Places where the speed limit should be more/less?

[PermitToTravel]

So if I decide to drive up the footpath I can do 60,stay on the main road 40.

Looking at that picture, yes!

I struggled to see it the first time, but the 60 limit actually applies to the dirt track through the bushes

 

[Tomnick]

I struggled to see it the first time, but the 60 limit actually applies to the dirt track through the bushes

I'm always up for a challenge - I'll give it a go

There's plenty of fantastic roller coaster rides, just like the example at Sandtoft, out in the Lincolnshire Fens. All good fun, as long as you keep an eye out for the ones that really can launch you skyward, and you can cope with the odd distressed noise from the vehicle (and don't drive into the drain).

 

[Mark62]

Grimsby Town to Doncaster via Scunthorpe. The whole thing just feels depressingly slow, especially for a line which is essentially straight and flat, and has no tight curves. The 185s certainly aren't challenged along that route - they quite often seem to run with one engine down from Wrawby Jn right through to Doncaster (I've known the odd driver turn one engine off after accelerating out of Grimsby, keeping it off until Donny).

Looking at the sectional appendix (which I'm not 100% sure I'm reading right!) it seems the PSR is 55 pretty much from Kirk Sandall to Wrawby Jn, then 60 from Barnetby to Grimsby. I know a lot of freight uses this route, at a lower speed anyway, but surely something could be done to boost the speed of the passenger service? (or is that just encouraging class 1 trains to run into the back of the freight?)

I agree. This route is just about one of the most frustrating runs I have been on. The trains just meander their way to the coast and back. The limit is ludicrously low and the track layout is far less demanding for example than between berwick and Edinburgh where the trains take very tight reverse curves at 70mph or more and on the straights they open up to full speed. This is a much more demanding line than the Grimsby Doncaster line.

 

[Tomnick]

I agree. This route is just about one of the most frustrating runs I have been on. The trains just meander their way to the coast and back. The limit is ludicrously low and the track layout is far less demanding for example than between berwick and Edinburgh where the trains take very tight reverse curves at 70mph or more and on the straights they open up to full speed. This is a much more demanding line than the Grimsby Doncaster line.

Have you read Bald Rick's explanation? Nothing to do with how demanding the track layout is or how tight the reverse curves are.

The geology of the area is terrible, and what with all the heavy freight pounding it, keeping the track straight and level enough for 55mph is a huge challenge.

In the dim and distant past I did some track renewal out there, and in some areas once you get under the ballast if is essentially bog.

 

[Mark62]

Have you read Bald Rick's explanation? Nothing to do with how demanding the track layout is or how tight the reverse curves are.

So it's like that all the way from Doncaster to Cleethorpes? That a big bog.

 

[northwichcat]

Of course the GLF is a maximum speed, not an advisory speed.

All the white road sign with a diagonal black stripe means is no specific speed limit has been deemed necessary for that section of road, so the maximum in the Highway code for the type of vehicle you are driving (national speed limit) applies and you as the driver decide a safe speed. What it looks like has happened there is someone's decided a lower speed limit should apply but the workers who erected the new speed limit signs didn't remove the old ones a short distance down the road.

Sometimes you see the speed limit signs change at a county border e.g. Macclesfield-Buxton road is 50mph in Cheshire but national speed limit in Derbyshire.

 

[Bald Rick]

So it's like that all the way from Doncaster to Cleethorpes? That a big bog.

It is. Marshland, or river / coastal floodplain almost the whole way.

(Managed to avoid the obvious toilet joke!)

 

[Joseph_Locke]

The track geometry is not the only constraint to linespeed, the signal sighting/ spacing has a lot to do with it as well.

My specialist subject , at last.

My list would also include (for the S&C anyway); structure and passing clearances, accelerated rail wear and reduced asset lifespan, track quality issues, transition lengths, track construction (aka the section 14 limits), train performance, stopping patterns, headways, tunnel aerodynamics, footpath crossing sighting, increased noise, bridge RA values, bridge resonance, lower D limits on jointed track, maximum tonnage on steel sleepers, complex S&C units, embankment stability, EMGTPA and track category changes, enhanced positions of safety at speeds >100mph, legality of introduction of standard or non-standard differential speeds, the track formation's critical velocity, turnout speeds at facing junctions and timetable constraints imposed at the junctions.

Dead simple to work out the most cost-effective journey time improvement option ... not.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

My specialist subject , at last.

My list would also include (for the S&C anyway); structure and passing clearances, accelerated rail wear and reduced asset lifespan, track quality issues, transition lengths, track construction (aka the section 14 limits), train performance, stopping patterns, headways, tunnel aerodynamics, footpath crossing sighting, increased noise, bridge RA values, bridge resonance, lower D limits on jointed track, maximum tonnage on steel sleepers, complex S&C units, embankment stability, EMGTPA and track category changes, enhanced positions of safety at speeds >100mph, legality of introduction of standard or non-standard differential speeds, the track formation's critical velocity, turnout speeds at facing junctions and timetable constraints imposed at the junctions.

