My idea to improve access at Ryde pier

[markymark2000]

Moderator note: split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/island-line-upgrade.199101/page-9

Just saying but could you not amend the track layout on that bridge so that between just north of the Esplanade station, the train uses what is current the non operational track?

Then what is currently the operational line, pull that up and make that into the footpath? (Think like Hythe and Southend piers).

That has to be much cheaper than building a completely new bridge and means that people will walk straight into the ferry terminal at Pier Head which is much better for people rather than giving them a nice long walkway for them to then have to walk on the road through the car park at Pier Head.

 

[Gloster]

You would have to put in a reverse curve beyond the end of the curve through the station at Esplanade; this would mean that pedestrians would not get access to the new walkway until they were around 100 metres from the station.

With pedestrians so close to the running line, it would probably be necessary to put the conductor rail on the sea side of the line, which has its disadvantages.

 

[markymark2000]

#259 You would have to put in a reverse curve beyond the end of the curve through the station at Esplanade and this would mean that pedestrians would not get access to the new walkway until they were around 100 metres from the station. With pedestrians so close to the running line it would probably be necessary to put the conductor rail on the sea side of the line, which has its disadvantages.

100m isn't too bad. I think it's fair to say that the tram area will need to be built on at least in part but if you can reduce it, it makes sense to from a cost point of view.

As for the conductor rail, It's whether the cost of the third rail on the sea side works out more expensive in the long run than building on the tramway. With the 2 tracks not being needed as well from Esplanade up to Pier Head, it made sense in my head to just rip up a track and make it a walkway but I do see your point.

 

[sem34090]

I think the slightly obvious point being missed here is the very poor condition of the disused track on the pier. It has been officially closed for almost 15 years if previous messages are anything to go by, and has been out of use for possibly up to around 20-25 years. It would require replacement of the trackwork, substantial works to the stations at Esplanade and probably at Pier Head too and probably cost far more than some light metalwork and decking on the tramway pier would cost (I would imagine - I am no expert). Add to that the need (if SWR wish to retain a passing place at the Northern end of the line) and cost of installing new pointwork after the platform at Esplanade and I fail to see how it "makes sense from a cost point of view"!

If suggesting use of the railway pier, a more logical suggestion would surely be to rip up the long-disused (and probably/certainly unusable) track and use that side of the pier? But that still has the potential conductor rail issue (albeit perhaps reduced by the presence of the tramway and road piers on that side? I wouldn't know). It would also require work at Esplanade, but not any that would disrupt the ability to run the railway.

 

[markymark2000]

I think the slightly obvious point being missed here is the very poor condition of the disused track on the pier. It has been officially closed for almost 15 years if previous messages are anything to go by, and has been out of use for possibly up to around 20-25 years. It would require replacement of the trackwork, substantial works to the stations at Esplanade and probably at Pier Head too and probably cost far more than some light metalwork and decking on the tramway pier would cost (I would imagine - I am no expert). Add to that the need (if SWR wish to retain a passing place at the Northern end of the line) and cost of installing new pointwork after the platform at Esplanade and I fail to see how it "makes sense from a cost point of view"!

Could you perhaps just rip up the current disused track and move the new track over or does that have the same complications?
As for a passing point, there would be no change to that as from Esplanade up to Pier Head is ran as single track anyway. I can't see there being any issue with that as you aren't affecting any passing point since one doesn't exist now.

If suggesting use of the railway pier, a more logical suggestion would surely be to rip up the long-disused (and probably/certainly unusable) track and use that side of the pier? But that still has the potential conductor rail issue (albeit perhaps reduced by the presence of the tramway and road piers on that side? I wouldn't know). It would also require work at Esplanade, but not any that would disrupt the ability to run the railway.

Thats possible but I'd have thought they would have wanted the walkway between the railway and the road bridge rather than force people over the hovercraft bridge to then walk up the pier. Better for cost but worse for encouraging people to use it and it being much use to people with luggage.

 

[Chris125]

Ultimately anything that involves Network Rail ownership and maintenance and interferes with an operational electrified railway is almost guaranteed to be way more complex and expensive than simply putting a new deck on the Wightlink-owned tramway pier.

 

[sem34090]

Could you perhaps just rip up the current disused track and move the new track over or does that have the same complications?

Almost certainly!

As for a passing point, there would be no change to that as from Esplanade up to Pier Head is ran as single track anyway. I can't see there being any issue with that as you aren't affecting any passing point since one doesn't exist now.

Yes it does. If you are only using the currently disused side of the railway pier presumably you would be using the old Platform 2 at Esplanade to avoid an awkward, tightly radiused, track slew on the pier (Which is probably impossible without significant structural alterations to the pier). In that case, how would you suggest Up trains reaching the 'new' platform at Esplanade? The current crossover goes the wrong way to permit that movement.

Thats possible but I'd have thought they would have wanted the walkway between the railway and the road bridge rather than force people over the hovercraft bridge to then walk up the pier. Better for cost but worse for encouraging people to use it and it being much use to people with luggage.

So why not use the currently unused, Wightlink-owned, separate from the electrified railway, Tramway Pier which is in just the right location to permit that and leaves the railway unaffected and possibly able to continue operating during the construction of the pedestrian walkway?! I'm afraid that your logic is completely missing me.

Ultimately anything that involves Network Rail ownership and maintenance and interferes with an operational electrified railway is almost guaranteed to be way more complex and expensive than simply putting a new deck on the Wightlink-owned tramway pier.

Exactly!