Portway Park & Ride opening date?

[Old Shire]

Hi, does anyone know why the station has not opened yet?

 

[pdeaves]

A financial-related issue needs to be sorted out, as I understand it.

 

[Freightmaster]

Hi, does anyone know why the station has not opened yet?

Some info here:

RailUK forums - 'new station calendar' topic





MARK

 

[Snow1964]

The timetable has now been published for Portway Park and Ride

Basic timetable is 2 per hour, with alternating 26 and 34 minute intervals

https://www.gwr.com/-/media/gwr-sc-website/files/plan-journey/timetables/2023/Train-times-21-May-to-9-December-v3/B9-train-times-21-May-to-9-December-2023-v3.pdf

 

[tigerroar]

Opened today. Why don't train run circular past Avonmouth and back through Hallen to Filton Abbey Wood then to BTM?

 

[Snow1964]

Opened today. Why don't train run circular past Avonmouth and back through Hallen to Filton Abbey Wood then to BTM?

There have been aspirations to run it as a loop via Henbury (very similar to way Kingston upon Thames loop is served), could even have alternate trains continuing to Severn beach (and of course it's possible to have a branch off a loop, eg like Shepperton)

I beleive the line was singled around 1970, and now trains can only cross at Clifton Downs or Avonmouth (or on mainline at Filton Bank). The uneven 34 and 26 minute spacing is result of this.

Some solutions have been proposed,
1) extension of the Clifton loop to Redland station, it's about 800m of track and reinstated platform (aids flexibility if trains running few minutes late).
2) East to North spur at Hallen Marsh so trains to Severn Beach could use Henbury line which is being reopened with 2 new / reopened stations (currently freight only)
3) St Andrews Road, about 300m of reinstated double track, connected to existing sidings (which are not all needed now hopper loader has gone), with one existing siding becoming other running line. Would give double track from Avonmouth station to Henbury loop.

 

[tigerroar]

Thanks for that, I know they're planning on a service towards Hallen when the stations open there, it would make sense to do two circular services although what you've said about the single sections answers why not

 

[pdeaves]

Additional to Snow1964's response, how much custom would there be for the additional journey opportunities afforded by a loop service (Henbury-Avonmouth, for example), compared to travelling via Bristol? Would it be enough to make the increased performance risk a risk worth taking?

 

[Annetts key]

Opened today. Why don't train run circular past Avonmouth and back through Hallen to Filton Abbey Wood then to BTM?

Primarily because the bulk handling terminal freight lines at Portbury Terminal Junction (between St. Andrews Road station and Hallen Marsh Junction, where the lines to Filton branch off) do not have trap points or full TPWS. When the work was done for the line to be made suitable for passenger lines trains to be diverted, only the minimum required work was done. During any diversion, special instructions had to be followed to ensure no wagons or locomotives could run away from the bulk handling terminal towards the line/junction being used for passenger trains.

There have been aspirations to run it as a loop via Henbury (very similar to way Kingston upon Thames loop is served), could even have alternate trains continuing to Severn beach (and of course it's possible to have a branch off a loop, eg like Shepperton)

I beleive the line was singled around 1970, and now trains can only cross at Clifton Downs or Avonmouth (or on mainline at Filton Bank). The uneven 34 and 26 minute spacing is result of this.

Until 1988, the line between Avonmouth station and Hallen Marsh Junction was double line (one up line and one down line).

In 1988 BR separated the passenger traffic from the freight by converting the up main line between Avonmouth station and Hallen Marsh Junction to a single line (and on to Severn Beach which was already a single line). At that time they extended the token section, the token section now being between St. Andrews Junction signal box and Severn Beach.

The former down main became a freight only line under the control of the Hallen Marsh shunter. Stop blocks were installed near St. Andrews Junction signal box.

At this time, the line between Hallen Marsh Junction and Filton was a single line.

In 1992 to 1993, with the construction of the bulk handling terminal, the line between Portbury Terminal Junction and Filton West Junction was a doubled. Extra sidings were built on private land for the bulk handling terminal. And a new heavy duty stop block was constructed right next to the level crossing right in front of St. Andrews Junction signal box (so that there is a useable head shunt for the freight locomotive).

Of course, now that both power stations that the bulk handling terminal supplied have closed, and the conveyor has been removed, the freight lines are used a lot less often. They are however still used for shunting for trains for the docks and for the SERC (Severnside Energy Recovery Centre) trains.

Some solutions have been proposed,
1) extension of the Clifton loop to Redland station, it's about 800m of track and reinstated platform (aids flexibility if trains running few minutes late).
2) East to North spur at Hallen Marsh so trains to Severn Beach could use Henbury line which is being reopened with 2 new / reopened stations (currently freight only)
3) St Andrews Road, about 300m of reinstated double track, connected to existing sidings (which are not all needed now hopper loader has gone), with one existing siding becoming other running line. Would give double track from Avonmouth station to Henbury loop.

Is it possible for trains at Avonmouth to go North to Filton? There is already a crossover at Holesmouth Junction (between St. Andrews Road station and Hallen Marsh Junction) with appropriate signalling. And another existing crossover for down trains at Hallen Moor West. Again, with appropriate signalling. See above for why this is not currently used for passenger trains.

