Redhill non stop via platform 3?

[Sunset route]

I’ve got no idea about signal sighting, that’s above my pay grade. So I wouldn’t quote me on such issues.

But most signallers will place the train at the London end of the platform if they need the country end clear or think they will need to use the country end of the platform whether it’s actually used or not.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Aug 2023 ==

Thanks - so stopping short has no operational drawbacks as long as it's with permission - i.e. none of the supposed signal sighting problems, underframe equipment location and other nonsense mentioned here? As a short stop on p0 by a 2 or 3 car train wouldn't make any difference to any other train in p0 (I wasn't even sure if there is permissive working in p0 anyway), it adds even more weight to my argument that it would be extremely easy to put an additional stop board up to make the current arrangements 'official'. Sorry - silly me - nothing can ever be done to Redhill again as the design team has been disbanded!

I’ve got no idea about signal sighting, that’s above my pay grade. So I wouldn’t quote me on such issues.

But most signallers will place the train at the London end of the platform if they need the country end clear or think they will need to use the country end of the platform whether it’s actually used or not.

 

[Surreytraveller]

Thanks - so stopping short on p0 has no operational drawbacks as long as it's with permission - i.e. none of the supposed signal sighting problems, underframe equipment location and other nonsense mentioned here? As a short stop on p0 by a 2 or 3 car train wouldn't make any difference to any other train in p0 (I wasn't even sure if there is permissive working in p0 anyway), it adds even more weight to my argument that it would be extremely easy to put an additional stop board up to make the current arrangements 'official'. Sorry - silly me - nothing can ever be done to Redhill again as the design team has been disbanded!

AWS magnets/TPWS grids and the such like are things which are taken into consideration when placing stop marks.
You cannot officially move the stop marks, as that would mean you wouldn't be able to top train.
It needs to be done with Signaller's permission. Drivers cannot just stop where they like.
I agree Redhill is a nightmare for passengers changing trains. The subway ought to be further towards London

 

[ComUtoR]

AWS magnets/TPWS grids and the such like are things which are taken into consideration when placing stop marks.

Especially when dealing with permissive working, turnback moves, or coupling etc. But that's Operational nonsense

 

[Deepgreen]

AWS magnets/TPWS grids and the such like are things which are taken into consideration when placing stop marks.
You cannot officially move the stop marks, as that would mean you wouldn't be able to top train.
It needs to be done with Signaller's permission. Drivers cannot just stop where they like.
I agree Redhill is a nightmare for passengers changing trains. The subway ought to be further towards London

I know but trains can, and do, stop there when arriving to reverse and when travelling south without issue! SB trains pull up to their stop boards without problems. Some people appear to be claiming, therefore, that classes 377 and 700 can stand there but not classes 165 or 166, which is clearly rubbish.

There is no technical reason why this can't be done but many people are chanting the same nonsense about issues that don't exist! Can anyone definitively state that a 3 car train stopping where Nicholas Lewis's photo shows it has caused a problem? IF there are grids and magnets that would be compromised then a signaller would not and could not give permission to stop short because he wouldn't simply isolate those pieces of kit - they would be fouled by the train and the signalling system would fail to allow the movement.

I suggest that those who say it can't be done actually go and look at the site. I used Redhill daily when I commuted through it and now occasionally when travelling that way, so I have personal experience of the layout there.

This is going nowhere because the railway simply isn't interested in the simple tweak required to improve its passengers' journeys, and, by the way, if the existing 4/5 car mark had been designed to include GWR units, it should have read 2 - 5 car stop. The design team very obviously simply forgot about Turbos when planning p0, and now no-one wants to admit it and correct the error.

I feel this is simply going round in circles and it is now pointless to continue with the issue (which I am aware has drifted off-topic a little anyway).

