more.

 

[edwin_m]

I think the speed limit was reduced at West Ham so that signals could be spaced closer together. This allows trains to run more closely together as well, and because the new franchise plans to stop all trains there, the speed limit isn't really relevant.

 

[Juniper Driver]

Between Earley and Reading is probably too fast.Should be 60 instead of 70 IMHO.(Track dodgy/bumpy and no need for this speed when approaching a terminal station like this with the change of layout.

Christchurch (dodgy bridge) Should be permanent 40.(From 60) (Temporary 40 been on it for over two years)

Basingstoke all lines should be 65 through the station.(65 on three out of four lines.Dodgy crossover London end of station Up Fast Line. (has had a temporary 40 on it for god knows how long) 90mph - 40mph.

 

[deltic08]

Travelling between Skipton and Carlisle irritates me especially in a 158 as we appear to be crawling along in a unit capable of 90mph. Southbound I can understand as full MGRs are restricted to 60mph but empty MGRs and occasional 153s are allowed to run at 75mph so northbound line limit should be raised to this speed.

 

[BantamMenace]

Bradford foster square branch from Shipley is 50 all the way i think, it should be 90 as its gun barrel straight and the Leeds - Skipton is 90mph most of the way.

 

[The Planner]

What is it that is tryng to be achieved with all these though? Are there actual drivers or demand for reduced journey times to increase patronage or is it just a case of "oh that should be higher because my train can do 125". Skipton Carlisle has been looked at plenty of times as an example and just cant wash its face in terms of value, little bits migbt get done where its cheap and easy to do but otherwise the cash isnt there.

 

[30907]

Bradford foster square branch from Shipley is 50 all the way i think, it should be 90 as its gun barrel straight and the Leeds - Skipton is 90mph most of the way.

How much time would a 333 save between FS and Frizinghall if the limit were increased? The distance is about 1.5 miles.

 

[thenorthern]

I don't think there is any point in raising Settle to Carlisle line speed, only 7 (I think) trains use it per day also Leeds and Carlisle are not places that people normally travel between.

I think the removal of Norton Bridge station and replacing it with a flying junction would be useful.

 

[The Planner]

You need to catch up a bit, Norton Bridge has already started to be built.

 

[317663]

On a lot of suburban routes the speed limits are irrelevant anyway because the trains dont get anywhere near it.

Whats this about Ashtead and Leatherhead, I am confused and I drive the route!

Oops I mean I used to drive the route!

Wasn't sure about the speed limit through Leatherhead, that's all.

 

[Ploughman]

It might be straight all the way horizontally but it is like a roller coaster between Shipley and Frizinghall. A legacy of OH wiring on the cheap.

Besides what are the Braking / Acceleration distances for this short branch.
Would there be any worthwhile gain in time?

 

[Juniper Driver]

Wasn't sure about the speed limit through Leatherhead, that's all.

60mph but not sure if I'd like to try it.

 

[thenorthern]

I have heard people talk that there is a 20 MPH speed restriction at Northwich because of a tight curve which Pacers find difficult and it would be raised if pacers were replaced with Sprinters which would have some benefits in the future if it was done.

 

[northwichcat]

Leftwich viaduct. In 2001 Railtrack said the speed could be raised to 50mph for Sprinters and 175s with no work (other than paperwork) required but would have to remain at 20mph for Pacers and freight. The line speed remains at 20mph for all trains as the paperwork was never completed.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I have heard people talk that there is a 20 MPH speed restriction at Northwich because of a tight curve which Pacers find difficult and it would be raised if pacers were replaced with Sprinters which would have some benefits in the future if it was done.

You must have posted that at the same time as my post. It's not related to any bends but to a running on a viaduct in an area of Cheshire which has suffered subsidence from salt mining.

The sharp bendy track is between Skelton Junction and Deansgate Junction, just before Navigation Rd in the Chester direction with the bend being sharpest in the Chester direction. There is a 15mph limit there with some drivers only risking 10mph with a 142 to protect their ears!

 

[Juniper Driver]

The 25mph points at Farnborough (Up Main) should be upgraded to 40 mph...I know they'd need to be relaid to do this.As is the down direction.(40mph)

Barnes many years ago up road crossover used to be 20 mph from the Mortlake direction to cross onto the Up Windsor Slow.Now it's 60mph because they relaid it.

 

[deltic08]

What is it that is tryng to be achieved with all these though? Are there actual drivers or demand for reduced journey times to increase patronage or is it just a case of "oh that should be higher because my train can do 125". Skipton Carlisle has been looked at plenty of times as an example and just cant wash its face in terms of value, little bits migbt get done where its cheap and easy to do but otherwise the cash isnt there.

What would be achieved? Shorter journey times, less brake pad wear on downhill sections, more efficient use of stock and crew, shorter diversion times for diverted Pendolinos and greater capacity. Over the last ten years most of the route has been relayed with cwr and deep ballasting. Raising linespeed by 15mph only needs tamping here and there then paperwork signing off. Signal siting and spacing is no different to 1970 when double headed class 50s on diversions regularly ran at up to 100mph between Carlisle and Dent.

