• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Welwyn Viaduct section doubling - How?

Status
Not open for further replies.

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,774
The Cambridge slow service is restricted in train length- the stations between Royston and Cambridge are four-carriage. There are AM peak services that use longer trains but with the rear four carriages locked out of use till Royston
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
sooo.... double the Welwyn Viaduct, six-track the line to WGC (with two track reserved for "metro" services, a bit like the Watford DC) and quad the Hertford loop to Hertford North (with two tracks for "metro"). Make Peterborough Pick Up northbound/Set Down southbound for EC, run non-stop Great Northern services from both Peterborough and Cambridge, semi-fast and slow services on both through Thameslink and have an intensive Metro (London Overground) service from Hertford and Welwyn to Kings Cross and Moorgate?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

LE Greys

Established Member
Joined
6 Mar 2010
Messages
5,389
Location
Hitchin
The Cambridge slow service is restricted in train length- the stations between Royston and Cambridge are four-carriage. There are AM peak services that use longer trains but with the rear four carriages locked out of use till Royston
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
sooo.... double the Welwyn Viaduct, six-track the line to WGC (with two track reserved for "metro" services, a bit like the Watford DC) and quad the Hertford loop to Hertford North (with two tracks for "metro"). Make Peterborough Pick Up northbound/Set Down southbound for EC, run non-stop Great Northern services from both Peterborough and Cambridge, semi-fast and slow services on both through Thameslink and have an intensive Metro (London Overground) service from Hertford and Welwyn to Kings Cross and Moorgate?

Sounds like a West Coast-beating upgrade to me! :D

Practical constraints would suggest we stick to four tracks from Ally Pally to Grantham, but upgrade the slows to 100 mph (equal to the WCML). Junction upgrades and dynamic loops north of there should also be helpful, although tweaks to the Lincoln loop should help.
 

Ediswan

Established Member
Joined
15 Nov 2012
Messages
3,441
Location
Stevenage
The whole route between Woolmer Green and Bounds Green needs work. It hasn't been upgraded since electrification. To take full advantage of a four-track Welwyn, we need 100 mph slows, 125 mph fasts (if possible) and full ERTMS.

By full do you mean level 3 as described here (NOT authoritative) http://www.railsigns.co.uk/info/ertms1/ertms1.html ?

If so, I tend to agree, but it it will be a long wait before that could be achieved. How far north would you envisage ERTMS being installed ?
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,774
Lets be ambitious :p :

Min. four track to Edinburgh (and Leeds). Six to Peterborough. Four to Cambridge (both Kings Cross and Liverpool Street Routes). Four round the entire Hertford Loop. Ely-Peterbrough as an electrified diversion route. High frequency services on all routes. Peterborough-York/Leeds locals. York/Leeds-Newcastle locals. Newcastle-Edinburgh locals. All with new/reopened stations.

Anyone got a spare £trillion?
 

Skimble19

Established Member
Joined
12 Dec 2009
Messages
1,508
Location
London
Out of that lot, I'd dread to think how much just six tracking to Peterborough would cost! :lol: Let's start with getting 4 track the whole way between Huntingdon and Peterborough first though ;)
 

D365

Veteran Member
Joined
29 Jun 2012
Messages
13,192
It's going to be bad enough fully 4 tracking HTD-PBO - for 6, embankments, bridges, stations and just about everything would have to massively rebuilt. You can take your 6 tracks down to Welwyn or Hitchin, thank you very much :)

Although I quite like the sound of your other plans, it's definitely the money that's the problem...
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
30,920
Location
UK
I know it's not all serious but I do think the recent suggestions are a bit OTT! When we get HS2 (and more) a lot of demand will reduce anyway.

Better to build these and then just do the obvious upgrades on the ECML, increasing line speed, longer platforms, new signalling to squeeze trains closer etc.
 

mr_jrt

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2011
Messages
1,577
Location
Brighton
I know it's not all serious but I do think the recent suggestions are a bit OTT! When we get HS2 (and more) a lot of demand will reduce anyway.

Better to build these and then just do the obvious upgrades on the ECML, increasing line speed, longer platforms, new signalling to squeeze trains closer etc.

Quite. I suspect you could get a large chunk of the benefits of a full 6-track metro to WGC by just adding loops at every station...perhaps with the odd few linked up into longer sections...but the timetabling would have to be pretty tight to pull it off, and you'd never get a high density on the semi-fasts...
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
30,920
Location
UK
If we had 6-car trains with open gangways, and services running at 15 minute intervals throughout the day (perhaps 20 minutes very early/late), I really don't think we'll have any problems for many years to come.

