Woking - Basingstoke (near Hook) landslip (15/01/23)

[pompeyfan]

I see the timetable for today is significantly different today compared to the past week which is a bit concerning. I understand that last week was organised by control, who are happy to take the odd delay minute here and there if there is a headway clash, however today, and weekdays from Monday 6th Feb will be done by the planning department. They have to ensure compliance with headways and so cannot schedule clashes between stopping and faster trains.

A summary of todays service:
Exeters terminate at Basingstoke
Salisburys divert to Reading
Weymouths call additionally at Farnborough
Portsmouth via Eastleigh’s are all stops Basingstoke - Farnborough
Basingstoke stoppers cancelled throughout

 

[Colin1501]

I viewed the site recently from Trotters Lane overbridge, some way to the east, and have been trying to work out where signal BE387 is relative to the deviation. Has the down fast returned to its normal course by the time it reaches the signal, or is it still some way to the right of it? Just thinking about sighting, etc, although with the wide and straight formation here, and no overbridges or other obstructions close by, this presumably isn't a problem.

 

[Ian Hardy]

I viewed the site recently from Trotters Lane overbridge, some way to the east, and have been trying to work out where signal BE387 is relative to the deviation. Has the down fast returned to its normal course by the time it reaches the signal, or is it still some way to the right of it? Just thinking about sighting, etc, although with the wide and straight formation here, and no overbridges or other obstructions close by, this presumably isn't a problem.

The slew back to the DN Fast is beyond signal BE387.

When I went over the slew yesterday afternoon, I noticed that all the signals for the DN Slow had been covered up between Winchfield CE# and Basingstoke LE, probably to assist drivers to see the correct signals? As the gantry that has BE387 also has BE135 for the DN Slow.

The 13:09 ex Waterloo arrived at Basingstoke only half a minute late according to the WTT, even though it had used the Winchfield CE# and the 50 mph limit at the slew.

 

[Omnishambles]

Its only two track for a short section so should have been able to accommodate the full service really. GE run 9TPH up what is effectively a two track railway to Shenfield now as well as accommodating an intermodal every hour as well.

Completely agree, it’s slewed for a very short section with a 50 ESR so not seeing the issue really

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Jan 2023 ==

I see the timetable for today is significantly different today compared to the past week which is a bit concerning. I understand that last week was organised by control, who are happy to take the odd delay minute here and there if there is a headway clash, however today, and weekdays from Monday 6th Feb will be done by the planning department. They have to ensure compliance with headways and so cannot schedule clashes between stopping and faster trains.

A summary of todays service:
Exeters terminate at Basingstoke
Salisburys divert to Reading
Weymouths call additionally at Farnborough
Portsmouth via Eastleigh’s are all stops Basingstoke - Farnborough
Basingstoke stoppers cancelled throughout

Maybe just today, looking at Monday, Exeters going through, xx54 all shacks cancelled. The 0730 from Yeovil is a runner which is good that was an 8car terminator last week with everyone piling into an already full 10car 0735

 

[swt_passenger]

I see the timetable for today is significantly different today compared to the past week which is a bit concerning. I understand that last week was organised by control, who are happy to take the odd delay minute here and there if there is a headway clash, however today, and weekdays from Monday 6th Feb will be done by the planning department. They have to ensure compliance with headways and so cannot schedule clashes between stopping and faster trains.

A summary of todays service:
Exeters terminate at Basingstoke
Salisburys divert to Reading
Weymouths call additionally at Farnborough
Portsmouth via Eastleigh’s are all stops Basingstoke - Farnborough
Basingstoke stoppers cancelled throughout

Is some of this due to engineering work towards Waterloo, I think reduced tracks through Queenstown Rd? A lot of other services from places nearer to London have also been thinned out today, there was a thread during the week about the effect on Guildford via Cobham, etc…

 

[pompeyfan]

Is some of this due to engineering work towards Waterloo, I think reduced tracks through Queenstown Rd? A lot of other services from places nearer to London have also been thinned out today, there was a thread during the week about the effect on Guildford via Cobham, etc…

I hadn’t seen that. Looking at open train times it would appear the slow lines between Waterloo and Clapham Jn are under T3 which would make more sense.

 

[greaterwest]

I see the timetable for today is significantly different today compared to the past week which is a bit concerning. I understand that last week was organised by control, who are happy to take the odd delay minute here and there if there is a headway clash, however today, and weekdays from Monday 6th Feb will be done by the planning department. They have to ensure compliance with headways and so cannot schedule clashes between stopping and faster trains.

A summary of todays service:
Exeters terminate at Basingstoke
Salisburys divert to Reading
Weymouths call additionally at Farnborough
Portsmouth via Eastleigh’s are all stops Basingstoke - Farnborough
Basingstoke stoppers cancelled throughout

The original plan was for the Basingstoke and Alton line services to split at Woking like they would on a Sunday because there is reduced capacity in the Queenstown Road area.