If 60-100mph is good enough for the Highland line with one train an hour in each direction and 75mph on the Borders line then the Settle-Carlisle with at least two trains per hour each way every 24 hours should have linespeed uplifted.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I don't think there is any point in raising Settle to Carlisle line speed, only 7 (I think) trains use it per day also Leeds and Carlisle are not places that people normally travel between.

I think the removal of Norton Bridge station and replacing it with a flying junction would be useful.

I think you should check out trains using the line to see how many passengers NORMALLY use this line just for the joy of the scenery before making such a remark. There are 42 mgr trains each way each day. This is a significant amount of traffic. Enough per hour to consider electrification.

 

[edwin_m]

I think you should check out trains using the line to see how many passengers NORMALLY use this line just for the joy of the scenery before making such a remark.

But, being devil's advocate for a moment, if they are all just there to enjoy the scenery then maybe they would prefer slower trains so they can see it for longer!

 

[The Planner]

What would be achieved? Shorter journey times, less brake pad wear on downhill sections, more efficient use of stock and crew, shorter diversion times for diverted Pendolinos and greater capacity.

Virgin aren't bothered with diverting over the S&C, they would prefer SLW over the WCML.

Over the last ten years most of the route has been relayed with cwr and deep ballasting. Raising linespeed by 15mph only needs tamping here and there then paperwork signing off. Signal siting and spacing is no different to 1970 when double headed class 50s on diversions regularly ran at up to 100mph between Carlisle and Dent.

That is different to what I have heard, in fact the opposite in some locations when it comes to ballast.

I think you should check out trains using the line to see how many passengers NORMALLY use this line just for the joy of the scenery before making such a remark. There are 42 mgr trains each way each day. This is a significant amount of traffic. Enough per hour to consider electrification.

Settle and Carlisle will be a looong way down the list for wires.

 

[D6975]

I think you should check out trains using the line to see how many passengers NORMALLY use this line just for the joy of the scenery before making such a remark. There are 42 mgr trains each way each day. This is a significant amount of traffic. Enough per hour to consider electrification.

42 PATHS, not 42 trains.
As someone who has spent full days at Carlisle, I can assure you that typically only about half of the paths are actually used at most.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

There are numerous sections of the North Downs which could be raised from 55 - 70+, the section from Pinks Hill to Wanborough almost dead straight for a good 1½ miles & from Aldershot South - East Heath (Wokingham) apart from the curve at Sandhurst, where I suspect that with a little superelevation it could be increased from 70 - 80.

The 60 from Shalford to Chilworth & Brook AHB, easily increased to 70 or more.

The Cobham line could do with being raised from 70 to 80 which could be achieved with some good tamping, especially from Boxgrove Road to M25 boundary.

OK the standard traction is capable of 75,but with it being a regular diversionary route and it being used by 450/444s, that little extra turn of speed would be useful.

 

[Tomnick]

Signal siting and spacing is no different to 1970 when double headed class 50s on diversions regularly ran at up to 100mph between Carlisle and Dent.

I won't comment on the assertion that higher linespeeds only need a spot of tamping here and there, because I don't know. On the signalling though - do you know that signal sighting and spacing isn't a problem? Standards have changed since then, and there have been quite a few changes since the 1970s - certainly singling (and some resignalling) of Ribblehead Viaduct, new signalling at Kirkby Thore (?) and the new IB signals in a few of the longer block sections.

 

[Bald Rick]

There are numerous sections of the North Downs which could be raised from 55 - 70+, the section from Pinks Hill to Wanborough almost dead straight for a good 1½ miles

Willing to bet that I'm the only other forum member who knows exactly where Pink's Hill is without prior reference to a map!

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Nope. From reading two other members posts I can tell you that you're wrong in that assumption.

I know that TEW & 455driver will know as well!
Do you realise you two how much & many of your posts I had to read to work that out!
My brain hurts!

 

[Bald Rick]

It's a very local name, not sure if any railway asset takes its name - perhaps the over bridge. I think the trackside sectioning cabin is Wood Street TSC.

I only know it as I lived there

 

[tsr]

It's a very local name, not sure if any railway asset takes its name - perhaps the over bridge. I think the trackside sectioning cabin is Wood Street TSC.

I only know it as I lived there

I'm fairly interested in the history of the line and had heard the name, but I wouldn't have been able to tell you where it was in the area!

 

[455driver]

The Cobham line could do with being raised from 70 to 80 which could be achieved with some good tamping, especially from Boxgrove Road to M25 boundary.

OK the standard traction is capable of 75,but with it being a regular diversionary route and it being used by 450/444s, that little extra turn of speed would be useful.

444s use it every day on some Pompy services, if they were allowed to do 80 they would simply catch up with the stopper or get held at Hampton Court jn so they could slot into their path, it isnt just a case of faster is better, because faster could eff up the timetable further along the line and rewriting that for the sake of one or two trains simply isnt worth it.

 

[satisnek]

Pinks Hill Crossing: now a foot crossing but was once an AHB. Before my time tho' - yup, I grew up in those parts!

Back on topic, I don't get Wolverhampton - Shrewsbury. Resignalled in recent(ish) years and used by 90mph trains on limited stop services, so why do they still have to amble along at 70? Surely the cost of increasing the line speed isn't going to be huge?