Ore Tunnel work to close Marshlink rail line

[Tomonthetrain]

From BBC

MP's upgrade plea over train line
Essential maintenance work on a railway tunnel in East Sussex will lead to the closure of a key route at the start of 2012, passengers have been warned.

Network Rail said the line between Rye and Hastings would be closed for nine weeks from January to March.

This will enable the repair of the Ore Tunnel, along with points and signals, on the Marshlink line.

The closure will affect Southern Railway services across Romney Marsh between Ashford in Kent and Hastings.

Network Rail said it needed to carry out the work in the Ore Tunnel to improve the drainage and repair the lining inside to prevent water seeping through.

"If this work does not take place, there could be substantial damage to the structure in the coming years which could have a major impact on people's journeys," a statement said.

It added that the work had been scheduled for the winter to try to avoid "the busy summer months, minimising the impact for passengers and the businesses which rely on tourism in particular".

Public meeting
It said other work would be carried out at the same time to improve the railway and minimise disruption, including upgrading points and signals to improve reliability, and the maintenance of bridges and tracks that could lead to higher line speeds.

Southern Railway said it would operate a rail replacement bus service between Hastings and Ashford International.

It said bus services would also need to be extended to Bexhill on some weekends.

The MarshLink Action Group (MLAG), which acts for passengers using the line, said while it believed the works were necessary, there were still questions arising from the intended closure of the line that needed to be addressed.

It said it had invited Network Rail and Southern Railway to a public meeting at Rye Community Centre, in Conduit Hill, on Friday evening to discuss the matter.

 

[A0]

From BBC

MP's upgrade plea over train line
Essential maintenance work on a railway tunnel in East Sussex will lead to the closure of a key route at the start of 2012, passengers have been warned.

Network Rail said the line between Rye and Hastings would be closed for nine weeks from January to March.

This will enable the repair of the Ore Tunnel, along with points and signals, on the Marshlink line.

The closure will affect Southern Railway services across Romney Marsh between Ashford in Kent and Hastings.

Network Rail said it needed to carry out the work in the Ore Tunnel to improve the drainage and repair the lining inside to prevent water seeping through.

"If this work does not take place, there could be substantial damage to the structure in the coming years which could have a major impact on people's journeys," a statement said.

It added that the work had been scheduled for the winter to try to avoid "the busy summer months, minimising the impact for passengers and the businesses which rely on tourism in particular".

Public meeting
It said other work would be carried out at the same time to improve the railway and minimise disruption, including upgrading points and signals to improve reliability, and the maintenance of bridges and tracks that could lead to higher line speeds.

Southern Railway said it would operate a rail replacement bus service between Hastings and Ashford International.

It said bus services would also need to be extended to Bexhill on some weekends.

The MarshLink Action Group (MLAG), which acts for passengers using the line, said while it believed the works were necessary, there were still questions arising from the intended closure of the line that needed to be addressed.

It said it had invited Network Rail and Southern Railway to a public meeting at Rye Community Centre, in Conduit Hill, on Friday evening to discuss the matter.

Feels like Network Rail are 'damned if they do and damned if they don't'

The work needs to take place. Presumably the alternative is to do the work over a far longer period on weekends and evenings only with the associated disruption that would cause?

The basic infrastructure wears out and sometimes needs replacing - it's a fact of life - unfortunately it will disrupt some people's journeys, but I'm not sure there's any alternative?

 

[yorksrob]

It's quite a hefty bit of infrastructure and I suppose that if it has to be done it has to be done.

I'd be surprised if they couldn't run some sort of shuttle between Rye and Ashford though.

 

[A0]

It's quite a hefty bit of infrastructure and I suppose that if it has to be done it has to be done.

I'd be surprised if they couldn't run some sort of shuttle between Rye and Ashford though.

Where are the units operated from? Presumably the decision not to run a service on the eastern section is due to where the units and crews are stationed and their ability to get to the eastern end of the line?

 

[HSTEd]

I dont suppose it will be electrified at the same time?
Would be nice

 

[yorksrob]

Where are the units operated from? Presumably the decision not to run a service on the eastern section is due to where the units and crews are stationed and their ability to get to the eastern end of the line?

I believe they come from Selhurst so I wouldn't have thought they'd have any more difficulty getting them to Ashford.

 

[OxtedL]

I don't think all of the Marshlink turbos go to Selhurst each night. From memory at least one hangs around in the Hastings area, for example, but don't quote me. I think a bigger issue could be that anything going out to Ashford way (well away from normal Southern routes) becomes a real headache to do anything about. If the 171 breaks down then the nearest help will be well over an hour away in all cases, and having two units there seems pointless.

I would like to think that if they are saving a unit, even if for only a couple of months, they could lengthen one of the critical Uckfields. Although actually that might not help in the long term when it goes away again...

Come to think of it if they can cut out a diagram and the Rye shuttle unit then that's two units. New plan: take this opportunity to lengthen all the 171/7s to 3-car with the slack suddenly available in the fleet. This will obviously have to be done using the shortest time to draw up a rolling stock order ever seen.

