Signal boxes: Being replaced by operating centres like Basingstoke?

[Pompey00]

Are signal boxes slowly getting wiped out and replaced by operating centres like basingstoke and other places have done.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Centralising operations and closing smaller boxes have been occurring for decades. The most recent plan was to have 12 ROC's for the whole country but I believe this has now been scaled down. Most of the signal boxes I know are still operational and I think, will be so for a few more years

 

[Pompey00]

Centralising operations and closing smaller boxes have been occurring for decades. The most recent plan was to have 12 ROC's for the whole country but I believe this has now been scaled down. Most of the signal boxes I know are still operational and I think, will be so for a few more years

Yh the smaller boxes are not as much good use but are graded and can’t be destroyed but eventually will be rocs but like you said they’ll be around for few more years.

 

[ac6000cw]

Centralising operations and closing smaller boxes have been occurring for decades.

For more than a century - the earliest power and automated signal installations happened at the end of the 19th/beginning of the 20th century.

 

[30907]

Yh the smaller boxes are not as much good use but are graded and can’t be destroyed but eventually will be rocs but like you said they’ll be around for few more years.

Do you mean "listed" by English Heritage? If so, not all of them are - but eg Petersfield is....

 

[Pompey00]

Do you mean "listed" by English Heritage? If so, not all of them are - but eg Petersfield is....

Yes but oh thought they all were .

 

[Annetts key]

Despite the PR from the railway in the past, not everywhere will be controlled by a route operating centre (ROC) anytime soon.

For starters, not all modern signalling centres include the Network Rail route operations control or the control for each TOC. And they may not cover (or nearly cover) a whole route. Hence they can’t correctly be called or described as a ROC.

Secondly, various signal boxes and power signalling boxes (PSB) or panels will remain in service for quite some time due to the high costs of replacing them. Especially if there is no significant cost saving in replacing them before they get to their end of service life.

 

[signalbox2015]

Centralising operations and closing smaller boxes have been occurring for decades. The most recent plan was to have 12 ROC's for the whole country but I believe this has now been scaled down. Most of the signal boxes I know are still operational and I think, will be so for a few more years

Would they like to close rugby signalling centre as they haven’t got a clue how to regulate trains ,old signalmen would turn in their graves at giving freight precedence over class 1 and 2 trains today.

 

[Railsigns]

And they may not cover (or nearly cover) a whole route. Hence they can’t correctly be called or described as a ROC.

But ROC stands for Rail Operating Centre, so they don't claim to cover a whole route.

 

[The Planner]

Would they like to close rugby signalling centre as they haven’t got a clue how to regulate trains ,old signalmen would turn in their graves at giving freight precedence over class 1 and 2 trains today.

Bit of a narrow view of the bigger picture, who is to say that freight hasn't got a slot at a port to make, or the wagon set is being used to form a return working etc etc...In some cases a Class 4 given a run will still keep in front of a stopper.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Would they like to close rugby signalling centre as they haven’t got a clue how to regulate trains ,old signalmen would turn in their graves at giving freight precedence over class 1 and 2 trains today.

How about, sometimes it is easier to signal a freight train through as it takes much longer to stop and restart a heavy freight from a red signal. Class 1 and 2 trains generally have much better acceleration. Have you tried starting a heavy freight from a red signal, especially up a gradient?

 

[bramling]

Are signal boxes slowly getting wiped out and replaced by operating centres like basingstoke and other places have done.

Not a new process, however a couple of things have changed in recent years:

1) Recontrolling power signalling installations has become easier, which has made it easier to close some of the mid-size installations.
2) Cheaper modular signalling has altered the economics of resignalling areas still controlled by mechanical signalling.

However there does seem to have been a realisation that having all the eggs in one basket is leading to issues which claim to have been unforeseen, even if plenty of people absolutely did foresee them. It may well be the case that the pace of centralisation slows a little from what we've seen in very recent years, especially with current financial pressures as well.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Would they like to close rugby signalling centre as they haven’t got a clue how to regulate trains ,old signalmen would turn in their graves at giving freight precedence over class 1 and 2 trains today.

