• 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!

Grand Central apply to replace HSTs

Status
Not open for further replies.

Pumbaa

Established Member
Joined
19 Feb 2008
Messages
5,022
If they take all 14, then they should just about be able to cover all their current diagrams and have slack to allow for, err, continued 180 reliability and flammability.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Aictos

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2009
Messages
10,403
What he said, i know where it is being tested! :D

Then why didn't you say that :roll: slight difference between saying Southern part of Hertford Loop and Southern part of ECML... Least I was being more specific to the area :p
 

Sidious

Member
Joined
11 Jun 2012
Messages
242
A couple of points

The Northern services are Northbound at xx02 and Southbound at xx 15 and probably take up about 5 mins each on the section where they share the same track. Also the freights are more than sporadic quite a bit of traffic goes up to Tyne Dock this way
Yes sorry - xx:02 and xx:15 you are correct.

I agree that it probably takes 4-5 minutes, because the level crossing at the south (east) end of the station needs to be cleared. But still we are talking about two trains per hour on one platform - nothing like approaching capacity. My understanding of the line between Norton Junction and Hartlepool is only signalled for 6tph anyway, so it comes back to is the capacity really needed?

Another issue which may be raised is that while the existing platform has 'grandfather rights' a new platform would probably have to comply with today's regulations regarding track curve radius, and Hartlepool Station is on a tight curve (much tighter than the curve at the site of the proposed Low Moor Station near Bradford which was rejected on safety grounds) and it would probably not comply.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top