East Croydon and Clapham Junction Pick Up only on Reigate Services?

[zwk500]

Would the best solution not be for 8 car Reigate bound trains to drop 4 coaches in Platform 0 at Redhill and then rejoin on the return journey?

No, because you'd be blocking out Platform 0 for the whole time or need a driver to shunt the unit.

 

[Minstral25]

Would the best solution not be for 8 car Reigate bound trains to drop 4 coaches in Platform 0 at Redhill and then rejoin on the return journey?

It's potentially a solution - see post #10 above

If Platform 0 is solely for Reigate trains, it means that P1 has to cope with both GWR and Tonbridge trains which would seem viable as Gatwick's are only planned as hourly now (not half hourly as per 3tph plan). In emergency the GWR trains can reverse in P0 as the dropped coaches will be further up the platform.

The timetable makes it viable as the Reigate to Victoria train departs 5 minutes before Victoria to Reigate arrives. It does require introducing potential unreliability and the need for staff at Redhill.

 

[infobleep]

Almost certainly - two changes for Reigate to Clapham Junction or London Victoria wouldn't go down well.


...and even when they run them from platform 4 it doesn't seem to put people off.

Well the summery board does say when the next fastest service is and that includes platform 4.

Generaly I will get the first service as usually I will be changing trains at Clapham Junction.

 

[CarrotPie]

If Platform 0 is solely for Reigate trains, it means that P1 has to cope with both GWR and Tonbridge trains which would seem viable as Gatwick's are only planned as hourly now (not half hourly as per 3tph plan). In emergency the GWR trains can reverse in P0 as the dropped coaches will be further up the platform.

The timetable makes it viable as the Reigate to Victoria train departs 5 minutes before Victoria to Reigate arrives. It does require introducing potential unreliability and the need for staff at Redhill.

Could a driver shunt the extra coaches into the nearby sidings and out again (possibly incorporating a break) to clear the platform for other use?

 

[zwk500]

Could a driver shunt the extra coaches into the nearby sidings and out again (possibly incorporating a break) to clear the platform for other use?

Yes, but it'd be a pain in the proverbial as the Sidings are on the east side of the line, so it needs to cross every line at the south end of Redhill Station.

 

[CarrotPie]

Yes, but it'd be a pain in the proverbial as the Sidings are on the east side of the line, so it needs to cross every line at the south end of Redhill Station.

True, but the ECS could be held to allow it to be pathed at the right moment.

 

[CarrotPie]

On the subject of extending Reigate's platform, how come only the 4-car platform is easily accessible (without wrong-line running from Redhill)? And also, why has a crossover not been added to access it (as it already has juice rails)?

 

[Fenchurch SP]

Yes, but it'd be a pain in the proverbial as the Sidings are on the east side of the line, so it needs to cross every line at the south end of Redhill Station.

If 4 coaches are left on the platform there would still be space for terminating and reversing services. The only problem would be if something else blocked up the southern part of the platform for a period of time.

 

[zwk500]

I think the only sidings there now are alongside the Tonbridge line.
If 4 coaches are left on the platform there would still be space for terminating and reversing services. The only problem would be if something else blocked up the southern part of the platform for a period of time.

Detaching 4 cars and leaving them in a through platform just isn't the right solution.
- The slow crossing move to get from the Down line to Platform 0 will extend the junction margins just as the Gatwick-Bedford is coming through,
- The need to leave the north set tight to the signal will mean stopping quite far up the platform, something people already complain about the reversing services doing.
- You'll also either need a long dwell while the driver decouples and secures the rear unit or a second member of staff to do so.
- You then need to have a gap when nothing's coming in from Reigate to get back to the right road.
- Finally, you'll need a plan for what to do if the decoupling fails (turf everybody off for the next train and head back north?) or if the coupling action fails northbound, trapping the train (shunt out and runround, just cancel the service and scratch your head?).

IIRC It has been done before (GN did it with the King's Lynn trains at Cambridge?), so it is possible, but the benefit for passengers of strengthening this service in this way is relatively small, and the potential negative impact on every other passenger on the BML is huge if delay occurs because of the weave at Selhurst.

Moving the wrong-direction starting signal and trailing crossover at Reigate about 50m to the east would seem to be a far better option to get 8-car trains to me. The sidings would need to be abolished to achieve it though.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Oct 2022 ==

On the subject of extending Reigate's platform, how come only the 4-car platform is easily accessible (without wrong-line running from Redhill)? And also, why has a crossover not been added to access it (as it already has juice rails)?

