Redhill - Reading

[Tomnick]

I can see that going down really well in some places! I believe Network Rail were given an improvement notice by the HSE, relating to the operation of one or two of the CCTV crossings on the Skipton line (specifically the excessive time for which the barriers were down) so I'm sure they'd take a keen interest too.

I accept that there's already plenty of systems to minimise the risk of a SPAD and to mitigate the effects of one - so, even with all that, are we so keen to not only avoid a driver approaching a signal at danger, but also to avoid any cautionary aspects on approach, even where there's a clear reason for doing so?

 

[FenMan]

Straying further off topic for a moment, the SNCF way probably horrifies risk averse Brits.

Last year at a road crossing adjacent to the station in a small French town, the lights and alarms went off for approx. 30 seconds, then the barrier came down. About 15 seconds later a Paris-Abbeville express passed at full tilt.

No messing about and a very French way of doing it.

It would be interesting to know if incident rates at French level crossings differ significantly from Britain.

 

[MarkyT]

. . . the lights and alarms went off for approx. 30 seconds, then the barrier came down. About 15 seconds later a Paris-Abbeville express passed at full tilt.

Very much like our AHB crossings then, which were inspired by French designs I understand in the 1960s.

I'm surprised the OD crossings don't have stopping/non stopping controls though. AHBs do this normally where there's a platform situated within the much shorter strike in. Usually the crossing stays in stopping mode which enforces a later strike in and delayed clearance of a signal placed between the platform and crossing edge. For a non-stop train the signaller operates a non-stop switch before the train arrives and a strike in point further out initiates the crossing. AHBs by law must not have more than a certain percentage of trains arriving in excess of a maximum warning time. This is considered a safety issue in that a very long road closure for a stopped train might encourage motorists to weave around the half barriers, perhaps thinking the equipment had failed. A full barrier crossing is lower risk in this respect clearly, but although the railway has no specific obligation to close the road for as short a time as possible, doing so makes it a better neighbour, and proposals for more frequent rail services might be seen in a better light.

 

[LexyBoy]

It would be interesting to know if incident rates at French level crossings differ significantly from Britain.

France seems to have roughly three times the number of LC fatalities as the UK - still very much below the EU average though.

http://www.era.europa.eu/Document-Register/Documents/Level_crossing_safety_EU_2012.pdf
http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2010/mar/10/level-cross-accident-statistics

 

[Yabbadabba]

I'm surprised the OD crossings don't have stopping/non stopping controls though.

I can't speak for other locations, but ours doesn't have and S/NS controls and at times will be down for three trains (two down one up) to pass over it, which must please the locals to no end.

 

[FenMan]

France seems to have roughly three times the number of LC fatalities as the UK - still very much below the EU average though.

http://www.era.europa.eu/Document-Register/Documents/Level_crossing_safety_EU_2012.pdf
http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2010/mar/10/level-cross-accident-statistics

Thanks for looking this up. Interesting numbers.

 

[GodAtum]

I could go Guildford - Redhill - East Croydon, but the SWT's trains are much more comfortable!

 

[Bald Rick]

Battery power is clearly not an option - the risk of stranding owing to drained batteries is way too high to allow it to be approved, I imagine.

Well the manufacturers are claiming up to 50 miles off the juice; if so the North Downs line would be rather straightforward. The technology has moved on a great deal in the last couple of years.

 

[FenMan]

Well the manufacturers are claiming up to 50 miles off the juice; if so the North Downs line would be rather straightforward. The technology has moved on a great deal in the last couple of years.

Given a Reading - Gatwick round trip is 106 miles plus a spell in the sidings I rather hope you've missed a nought off that mileage.

 

[tsr]

Given a Reading - Gatwick round trip is 106 miles plus a spell in the sidings I rather hope you've missed a nought off that mileage.

Quite a bit of that is over 3rd rail; if the train could charge its batteries somewhat, it might be able to cover the missing links both ways. With a few minutes of dwell at Gatwick and Redhill, I guess it may be feasible. However, I am not entirely sure what would happen if (for example) there was a major tree fall near Chilworth, so the train had to do a wrong-direction movement to Gomshall, wait a while there and then continue in the original direction of travel some time later. How well do the batteries retain charge and how much leeway is there for emergency movements?

 

[bigdelboy]

The line profile of guildford-reigate is two major summits at about gomshall and between dorking and reigate ... battery expenditure would be somewhat great going up hills, i assume going downhill would result in battery recharge ... e.g. down from gomshall to Jessie's seat.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Thought: A further point on the battery operation might be that a small amount of 3rd rail on the lines uphill away from dorking (possibly not too difficult as juice is already fed to 3rd rail here would help avoid the large drain on batteries on the climb away from dorking, and provide a useful oasis of recharge.

