• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Great Western Main Line should be upgraded to 140mph

Status
Not open for further replies.

FGWHST43009

Member
Joined
3 Nov 2020
Messages
255
So about half as much from a massive reconstruction of the entire route?

Given the mess the Severn Tunnel is in operational terms it doesn't sound too awful.

Althouhg in the long run it would probably be better to just build a new alignment Bristol Parkway to Newport.
I agree with you on that, a new line from Bristol Parkway to Newport would be a good idea. Also between Cardiff and Newport we need more differentiation between slow and fast services. You have services that have '1' headcodes operated by 90mph 158s/165s/166s etc and services with '2' headcodes operated by 125mph HSTs. Arguably the bits of the GWML and associated lines like the SWML that need upgrading are the slower bits, not the fast bits. Really we need a grade separation at Didcot.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
5,670
Is this off the back of that article last week? Speeding up Swansea through to Bristol Parkway would definitely be helpful, but it's chipping away at those smaller speeds and slowdowns which will make a difference (vs Newport-Cardiff from 90mph to 125mph - given everything stops at both and fasts do it in 10 mins - 1 min saving? How many mins at 125?)

Swansea wires would also help any Valleys metro extensions/workings and move towards further decarbonization in Wales.
 

FGWHST43009

Member
Joined
3 Nov 2020
Messages
255
Is this off the back of that article last week? Speeding up Swansea through to Bristol Parkway would definitely be helpful, but it's chipping away at those smaller speeds and slowdowns which will make a difference (vs Newport-Cardiff from 90mph to 125mph - given everything stops at both and fasts do it in 10 mins - 1 min saving? How many mins at 125?)

Swansea wires would also help any Valleys metro extensions/workings and move towards further decarbonization in Wales.
In reality I'd build a new high-speed line from Bristol Parkway to Swansea. Express non-stop train services could run without being affected by slower trains
 

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
5,670
Also Cardiff to Newport (the core?) is four tracked and there is plenty of capacity. Surely if faster speeds were possible in the tunnel, they would have been activated alongside the wiring. West of BPW to the tunnel can feel slow. But I can't see the case for another crossing - it's not super frequent!
 

miklcct

Established Member
Joined
2 May 2021
Messages
5,017
Location
Cricklewood
I think 200 km/h (125 mph) is the most appropriate line speed of Great Western Main Line as it's not long enough to offer significant time saving having a higher speed. However, I think in-cab signalling should still be installed to enable more trains run on the line, and more section of the line should be upgraded to 200 km/h as well such that a train from London to Bristol can be run at 200 km/h for nearly the whole length.
 
Joined
11 Mar 2022
Messages
64
If line speed improvements were to be made somewhere I'd be looking to try and improve the Reading-Taunton line, in a bid to improve journey times to Devon and Cornwall, rather than go for 140mph running on the core GWML. I wouldn't be surprised if 125mph wasn't possible in HST running because the only sections straight enough, all else being sufficient, were too short to both accelerate to that speed and sustain it and/or some congestion exists on the easternmost part of the route. If an 802 can get to 125mph faster on diesel than a HST would, the 110mph stretches could be upgraded to that, and the 100mph stretches up to 110mph. At the moment Paddington-Exeter is just over 2 hours, to Plymouth just over 3 hours, and to Penzance around 5 hours. If it was possible to enhance line speeds and improve capacity in places to reduce journey times by 10-20 minutes on current workings, then railway journeys can be sold on a "less than 2/3/5 hours" to those major destinations. In an ideal world rerouting the line through the Bedwyn area to be straighter and faster would help, but I imagine be too costly and subject to local opposition.

I read that NR reckoned the biggest single saving in journey time would be to electrify west of Exeter so that the IETs would take the Devon banks on AC. Average speed non-stop to Plymouth is ~50mph?
 

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
5,670
The issue is that the Berks/Hants is really just 1tph fast. And long. So the upgrade wouldn't impact that many services.

I personally think 2tph to Exeter makes sense, but even then, the slower one would stop a few times. Still, wires would help that too.