Fundamentally, we are left with the layout the SR decided on when electrifying the line. The cross-platform shunt wouldn't have been an issue then and a trailing crossover meant no FPLs would have been required. The 1974 track diagram shown here: https://signalbox.org/photo-gallery/southern-railway/reigate/ indicates that the only change from that layout (apart from TCB taking over from AB) is the replacement of Disc 11 with a Main Aspect signal and the motor working of the crossover, to permit reversals to depart back to Redhill.
Adding a facing crossover would require a major intervention to the signalling, which would be a much bigger project and would likely see the 'box abolished and control moved to Three Bridges ROC as there isn't space free in the existing interlocking. If you're doing that level of work, then you'd want to take the opportunity to do other changes as well, such as the turnback platform and extension to full 12-car length.
Moving the existing infrastructure to the east would still be a big job, but in theory it should be within the capacity of the interlocking, as it'd be the same number of elements, just at different positions. Things like overlaps and signal sighting would still be involved, so still expect it to be in the millions.

 

[infobleep]

Moving the wrong-direction starting signal and trailing crossover at Reigate about 50m to the east would seem to be a far better option to get 8-car trains to me. The sidings would need to be abolished to achieve it though.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Oct 2022 ==

How critical is the siding at Reigate? Is it more important than the vendors brought about extending the trains?

In the evening peak, Reigate trains are split off trains that run to Three Bridges. I take it lack of demand and need for more staff would preclude that running all day.

 

[zwk500]

How critical is the siding at Reigate? Is it more important than the vendors brought about extending the trains?

Nothing appears to be booked into it, and presumably anything that would be could return to Redhill if pushed.

In the evening peak, Reigate trains are split off trains that run to Three Bridges. I take it lack of demand and need for more staff would preclude that running all day.

The demand is probably there, it's the staff and delay concerns that will be bigger blockers. Splitting/joining at Redhill all day is a recipe for disaster. Southern have only just managed to get rid of the Haywards Heath dividers.

 

[MotCO]

Years ago, there used to be a Charing Cross, then Petts Wood and Orpington only service in the peaks. If the Reigate problem is rush hours only, could there be a Victoria to Purley Merstham, Coulsdon South, Redhill, Reigate only service, one in each peak? Obviously depends on paths being available, but if it is fast, it could leave Victoria just before a stopper, and get well out of the way.

 

[Peregrine 4903]

Nothing appears to be booked into it, and presumably anything that would be could return to Redhill if pushed.

The demand is probably there, it's the staff and delay concerns that will be bigger blockers. Splitting/joining at Redhill all day is a recipe for disaster. Southern have only just managed to get rid of the Haywards Heath dividers.

Reigate CHS is occosionally used when the Tonbridge to Redhill services are extended to Reigate during engineering work, and then they go and shunt into the Reigate CHS to let a GWR service path to avoid blocking up the platform. I've only ever seen it happen once though.

Also due to the condition of the track, its currently limited to being a 4 car siding.

 

[WizCastro197]

Years ago, there used to be a Charing Cross, then Petts Wood and Orpington only service in the peaks. If the Reigate problem is rush hours only, could there be a Victoria to Purley Merstham, Coulsdon South, Redhill, Reigate only service, one in each peak? Obviously depends on paths being available, but if it is fast, it could leave Victoria just before a stopper, and get well out of the way.

No It isn't just rush hour only problem. It is all times of the day in the down direction. The Up is not really a problem at most passengers board at either Coulsdon South and or East Croydon. Removing the service out of peak isn't going to work.


To Be completely fair, the joining (not sure about splitting) at Redhill isn't too bad. The train does often leave on time with both portions arriving slightly earlier than planned (09:41-VIC) But I have been on one where the Gatwick-Redhill portion was cancelled and it then left 10 late. It can go wrong very quickly so I agree, I wouldn't be merging and dividing trains all day.

 

[infobleep]

The demand is probably there, it's the staff and delay concerns that will be bigger blockers. Splitting/joining at Redhill all day is a recipe for disaster. Southern have only just managed to get rid of the Haywards Heath dividers.

If it's a recipe for disaster, how come they permit it in the peaks? Sure that is when they don't want trains to be delayed.

There is still at least one Haywards Heath divider, although late at night and trains still divide at Eastbourne.

I thought the Haywards Heath trains not dividing was due to the Gatwick Airport works and once that is completed, they would go back to dividing again so that the other path can be used by trains to Brighton.

The point of mentioning these is that it already occurs. I do accept there is a balance.

 

[zwk500]

If it's a recipe for disaster, how come they permit it in the peaks? Sure that is when they don't want trains to be delayed.

There is still at least one Haywards Heath divider, although late at night and trains still divide at Eastbourne.

I thought the Haywards Heath trains not dividing was due to the Gatwick Airport works and once that is completed, they would go back to dividing again so that the other path can be used by trains to Brighton.

The point of mentioning these is that it already occurs. I do accept there is a balance.

I don't know for sure about the Haywards Heath situation, but I know there was a shift away from dividing at one point.
I suspect the peaks do it because the balance is between having 8-car trains vs Serving Reigate. There are enough drivers around that for a couple of hours it's worth it, to do it all day is a different calculation.

I don't deny it can be done, just the value of doing so.

