The Bristol Railway Archive

Anybody know what caused the closure of Temple Meads to Stapleton Road for a short period this afternoon (according to NRE) ...

60010 failed on the bank whilst running light from Whatley Quarry to Newport AD Junction, apparently.

Poor old 60s - they don't look after them like they used to ... They used to be such reliable machines.

Nothing for miles around to drag it, I presume?

It was stuck there for some time, so assistance probably had to come from Westbury or South Wales.
A couple of northbound XC's worked by Bristol crews were diverted via Bath, Swindon and Kemble and at least one other was cancelled.
Now if British Rail hadn't "dequadrified" the route in the eighties there wouldn't have been a problem....

A couple of northbound XC's worked by Bristol crews were diverted via Bath, Swindon and Kemble and at least one other was cancelled.

Just goes to show, BTM to Narroways is a bit of a national pinch point ... Quadrupling at least as far as Narroways would have meant the Beach could have been pressed into service as a diversionary, rather than the 100 or so mile trip via Swindon and Kemble ...

As if the single line section on the Cotswold ain't busy enough already!

jules wrote: Just goes to show, BTM to Narroways is a bit of a national pinch point ... Quadrupling at least as far as Narroways would have meant the Beach could have been pressed into service as a diversionary, rather than the 100 or so mile trip via Swindon and Kemble ...

As if the single line section on the Cotswold ain't busy enough already!

Which also goes to show the remarkable short-sightedness employed within the railway industry since Phillip Shirley's antics in the 1960s of disposing of as much "redundant" infrastructure as possible. This is all very well until something goes wrong.

Another example. Quite a few years ago now (late 1990s?) I was travelling from Birmingham to Chippenham. The GWR main line service was in chaos when I got to BTM because of a broken rail somewhere near Keynsham. The entire section between Bristol and Bath was being worked as a single line because there are no longer any crossovers between the two.

Did it really save that much money to take out crossovers and associated signalling?

I attended the meetings about removing the tracks known as the up and down main lines. The reason was the bridge at Stapleton road requiered replacing.which turned out to be a porkie.the real reason was the track on the Berks and Hants needed to be replaced as a matter of urgency.We tried to get one line remaining working two way if necessary.It was turned down.Later we were told that the Western was short of money!No need to say who running the show is there?

jules wrote:Just goes to show, BTM to Narroways is a bit of a national pinch point ... Quadrupling at least as far as Narroways would have meant the Beach could have been pressed into service as a diversionary, rather than the 100 or so mile trip via Swindon and Kemble ...

The engine failed further up the bank, so diversion via Henbury was possible. Sadly no drivers or guards sign this route.

We desperately need the reinstatement of the 1970s track layout. Filton - Dr Day's is such a vital link for XC and Portsmouth - Cardiff services. There is no realistic diversionary route.

Alex

stumpytrain wrote:

jules wrote:Just goes to show, BTM to Narroways is a bit of a national pinch point ... Quadrupling at least as far as Narroways would have meant the Beach could have been pressed into service as a diversionary, rather than the 100 or so mile trip via Swindon and Kemble ...

The engine failed further up the bank, so diversion via Henbury was possible. Sadly no drivers or guards sign this route.

We desperately need the reinstatement of the 1970s track layout. Filton - Dr Day's is such a vital link for XC and Portsmouth - Cardiff services. There is no realistic diversionary route.

Alex

Alex - with the greatest respect this is utter nonsense. A simple question - which is the cheapest option and therefore more likely to happen in today's financial climate?

1. Re-quadruple between Dr Days and Filton
2. Provide crews with route knowledge for diversionary routes?

Avonmouth is a perfectly acceptable diversionary route for this location and adds about 8 mies to the journey. The alternative diversionary routes - Bristol to Cardiff going up to Swindon and reverse adds about an extra 80 miles, and Bristol to Brum going to Swindon then Gloucester adds about an extra 40 miles.

When I was on the railway in the 1970s at Bath Road depot, most drivers had traction knowledge of all the types of engine they were likely to come across and route knowledge of everywhere they were remotely likely to go, inculding diversionary routes.

Such is progress.

Robin Summerhill wrote:Alex - with the greatest respect this is utter nonsense. A simple question - which is the cheapest option and therefore more likely to happen in today's financial climate?

Robin - with the greatest respect I think the prospect of quadrupling is a lot more likely to happen than train crew signing Henbury in today's railway. Things have changed since your time at Bath Road depot, though not for the better I will agree.

Alterations were made at Holesmouth Junction to allow trains to run between Avonmouth Station and Henbury for the 2004 resignalling of Filton Abbey Wood. XC and Wessex Trains learnt this route, and indeed for some time after continued to run route refreshing empty stock services. However, eventually these ceased and route knowledge lapsed.

While the principle of diverting via Henbury sounds exciting, there would be insufficient paths without suspending the Avonmouth services, these already crossing at Clifton. It is also not possible to use the connection at Holesmouth when a train is in the section towards Severn Beach.