 

[Surreytraveller]

The driver's seating position in a 700 is different than other trains. This causes an issue at numerous locations.
Its not without issue that southbound trains stop where they do. Redhill has permissive working and top train working, splitting and attaching. Anything outwith a booked move has to be done with the Signaller's permission. Which all adds to the complication. Its not as simple as you insist.
But I agree, its very inconvenient for the passengers

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Aug 2023 ==

You'll notice the 377s will always pull up to the end of the platforms too, its not just the turbos

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Aug 2023 ==

If a train stopped in the wrong location without the Signaller's awareness and permission, you've effectively just shut the station. If trains were just booked to stop at the south end, you reduce the capacity and there would have to be a reduction in the timetable to accommodate that

The railway is well known for not being passenger friendly

 

[infobleep]

It would have been all measured out when the stop mark was first implemented.



I Would agree that the reasons that you have been given are not specifically correct. I do wish that the correct reason is provided.



Clearly there is a need to move or extend it. You have complained about it and cited it as one of your reasons; if that is no longer the case then it is understandable why the TOC' on the surface, do not appear to care. As you say, if it matters to the passenger, something should be done.




'Could easily' is a very broad statement. Easy to post but not easy to qualify.




Many thanks for the photo. I understand where you are coming from and from your perspective I can see why you believe there is no issue. I have spent some time working on the placement of new stop car markers and from your photo I can see a significant issue and now I understand why the stop car mark has been placed where it has. There is a potential issue that I cannot see directly from the photo but there are various factors that go into deciding where stop marks get placed.

Stop markers can, and do, get moved but it isn't as easy as you believe. The procedure and verification steps it takes can be weirdly complicated. Unfortunately, station design does have an impact and might ultimatley be the deciding factor if the stop mark can be moved or not.

My advice would be to tackle it from a more technical perspective and provide the correct evidence why the mark could be moved.

Perhaps someone could also provide the correct evidence as to why it is the way it is if the reasons given previously are not specifically correct.

I have a workaround to ensure I make an earlier connecting train if it's looking slightly right and that is to run. I accept there is risk in running but I only try to do it when I think it necessary to catch a train.

One must of course always remember the North Downs Line is a secondary route and therefore it isn't so important. As a regular user, it might be easy to forget that.

 

[Surreytraveller]

When you've got permissive working or a dead-end line, you go to the end of the platform or the buffer stops. Themz the rulz.

 

[ComUtoR]

I know but trains can, and do, stop there when arriving to reverse and when travelling south without issue! SB trains pull up to their stop boards without problems. Some people appear to be claiming, therefore, that classes 377 and 700 can stand there but not classes 165 or 166, which is clearly rubbish.

No every train is identical. That's kinda the point you are missing. Each train has its own specific sightlines and angles. What is good for one doesn't automatically mean it's good for every single train. You get different stop marks for different units across the entire network. This isn't to annoy passengers or because it's in the too difficult pile. What you are potentially seeing is that same situation playing out here.

I've driven 700s and 377s. They have different stop marks and stop at them entirely differently. A 700 stops with the car mark in the top corner of the cab window (sighting issues) and 377s stop with the mark in the side window.

There is no technical reason why this can't be done

No technical issue that you can see. Clearly others do. As I said, instead of ranting. Demonstrate that the technical constraints are being met and then it will probably get moved.

Can anyone definitively state that a 3 car train stopping where Nicholas Lewis's photo shows it has caused a problem?

Has or could ?

For me, when I first saw the photo, that's something that I would certainly say has an impact on the stop mark.

IF there are grids and magnets that would be compromised then a signaller would not and could not give permission to stop short because he wouldn't simply isolate those pieces of kit - they would be fouled by the train and the signalling system would fail to allow the movement.

This is something that happens at my home station. A unit comes in and if it stops in the wrong place, the AWS cannot be cleared as the AWS on the underframe of the unit sits over the magnet. This can happen when a unit gets split in the platform or when someone changes ends. The same thing happens with the TPWS and people regularly stop over the grids because they think they are doing the right this by stopping short for passengers by stopping under the canopy in bad weather or.purelybfor ease of exit. The signalling absolutely let's the happen and the Signally will absolutely let us pull short etc. Part of our route knowledge is to be able to stop short and still not cause these issues; which sounds like what you've observed with some Drivers at Redhill.

