Plans to reopen Totton - Fawley/Hythe (again!)

[theironroad]

I'd certainly hope that the linespeeed would be 60mph like a stretch of the Brock to Lymington line.

Maybe it would a contender for a bi mode 3rd rail / battery powered train with say a small fleet of 3 cartiage trains which could also be used on the Lymington (in full 3rd rail mode) and ideally for a Poole to Swanage service (though that's very unlikely to happen as Swanage Railway want to run the operation to Wareham themselves and at 25mph, the line would need upgrading to attract people out of their cars.

 

[Carlisle]

The area around Eastern docks has been developed since, although I'm not sure if there is enough demand to justify the re-building of a chord towards Soton Central.
.

Perhaps there’d also be some demand for connections with the nearby IOW ferry, although I’m unsure of potential numbers involved

 

[Train wasp]

The Marchwood bypass in rush hour is a complete nightmare to travel on. Reinstating the passenger traffic could reduce traffic congestion on local roads around this area.

 

[markymark2000]

The studies on the subject all say the Romsey rounder needs to continue as it is, because when asked people want to use the direct route to Southampton Central (SOU), rather than the long way round.

AIUI the best way to run it is to keep it independent and into P5 at SOU.

Could it work for Romsey to Fawley via Eastleigh and then have Salisbury to Southampton via Millbrook?
I know then people from Salisbury, Dean and Mottisfont & Dunbridge lose their link to Southampton Airport Parkway and Eastleigh but this service pattern keeps the faster service from Romsey to Southampton and gives people on the Totton, Hythe and Fawley line a service to the Airport which I think might be more used than Salisbury, Dean and Mottisfont & Dunbridge.

 

[swt_passenger]

Could it work for Romsey to Fawley via Eastleigh and then have Salisbury to Southampton via Millbrook?
I know then people from Salisbury, Dean and Mottisfont & Dunbridge lose their link to Southampton Airport Parkway and Eastleigh but this service pattern keeps the faster service from Romsey to Southampton and gives people on the Totton, Hythe and Fawley line a service to the Airport which I think might be more used than Salisbury, Dean and Mottisfont & Dunbridge.

I’m sure there are a number of other possibilities in that vein, but I expect involving more distant places like Fareham is highly unlikely, there’s only limited capacity for a single stopper on the Netley line, and no real need for additional semifasts or non stop trains.

I’d say just get it going into P5 first, and see where else it goes later if it develops useful numbers.

 

[matt]

Thread reopened for @swt_passenger to post an update.

 

[swt_passenger]

Thanks Matt.

The local BBC bloke, Paul Clifton, has done an update on the Fawley branch proposal. Seems to have gone a bit lukewarm on the idea of a Fawley Parkway further down the line (that was mentioned in one of the speculation threads last year)…

He also seems to be suggesting Marchwood signal box has to be upgraded first - which is surprising?

Plans to reopen a disused branch rail line look set to go ahead.
The Waterside line between Southampton and Fawley closed to regular passengers in 1966 but had been used for occasional freight trains.
Network Rail has backed the idea of running a shuttle passenger service part way along the line.
Campaigners had called for it to be reopened to help ease traffic congestion from new housing developments.
The latest plan is scaled back from previous mooted attempts to reopen the six-mile (10km) branch line - the proposals only take the line as far as Hythe, rather than Fawley oil refinery.
With the line used until for freight trains until 2017, much of the track and infrastructure remained in place, although the Marchwood signalling facilities would need upgrading and a new station would have to be built at Hythe.

Hopes for Waterside rail line to reopen for passenger trains

The Waterside line between Southampton and Fawley closed to regular passengers in 1966.

www.bbc.co.uk

The local paper, the Southampton Echo, has run a very similar story that adds a suggestion that there’ll be an announcement after the local elections.

 

[341o2]

I've seen that recent article reprinted in the Southern Echo, apparently there will be a formal announcement after local elections in May.

 

[fgwrich]

Given that I don't think any work has formerly begun on Fawley Waterside yet, opening to Hythe with a later extension down to Fawley Parkway feels like the better option to me. It isn't far to go from Hythe to the refinery gates, and for now at least, Hythe will be where the main market is. As for a station site in Hythe itself, I still feel that the space by the library may be the best option - It's central enough to the town, and the car park could be expanded or double decked if required.

 

[swt_passenger]

Given that I don't think any work has formerly begun on Fawley Waterside yet, opening to Hythe with a later extension down to Fawley Parkway feels like the better option to me. It isn't far to go from Hythe to the refinery gates, and for now at least, Hythe will be where the main market is. As for a station site in Hythe itself, I still feel that the space by the library may be the best option - It's central enough to the town, and the car park could be expanded or double decked if required.

The RAIL magazine version of the story does report that Hythe Library is the likely station location:

The original idea was to reach a new park-and-ride at Hardley - just outside Britain’s largest oil refinery, on the site of a former halt for refinery workers. Instead, plans two miles shorter will be developed for services to a new station at Hythe.

The original Hythe station still exists, but the platform was removed in the 1970s and the site is well away from the town centre. A new single-platform station is now proposed behind Hythe’s library car park, where the railway passes on a steep embankment.