Since the service would have been half-hourly it would have complicated the diagrams so I suspect the extra stops on the Weymouth and Portsmouth services was the simpler (and IMO more sensible) solution.

The only station losing out vs the weekday plan is Fleet, which is down to 1 train per hour from 2.

 

[Colin1501]

The slew back to the DN Fast is beyond signal BE387.

When I went over the slew yesterday afternoon, I noticed that all the signals for the DN Slow had been covered up between Winchfield CE# and Basingstoke LE, probably to assist drivers to see the correct signals? As the gantry that has BE387 also has BE135 for the DN Slow.

The 13:09 ex Waterloo arrived at Basingstoke only half a minute late according to the WTT, even though it had used the Winchfield CE# and the 50 mph limit at the slew.

Thanks - interesting to know. I also spotted that some of the down slow signals had been covered.

 

[Signal Head]

I viewed the site recently from Trotters Lane overbridge, some way to the east, and have been trying to work out where signal BE387 is relative to the deviation. Has the down fast returned to its normal course by the time it reaches the signal, or is it still some way to the right of it? Just thinking about sighting, etc, although with the wide and straight formation here, and no overbridges or other obstructions close by, this presumably isn't a problem.

387 is about halfway along the 'return' slue. The signal head has been realigned to point towards the temporary alignment, which apparently achieved good enough sighting such that a temporary signal wasn't, in the end, required.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Jan 2023 ==

Completely agree, it’s slewed for a very short section with a 50 ESR so not seeing the issue really

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Jan 2023 ==


Maybe just today, looking at Monday, Exeters going through, xx54 all shacks cancelled. The 0730 from Yeovil is a runner which is good that was an 8car terminator last week with everyone piling into an already full 10car 0735

The two-track section isn't just the slue area, it's all the way from Winchfield to Basingstoke. In the up direction the points to access the Up Fast (from the Up Slow) are London-side of the station so stopping trains are going to affect 'fast' ones more in that direction.

 

[kristiang85]

I went past it today, and it was very obvious from the slew to see the damaged track. I must admit I hadn't appreciated how lucky it was that a 10 car train wasn't going over it when it failed. It would have been carnage.

 

[Brush 4]

It does seem in most cases over the decades, that these landslips occurred when there were no trains present, which seems a bit miraculous. I'm sure there were some tragedies but in the case of all the Hook ones, apparently not....

 

[Jimini]

Slightly off topic, but I'm wondering how much longer the ESR (or maybe TSR?) / drooping double bridge between Radley and Culham over the Thames is going to last -- that's an ever increasing bump as you go over it at reduced speed on the south side!

 

[FuzzyDuck]

Slightly off topic, but I'm wondering how much longer the ESR (or maybe TSR?) / drooping double bridge between Radley and Culham over the Thames is going to last -- that's an ever increasing bump as you go over it at reduced speed on the south side!

Is it really as warped as this: Google

 

[The Ham]

The two-track section isn't just the slue area, it's all the way from Winchfield to Basingstoke. In the up direction the points to access the Up Fast (from the Up Slow) are London-side of the station so stopping trains are going to affect 'fast' ones more in that direction.

Presumably the extra capacity created from adding a set of points only just the London side of the slip isn't really enough to justify closing the line for long enough to install, especially given that you'd likely need to make changes to the signals to permit the changing on lines and it would be of limited use after the lines fully reopen.

 

[Colin1501]

Presumably the extra capacity created from adding a set of points only just the London side of the slip isn't really enough to justify closing the line for long enough to install, especially given that you'd likely need to make changes to the signals to permit the changing on lines and it would be of limited use after the lines fully reopen.

Well, quite. I think one of the reasons they were able to bring this temporary layout into use so quickly is that there are no signalling changes and no pointwork.

 

[Signal Head]

Presumably the extra capacity created from adding a set of points only just the London side of the slip isn't really enough to justify closing the line for long enough to install, especially given that you'd likely need to make changes to the signals to permit the changing on lines and it would be of limited use after the lines fully reopen.

Essentially, yes. It's not just 'adding points', all lines are unidirectional and the signals are mostly automatic, just controlled by track circuit occupation.

If you wanted to change part of the track to work in both directions, it's a rather major alteration, assuming it's to be protected by signalling (ie not just locally worked by Ops staff with no interlocking, which would be severely restrictive anyway).

To get such an alteration designed, built and commissioned would take several months at least, far longer than the slip repair is expected to take.

 

[QueensCurve]

It does seem in most cases over the decades, that these landslips occurred when there were no trains present, which seems a bit miraculous. I'm sure there were some tragedies but in the case of all the Hook ones, apparently not....