 

[pendolino]

I don't think all of the Marshlink turbos go to Selhurst each night. From memory at least one hangs around in the Hastings area, for example, but don't quote me.

One unit comes to Selhurst nightly for maintenance; Eastbourne driver piloted into/out of Selhurst by a Norwood driver. The rest stay down south somewhere, not sure where though.

 

[87015]

No surprise its too difficult for them to get a unit round to run on the other side of the block, obviously much better to bus throughout...

 

[Greenback]

There is a perception that NR, and the TOC's do not do enough to run part services during these kinds of work. It still seems to be just easier to close the whole route, and put a bus on, depsite various utterances that more efforts will be made to reduce the iconvenience to passengers.

After the diversions around Reading at Christmas 2010, I thought progress had been made, but it seems not - unless you live in certain areas that is.

 

[cle]

I've always thought that extending the 3rd rail down this would be a great idea.

Fast services from St Pancras would be amazing for the economies of the places along the route, and give Hastings a much faster route to London. You could then look at whether the slower Victoria - Hastings could be cut back to Eastbourne and replaced with another Brighton service, with connections at Lewes for Gatwick/London. You could also look at the Hastings line services to Charing Cross too.

Eastbourne might be competitive on HS1 too - or certainly the towns between there and Hastings, as well as potentially for connections at Stratford.

 

[A0]

There is a perception that NR, and the TOC's do not do enough to run part services during these kinds of work. It still seems to be just easier to close the whole route, and put a bus on, depsite various utterances that more efforts will be made to reduce the iconvenience to passengers.

After the diversions around Reading at Christmas 2010, I thought progress had been made, but it seems not - unless you live in certain areas that is.

To be fair - the Marshlink line is very much a secondary route. It sounds like the units are stabled at the west end of the line at the end of the day and even that the return to base (Selhurst) is actioned from the west end of the line (if it is an Eastbourne driver doing the work).

To run the eastern half on this secondary line seems to make little practical or economic sense.

Reading, by comparison, is a major hub with the GWML running through the middle. To have fully replaced all services with buses would have meant major places like Bristol, Oxford, Exeter, Cardiff and Plymouth having no through service to London.

I don't think it is either fair or reasonable to compare the efforts made to keep services running during that blockade with the Marshlink one.

 

[westcoastway]

Hello all - long time reader of the forums, but irregular poster.

To answer a question asked earlier, the Class 171s are stabled and refuelled at St Leonards depot, the other side of Hastings, so it would be very difficult to provide a Rye-Ashford shuttle.

An interesting article on St Leonards depot is here: http://www.hastingsdiesels.co.uk/news/articles/2009a06/

 

[yorksrob]

I'm not convinced that it's not practical to run a shuttle for the Eastern half of the line only on an economic basis - the Rye - Ashford section does get quite busy in my experience and we are talking about several weeks of inconvenience.

Plus there are the stopping patterns. Most of the trains seem to go straight past the halts and Ore these days, so a replacement bus from Rye would at least be straight along the main road. The section East of Rye, however calls at Appledore and Hamstreet, so you'd have all the winding around of trying to serve the stations.

The refueling issue at St Leonards would be a bit trickier. Perhaps if they just replaced the early morning/late evening Rye/Ashford trains with buses where necessary to provide time to run the train to and from the depot via Tonbridge and Tunbridge Wells

 

[N Levers]

To run an hourly service ashford - Rye would require 2 units plus one standby. There is a requirement for 3 units for the west end service which is makes 6 (one more than the usual five) so would require an additional 377 to cover one west end diagram.

I hope they run one fast bus Ashford - Rye - Hastings and one slow Ashford all stops to rye then winchelsea or three oaks (alternating as train plan) and then Hastings

 

[OxtedL]

Running a unit daily round Hastings to Tonbridge to Ashford would be quite complicated for Southern, I would have thought. It would almost certainly need piloting by SE drivers and would be a long way to go for a reasonably minor route in Southern terms. Bear in mind that these are two coach trains and the vast majority won't get to standing point, whereas Southern operates absolutely packed 12-car trains elsewhere on their network everyday, which would kinda make it look like an insignificant service. (I'm not saying that I think this is a good thing, mind.)

N Levers point about diagram is also an important one - you quite literally can't have any extra 171s to help, and if it takes 3 units to cover the Rye end of things (quite sensible really) finding an extra unit from somewhere would be entertaining.

I would have quietly thought that the MLAG meeting that various people might be hoping for would probably go something like this:
* Is there no chance of you running a service at the Rye end?
* OK, well since you are going to blockade us for over 2 months I don't suppose you would consider doing some other improvement works, cough, electrification, cough?

Where the answer to at least one of the questions ought to be yes but will probably turn out to both be no.

 

[A0]

I'm not convinced that it's not practical to run a shuttle for the Eastern half of the line only on an economic basis - the Rye - Ashford section does get quite busy in my experience and we are talking about several weeks of inconvenience.