A couple of passing loops might help enable some semi-fast services to run around the all station stoppers, each using the slow lines. As it stands, FCC schedules some semi fast trains from KGX to slot in around the slows from MOG - and quite often, the semi fasts catch up by around Potters Bar and crawl to WGC. It's not a massive issue, as both trains terminate at WGC (and thus, neither hold up any services over the viaduct).

If you had a train every 15 minutes, you'd really need a way to have the semi fasts overtake without going out on to the fasts. I have no idea how many loops might be needed, or the best location, but it might be just one?

If adding two loops at one station was too hard to fit, what about putting the loops in different locations?
 

mr_jrt

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2011
Messages
1,577
Location
Brighton
If we had 6-car trains with open gangways, and services running at 15 minute intervals throughout the day (perhaps 20 minutes very early/late), I really don't think we'll have any problems for many years to come.

A couple of passing loops might help enable some semi-fast services to run around the all station stoppers, each using the slow lines. As it stands, FCC schedules some semi fast trains from KGX to slot in around the slows from MOG - and quite often, the semi fasts catch up by around Potters Bar and crawl to WGC. It's not a massive issue, as both trains terminate at WGC (and thus, neither hold up any services over the viaduct).

If you had a train every 15 minutes, you'd really need a way to have the semi fasts overtake without going out on to the fasts. I have no idea how many loops might be needed, or the best location, but it might be just one?

If adding two loops at one station was too hard to fit, what about putting the loops in different locations?

The one that originally prompted my line of thought was New Barnet...where there are the remnants of sidings outside the slow lines already in situ, so the major earthworks are already in place.
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
30,920
Location
UK
Ah yes, that's very true. It seems a pretty good geographical location for passing a stopping service too.

If more trains can run to and end at WGC (assuming there's then room to terminate all of these trains and turn them around) then you've got a good turn-up-and-go service that allows faster trains to go unhindered beyond WGC.

I'd still want to have the faster trains to KGX (or to the core) but I do think that if there was a regular service serving all stops along the line from WGC to KGX/MOG (perhaps some could skip some of the smaller stations, like Welham Green?) then most people would soon get used to a slightly longer journey time, with the benefit of not having to wait so long for a train in the first place.

Admittedly, there would likely be less seats but in the evening peak few people seem to board along the route, so at every station you're losing a few people and by New Barnet and Potters Bar there's quite a lot of room.. By Hatfield, you sometimes wonder why the train even bothers to carry on to WGC!!
 
Last edited:

LE Greys

Established Member
Joined
6 Mar 2010
Messages
5,389
Location
Hitchin
By full do you mean level 3 as described here (NOT authoritative) http://www.railsigns.co.uk/info/ertms1/ertms1.html ?

If so, I tend to agree, but it it will be a long wait before that could be achieved. How far north would you envisage ERTMS being installed ?

I mean whatever gives the best capacity (although I think Level 3 would mean the end of steam from King's Cross for good, I can probably get over that).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I know it's not all serious but I do think the recent suggestions are a bit OTT! When we get HS2 (and more) a lot of demand will reduce anyway.

Better to build these and then just do the obvious upgrades on the ECML, increasing line speed, longer platforms, new signalling to squeeze trains closer etc.

We'll still need a way to move commuters and freight even if we do lose end-to-end traffic to HS2. There's also traffic from East Anglia filtering through Peterborough to head north (and vice versa). Specifically through Welwyn, any reduction in express paths would be swallowed up immediately by more suburban traffic, including the expanding long-distance commuter market from the Towns Line (and maybe Lincoln).

Besides, I quite like being able to get home from Aberdeen without changing trains.
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
30,920
Location
UK
If more trains terminate at WGC to serve the inner-suburban users, it will surely take a load off the viaduct.

It seems that if many stations to Cambridge can only take 4-car trains, there's a lot of wastage there. I know some trains run as 8-car and split at Royston, but can these platforms be extended to 8 (or even 12) car to ensure that most trains running over the viaduct aren't just 4-car... a real waste of a path?
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,774
the stations to Cambridge that are only 4-car only get the hourly service- but I think are due at least 8-car (if not 12) extensions for Thameslink. There's no obvious physical restrictions at them
 

LE Greys

Established Member
Joined
6 Mar 2010
Messages
5,389
Location
Hitchin
the stations to Cambridge that are only 4-car only get the hourly service- but I think are due at least 8-car (if not 12) extensions for Thameslink. There's no obvious physical restrictions at them

All stations on the Cambridge line can take 8-car trains, with single units only running off-peak unless they are short of stock. Most are being extended to 12, but Foxton is a bit tricky because of the level crossing. All local stations between Hitchin and Huntingdon are now long enough to take 12.
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,774
Are you sure? There are services that still leave Cambridge with the rear four locked until they reach Royston.
 