The two exceptions were Watford Slow Tunnel Sept 2016, which ended without a catastrophe, and Carmont August 2021 which sadly ended rather badly.

 

[Darandio]

Is it really as warped as this: Google

Err, no.

 

[pompeyfan]

The two exceptions were Watford Slow Tunnel Sept 2016, which ended without a catastrophe, and Carmont August 2021 which sadly ended rather badly.

The Guildford tunnel slip was also fortunate in that the line was open but the first train to observe the slip was a GWR service accelerating from 25mph as apposed to a 70mph SWR service.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Is it really as warped as this: Google

Err, no.

Thank goodness!

 

[Kite159]

I dread to think how busy some of the hourly fast services between London & Basingstoke have been, along with the hourly stopper today.

 

[Horizon22]

I dread to think how busy some of the hourly fast services between London & Basingstoke have been, along with the hourly stopper today.

Was on today towards Waterloo and whilst it was certainly busier than normal, you could still get a seat up to about Woking - and this was a 10-car train.

 

[infobleep]

I've grabbed an image from the BBC South drone footage to show the slip remediation works in detail (for us engineering geeks)View attachment 127784

It reminds me of one of those wooden rope bridges, just without the rope sides to hold on. to.

 

[Meerkat]

How do they manage the risk of the embankment failing more, particularly if they are mucking about* with it? Looked like there was some kind of sensor on a tripod next to the shifted DF - are they automatic or does someone have to get an alarm then hit the big red button?

*I doubt this is the official term....

 

[swt_passenger]

I don’t think this chap’s drone footage of the area has been linked before, there are four videos on his channel, they’re from around the weekend 20/22 Jan and then an update on the 29th of Jan.

I think they’re possibly the best view so far of the overall length of the track alterations etc, they also show various engineering trains present over the weekend when the changes were being installed:

 

[Tim M]

Essentially, yes. It's not just 'adding points', all lines are unidirectional and the signals are mostly automatic, just controlled by track circuit occupation.

If you wanted to change part of the track to work in both directions, it's a rather major alteration, assuming it's to be protected by signalling (ie not just locally worked by Ops staff with no interlocking, which would be severely restrictive anyway).

To get such an alteration designed, built and commissioned would take several months at least, far longer than the slip repair is expected to take.

This incident illustrates that NR and its contractors can be very creative following such an incident. With trackwork, S&T and traction power departments working together with the operators a solution has been realised incredibly quickly.

What this incident also illustrates is the need for bi-directional signalling, something that is normal in some countries such as Switzerland a possibly Germany etc., and that includes four track lines. Yes it’s complex and will need alterations to track layouts in some/many instances. But - now is the time to do it.

Using ETCS most of the additional signalling work would be in data produced in the design offices with (hopefully by now) a high degree of automation. So much cheaper than planting signals.

Just imagine how quickly services past the Hook slip might have been restored, not days but hours.

 

[zwk500]

What this incident also illustrates is the need for bi-directional signalling, something that is normal in some countries such as Switzerland a possibly Germany etc., and that includes four track lines. Yes it’s complex and will need alterations to track layouts in some/many instances. But - now is the time to do it.

How often are bi-di capabilities we already have actually used? They're good in places but we don't need a national programme of making our railways far more expensive to run. The SWML if done today would probably be bi-di on the centre lines, similar to the Trent Valley, but we don't need every twin track in the country to have the option, even if other countries (mainly ones which use speed signalling) do.

Using ETCS most of the additional signalling work would be in data produced in the design offices with (hopefully by now) a high degree of automation. So much cheaper than planting signals.

Agree. There are certain places where it won't be, but they're very small. Bi-di for ETCS is mainly data, it only requires an additional block marker sign and maybe a couple of extra balises.

Just imagine how quickly services past the Hook slip might have been restored, not days but hours.

ISTR the line was under possession when the slip happened. Not sure if the SLW was instituted as soon as the line opened or if there was further disruption after that.

 

[jfollows]

How often are bi-di capabilities we already have actually used?

My local one, Wilmslow, is used quite frequently, usually as a result of late running trains. For example, the Alderley Edge terminator sometimes gets sent up the down line from Wilmslow to Alderley Edge to stay out of the way of a Manchester-London service. Of course it requires no down service at the same time, which isn't often the case, but it does appear that it gets used when it can be useful.

 

[Bald Rick]

Yes it’s complex and will need alterations to track layouts in some/many instances.

Bi di costs a lot more, and in most cases provides limited benefit. The Sums just don’t add up for most locations.

Bi-di for ETCS is mainly data, it only requires an additional block marker sign and maybe a couple of extra balises.

and often extra train detection, plus of course the data / design

 

[Steve Harris]

How often are bi-di capabilities we already have actually used?

Ely !!!?

Or more precisely, Ely - Ely North Jnc