But "All trains are equal" nowadays (in terms of access rights).
Some freight may be commercially more critical than some passenger trains, particularly at certain days/times of the week.
Today's disrupted railway also presents its own pathing problems.

Why there are still two signalling centres at Rugby (SSC and ROC) is another story.

(Welcome to the forum, by the way).

 

[Bald Rick]

It’s been happening for a century, and will continue to happen. Unlikely we will get down to 12 ROCs or equivalents anytime soon, but I can Certainly see getting down to fewer than 200 in the next 20 years.

Just one example - as recently as 2008 Anglia route had 77 ’signal boxes’ including crossing ‘boxes and swing bridges. Today it has 37, with another 3 going soon and at least a further 12 with active plans for replacement.

 

[Sonik]

Secondly, various signal boxes and power signalling boxes (PSB) or panels will remain in service for quite some time due to the high costs of replacing them. Especially if there is no significant cost saving in replacing them before they get to their end of service life.

So essentially the people (signalers) are cheaper than the systems that replace them?

Or is it a case of not being viewed holistically AKA someone else's budget?

 

[43066]

It’s been happening for a century, and will continue to happen. Unlikely we will get down to 12 ROCs or equivalents anytime soon, but I can Certainly see getting down to fewer than 200 in the next 20 years.

Just one example - as recently as 2008 Anglia route had 77 ’signal boxes’ including crossing ‘boxes and swing bridges. Today it has 37, with another 3 going soon and at least a further 12 with active plans for replacement.

So probably another century to go before the whole country is controlled by ROCs?

 

[Bald Rick]

So probably another century to go before the whole country is controlled by ROCs?

Well that depends how much Railway is going to close in the next few years

 

[43066]

Well that depends how much Railway is going to close in the next few years

Oh well, if it frees up funds to give the rest of us the pay rise we need, a saying involving silver linings and clouds springs to mind.

We could do with more nature trails/cycle routes/walks after what has been a sedentary couple of years for many. Who has ever heard of (let alone used) the “Welsh Marches line” anyway ?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

So essentially the people (signalers) are cheaper than the systems that replace them?

Quite possibly a simple mechanical box is far cheaper to man than spend a small fortune in providing modern equivalent replacement although it shouldn't be but NR has never really got a grip of resignalling costs. Also even old boxes have been bought into modern age equipped with TPWS at high risk locations, have electric lamps instead of oil lamps as well as CSR equipment.

 

[Annetts key]

So essentially the people (signalers) are cheaper than the systems that replace them?

No, it’s a cost benefit calculation. Cost of the running and maintaining of the existing system vs. cost of replacing it with a newer system. In some cases, there may be a reduction of signalling staff, but not always. Plus consideration of the capital cost of any new system.

 

[scrapy]

Would they like to close rugby signalling centre as they haven’t got a clue how to regulate trains ,old signalmen would turn in their graves at giving freight precedence over class 1 and 2 trains today.

It's imperative where possible that freight keeps its path even if it delays the odd passenger service as they will likely delay many more services across the country of they don't. The Northern part of the WCML has a lot fewer opportunities to overtake a late freight train.

 

[Exscrew]

Oh well, if it frees up funds to give the rest of us the pay rise we need, a saying involving silver linings and clouds springs to mind.

We could do with more nature trails/cycle routes/walks after what has been a sedentary couple of years for many. Who has ever heard of (let alone used) the “Welsh Marches line” anyway ?

I've heard of it and work it you cheeky bugger

 

[Backroom_boy]

So probably another century to go before the whole country is controlled by ROCs?

I think it's never; at least to the original proposed 12 ROCs. ROCs and Sub-ROCs seem to be the plan now. So maybe 'less than 50 in 50 (years)' would be a finger in the area projection to aim for.

