Betchworth Reversals Aborted

[Deepgreen]

This week there has been a NR working each day that does a huge meandering run from Ashford (Kent) around London and south suburbs, then is shown on RTT to be reversing at Betchworth (E to W) to do another meandering run back to Redhill. Each day it has been revised during the day to a VVR category on the last leg of its journey from Guildford, to continue back to Ashford via Redhill instead of reversing at Betchworth. I'm wondering why - has it been found impossible/impractical to use the crossover at Betchworth?

 

[John Webb]

Is it possibly some form of monitoring train checking on the tracks in the hot weather and it's route has been altered to check a section of track considered more at risk? Or was the crossover affected by the heat and couldn't be used? (PS what is a 'VVR category', please?)

 

[swt_passenger]

Is it possibly some form of monitoring train checking on the tracks in the hot weather and it's route has been altered to check a section of track considered more at risk? Or was the crossover affected by the heat and couldn't be used? (PS what is a 'VVR category', please?)

I think VVR is a VAR at very short notice. I think it’s explained somewhere in one of the threads about realtimetrains.
Here you are: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/realtimetrains-website.189152/page-28#post-5170057

 

[Deepgreen]

Is it possibly some form of monitoring train checking on the tracks in the hot weather and it's route has been altered to check a section of track considered more at risk? Or was the crossover affected by the heat and couldn't be used? (PS what is a 'VVR category', please?)

I don't know the purpose of the runs (saw it to be a single yellow vehicle when it went past earlier - it passes Betchworth five times during its journey!). Seems unlikely to be a hot weather check as it's still happening and has been run all week. I imagine service train drivers are relied upon to report kinks, buckling, etc. On RTT, VVR means very short notice alteration, rather than STP (Short Term Plan). Some days it has run very early by the time it gets about halfway through its journey, others, like today, only a few minutes early. On each day, it gets to Guildford and the rest of its journey, reversing at Betchworth, is cancelled and replaced by a VVR working back to Ashford direct (i.e. straight through Betchworth eastbound). Living at Betchworth I was hoping to nip to the station and see a very rare use of the crossover there, but to no avail!

 

[High Dyke]

This train: 0Z50 / 0Z51 https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:R05776/2022-07-21/detailed

Today's working was booked for a pair of 73's. No idea what it's actually doing though.

 

[Deepgreen]

This train: 0Z50 / 0Z51 https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:R05776/2022-07-21/detailed

Today's working was booked for a pair of 73's. No idea what it's actually doing though.

I only caught a glimpse from my window as it passed on the other side of the valley and I saw yellow. Could easily have had a 73 at each end - would have been a good shot of it crossing st Betchworth! I've lived here for 11 years and have never witnessed the crossover used - it certainly was never used for reversing service trains (as ECS) during disruption when I commuted from Betchworth until 2017, so maybe the odd NR working has used it but it's rare indeed.

 

[John Webb]

Thanks for the explanations. Glimpses of yellow would suggest some form of NR monitoring coach?

 

[Deepgreen]

Thanks for the explanations. Glimpses of yellow would suggest some form of NR monitoring coach?

That was my thinking. Not running today so I may never know.

 

[Townsend Hook]

If it ran with with a class 0 headcode, that implies a light loco move. Loco-hauled Network Rail infrastructure monitoring trains run with a class 1, 3 or (very rarely) 5 headcode.

As to the reasoning for changing the reversal location, it may be that the Betchworth crossover is currently out of use, or that there’s no safe walking route for the driver to change ends there. It’s not unusual for rarely-used points to be secured out of use for extended periods of time if they have a defect, as they tend not to be high priorities for maintenance.

 

[Deepgreen]

If it ran with with a class 0 headcode, that implies a light loco move. Loco-hauled Network Rail infrastructure monitoring trains run with a class 1, 3 or (very rarely) 5 headcode.

As to the reasoning for changing the reversal location, it may be that the Betchworth crossover is currently out of use, or that there’s no safe walking route for the driver to change ends there. It’s not unusual for rarely-used points to be secured out of use for extended periods of time if they have a defect, as they tend not to be high priorities for maintenance.

The platform would be the walking route to change ends, but the crossover may be OOU. I would have thought RTT would 'know' that, though. I saw the working through the trees across the valley as it made one of its earlier passes and there was certainly a yellow vehicle. Post no5 said it was booked for a pair of 73s, so who knows if it was actually just a single yellow self-powered vehicle or 'top and tailed' NR coach(es).

 

[High Dyke]

The platform would be the walking route to change ends, but the crossover may be OOU. I would have thought RTT would 'know' that, though. I saw the working through the trees across the valley as it made one of its earlier passes and there was certainly a yellow vehicle. Post no5 said it was booked for a pair of 73s, so who knows if it was actually just a single yellow self-powered vehicle or 'top and tailed' NR coach(es).

Ordinarily RTT would not know if a particular crossover was out of use. For example, the crossover at Allington (Lincs) has been out of use for three months, and likely to be until October. Network Rail train planners know this and reschedule trains accordingly.

In my earlier post the working for the day I referred to was shown as a 0Z** service. This was indeed a light loco move, without any wagons / stock. The working was Network Rail Cl.73's, (73951 / 73952), which are painted in yellow.

 

[John Webb]

.....In my earlier post the working for the day I referred to was shown as a 0Z** service. This was indeed a light loco move, without any wagons / stock. The working was Network Rail Cl.73's, (73951 / 73952), which are painted in yellow.

Possibly driver training/route retention exercises then?

 

[Deepgreen]

A chance visit to a FB site has revealed all - 73951 and 73952 running light, and both in full NR yellow livery! A video of them running through Nutfield (on diesel) back to Ashford confirms it. Don't know the purpose of the runs, though. Edit - just seen High Dyke's post - thanks. I had assumed that as RTT takes its data from NR it would know about crossovers' status, but obviously that level of granularity isn't covered. Thanks again.

 

[IanXC]

A chance visit to a FB site has revealed all - 73951 and 73952 running light, and both in full NR yellow livery! A video of them running through Nutfield (on diesel) back to Ashford confirms it. Don't know the purpose of the runs, though. Edit - just seen High Dyke's post - thanks. I had assumed that as RTT takes its data from NR it would know about crossovers' status, but obviously that level of granularity isn't covered. Thanks again.

Its not that RTT 'doesn't know', the same data would be shown in Trust until it is VVR amended to take account of the infrastructure that is not available.

 

[Deepgreen]

Its not that RTT 'doesn't know', the same data would be shown in Trust until it is VVR amended to take account of the infrastructure that is not available.

Thanks - I meant that I assumed that the data available to RTT would include the status of infrastructure, but it doesn't. Fair enough.

 

[Townsend Hook]

A chance visit to a FB site has revealed all - 73951 and 73952 running light, and both in full NR yellow livery! A video of them running through Nutfield (on diesel) back to Ashford confirms it. Don't know the purpose of the runs, though. Edit - just seen High Dyke's post - thanks. I had assumed that as RTT takes its data from NR it would know about crossovers' status, but obviously that level of granularity isn't covered. Thanks again.

That depends if the person who planned the schedule knows the status of the crossover or not. Frequently on test train shifts we can't record loops and such we're timed for because they've been taken out of use, or occasionally can't make booked moves because they require groundstaff to operate a ground frame, and that hasn't been allowed for.