Fuzzy Logic

Member
Joined
26 Dec 2007
Messages
36
Location
Staffs
All stations on the Cambridge line can take 8-car trains, with single units only running off-peak unless they are short of stock. Most are being extended to 12, but Foxton is a bit tricky because of the level crossing. All local stations between Hitchin and Huntingdon are now long enough to take 12.

Afraid you're wrong on this one! Sectional appendix lists:

Meldreth: Up 138yds, Down 138yds
Shepreth: Up 105yds, Down 98yds
Foxton: Up 113yds, Down 91yds
 

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
All stations on the Cambridge line can take 8-car trains, with single units only running off-peak unless they are short of stock. Most are being extended to 12, but Foxton is a bit tricky because of the level crossing. All local stations between Hitchin and Huntingdon are now long enough to take 12.

Where does this info come from?

None of the Cambridge branch stations are being extended, Royston and LGC can take a 12 but baldock and ashwell are 8. The villages can only take 4 and I don't know of any plans to ever extend them.

In the up direction only they can and do run 8 car 317s in the peak using SDO. They can't do this in down of an evening as the back of the trains would be overhanging the AHBs at shepreth and Foxton. Therefore the evening peak trins split at LGC or Royston.
 

LE Greys

Established Member
Joined
6 Mar 2010
Messages
5,389
Location
Hitchin
Where does this info come from?

None of the Cambridge branch stations are being extended, Royston and LGC can take a 12 but baldock and ashwell are 8. The villages can only take 4 and I don't know of any plans to ever extend them.

In the up direction only they can and do run 8 car 317s in the peak using SDO. They can't do this in down of an evening as the back of the trains would be overhanging the AHBs at shepreth and Foxton. Therefore the evening peak trins split at LGC or Royston.

Observation mostly, although this is curious. I'm sure I remember being on various all-shacks trains with paired units, especially in the peaks, going right back to NSE days. From the looks of things here, I may be mistaken (which is not unknown). :oops:
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Are you sure? There are services that still leave Cambridge with the rear four locked until they reach Royston.

Actually, this might be an explanation, since my usual direction is up in the evening peak. Thanks.
 
Last edited:

Aictos

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2009
Messages
10,403
All stations on the Cambridge line can take 8-car trains, with single units only running off-peak unless they are short of stock. Most are being extended to 12, but Foxton is a bit tricky because of the level crossing. All local stations between Hitchin and Huntingdon are now long enough to take 12.

All local stations between Stevenage and Huntingdon are now long enough to take 12, ;)
 

LE Greys

Established Member
Joined
6 Mar 2010
Messages
5,389
Location
Hitchin
All local stations between Stevenage and Huntingdon are now long enough to take 12, ;)

A junction with a infrastructure yard (and more passengers than Huntingdon - 2.594 million to their 1.630 million last year) is hardly a local station. Or if it is, then 'All local stations between Stevenage and Peterborough are now long enough to take 12'. Besides, no modification was needed to Hitchin.

As of Monday extensions at Sandy are open, with some work still being done. Arlesey is complete, as is Biggleswade.
 

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
The only platform still not 12 car is the up at hitchin. We are not allowed to stop 12 cars there, not entirely sure why, I believe it's to do with station lightning or something.
 

LE Greys

Established Member
Joined
6 Mar 2010
Messages
5,389
Location
Hitchin
The only platform still not 12 car is the up at hitchin. We are not allowed to stop 12 cars there, not entirely sure why, I believe it's to do with station lightning or something.

I take it you don't mean that you will get struck by lightning if you stop there! ;)

That's also true, the old extension is poorly lit.
 

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
That'll be iphone auto correct once again. Of course I meant lighting.
 

Skimble19

Established Member
Joined
12 Dec 2009
Messages
1,508
Location
London
I've seen a few things happen at Hitchin in the past, but I've never seen THAT happen (yet!) <D
A junction with a infrastructure yard (and more passengers than Huntingdon - 2.594 million to their 1.630 million last year) is hardly a local station. Or if it is, then 'All local stations between Stevenage and Peterborough are now long enough to take 12'. Besides, no modification was needed to Hitchin.

As of Monday extensions at Sandy are open, with some work still being done. Arlesey is complete, as is Biggleswade.
I'd say Biggleswade is very very nearly, but not quite complete.. still, should be done by Monday. Interestingly, a Customer Information office is being opened on the Southbound platform in the remaining unused room.. possibly linked to Platform 2 not getting cameras (unlike Platform 3, which has).
 