Dead simple to work out the most cost-effective journey time improvement option ... not.

Why all of a sudden is the theme tune to Mastermind going through my head, now you've said My specialist subject!

 

[The Planner]

My specialist subject , at last.

My list would also include (for the S&C anyway); structure and passing clearances, accelerated rail wear and reduced asset lifespan, track quality issues, transition lengths, track construction (aka the section 14 limits), train performance, stopping patterns, headways, tunnel aerodynamics, footpath crossing sighting, increased noise, bridge RA values, bridge resonance, lower D limits on jointed track, maximum tonnage on steel sleepers, complex S&C units, embankment stability, EMGTPA and track category changes, enhanced positions of safety at speeds >100mph, legality of introduction of standard or non-standard differential speeds, the track formation's critical velocity, turnout speeds at facing junctions and timetable constraints imposed at the junctions.

Dead simple to work out the most cost-effective journey time improvement option ... not.

Details!

 

[Jamesb1974]

Sorry that's rubbish. There is no difference between patrolling requirements or maintenance standards at 10mph and, say, 20mph (or 30mph). The standards do vary above 45mph(? I haven't got my book in front of me) in speed bands, but also by the tonnage of traffic over the line in question.

There is, of course, a difference in permitted track condition between different speeds.

With a few exceptions, the low PSRs in place on freight / low usage lines for track condition are as they were on 1/4/94.

Hmm. Why then do we have lines like the Independents round the back of Crewe that are used 24/7 by the heaviest freight trains, yet are restricted to 10mph throughout? The condition of the track there is shocking and I've yet to see any of the 'Orange Army' down there doing anything to improve it.

Similarly the Bootle Branch. Used 24/7 (nearly) by 2000+ ton trains, yet limited to 20mph throughout. You rarely see anyone patrolling that lovely section of railway either.

 

[The Planner]

That's because it's freight and therefore doesn't bring enough cash in to justify the expense of upgrading, simple as.

 

[thenorthern]

Settle Junction to Carnforth would be a nice one to increase the line speed by a bit but as its only used 5tpd and there is no intermediate signals between Settle Junction and Carnforth I don't think it will be one that will be increased any time soon.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Until last year I'd never travelled that section of line, but I think it's lovely. I even managed to get the Heysham branch in as well and that's seriously quiet & slow.

 

[Bald Rick]

Hmm. Why then do we have lines like the Independents round the back of Crewe that are used 24/7 by the heaviest freight trains, yet are restricted to 10mph throughout? The condition of the track there is shocking and I've yet to see any of the 'Orange Army' down there doing anything to improve it.

You've just answered your own question. Poor condition of track = low speed. But it doesn't need much maintenance as it is low speed. To raise the speed would need complete renewal (probably, I don't know that particular stretch). As you say, it's an (almost) 24/7 railway, so you can bet your last penny that the freight companies would rather have a 10mph railway (almost) indefinitely than have to close it for a few days to get the work done.

And if the speed was raised on these lines, who actually benefits? And how does that benefit work it's way back to the organisation that paid for the upgrade?

 

[deltic08]

My specialist subject , at last.

My list would also include (for the S&C anyway); structure and passing clearances, accelerated rail wear and reduced asset lifespan, track quality issues, transition lengths, track construction (aka the section 14 limits), train performance, stopping patterns, headways, tunnel aerodynamics, footpath crossing sighting, increased noise, bridge RA values, bridge resonance, lower D limits on jointed track, maximum tonnage on steel sleepers, complex S&C units, embankment stability, EMGTPA and track category changes, enhanced positions of safety at speeds >100mph, legality of introduction of standard or non-standard differential speeds, the track formation's critical velocity, turnout speeds at facing junctions and timetable constraints imposed at the junctions.

Dead simple to work out the most cost-effective journey time improvement option ... not.

Apart from embankment stability, I can't see any of these points apply in raising speeds selectively on the S&C from 60 to 75mph. Speeds were higher than this for class 40/45/46 hauled passenger trains on jointed track with no transitions, very little cant and 20mph turnout speeds. If 60mph is possible on steel sleepers with 25t axle loading with full MGR trains, why not 75mph for empty 10t axle weight wagons and Sprinters.

In steam hauled Thames-Clyde and Waverley express days, Leeds-Carlisle time was 130 minutes with one stop. The fastest to-day is 165. Where else are services slower now than fifty years ago on a main route by this margin?

 

[Bald Rick]

In steam hauled Thames-Clyde and Waverley express days, Leeds-Carlisle time was 130 minutes with one stop. The fastest to-day is 165. Where else are services slower now than fifty years ago on a main route by this margin?

I picked a random train, which happens to be the next one, 1049 Leeds - Carlisle. Due to arrive at 1329 (GBTT, 3 mins earlier WTT) which I make 160 minutes. With 15 stops. 2 minutes a stop (which is tight) for the 14 additional stops, makes the journey time 132 mins GBTT, 129 mins WTT.