No. 1 - Is not too difficult. The problem as always, is finding someone to pay for the work needed…

No. 2 - I’m not sure there are any aspirations or indeed enough demand to put in a curve from Severn Beach to go north to Filton. Finding a route, buying the land, putting in a new line and all the alterations is likely to cost far too much.

No. 3 - both hoppers are still present. Yes, they will be removed at some point (within 18 months I am led to understand). The former down main is currently called the “Engine Release Line” and is owned by Network Rail. It could be returned back to being a down main line between Avonmouth station and Hallen Marsh Junction. However, there are some problems to overcome. One is that St. Andrews Junction signal box is the boundary between a 1988 WR free wired RRI (Western Region Route Relay Interlocking) signalling system for the Avonmouth station side and SSI (Solid State Interlocking) for the Engine Release Line and the rest of the bulk handling siding area. So that makes alterations slightly more alkward. Secondly, apart from the Engine Release Line, all the sidings are on private land. So that means the landowners need to agree for these sidings to continue to be used. Or they are prepared to sell the land and infrastructure. But that means money again…

For those struggling to visualise the layout, here’s a diagram showing the Avonmouth area.

Please note, not all sidings and points shown for the freight lines.

 

[tigerroar]

There is a swinging pendulum between wishing I hadn't asked and being grateful that I did!

Thanks

 

[The exile]

I believe there is also the problem of a crossing on a dock entrance that would remain closed for too long. I don’t think I’m confusing it with the crossing issues that were among the things that held up Portway P&R for so long.
With money no object and no other awkward access issues I suspect the ideal might be something like Severn Beach to Temple Meads via Henbury, Temple Meads to Parkway via Avonmouth and Henbury with the odd (peaks and evenings?) service as now to maintain the Severn Beach to Clifton link.

 

[Sly Old Fox]

Also the fact that nobody at GWR signs the route from St Andrews Road to Filton Abbey Wood.

 

[The exile]

Also the fact that nobody at GWR signs the route from St Andrews Road to Filton Abbey Wood.

That can be altered a lot easier than physical infrastructure. They don’t sign the route because GER don’t run trains over it, rather than the other way round. For about half the route, that will change fairly soon.

 

[JohnRegular]

I did wonder if it wasn't a missed opportunity to not build a second platform and extend the double track from Avonmouth.
I'm assuming this didn't happen for one or more of:
- Significant cost increase
- Not allowing any uplift in service on its own
- Increase in costs
- The adjacent nature reserve
- Higher expense
- Requiring and upgrade of the nearby LC
- More money needing to be spent

 

[zwk500]

I did wonder if it wasn't a missed opportunity to not build a second platform and extend the double track from Avonmouth.
I'm assuming this didn't happen for one or more of:
- Significant cost increase
- Not allowing any uplift in service on its own
- Increase in costs
- The adjacent nature reserve
- Higher expense
- Requiring and upgrade of the nearby LC
- More money needing to be spent

All of these, plus the extra time taken to do the upgrade and additional disruption to passengers while they did the work (especially if they extended through to Clifton Down and the tunnel).

 

[tigerroar]

is the Tesco place brand new? I haven't been to Pilning for a few years and when I did it was fields as far as the eye could see!

 

[JKF]

I’ve heard suggestions for doubling between Narroways Jn and Clifton Down, but that would I imagine be quite costly, not least because they‘d start having to add those massive lift towers that all modern statins have to stations like Montpelier when adding another platform.

A curve towards Severn beach at Holesworth might at least reduce the amount of shunting needed to get trains into the severnside incinerator. Currently it takes two reversals. If only the line from Severn Beach to Pilning hadn’t gone many decades ago.

 

[The exile]

I’ve heard suggestions for doubling between Narroways Jn and Clifton Down, but that would I imagine be quite costly, not least because they‘d start having to add those massive lift towers that all modern statins have to stations like Montpelier when adding another platform.

A curve towards Severn beach at Holesworth might at least reduce the amount of shunting needed to get trains into the severnside incinerator. Currently it takes two reversals. If only the line from Severn Beach to Pilning hadn’t gone many decades ago.

As long as whoever owns the neighbouring park cooperates (the City Council), Redland shouldn’t require them - there’s already a ramped bridge, so all it would need is access from the park. Montpelier would indeed be expensive and I assume that double track would have to end a reasonable distance from the viaduct.

 

[Benjwri]

Additional to Snow1964's response, how much custom would there be for the additional journey opportunities afforded by a loop service (Henbury-Avonmouth, for example), compared to travelling via Bristol? Would it be enough to make the increased performance risk a risk worth taking?

Not to mention a half hourly bus service already exists that you would be shaving perhaps 2 or 3 minutes off by using a train. Unfortunately likely hundreds of thousands to allow a circular service doesn’t stack too well up against a few minutes saving.

 

[WesternBiker]

For those struggling to visualise the layout, here’s a diagram showing the Avonmouth area.
View attachment 140191
Please note, not all sidings and points shown for the freight lines.

That's brilliant - thank you. Always love a map / track diagram!