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
From what we have been told (and we will hopefully find out exact arrangement on momday) the up fast at Biggleswade and down at arlsey will be dispatched for 12 cars, not DOO. Not sure about the up at sandy but I havnt seen screens up there yet. Will he the same as st Neots with DOO for 4&8 cars and dispatch staff for a 12.
 

Fred26

Member
Joined
5 Mar 2010
Messages
1,107
There are part time staff in place to dispatch all 12 car trains - up and down - at Arlesey, Biggleswade and Sandy. The others already have staff, but may have acquired some extras. The new part timers have been in place for a few months now, though won't be at their stations until Monday.
 

A-driver

Established Member
Joined
9 May 2011
Messages
4,482
There are part time staff in place to dispatch all 12 car trains - up and down - at Arlesey, Biggleswade and Sandy. The others already have staff, but may have acquired some extras. The new part timers have been in place for a few months now, though won't be at their stations until Monday.

Ah-thank you.

We don't get told that kind of thing until after we should know it! When changing the speed limit for the new junction at stotfold road for the hitchin flyover do you think we were actually told that the 80mph limit has been permanently reduced to 50?! Or do you think that half the trains that week ended up speeding as no one noticed the new sign!
 

Skimpot flyer

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2012
Messages
1,938
If you had a train every 15 minutes, you'd really need a way to have the semi fasts overtake without going out on to the fasts. I have no idea how many loops might be needed, or the best location, but it might be just one?

If adding two loops at one station was too hard to fit, what about putting the loops in different locations?
In the off-peak periods, running the WGC 'stoppers' at 20min intervals (i.e. 3tph), and semi-fasts at 30min intervals (2tph) is, in my opinion, really dumb.
Given that a stopping train takes 21min from Finsbury Park to Potters Bar, and a semi-fast takes only 10mins on the same stretch, you will always have the problem of at least one of the semi-fasts 'catching up' a slower service if you do not use the fast line to overtake.
For example, if you do the logical thing and have your 1st semi-fast depart just ahead of your 1st stopper (to give it a clear path), you would have departures from FP at, say,

xx00 Semi-Fast1
xx05 Stopper1
xx25 Stopper2
xx30 Semi-Fast2
xx45 Stopper3

Whichever way you crunch the numbers, it is clear that it is the 2tph/3tph pattern itself that creates the need for use of the fast line.

I'm assuming that the Welwyn Viaduct and lack of paths over it prevents the semi-fasts being increased to 3tph (which would remove the need to use the fast line between FP and PB).
Increasing the semi-fasts to 3tph and running one of them only as far as WGC (returning to KX on a similar semi-fast calling pattern) is also clearly undesirable, as Welwyn North and Knebworth would then have 2tph but spaced at intervals of 20min and then a wait of 40mins for the next one!

So my solution is this:
Increase the ex-Moorgate services on the WGC branch (and on the Hertford loop) to 4tph, but accelerate two of them by omitting calls at more lightly-used stations. My candidates for this would be Harringey, Hornsey, and Hadley Wood in the key FP-PB section, then Brookmans Park and Welham Green beyond there. Controversial, yes, but then again four of these stations have only 2tph at weekends and that seems to be sufficient.

I would envisage a pattern at Finsbury Park, once the Hertford Loop services are running on the 'ex-goods lines, to be something like:

xx06 stations on the Hertford loop, departing Platform 6 and using ex-goods line
xx11 Semi-fast to Cambridge, departing Platform 5
xx14 all-stations to WGC, departing Platform 6
xx21 stations on the Hertford loop, departing Platform 6 and using ex-goods line
xx29 limited-stops to WGC, departing Platform 6
xx36 stations on the Hertford loop, departing Platform 6 and using ex-goods line
xx41 Semi-fast to Peterborough, departing Platform 5
xx44 all-stations to WGC, departing Platform 6
xx51 limited-stops to WGC, departing Platform 6
stations on the Hertford loop, departing Platform 6 and using ex-goods line
xx59 limited-stops to WGC, departing Platform 6

Now, assuming omitting Harringey, Hornsey, and Hadley Wood accelerates those 2 stoppers by 3mins, trains would call at Potters Bar in the down direction thus:

xx21 Hatfield, WGC and stations to Cambridge
xx35 all stations to WGC
xx47 Hatfield and WGC only
xx51 Hatfield, WGC and stations to Peterborough
xx05 all stations to WGC
xx17 Hatfield and WGC only

No need to use down fast.
No semi-fasts crawling behind slows to WGC (due to 4min headway)

(Similar patterns would apply in the up direction)

Simples!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top