Given how expensive a decent platform can be to build (it would have to be a fairy long one too, to safely hold charter trains) - this doesn't seem like a viable idea even without the need to modify the signalling system to accommodate it.
Didcot's area of control currently extends from Paddington to Lavington (just east of Westbury) via the Berks and Hants
Warrington PSB - the boundary with Preston PSB is between Coppull and Boars Head,
Dosen’t need a new one as the original Barnstaple Junction island platform is still in situ and is likely more than lengthy enough, would obviously need some refurbishment work though.
I believe the concept is the same as has been done for Tweedbank for much the same reasons(ie 2 platforms). Suspect some external funding will be needed but if FTN goes all the way to Barnstaple, not as expensive ss you might think to do, especially if done as part of a general resignalling.
Definitely agree about the external funding and presumably primarily from the area’s tourist authorities. If it was possible to lock-in and stable the charter set overnight perhaps operators i.e. Belmond and others could be offering an overnight stay in a quality hotel with tour participants then conveyed by coaches meeting the train on arrival. This part of the world has a lot to offer in terms of both coastal and inland scenery imho...
Indeed. What has moved it from fantasy to potentially do-able is FTN enabling remote signalling equipment to be installed far more cheaply and axle counters making track circuit block feasible without continuous track circuits.
Don't be so sure about that for Warrington.
Been racking my brains trying to work out what FTN means, but have finally admitted defeat, so perhaps someone could put me out of my misery.
Fixed Telecom Network. A high speed fibre optic based comms network that was put in primarily to provide landlines for GSM-R radio but also to support signalling links to ROCs and general telecoms. Unlike the legacy comms/signalling it provides diversity so that if a cable is cut or equipment fails an alternative route provides service.
A "google" of the exact words "FTN signalling railway" comes up with Fixed Telecoms Network. I can't/won't show link as it can't be "quoted" as per forum rules. On the subject aren't acronyms supposed to be explained anyway ?
Thank you for the detailed explanation.
Tweedbank platforms are both used - including for overnight berthing - though as you say there was a plan for regular tourist trains from Edinburgh.
www.gwr.com
I'm not calling for additional double tracking. The double track is already there, just not configured in a way that it can be used as double track. A legacy of the technology constraints at the time.You are incorrectly comparing the departure time at Crediton and the departure time at Eggesford, you should be looking for the arrival time as per the enquiry on the same train attached.
The actual running time between the two points is around 26 minutes. The train from Exeter usually awaits around 5 minutes at Eggesford for the train from Barnstaple to cross.
There is no need for additional double tracking for the existing Barnstaple service, it performs very well on the infrastructure that is there. Yes in an ideal world the line would have more double track but it’s not necessary and there’s more important things to spend money on. Looking at GWR’s performance for the last 4 weeks over 98% of Devon Local services were on time compared to the target of 92% showing little need for infrastructure enhancements.
Our Performance | Great Western Railway
Track how our performance has improved with getting your trains to you and your destination on time. For more details on our hard work visit our site.
Yeoford could be solved by moving the junction east of the station although I am not sure it would be operationally desirable. If the down platform was brought back into use it would more likely have its own short step free path to Station Road than a footbridge/lifts as is being done at Brading, so wouldn't be costly.
Surely it would give much more resilience. If a train is late coming south it would reduce any knock-on delays going north? And I'm not convinced by the existing performance argument - it's unusually high everywhere at the moment with so few of those pesky passengers that can delay trains for a multitude of reasons (often the simple fact of there being too many of them).
Given the age of Exeter's signalling I wonder if anyone would dare modify it...
Crediton, although about the same age as Exeter PSB, is a small self-contained western region 'E10K'* installation with a local relay-based interlocking and panel. A major issue at Exeter has been the 'panel processor', an old processor-based system that provides the multiplexed control links and handles the controls and indication logic for the wider remote-controlled areas overseen by Exeter such as Taunton and Newton Abbott, but not the immediate environs of Exeter St Davids, Cowley Bridge Junction and Exeter Central station which were provided with traditional relay-based panel circuits and direct multicore cable links instead. The panel processor supplier almost immediately ceased supporting the product, and that has prevented any reconfiguration requiring data changes, effectively locking in the current track layout for four decades! For example, the new properly signalled passenger connection to the West Somerset Railway had to wait until the level crossing at Silk Mills had been decommissioned, so the channels used for its manual control from Exeter could be reassigned to the new signalled routes without a panel processor reconfiguration being required. The panel processor issue would not affect any work at Crediton.
Just want to say - what a great, concise summary of the situation complete with relevant background ( and as someone with a more than passing interest in signalling, informative too! ).
Surely the existing disused platform can be cleared and refurbished - there is no need to build a new one?
Depends how structurally sound it is. Might be cheaper and easier to build a new one from scratch.
Its a solid platform of decent length with a brick/stone edge in fair condition. Shouldn't need much more than resurfacing, a new set of coping stones, lighting a shelter and short path to station road across the old sidings.
Its a solid platform of decent length with a brick/stone edge in fair condition. Shouldn't need much more than resurfacing, a new set of coping stones, lighting a shelter and short path to station road across the old sidings.
Legacy of it being a fairly important interchange station in times gone by.
File:Yeofordplat.jpg - Wikimedia Commons
commons.m.wikimedia.org
Stepping distance is a possible issue, but there's no really good reason why tactiles or anything else should present a massive issue. Even with stepping distance, the work being done on the Isle of Wight clearly shows that platforms can be raised up to modern heights quite easily at minimal cost, and the (now rather redundant) work at Bath shows that you can build the platforms outwards toward the track with no great difficulty. The largest expense of new platforms is almost invariably massive overbearing bridges with lifts and electrification clearance. If there's an easy way to use the existing street to avoid that then there aren't a lot of reasons why it can't happen.
I think they said something like that about Axminster, (and probably a few other places).
I wonder how much else the state of Exeter PSB is holding back. The Crediton-Barnstaple section used to be a lot more complex than it currently is ( even since area resignalling ) but I guess most of that complexity was controlled by ground frames?