Whereas Plymouth-Exeter(-Bristol) would benefit a lot more services if wired and sped up. I don't think London-Bristol-Taunton, even all wired will beat the B&H sadly though as would be a great use for those 2tph BPW fasts.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
35,970
I think 200 km/h (125 mph) is the most appropriate line speed of Great Western Main Line as it's not long enough to offer significant time saving having a higher speed. However, I think in-cab signalling should still be installed to enable more trains run on the line, and more section of the line should be upgraded to 200 km/h as well such that a train from London to Bristol can be run at 200 km/h for nearly the whole length.

how would in cab signalling enable more trains on the line?
 

MattRat

On Moderation
Joined
26 May 2021
Messages
2,129
Location
Liverpool
Well given that Cardiff is in the way, would seem strange to not go through it?
Considering how little information the original poster is giving though, it's possible that's not the case, and they know we'll not take what they say seriously.
 

D365

Veteran Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
13,201
That is the conundrum though isn't it. Spec for now for efficiency and then get grief if 140 ever sees the light of day, or spec for 140 and it doesnt happen and then get grief for over spec.
Better the latter; look at the work it’s taking to update the BedPan electrification.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

how would in cab signalling enable more trains on the line?
The only benefit I can see is enabling immediate driver response to signal aspects clearing…
 

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
19,749
Better the latter; look at the work it’s taking to update the BedPan electrification.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==


The only benefit I can see is enabling immediate driver response to signal aspects clearing…
You don't see aspects, its a speed curve and movement authority.
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
35,970
Perhaps just the stories I’ve heard blowing it out of proportion.

don’t forget it’s been over 40 years since the kit was installed.

Installing 125mph compatible electrification back then (which at that time would have been the first 125mph compatible electrification in the country), when there were no plans to run at 125mph on the MML, and no realistic prospect of it, would have been rather extravagant. Similarly providing power supply for anything significantly more than a fleet of 4 car units and the potential for a half hourly intercity service.
 

Irascible

Established Member
Joined
21 Apr 2020
Messages
2,233
Location
Dyfneint
I read that NR reckoned the biggest single saving in journey time would be to electrify west of Exeter so that the IETs would take the Devon banks on AC. Average speed non-stop to Plymouth is ~50mph?
With Newton Abbott & Totnes ( which are both pretty essential stops and also both at the bottom of banks ) it's nearer 40 avg than 50, iirc. Unfortunately it's also quite twisty, so perhaps any scheme can look at cutting some corners too.

Exeter to Taunton is not the straightest either ( because it uses the wrong valley ) but at this point I don't think there's much opportunity to sort that. Wires from Tiv Parkway to Wellington might be a handy little fill.

--

Taunton-Reading is about as fast as is practical without rsbuilding, I thought? trains that way were timed to 110 between Reading & Padd so they didn't need a secondman for that little bit, was my understanding.
 

stuu

Established Member
Joined
2 Sep 2011
Messages
3,774
With Newton Abbott & Totnes ( which are both pretty essential stops and also both at the bottom of banks ) it's nearer 40 avg than 50, iirc. Unfortunately it's also quite twisty, so perhaps any scheme can look at cutting some corners too.

Exeter to Taunton is not the straightest either ( because it uses the wrong valley ) but at this point I don't think there's much opportunity to sort that. Wires from Tiv Parkway to Wellington might be a handy little fill.

--

Taunton-Reading is about as fast as is practical without rsbuilding, I thought? trains that way were timed to 110 between Reading & Padd so they didn't need a secondman for that little bit, was my understanding.
I'm intrigued by this statement. Which other valley could a line from Taunton to Exeter conceivably use?
 

FGWHST43009

Member
Joined
3 Nov 2020
Messages
255
How? Will the new track go through them, or will it be via spurs?
Either way is possible

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

With Newton Abbott & Totnes ( which are both pretty essential stops and also both at the bottom of banks ) it's nearer 40 avg than 50, iirc. Unfortunately it's also quite twisty, so perhaps any scheme can look at cutting some corners too.

Exeter to Taunton is not the straightest either ( because it uses the wrong valley ) but at this point I don't think there's much opportunity to sort that. Wires from Tiv Parkway to Wellington might be a handy little fill.