 

[Peregrine 4903]

I don't know for sure about the Haywards Heath situation, but I know there was a shift away from dividing at one point.
I suspect the peaks do it because the balance is between having 8-car trains vs Serving Reigate. There are enough drivers around that for a couple of hours it's worth it, to do it all day is a different calculation.

I don't deny it can be done, just the value of doing so.

Yeah they have to do it in the peaks to prevent overcrowding.

It is noticeable though how poorly the trains that split/join at Redhill perform.

 

[ComUtoR]

If 4 coaches are left on the platform there would still be space for terminating and reversing services. The only problem would be if something else blocked up the southern part of the platform for a period of time.

There are rules that restrict trains from being left unattended on running lines. Does Redhill have a local instruction for leaving trains unattended ?

 

[zwk500]

There are rules that restrict trains from being left unattended on running lines. Does Redhill have a local instruction for leaving trains unattended ?

To be fair, such an instruction could be written fairly quickly if required.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Yes, absolutely no Reigate trains are held at Redhill under any circumstance. Given they are on an unconflicted side of the station the policy is right time departure every time.

yes but in doing so they screw over loads of people that needs the stations across to Tonbridge or Guildford and the industry really must build timetables that provide robust connections if they want to enable modal shift.

 

[WizCastro197]

There are rules that restrict trains from being left unattended on running lines. Does Redhill have a local instruction for leaving trains unattended ?

There maybe. Terminating Tonbridge trains are never left alone at Redhill and are always under supervision by a driver. I am not sure if this counts as I am confused as what you mean by running lines sorry

 

[ComUtoR]

There maybe. Terminating Tonbridge trains are never left alone at Redhill and are always under supervision by a driver.

Being left unattended means that they can be left without supervision. So no Driver in attendance.

I am not sure if this counts as I am confused as what you mean by running lines sorry

In this sense it generally means that it's a through platform and not a bay/terminal.

 

[WizCastro197]

Being left unattended means that they can be left without supervision. So no Driver in attendance.



In this sense it generally means that it's a through platform and not a bay/terminal.

Thought as much, that is why I thought it didn't count.

In that case I am not sure Redhill does have any rules as no trains are really left unattended even the terminators.

 

[zwk500]

Thought as much, that is why I thought it didn't count.

In that case I am not sure Redhill does have any rules as no trains are really left unattended even the terminators.

If Redhill had a rule permitting stabling of trains on a through line, there would either be an instruction in the Sectional Appendix or a Timetable Planning Rule saying so (probably both). Both documents are freely available online, but IIRC there is no such permission at Redhill.

 

[Peregrine 4903]

If Redhill had a rule permitting stabling of trains on a through line, there would either be an instruction in the Sectional Appendix or a Timetable Planning Rule saying so (probably both). Both documents are freely available online, but IIRC there is no such permission at Redhill.

Trains can stable at Redhill but only in exceptional circumstances.

 

[Minstral25]

Trains can stable at Redhill but only in exceptional circumstances.

Surely this is a paperwork issue to resolve & get approval rather than an impossibility.

It's probably more important that a timetable can be constructed around platform 0 spending the day as purely for Reigate to Victoria services. I think it can, but it would need some work on current timings.

 

[cle]

I know it was recently updated, but it did seem to me a missed trick to not rebuild Redhill with two islands and a side platform/bay or two. There is definitely space for it. Would have been a big build, but between making it a more viable interchange/junction, enabling unavoidable reversals, some terminating, and the 12 car mainline - it might have been worth it.

Still wouldn't solve Reigate though, so perhaps aspiring to that 12 car build in future CP periods is the only realistic option for the medium term.

 

[WizCastro197]

I know it was recently updated, but it did seem to me a missed trick to not rebuild Redhill with two islands and a side platform/bay or two. There is definitely space for it. Would have been a big build, but between making it a more viable interchange/junction, enabling unavoidable reversals, some terminating, and the 12 car mainline - it might have been worth it.

Still wouldn't solve Reigate though, so perhaps aspiring to that 12 car build in future CP periods is the only realistic option for the medium term.

Where would the diversionary fast lines fit in?

I think an extra platform, Platform 5 perhaps, a small bay for GWR trains to terminate, therefore allowing Tonbridge trains to be unnaffected by effectively being blocked in. Therefore more services from the south could terminate at Redhill, perhaps even a Brighton-Redhill service, although now I feel I am pushing it too far.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

I know it was recently updated, but it did seem to me a missed trick to not rebuild Redhill with two islands and a side platform/bay or two. There is definitely space for it. Would have been a big build, but between making it a more viable interchange/junction, enabling unavoidable reversals, some terminating, and the 12 car mainline - it might have been worth it.

Still wouldn't solve Reigate though, so perhaps aspiring to that 12 car build in future CP periods is the only realistic option for the medium term.

It was supposed to have had three through roads on the Up side but as usual the signalling costs got out of hand and it was "value" engineered to basically replicate the existing layout (P0 was actually a signalled route for freights prior to rebuild). It still cost 80m mind you.