Doesn't seem so bad now?

 

[HarleyDavidson]

Try our services & they're slower than steam days on all routes. Utterly pathetic.

No wonder I drive to most places in the SE & SW, it's easier & usually quicker too.

 

[Ships]

I don't think there is any point in raising Settle to Carlisle line speed, only 7 (I think) trains use it per day also Leeds and Carlisle are not places that people normally travel between.

I think the removal of Norton Bridge station and replacing it with a flying junction would be useful.

SAC is going up to 75mph in quite a few places and it's being designed to 75 where renewals are taking place
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Virgin aren't bothered with diverting over the S&C, they would prefer SLW over the WCML.



That is different to what I have heard, in fact the opposite in some locations when it comes to ballast.



Settle and Carlisle will be a looong way down the list for wires.

There where a lot of steel sleeper relays done in the early 2000's when the route was close to being closed due to the state of the track. Steel sleeper relays only scarify (or skim) the ballast so these renewals are now failing and the track quality is going down (not helped by the battering all the heavy freight is giving it). There were renewals more recently on concrete which have been failing due to drainage issues. However sac is getting a lot of work done (track and drainage) in cps5.

 

[The Planner]

SAC is going up to 75mph in quite a few places and it's being designed to 75 where renewals are taking place


There where a lot of steel sleeper relays done in the early 2000's when the route was close to being closed due to the state of the track. Steel sleeper relays only scarify (or skim) the ballast so these renewals are now failing and the track quality is going down (not helped by the battering all the heavy freight is giving it). There were renewals more recently on concrete which have been failing due to drainage issues. However sac is getting a lot of work done (track and drainage) in cps5.

Is that still going ahead as part of the renewals budget? As if its enhancement money I would bet on it being canned.

 

[Joseph_Locke]

Is that still going ahead as part of the renewals budget? As if its enhancement money I would bet on it being canned.

Renewals, I understand, judging by the contractor types opportuning us in the Corridors of Power (well, Square1)

 

[deltic08]

SAC is going up to 75mph in quite a few places and it's being designed to 75 where renewals are taking place
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


There where a lot of steel sleeper relays done in the early 2000's when the route was close to being closed due to the state of the track. Steel sleeper relays only scarify (or skim) the ballast so these renewals are now failing and the track quality is going down (not helped by the battering all the heavy freight is giving it). There were renewals more recently on concrete which have been failing due to drainage issues. However sac is getting a lot of work done (track and drainage) in cps5.

That is something to look forward to including the civils.

 

[thenorthern]

I think the speed limit for trains passing though Cheadle Hulme would be nice if it was a bit higher but again like the others its at a junction which prevents that

 

[The Planner]

In which direction? Macclesfield? Its 40 and you wont get much more than that due to the curvature and the platforms.

 

[thenorthern]

In which direction? Macclesfield? Its 40 and you wont get much more than that due to the curvature and the platforms.

The Macclesfield direction yes, I know the cost of improving it would be prohibitive but it would be nice if it was a but quicker.

Talking of Macclesfield it would be good if non-stop trains could pass there quicker but thats unlikely to ever happen.

 

[The Planner]

The tunnel and slab track stops that one.

 

[Ships]

Is that still going ahead as part of the renewals budget? As if its enhancement money I would bet on it being canned.

Being done as part of the domestic renewals. The other LSI where a case of a small budget for tamping and seeing what could be done with throd way analysis, afaik.

 

[Aictos]

Be nice to raise speed limits between Alexandre Palace and Stevenage via Hertford to make it faster for both booked and diverted services to use for both passenger and freight, also reduce the long signal sections between Hertford and Stevenage.

 

[thenorthern]

In steam hauled Thames-Clyde and Waverley express days, Leeds-Carlisle time was 130 minutes with one stop. The fastest to-day is 165. Where else are services slower now than fifty years ago on a main route by this margin?

The thing to remember with Carlisle is although its a railway hub the city itself isn't really that big and from Leeds there are direct trains to most cities in the country so there is no real need to use the line for interchange to other cities and therefore no need for faster trains along the line.

Something GNER mentioned in around 2000ish time IIRC was they were looking at extending the London to Skipton service to run along the S&CL to Carlisle as at the time the service was run by HSTs but it never came to fruition.

 

[deltic08]

The thing to remember with Carlisle is although its a railway hub the city itself isn't really that big and from Leeds there are direct trains to most cities in the country so there is no real need to use the line for interchange to other cities and therefore no need for faster trains along the line.

Something GNER mentioned in around 2000ish time IIRC was they were looking at extending the London to Skipton service to run along the S&CL to Carlisle as at the time the service was run by HSTs but it never came to fruition.

The shortest route between Leeds and Glasgow is via the S&C yet booking online routes passengers via York/Edinburgh or Manchester/Preston. No wonder there isn't the traffic for through trains and faster line speeds.

It would be interesting to see what business a couple of through services using cascaded 185s would generate post 2018 via Beattock or Dumfires.