 

[higthomas]

I'm just instinctively not a fan of battery technology, if for some reason the battery runs out, e.g. a temporary signal failure, the whole train will have to be rescued, and I think that that would really not go down well with passengers.

 

[Bald Rick]

That would have to be a verrrrrry long signal failure.

 

[cactustwirly]

How about a DEMU consisted of: 377 DMCO & MSO and a 172 DMSL

DMCO + MSO + DMSL

 

[Deepgreen]

There is an article about the history of the route in one of the Surrey papers - go to BBC News - Surrey and there is a link. Mainly then and now photos.

On the battery power issue, it may be technically possible, but the massively risk-averse railway of today would require far more certainty that a train could never become stranded with low batteries.

 

[Bald Rick]

On the battery power issue, it may be technically possible, but the massively risk-averse railway of today would require far more certainty that a train could never become stranded with low batteries.

Far more certainty than what?

 

[The Ham]

There is a new NR document which can be downloaded from HERE provides an update on NR's thinking about the North Downs Line

The Cross - Boundary Working Group has remitted the Sussex, Western and Wessex Route Studies to consider the following services:
• 2tph semi-fast service between Reading (and potentially Oxford) and London Gatwick Airport. In order to deliver best possible journey times, a third service may also be required over this route to meet demand from smaller stations.

There's a bit more it's all on pages 80 / 81, with full details on pages 128 - 130, there is an intresting paragraph which I spotted on page 130.

Of the proposed electrification infill projects in the Sussex area, the electrification of the North Downs line is the highest priority given its role in serving Gatwick Airport and the link it provides between major towns and cities. Network Rail’s publication of the Network RUS: Electrification refresh in early 2015 will assess the business case and set out how the project sits in terms of priority against electrification schemes in other routes nationally.

NOTE that is saying that although high on their list of electrification projects in the locality it will need to be seen in the light of national projects (or don't hold your breath).

 

[HarleyDavidson]

So they are considering electrifying it sometime after 2015. Don't make me laugh, the chances of it being juiced up are something like coming up with the winning numbers on €uromillions. It ain't going to happen.

I've been waiting for over 30 years for it to happen, BR said it was going to happen until some retarded councillor from a local council objected to it because (wait for it!!!) "Electric trains are noisier & more polluting than the (at the current time) diesel ones" (remember what the WR mechanicals were like?) Smoke bombs!

If they're going to do it, then they (NR) need to pull their fingers out of their corporate backsides and organise to to coincide with the recontrol of the line which sees it being controlled from Basingstoke ROC from around 2018, the operations side of it should be transferred to SWT & following franchise as it eliminates one of the TOC on TOC TDA's.

Also it makes sense as the line is apart from Deepdene to Gatwick completely within the SWT/Wessex boundary and it's the SWT MPV drivers who keep the North Downs line clear of weeds (weedkilling), scrap & do the RHTT's over it. There's a depot dead centre of the line as well to almost entirely eliminate the amount of travelling passenger by traincrews.

 

[HowardGWR]

A west to south chord at Farnborough to enable through journeys to Gatwick and Brighton from points west would be a boon too. Has thought ever been given to that development?

 

[HarleyDavidson]

A west to south chord at Farnborough to enable through journeys to Gatwick and Brighton from points west would be a boon too. Has thought ever been given to that development?

As per the idea of reinstatement to the Sturt Lane curve & junction, too many conflicts with the SW mainline.

However if you wanted to use the North Downs line effectively, you could have an all electric circular service if/when the electric spine comes into being, with dual voltage stock, so you could have Gatwick - Gatwick via Horsham, Chichester, Havant, Eastleigh, Basingstoke, Reading, Wokingham, Guildford, Redhill, which would serve & link many strategic locations with a single service.

This would utilise the dive under from the Westbury lines, access platforms 14/15 to provide minimal conflict with GWML services & then use the other dive under to rejoin the Southern metals just prior to Reading Spur junction.

Whilst that wouldn't be the fastest routing, it would provide a convenient service for passengers who are taking the kids & loads of luggage away with them to the airports.

Of course you could also have it for through services from Exeter/Salisbury to Gatwick as well, using 158/159's, there are multiple uses. However as I have previously stated unless NR are prepared to pull their finger out and get the line electrified & resignalled to eradicate the very long signal sections, all of this is completely irrelevant.