Again, each unit has its underframe gubbins in slightly different positions and not every unit has the same issue.

There are other small technical issues that affect where stop makes are placed but none of those immediately spring to mind but they still play a factor in where marks are placed.

Perhaps someone could also provide the correct evidence as to why it is the way it is if the reasons given previously are not specifically correct.

There is a difference between understanding why stop marks are placed in such a way and what the technical issues for signal sighting and giving the correct evidence for why it's been done at a specific location. It really isn't as easy as saying let's grab a screwdriver and Allen key, move the stop mark because another train stops there.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Thanks - so stopping short on p0 has no operational drawbacks as long as it's with permission - i.e. none of the supposed signal sighting problems, underframe equipment location and other nonsense mentioned here? As a short stop on p0 by a 2 or 3 car train wouldn't make any difference to any other train in p0 (I wasn't even sure if there is permissive working in p0 anyway), it adds even more weight to my argument that it would be extremely easy to put an additional stop board up to make the current arrangements 'official'. Sorry - silly me - nothing can ever be done to Redhill again as the design team has been disbanded!

There is permissive working in P0 from the South end for sure used daily for the Gatwick/Reigate-Vic peak hour extras

 

[infobleep]

There is a difference between understanding why stop marks are placed in such a way and what the technical issues for signal sighting and giving the correct evidence for why it's been done at a specific location. It really isn't as easy as saying let's grab a screwdriver and Allen key, move the stop mark because another train stops there.

I wasn't suggesting they move it. Just that the reasons are explained correctly.

 

[KT530]

Network Rail Sectional Appendix Local Instructions dictate that GWR terminating services arriving on platforms 0 and 2 should stop at the 6 car marker, regardless of turnaround time.

In what appears to be a rare occurrence of common sense, GWR instructions to drivers actually overrule this and state only if more than 10 mins turnaround to stop at 6 car marker, otherwise at the 2/3 marker. GWR instructions also apply to platform 1.

 

[Surreytraveller]

Network Rail Sectional Appendix Local Instructions dictate that GWR terminating services arriving on platforms 0 and 2 should stop at the 6 car marker, regardless of turnaround time.

In what appears to be a rare occurrence of common sense, GWR instructions to drivers actually overrule this and state only if more than 10 mins turnaround to stop at 6 car marker, otherwise at the 2/3 marker. GWR instructions also apply to platform 1.

Can GWR instructions overrule the Sectional Appendix, though? If so, are the Signallers and any other train operators aware?
If they are aware, why isn't that the instruction in the Sectional Appendix?

 

[TurboMan]

Network Rail Sectional Appendix Local Instructions dictate that GWR terminating services arriving on platforms 0 and 2 should stop at the 6 car marker, regardless of turnaround time.

In what appears to be a rare occurrence of common sense, GWR instructions to drivers actually overrule this and state only if more than 10 mins turnaround to stop at 6 car marker, otherwise at the 2/3 marker. GWR instructions also apply to platform 1.

Are you sure you're not confusing the services which terminate at Redhill with those that continue to Gatwick? Because I can't find anything in any GWR route learning materials about turnarounds of 10 minutes or less.

 

[KT530]

Are you sure you're not confusing the services which terminate at Redhill with those that continue to Gatwick? Because I can't find anything in any GWR route learning materials about turnarounds of 10 minutes or less.

I’m positive. You won’t find it in route learning materials, it was a local Route Brief issued on 4th Dec 2020 (number TRREW002020067).

 

[TurboMan]

I’m positive. You won’t find it in route learning materials, it was a local Route Brief issued on 4th Dec 2020 (number TRREW002020067).

Thanks for that. At least it's official and not just hearsay. I'll track down the notice.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

I’m positive. You won’t find it in route learning materials, it was a local Route Brief issued on 4th Dec 2020 (number TRREW002020067).

was on a 1Oxx 2 vice 3 car last night that stopped short of the 3-5 Car stop on P0 as was on a quick turnaround and had it been a 3 car country end would have been around where the "S" stop is for down trains.