 

[43066]

Also even old boxes have been bought into modern age equipped with TPWS at high risk locations, have electric lamps instead of oil lamps as well as CSR equipment.

Indeed and of course all are equipped with GSMR equipment these days.

I think it's never; at least to the original proposed 12 ROCs. ROCs and Sub-ROCs seem to be the plan now. So maybe 'less than 50 in 50 (years)' would be a finger in the area projection to aim for.

I think you might be right!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 Nov 2022 ==

I've heard of it and work it you cheeky bugger

I probably deserved that .

 

[Islineclear3_1]

I suppose it also depends on the success (or not) of ERTMS which is supposed to do away with lineside signals

 

[High Dyke]

I think it's never; at least to the original proposed 12 ROCs. ROCs and Sub-ROCs seem to be the plan now. So maybe 'less than 50 in 50 (years)' would be a finger in the area projection to aim for.

Indeed. Many years ago Network Rail produced a 30-year closure plan, which was outdated before it began. Boxes on it that had already closed, some boxes never on the list and some that did close, but not on the timescale shown.

Indeed and of course all are equipped with GSMR equipment these days.

Crossing boxes don't have that installed, only signal boxes.

 

[DerekC]

I suppose it also depends on the success (or not) of ERTMS which is supposed to do away with lineside signals

Well, yes and no. Mechanical signalboxes obviously would have to go if ERTMS was fitted on a route, and that would be an opportunity for centralisation of control. However ERTMS isn't (yet) a cost-effective solution for rural/low usage lines so fitting is being concentrated on routes like ECML where the capacity and safety benefit can support a business case - and those are the ones where control is generally centralised anyway. The Network Rail Grand Plan at one point promised a fully integrated approach with ROCs (which were originally called Regional Operating Centres, whatever they are now) rolled out across the whole country and ERTMS fitted in a linked programme, but it kind of ignored affordability. You aren't going to throw away signalling kit that's only halfway through its design life when money is short - and that applies to both the ROC programme and the ERTMS programme, but in subtly different ways. Simplistically, fitting ERTMS requires replacement of the interlocking (unless it's a modern one designed to be ERTMS compatible) whereas centralisation of control doesn't (unless it's mechanical).

 

[Tim M]

Well, yes and no. Mechanical signalboxes obviously would have to go if ERTMS was fitted on a route, and that would be an opportunity for centralisation of control.

Well maybe. It’s theoretically possible to interpose a computer based interlocking (has to be that to maintain safety levels) to eavesdrop on a mechanical interlocking, that in turn sending route set outputs etc. to the ETCS Radio Block Processor. That’s sort of what was done during the Resignalling of the LU Victoria Line in order to allow for mixed running of old and new trains with different generations of on board train control systems.

Before anyone tries to analyse this solution, please note this is a very daft idea!!

 

[Sonik]

Well maybe. It’s theoretically possible to interpose a computer based interlocking (has to be that to maintain safety levels) to eavesdrop on a mechanical interlocking, that in turn sending route set outputs etc. to the ETCS Radio Block Processor. That’s sort of what was done during the Resignalling of the LU Victoria Line in order to allow for mixed running of old and new trains with different generations of on board train control systems.

Before anyone tries to analyse this solution, please note this is a very daft idea!!

You raise a very good point though because a major impediment to the rollout of ETCS is the high cost of equipping train fleets across multiple operators.

This problem is progressively going away as fleets are renewed; I believe one of the reasons ECML has been selected for upgrade is that the passenger fleets are mostly new so are already equipped.

 

[43066]

Crossing boxes don't have that installed, only signal boxes.

I knew it wasn’t possible to call them directly, but I had assumed they were still equipped with something…. How do they notify the next box or trains in the area that there is an issue with the crossing, for example?

I should know better than to ask a question I might not like the answer to!