 

[The Ham]

A west to south chord at Farnborough to enable through journeys to Gatwick and Brighton from points west would be a boon too. Has thought ever been given to that development?

IF such a junction were to exist (as would the north to east junction of Sturt Lane and/or a nort to west junction to provide a link from Farnborough to Frimely which I have suggested elsewhere) then it would have to be fully grade sperated.

The cost of this for the Sturt Lane Junction (according to Surrey County Council's report) is £75million. However, have you seen how little space there is around the North Down's Line where it passes under the SWML? I don't think that you could fit anything in there.

Also, although it may be possible to run south to west from the Frimley - Aldershot Line to the SWML I do not see that the return link would be possible (leaving aside the fact that the line to south of here is single track which pretty much always has a train on it meaning that it would have to be doubled - note not re-doubled!).

Even if such a link were to exist it wouldn't save much time as to go from Farnborough to Guildford via Woking is about 20 minutes slower than the about 20 minutes that it takes to go direct. Most of this time benefit could be wiped out by those from Basingstoke and south or west if the new service called at the local stations between Basingstoke and Farnborough combined with the likelihood that the trains from the south and west would likely have a connection time of (say) 10 minutes with such a service at Basingstoke or Farnborough.

By the time a 10 minute connection time is allowed for (so that there is time to make the connection even if the service is running 5 minutes late) and a slightly longer journey time of 5 minutes is included then the time difference is down to 5 minutes, which makes it hardly worth doing.

Either way (changing at Woking or using a new service) for most people it would still require a change of trains, unless the new service was to serve the West of England Line and the SWML to Southampton. However, that would use up several paths which would otherwise be used (post Crossrail 2) for more profitable services to London.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As per the idea of reinstatement to the Sturt Lane curve & junction, too many conflicts with the SW mainline.

Only if it were a flat Junction, which is not what Surrey are currently proposing. However, the bigger problem is that there are no paths into Waterloo. The only way around this as I see it would be to extend the Woking-Waterloo stoppers, however that wouldn't bring the time savings that Surrey are looking for. It would also require improvements to the junction at Woking sooner. (but that is going of the main course of this thread and have been covered here)

 

[infobleep]

IF such a junction were to exist (as would the north to east junction of Sturt Lane and/or a nort to west junction to provide a link from Farnborough to Frimely which I have suggested elsewhere) then it would have to be fully grade sperated.

The cost of this for the Sturt Lane Junction (according to Surrey County Council's report) is £75million. However, have you seen how little space there is around the North Down's Line where it passes under the SWML? I don't think that you could fit anything in there.

Also, although it may be possible to run south to west from the Frimley - Aldershot Line to the SWML I do not see that the return link would be possible (leaving aside the fact that the line to south of here is single track which pretty much always has a train on it meaning that it would have to be doubled - note not re-doubled!).

Even if such a link were to exist it wouldn't save much time as to go from Farnborough to Guildford via Woking is about 20 minutes slower than the about 20 minutes that it takes to go direct. Most of this time benefit could be wiped out by those from Basingstoke and south or west if the new service called at the local stations between Basingstoke and Farnborough combined with the likelihood that the trains from the south and west would likely have a connection time of (say) 10 minutes with such a service at Basingstoke or Farnborough.

By the time a 10 minute connection time is allowed for (so that there is time to make the connection even if the service is running 5 minutes late) and a slightly longer journey time of 5 minutes is included then the time difference is down to 5 minutes, which makes it hardly worth doing.

Either way (changing at Woking or using a new service) for most people it would still require a change of trains, unless the new service was to serve the West of England Line and the SWML to Southampton. However, that would use up several paths which would otherwise be used (post Crossrail 2) for more profitable services to London.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Only if it were a flat Junction, which is not what Surrey are currently proposing. However, the bigger problem is that there are no paths into Waterloo. The only way around this as I see it would be to extend the Woking-Waterloo stoppers, however that wouldn't bring the time savings that Surrey are looking for. It would also require improvements to the junction at Woking sooner. (but that is going of the main course of this thread and have been covered here)

Why would the connection time have to be 10 minutes. Some stations have an official connection time of just 4 minutes. The busy East Croydon station is still only 5 minutes during peak rush hour.

So if the connection was timed for 4 minutes, it would represent a time saving of 11 minutes.

How long is the time saving to Cardiff on the new electrified line vers the current diesels? I thought it was something like 20 minutes. Thus journey isn't as long as that so it could be a reasonable saving.

 

[The Ham]

Why would the connection time have to be 10 minutes. Some stations have an official connection time of just 4 minutes. The busy East Croydon station is still only 5 minutes during peak rush hour.