--

Taunton-Reading is about as fast as is practical without rsbuilding, I thought? trains that way were timed to 110 between Reading & Padd so they didn't need a secondman for that little bit, was my understanding.
I believe it's mostly 100 from Exeter to Reading with a few bits at 110 as well as a few slower restrictions, nothing less than 70mph I think

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

What I mean is a new high-speed line akin to HS3 which probably won't avoid Cardiff to be honest, just that it will bypass the smaller stations like Pyle etc
Considering how little information the original poster is giving though, it's possible that's not the case, and they know we'll not take what they say seriously.
 

Irascible

Established Member
Joined
21 Apr 2020
Messages
2,233
Location
Dyfneint
I'm intrigued by this statement. Which other valley could a line from Taunton to Exeter conceivably use?

Could have just run down from Whiteball & gone straight to Tiverton town, and then down the Exe valley - other than a bit of a corner at Tiverton ( which would have got a station anyway ) it's fairly straight. It might have actually been a plan too but for objections from the local landowners ( don't quote me on this, that is from long distant memory of local history lessons ). IIRC the B&E originally looked at going to Tiverton & then Exeter via Crediton, which would have been quite some work...
 

stuu

Established Member
Joined
2 Sep 2011
Messages
3,774
Could have just run down from Whiteball & gone straight to Tiverton town, and then down the Exe valley - other than a bit of a corner at Tiverton ( which would have got a station anyway ) it's fairly straight. It might have actually been a plan too but for objections from the local landowners ( don't quote me on this, that is from long distant memory of local history lessons ). IIRC the B&E originally looked at going to Tiverton & then Exeter via Crediton, which would have been quite some work...
That would definitely have been longer and bendier though, through Bickleigh especially, so wouldn't have had any chance of being a faster route than the existing one. It's all 100mph from Cowley Bridge to Taunton anyway
 

Irascible

Established Member
Joined
21 Apr 2020
Messages
2,233
Location
Dyfneint
That would definitely have been longer and bendier though, through Bickleigh especially, so wouldn't have had any chance of being a faster route than the existing one. It's all 100mph from Cowley Bridge to Taunton anyway

Marginally longer, but if you ignore the existence of the Exe valley branch entirely & assume more money was spent on alignment, don't think it's bendier. Probably not any less of a flood problem than the other valley though.
 

The exile

Established Member
Joined
31 Mar 2010
Messages
9,485
Location
Somerset
I think 200 km/h (125 mph) is the most appropriate line speed of Great Western Main Line as it's not long enough to offer significant time saving having a higher speed. However, I think in-cab signalling should still be installed to enable more trains run on the line, and more section of the line should be upgraded to 200 km/h as well such that a train from London to Bristol can be run at 200 km/h for nearly the whole length.
I assume you would mean running to Bristol via Parkway - as the extra fasts that never really got off the ground were supposed to do. By giving Bristol its express service that way it would have the added potential benefits of making it easier to squeeze a more intensive service in between Bristol and Bathampton Jn by slowing the timings of the London trains between Bristol and Bath thus freeing up the odd extra path. As far as I can see the only losers there would be passengers from Chippenham to Bristol - although if the freed up paths enabled a Swindon - Wootton Bassett - Chippenham - Corsham - Bath etc. service, the increased frequency would probably compensate for the longer actual train journey times. 125 mph running via Bath probably wouldn't help much...
 

FGWHST43009

Member
Joined
3 Nov 2020
Messages
255
Well given that Cardiff is in the way, would seem strange to not go through it?
TGV trains mostly use existing infrastructure when stopping at most stations. It would be a similar kind of arrangement for a Bristol Parkway to Swansea line.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
20,386
TGV trains mostly use existing infrastructure when stopping at most stations. It would be a similar kind of arrangement for a Bristol Parkway to Swansea line.
I'd argue the model we should be going for is not the TGV one though.

There isn't much traffic to Swansea compared to traffic to Cardiff, so if we built a bypass very few people would actually use it.
I'd argue a better model is the Shinkansen style segregated station model.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top