Fareham to Botley single line

[Phillipimo]

Why was the line between Fareham and Botley never doubled? It was built with double track infrastructure and the line from Eastleigh to Botley is double so it seems strange to leave a gap. Surely after 170 odd years it would have been done, it seems like its just attracting delays.

 

[swt_passenger]

It was doubled at opening, and the two tracks ran through the current tunnels until singled about 1906/7, and from then until the early seventies, (1973) there was also a double track bypass route that diverged between the present routes to Botley and Swanwick. This pair (singled and used for northbound traffic only by the sixties) ran round to the west of the two tunnels, and rejoined the line at Knowle, at which point there were effectively three lines with the eastern most line being the route towards Wickham. AIUI the tunnel route served the Meon Valley when that was open, although over the years there have been 7 or 8 different track layouts in the Knowle area!

All flexibility was removed with rationalisation under BR, and is now impossible to reinstate as the M27 crosses the route at very near original grade.

The route is only single as it runs alongside Eastleigh works as well, which is another capacity bottleneck - this would be much easier to re-instate though.

The bypass route is fairly obvious on Google Satellite view: http://goo.gl/maps/53TCb and street view shows the solid looking bridge on Funtley Rd: http://goo.gl/maps/KwfcE

 

[Helvellyn]

It was doubled at opening, and the two tracks ran through the current tunnels until singled about 1906/7, and from then until the early seventies, (1973) there was also a double track bypass route that diverged between the present routes to Botley and Swanwick.

All removed with rationalisation under BR, and is now impossible to reinstate as the M27 crosses the route at very near original grade.http://goo.gl/maps/KwfcE

I wonder why BR closed the double track bypass route and not the single line through the tunnels? Or was this because the route was rationalised all the way to Botley?

If I recall, I've been told that the route through the two Fareham Tunnels was singled due to structural issues that required strengthening work.

 

[swt_passenger]

I wonder why BR closed the double track bypass route and not the single line through the tunnels? Or was this because the route was rationalised all the way to Botley?

If I recall, I've been told that the route through the two Fareham Tunnels was singled due to structural issues that required strengthening work.

I agree that's the likely reason for singling the tunnel route. Built on very unstable ground conditions and of course the gap between the two tunnels is the result of it collapsing pre-opening.

I have always wondered if the bypass route was given up because it was judged 'too difficult' to cross when they were planning the M27. The dates fit, with line closure in '73 and the M27 section round Fareham being opened about '76?

Of course the whole Eastleigh station area was also being 'dumbed down' at the same time, as trains from Botley could still cross to the up side at the south of the station and run through the old P1. And pre-electrification they probably only expected short distance shuttle services between Fareham and Eastleigh for much of the day.

(For those who didn't know already, the station layout at Eastleigh used to be very similar to Brockenhurst, with an independent entrance building and booking office on the roadside, a longer footbridge, and even a similar traverser or swing bridge to get over the P1 track...)

 

[MidnightFlyer]

I seem to recall Quail Maps state that the line near Botley (is it called the Knowle single or have I just made that up?) had fourth rail installed for about 4 miles - if this is true what was the purpose of such?

 

[swt_passenger]

I think it was just a second conductor to reduce circuit resistance in stead of a cable, so it wasn't a 'fourth rail' in the true sense, and wasn't in the normal LU style layout, I believe it was on the other side of the track in the normal third rail position but much lower - I'm fairly sure it was not in contact with trains.

Edited the tense above, because I just checked and it is no longer there, the line looks to be just the normal setup now.

 

[penrithsteve]

I have always wondered if the bypass route was given up because it was judged 'too difficult' to cross when they were planning the M27. The dates fit, with line closure in '73 and the M27 section round Fareham being opened about '76? [/I]

I seem to remember that there's a fairly substantial bridge built for the M27 over the bypass line - still possible to walk most of this route as a footpath.

Like you it also struck me as odd that the problematic tunnel was kept open, but the bypass line was closed.

 

[Waldgrun]

The two tunnels near Fareham where originally one, part of which collapsed, very soon after the line was opened, due to a geological fault. The collapsed part was removed and opened out to enable the line to reopen.
However the nature of the soil through which it was driven continued to cause problems, so when the Meon Valley line was built, a new deviation deviation line was constructed between Fareham and Knowle. The tunnels where downgraded to become part of the Meon Valley branch.
Sometime in the Mid 1950's there was a landslide on the new line caused by the same geological fault near to Highland Lane bridge (I think). British Railways then used the best bits of the Up & Down lines to construct a single line on the by pass route. This lead to a strange operating procedure, trains from Fareham to Eastleigh travelled via the deviation line, with out taking a token as the line was worked in that direction only, in the other direction trains from Eastleigh to Fareham picked up a token at Knowle Junction Box and took it through the tunnel to Fareham East Box ( this was at the west end of the station!)
This continued until the early 1970's when the M27 was built,part of the deviation line trackbed was built over and the western tunnel was extended to enable the M27 to past over it.Also the length of the single line working was extended from Knowle Junction to Botley!
The joy's of leaning out the windows on Hampshire units to watch the token being exchange, seems like yesterday!

 

[yorksrob]

I must admit, removing the up loop platform at Eastleigh seems a bit of an own goal - particularly given the strategic importance of the location.

 

[455driver]

It wasnt needed at the time and the station had to be made more accessible for the less able bodied so it was easiest/cheapest to take out the up loop and build over the trackbed.

 

[swt_passenger]

It wasnt needed at the time and the station had to be made more accessible for the less able bodied so it was easiest/cheapest to take out the up loop and build over the trackbed.

I agree. It's always easy to look at decisions made nearly 40 years ago with a huge amount of hindsight - I guess they would have had little or no idea then what today's problems would be. As an example, the new extended freight loop at Eastleigh, which isn't a re-instatement, it is a brand new facility. I doubt they were planning for so many containers back in the day...

 

[yorksrob]

I agree. It's always easy to look at decisions made nearly 40 years ago with a huge amount of hindsight - I guess they would have had little or no idea then what today's problems would be. As an example, the new extended freight loop at Eastleigh, which isn't a re-instatement, it is a brand new facility. I doubt they were planning for so many containers back in the day...

Granted. I just mean it's strange given that they left two island platforms at Brockenhurst which seems a less important location.

 

[NSEFAN]

Granted. I just mean it's strange given that they left two island platforms at Brockenhurst which seems a less important location.

Brockenhurst can be busier than you'd think. It makes a convenient passing loop for trains between Bournemouth and Southampton. There's the Lymington shuttle and there would also have been the need for Motorail shunting back in the day.

 

[Eagle]

Granted. I just mean it's strange given that they left two island platforms at Brockenhurst which seems a less important location.

In the current timetable all four platforms are definitely needed though. The Lymington train occupies p4 for a considerable time, and the stopper from Poole typically waits in p1 for about 20 minutes. But they wouldn't have known that in the 1970s though.

I think one of the main reasons that Brockenhurst remained a larger station is because up until the mid-1980s it was a Motorail terminal.

 

[Carlisle]

It wasnt needed at the time and the station had to be made more accessible for the less able bodied so it was easiest/cheapest to take out the up loop and build over the trackbed.

I wonder just how joined up the thinking actually was concerning Eastleigh cos I can remember it was quite a few years between plat1 being closed and the rebuilding of the station frontage