So if the connection was timed for 4 minutes, it would represent a time saving of 11 minutes.

The change time could be 4 minutes, but then if the train was more than 30 seconds late the connection could then be missed by some, even 2 minutes late would be too tight for most (given doors can be closed 30 seconds before departure time), hense why I suggested 10 minutes. Therefore, if the frequency was half hourly then the journey time would be significantly more as the change would be almost as long as the whole journey time going via Woking.

On a personal level I would love a stopping service between Basingstoke and Guildford diverging off the SWML at Farnborough, I just don't see that it would attract that many people, or more improtanly be able to get from the SWML to head south at Farnborough.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

The change time could be 4 minutes, but then if the train was more than 30 seconds late the connection could then be missed by some, even 2 minutes late would be too tight for most (given doors can be closed 30 seconds before departure time), hense why I suggested 10 minutes. Therefore, if the frequency was half hourly then the journey time would be significantly more as the change would be almost as long as the whole journey time going via Woking.

On a personal level I would love a stopping service between Basingstoke and Guildford diverging off the SWML at Farnborough, I just don't see that it would attract that many people, or more improtanly be able to get from the SWML to head south at Farnborough.

Not a hope in hell of that happening you'd have to demolish virtually all of the houses on Rectory Rd and negotiate the A331 Blackwater valley bypass & fishing lake. Too many obstacles.

 

[HowardGWR]

Not a hope in hell of that happening you'd have to demolish virtually all of the houses on Rectory Rd and negotiate the A331 Blackwater valley bypass & fishing lake. Too many obstacles.

New two level station at Rectory Rd crossover then?

 

[The Ham]

Not a hope in hell of that happening you'd have to demolish virtually all of the houses on Rectory Rd and negotiate the A331 Blackwater valley bypass & fishing lake. Too many obstacles.

My thoughts.

New two level station at Rectory Rd crossover then?

Unlikely to happen, as it would result in longer journey times for services to London, so wouldn't likely to go down well.

Hampshire would like to see better connectivity between the three lines through the Blackwater Valley (Farnborough), however hae no suggestion as to how to do this.

If there was the west facing junction between Farnborough Main and Frimley with a new station on the junction (but off of either of the existing lines) it could be a 800m walk from this station to Farnborough North (compared with 1.2km between the two Farnborough stations). Still fairly unlikely to happen, but would provide many of the benefits of any of the other options, just not as well as the "best" soultion (although as discussed above some of these best soultions are not possible).

 

[infobleep]

The change time could be 4 minutes, but then if the train was more than 30 seconds late the connection could then be missed by some, even 2 minutes late would be too tight for most (given doors can be closed 30 seconds before departure time), hense why I suggested 10 minutes. Therefore, if the frequency was half hourly then the journey time would be significantly more as the change would be almost as long as the whole journey time going via Woking.

On a personal level I would love a stopping service between Basingstoke and Guildford diverging off the SWML at Farnborough, I just don't see that it would attract that many people, or more improtanly be able to get from the SWML to head south at Farnborough.

Well there are already tight connection times so clearly it's that isn't most important thing when it comes to running a railway. What matters most is getting people from A to B on one train. Perhaps I'm being to cynical here.

I mean getting from Guildford to Alton has officially a 33 minute wait at Aldershot but if you know the system, you'll realise you can nearly always catch the train 3 minutes later.

I'm not even suggesting a 3 minute unofficial connection gap, no 4 minutes.

Not I'm not commenting on whether such a line would be possible based on all the other factors, just commenting on the connection time point.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

This thread is about Reading and Redhill, not the Alton line.

 

[infobleep]

This thread is about Reading and Redhill, not the Alton line.

I know. I'm just pointing out that are already short gaps elsewhere, such as Alton so the connection gap shouldn't be such an issue if one at all.

 

[455driver]

Well there are already tight connection times so clearly it's that isn't most important thing when it comes to running a railway. What matters most is getting people from A to B on one train. Perhaps I'm being to cynical here.

I mean getting from Guildford to Alton has officially a 33 minute wait at Aldershot but if you know the system, you'll realise you can nearly always catch the train 30 minutes <later> earlier.

I'm not even suggesting a 3 minute unofficial connection gap, no 4 minutes.

Not I'm not commenting on whether such a line would be possible based on all the other factors, just commenting on the connection time point.

The lton train is booked to follow the train from Guildford so the cross platform connection normally works quite well.
Returning the train from Alton is booked in front of the Guildford train so that connection works as well.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

This thread is about Reading and Redhill, not the Alton line.

I thought everything was about the Alton line and its users?