I think you're wrongly assuming the eastern end of the line will be available.

The original post included this comment

"This will enable the repair of the Ore Tunnel, along with points and signals, on the Marshlink line."

This suggests that the blockade is more than just the tunnel closure, but also other infrastructure the length of the line which may mean running services around the works is impractical.

 

[N Levers]

Even if they did electrify ashford - ore HS1 services couldnt run due to lacking capacity at Ashford (plat 2) also there is currently no track route from platform 2 onto hs1

 

[atomicdanny]

Just had a completely random thought - how long would it take to put 3rd rail on the whole marshlink line? Obviously it won't happen but was just curious!

 

[yorksrob]

To run an hourly service ashford - Rye would require 2 units plus one standby. There is a requirement for 3 units for the west end service which is makes 6 (one more than the usual five) so would require an additional 377 to cover one west end diagram.

I hope they run one fast bus Ashford - Rye - Hastings and one slow Ashford all stops to rye then winchelsea or three oaks (alternating as train plan) and then Hastings

Couldn't the "spare" unit at the Eastern end be a replacement bus instead ?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Running a unit daily round Hastings to Tonbridge to Ashford would be quite complicated for Southern, I would have thought.

Granted - but you would have thought that they would be able to come up with some sort of arrangement - bearing in mind that they are both owned by the same company !
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

This suggests that the blockade is more than just the tunnel closure, but also other infrastructure the length of the line which may mean running services around the works is impractical.

Granted - if they really do require nine whole weeks to do the rest, then fair enough. Only if mind you.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

To run an hourly service ashford - Rye would require 2 units plus one standby. There is a requirement for 3 units for the west end service which is makes 6 (one more than the usual five) so would require an additional 377 to cover one west end diagram.

I think you mean an additional 171?

 

[OxtedL]

There aren't realistically any more 171s, but that's fine as the Western side of the blockade is of course entirely electrified, so a 377 will do. In fact if they aren't doing anything east of Ore then they may as well run as many diagrams as possible with 377s, could reduce running costs? Or am I thinking in a wishful manner?

 

[Peter Mugridge]

That's a good point; I'd forgotten it was juiced as far as Ore.

What's the turnaround time on the Charing Cross - Hastings service? Is it enough time to reliably extend to Ore during the works?

 

[N Levers]

I think you mean an additional 171?

no i meant 377 as that is what tends to happen when they have a shortage of 171's as they did the sunday just gone (vandalism i was told)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That's a good point; I'd forgotten it was juiced as far as Ore.

What's the turnaround time on the Charing Cross - Hastings service? Is it enough time to reliably extend to Ore during the works?

The brighton slows already go to ore. The Ashfords dont call there

 

[mappman1000]

Could Southern not hire in some coaches and have top and tail locos for a shuttle between Ore and Ashford Int'l?

I've heard from a friend that DRS were bidding for such a service, using their newly aquired 37/4's. But I'm not that convinced, although it would be a reasonable idea.

 

[ushawk]

An Ore-Ashford shuttle cant operate as the Ore Tunnel is to the north of the station. But would this affect the SN/SE services that terminate at Ore ?

 

[TheJRB]

I must admit that when I found out about this I wondered why Southern wouldn't move a couple of 171/7s to the Ashford Down Sidings or Hitachi Depot (I don't think there's a lack of room at Ashford particularly), but then of course there's the fuelling problem which was mentioned here earlier.

I assume that the nuclear flasks will continue to run as usual what with the branch joining the line at Appledore, which would make it even more ironic that there would be no passenger service on the whole of the Marshlink.

Could Southern not hire in some coaches and have top and tail locos for a shuttle between Ore and Ashford Int'l?

I've heard from a friend that DRS were bidding for such a service, using their newly aquired 37/4's. But I'm not that convinced, although it would be a reasonable idea.

That would be impressive. As it's my local line I'd like to see a loco hauled service on the Marshlink. I imagine it'd attract some attention too.

 

[yorksrob]

Could Southern not hire in some coaches and have top and tail locos for a shuttle between Ore and Ashford Int'l?

I've heard from a friend that DRS were bidding for such a service, using their newly aquired 37/4's. But I'm not that convinced, although it would be a reasonable idea.

Or, if they were short, they could borrow tht Thumper (as has been done before)

 

[TheJRB]

I would have quietly thought that the MLAG meeting that various people might be hoping for would probably go something like this:
* Is there no chance of you running a service at the Rye end?
* OK, well since you are going to blockade us for over 2 months I don't suppose you would consider doing some other improvement works, cough, electrification, cough?

Where the answer to at least one of the questions ought to be yes but will probably turn out to both be no.

I'd imagine many would suffer serious shock if they saw a shiny new third rail after the reopening in March!

 

[yorksrob]

I assume that the nuclear flasks will continue to run as usual what with the branch joining the line at Appledore, which would make it even more ironic that there would be no passenger service on the whole of the Marshlink.

I'm not sure, but the original article only mentioned the line being closed between Rye and Hastings.