With only two lines between Filton and Dr. Day's, trains are constantly coming to a stand at Filton, Narroways, Dr. Day's and Bristol East because of conflicting moves. With improved stopping services at Lawrence Hill and Stapleton Road "fast" trains between Filton and Bristol are grimacing around on single yellows. Coal trains with 1800 tons of coal require a 10 minute margin and are down to a walking pace at the top of the bank in bad weather.

When I first started in Bristol discussions with the management about Quadrupling were always treated as a joke. Now, they realise that reinstatement will save huge amount of minutes delay and allow for further growth. I'm quite sure that unless the interest in the rail industry starts to decline that Filton with continue to climb the wish list and eventually the wrongs of the 1980s will be righted.

Cheers,
Alex

stumpytrain wrote:

Robin Summerhill wrote:Alex - with the greatest respect this is utter nonsense. A simple question - which is the cheapest option and therefore more likely to happen in today's financial climate?

Robin - with the greatest respect I think the prospect of quadrupling is a lot more likely to happen than train crew signing Henbury in today's railway. Things have changed since your time at Bath Road depot, though not for the better I will agree.

On that we will most certainly agree

The trouble is, some of us old buggers tend to forget (until we look on Google Earth to remind ourselves) that the Narroways to Avonmouth line has been singled and, looking at the off-peak service as an example, I have to agree up to a point that track capacity could clearly be an issue. However, that off peak service is running from Stapleton Road at 53 mins past the hour to Avonmouth at 15 mins past, returning beween 18 mins and 39 mins past each hour.

So, whilst on the one hand you could say that the line is only completely unoccupied for 14 minutes in each hour, you could also say that off peak, with one train running, when nothing is crossing at Clifton, there should at be least two spare paths kicking around the place using Clifton as a crossing point, plus (at a push) two more crossing at Clifton during the unoccupied period. I don't know the signalling arrangements down there any more but, if it is possible to have more than one train in section (going the same way, obviously ) between Narroways and Clifton, and Clifton and Avonmouth, then a few more become available. All that said, however many spare paths you managed to find, it would clearly not completely resolve a closure of the Horfield route, but it could certainly help out in such an emergency.

As Jules said earlier, finding spare paths between Swindon and Kemble is not easy either and, given the additional mileage involved as well, to allow the Avonmouth loop to fall into disuse as a diversionary route seems to me, quite simply, crackers.

Mind you, the way that our railway has been organised since privatisation seems to me to be crackers anyway, but that's a wider discussion

PS - sorry if my original post came over a bit strong, but the hairs on the back of my neck always stick up when I see something apparently being dismissed out of hand with a variation on "No, it can't be done." My preferred adage is "Where there's a will there's a way"

Sadly Narroways to Severn Beach has been heavily rationalised with 2 aspect signalling. Narroways - Clifton is one section, Clifton to Dock Junction is only one section.

If money was no object one of the top modifications I would chose to do to the Bristol area would be the redoubling of Narroways to Clifton. For the sake of reinstating the second platforms at Montpelier and Redland and a couple of miles of plain track other infrastructure like points and signals can actually be reduced. This would allow Avonmouth trains to pass anywhere between Clifton and Bristol resulting in accelerated schedules and considerable service recovery potential. It would also allow much more freedom with the timetabling of Filton bank trains. Presently there are a number of XC services that are timetabled to come to a stand at Narroways and follow an Avonmouth service in to Bristol calling at Stapleton Road and Lawrence Hill.

Cheers,
Alex

Dont forget when they remodled Filton Junction and provided Filton Abbey Wood with its extra platform they plonked the platform right where the down patway line would have run towards Filton Junction. Also there are numerous S&T cabinets placed on what woulod have been the up Patchway line.
There was rumors that Bristol was due for resignalling in 2012 probablu more like 2112 now.

If money was no object one of the top modifications I would chose to do to the Bristol area would be the redoubling of Narroways to Clifton.

This is also what FOSBR (www.fosbr.org.uk) identified as their next major goal - redoubling Narroways to Clifton would quite possibly enable a 30 minute clockface timetable on The Beach line.

stopblock wrote:Dont forget when they remodled Filton Junction and provided Filton Abbey Wood with its extra platform they plonked the platform right where the down patway line would have run towards Filton Junction. Also there are numerous S&T cabinets placed on what woulod have been the up Patchway line.
There was rumors that Bristol was due for resignalling in 2012 probablu more like 2112 now.

Yeah, the GSMR mast in the 6' foot of the missing Filton mains at Narroways is an excellent own goal. Current talk for resignalling all hinges on electrification because the Bristol Panel area isn't compatible with overhead lines. I think they want to put most of it in the Thames Valley Signalling Centre at Didcot with south of Parson Street ending up in a work station at Exeter. However, I'm hoping that like most plans on the railway this will never happen!

jules wrote:

If money was no object one of the top modifications I would chose to do to the Bristol area would be the redoubling of Narroways to Clifton.

This is also what FOSBR (www.fosbr.org.uk) identified as their next major goal - redoubling Narroways to Clifton would quite possibly enable a 30 minute clockface timetable on The Beach line.

Fantastic, I wasn't aware that anyone else had thought about this. Great to see that the idea is out in the open. It would be really useful; single lines are a nightmare.

Alex