Progress on Fawley reopening, but plans scaled back

Plans to reopen the former branch line to Fawley (Hampshire) for passenger services have taken another step forward… but have also been scaled back.

www.railmagazine.com

 

[zwk500]

He also seems to be suggesting Marchwood signal box has to be upgraded first - which is surprising?

Marchwood level crossing is currently manually worked gates controlled by the signaller (who must leave the 'box to swing the gates then return to the box to clear the signals). This would need to be upgraded for a passenger service, at a minimum to putting a control panel in the 'box itself.

 

[swt_passenger]

Marchwood level crossing is currently manually worked gates controlled by the signaller (who must leave the 'box to swing the gates then return to the box to clear the signals). This would need to be upgraded for a passenger service, at a minimum to putting a control panel in the 'box itself.

OK - I was wondering exactly what he meant by the ‘heavy mechanical signalling’. I thought he meant the levers in the box, which are not exactly unusual…

 

[zwk500]

OK - I was wondering exactly what he meant by the ‘heavy mechanical signalling’. I thought he meant the levers in the box, which are not exactly unusual…

The semaphores are still lever-worked rather than power-worked, so there would need to be a judgement of the physical workload on signallers who would now be signalling a lot more movements than the occasional freight! However it is perfectly possible for Marchwood to continue in it's current form, should it be suitable for the requirements of the passenger service. Of course, if changes were needed to the signalling or layout to accommodate the passenger service then the signalling would need changes. As the box is just a shed on the platform (a very nice one, I'm sure) then actually making the changes to the interlocking or lever frame may not be straightforward.

 

[swt_passenger]

The semaphores are still lever-worked rather than power-worked, so there would need to be a judgement of the physical workload on signallers who would now be signalling a lot more movements than the occasional freight! However it is perfectly possible for Marchwood to continue in it's current form, should it be suitable for the requirements of the passenger service. Of course, if changes were needed to the signalling or layout to accommodate the passenger service then the signalling would need changes. As the box is just a shed on the platform (a very nice one, I'm sure) then actually making the changes to the interlocking or lever frame may not be straightforward.

Thanks for the detail.

 

[341o2]

Marchwood "signal box" is actually in the former station building, the levers and tablet instruments would be a credit to any heritage railway

View attachment 1648150258917.jpeg

 

[nw1]

Great news though I do hope they extend the service further down towards Fawley at some point: the Holbury/Blackfield/Fawley area has considerable housing.

Presumably the still-existent - if disused - Marchwood will be called at?

For maximum success I think the service will need to have a reasonable connection to and from London trains at Southampton Central (i.e 20 minutes max), I hope this can be accommodated and it doesn't have to be pathed in the slot the with the worst connections!

 

[zwk500]

Great news though I do hope they extend the service further down towards Fawley at some point: the Holbury/Blackfield/Fawley area has considerable housing.

Not any that the railway can get particularly close to.

Presumably the still-existent - if disused - Marchwood will be called at?

That is indeed the plan, including a renovation of the platform to bring it up to scratch.

For maximum success I think the service will need to have a reasonable connection to and from London trains at Southampton Central (i.e 20 minutes max), I hope this can be accommodated and it doesn't have to be slotted into the time of the half-hour with the worst connections!

Between junction capacity at Redbridge and Platform availability at Southampton I would just focus on getting the thing up and running.

 

[31160]

Could the bay at Southampton be brought back into use to help platform capacity

 

[swt_passenger]

Could the bay at Southampton be brought back into use to help platform capacity

That’s exactly what the RAIL article I linked earlier is reporting, and what has usually been assumed.

 

[Gloster]

As I have said on another thread about this subject, as soon as you start going beyond a basic service, the costs spiral and the whole project ends up being abandoned as too costly. “The perfect is the enemy of the good.”

 

[DorkingMain]

Could the bay at Southampton be brought back into use to help platform capacity

Would only take a minor change to the signalling to do, in theory

 

[PTR 444]

Interesting that the Rail Magazine article suggests a half-hourly service will run between Southampton and Hythe. I suppose with Hardley Parkway being dropped, it is just about possible to run 2tph with only one unit, especially if one of the services skips Millbrook and Redbridge.

I’m not sure if 2tph to Hythe is the best use of overall capacity however, especially if one could be diverted to run Southampton - Bournemouth for wider benefit to the SWML. Moreover, will people living in Fawley, Langley and Hardley be willing to change onto the train at Hythe when they already have a reasonably direct bus to Southampton on their doorstep?

 

[444045]

I used to work in Marchwood Signal Box in the 1980's when discussions started about having a passenger service brought back as there
was alot of house building at Marchwood (opposite the station) and in the Hythe area. However it never got off the ground because of
money and who would fund it, Hampshire County Council or Network Rail or a combination, in fact neither side was willing to invest.

There is alot of work needed to be done for a passenger service to operate on the line, when they did a remit at the end of 1989 the
following would need to be done at that time :

Marchwood Signal Box would no longer carry on, the line would be incorporated onto Eastleigh Panel Box.

The level crossings at Marchwood and School Road Hythe currently gates manually operated would be replaced by a full set of barriers.

The track would have to be upgraded along the branch line so it is fit for passenger service.

The signalling would have to be upgraded so that it could be operated from Eastleigh Panel, with a method of working of both passenger
and freight services as Marchwood Port is still used by the Army mainly container wagons and the occasional military vehicles on warwells.
Currently a key token instrument is used between Marchwood and Fawley with one train in section working, this would have to change as
the section of line would start at Totton loop to Hythe with the closure of Marchwood Signal Box.

 

[nw1]

Interesting that the Rail Magazine article suggests a half-hourly service will run between Southampton and Hythe. I suppose with Hardley Parkway being dropped, it is just about possible to run 2tph with only one unit, especially if one of the services skips Millbrook and Redbridge.

Is that the case? Assuming a 5-min turnaround at each end, that would need the trip to be completed in 10 minutes. I'd imagine it would take at least 15?

I’m not sure if 2tph to Hythe is the best use of overall capacity however, especially if one could be diverted to run Southampton - Bournemouth for wider benefit to the SWML. Moreover, will people living in Fawley, Langley and Hardley be willing to change onto the train at Hythe when they already have a reasonably direct bus to Southampton on their doorstep?

It depends if there is through ticketing between bus and train, I guess - and how much faster the train is than staying on the bus.

 

[kwrail]

As I have said on another thread about this subject, as soon as you start going beyond a basic service, the costs spiral and the whole project ends up being abandoned as too costly. “The perfect is the enemy of the good.”

This. Keep it simple to get it up and running - which given that Hythe and Fawley Parkway is out of the initial scope they seem minded to do. Do the necessary signal box, level crossing and track work as the previous poster has described. Then run a basic diesel hauled service Romsey to Hythe via Eastleigh. Which avoids having to mess around with signalling and bay platforms at Southampton Central. Then hopefully extend to Hythe and Fawley Parkway once the service is established and the new houses built.

 

[zwk500]

This. Keep it simple to get it up and running - which given that Hythe and Fawley Parkway is out of the initial scope they seem minded to do. Do the necessary signal box, level crossing and track work as the previous poster has described.

Yes

Then run a basic diesel hauled service Romsey to Hythe via Eastleigh. Which avoids having to mess around with signalling and bay platforms at Southampton Central.

1. [PEDANT] It won't be hauled, it'll be DMU operation [/PEDANT]
2. Running through to Romsey isn't possible because of capacity constraints at Southampton Tunnel, Eastleigh and on the single line via Chandlers ford. It would also mean changing the existing timetable to integrate the new service, which means if the work on the branch doesn't get done in time then it's harder to operate the bit over the existing track. The lesser of 2 evils is to plan for the shuttle and if it isn't ready the rest of the timetable can carry on.

 

[swt_passenger]

Interesting that the Rail Magazine article suggests a half-hourly service will run between Southampton and Hythe. I suppose with Hardley Parkway being dropped, it is just about possible to run 2tph with only one unit, especially if one of the services skips Millbrook and Redbridge.

I’m not sure if 2tph to Hythe is the best use of overall capacity however, especially if one could be diverted to run Southampton - Bournemouth for wider benefit to the SWML. Moreover, will people living in Fawley, Langley and Hardley be willing to change onto the train at Hythe when they already have a reasonably direct bus to Southampton on their doorstep?

Why would an additional train to Bournemouth have anything to do with this proposal, which will make effective use of two car DMUs, almost certainly a 158? it’s the sort of wishful thinking that leads to this thread being closed down and discussion moved to speculation, as usually happens after a day or two…

 

[zwk500]

Interesting that the Rail Magazine article suggests a half-hourly service will run between Southampton and Hythe. I suppose with Hardley Parkway being dropped, it is just about possible to run 2tph with only one unit, especially if one of the services skips Millbrook and Redbridge.

2tph will need 2 units. Squeezing the service onto one diagram (if it was even possible between the capacity constraints) would leave no recovery time for delays.

 

[nw1]

2tph will need 2 units. Squeezing the service onto one diagram (if it was even possible between the capacity constraints) would leave no recovery time for delays.

Trying to imagine how long it would take. I think Totton can be done 6 minutes non-stop. Assuming the line speed is quite slow, I would imagine a further four to Marchwood, and then four again to Hythe in the best case, so 14 minutes. So basically unless you allow 1-min turnarounds (a recipe for disaster), 2tph with one unit isn't going to happen.

Wonder where the unit(s) will be resourced from? Do SWR have any spare?

 

[swt_passenger]

Trying to imagine how long it would take. I think Totton can be done 6 minutes non-stop. Assuming the line speed is quite slow, I would imagine a further four to Marchwood, and then four again to Hythe in the best case, so 14 minutes. So basically unless you allow 1-min turnarounds (a recipe for disaster), 2tph with one unit isn't going to happen.

Another way to think about timings is that the distance is very near twice that of the Lymington branch, but this is running in amongst other trains, and dealing with 2 busy flat junctions, call it 3 if you include an up train heading for Southampton P5.

As you say it has to be two, I’m wondering where they’d cross?