East-West Rail (EWR) Test runs

[DavidGrain]

mods note - split from this thread

I see that on Wednesday and Thursday both trains will be running through the Claydon Loops which they did not do today.
Am I right in thinking these loops are for the bin liners when they resume?

 

[zwk500]

I see that on Wednesday and Thursday both trains will be running through the Claydon Loops which they did not do today.
Am I right in thinking these loops are for the bin liners when they resume?

One train did appear to be routed through the loops on Signalmaps.com.
AIUI The loops are intended for trains to/from the HS2 IMD, as well as being usable for any through freight and presumably if needed any trains to/from Calvert.

 

[Tilting007]

The 800 was route learning and PTI testing.
The plan is for ECS moves via the WCML and onto North Pole from the West London Line.
The train is already gauged cleared otherwise it wouldn’t be allowed to run!

One train did appear to be routed through the loops on Signalmaps.com.
AIUI The loops are intended for trains to/from the HS2 IMD, as well as being usable for any through freight and presumably if needed any trains to/from Calvert.

This was the 800

 

[12LDA28C]

I see that on Wednesday and Thursday both trains will be running through the Claydon Loops which they did not do today.
Am I right in thinking these loops are for the bin liners when they resume?

The Claydon loops are not associated with the waste disposal facility at Calvert or trains heading to or from there. There is no access from Claydon to Calvert anyway until the curve is reinstated.

 

[Tilting007]

I’m assuming it’s simply testing for gauge clearance of all IET varieties. Doesn’t mean any diversions over the route are planned at this stage.


No Chiltern staff have yet been trained on 196s


What would ASLEF have to do with it? More likely RMT would be against any extension of DOO operation.

You can’t use one class of IET than then covers all.
This is why the GWR IETs had to have separate checks into Euston even though 805/807 are cleared.

All classes will need to be individually cleared and clearance will need to be proven through systems like clear route and all other compatibility confirmed before it can run.

 

[800001]

You can’t use one class of IET than then covers all.
This is why the GWR IETs had to have separate checks into Euston even though 805/807 are cleared.

All classes will need to be individually cleared and clearance will need to be proven through systems like clear route and all other compatibility confirmed before it can run.

Why would an 800/801/802/803 all have to have separate clearance checks when they are all the same train? (Just quantity of engines different).

 

[Tilting007]

Why would an 800/801/802/803 all have to have separate clearance checks when they are all the same train? (Just quantity of engines different).

It depends on their acceptance certs and how they are classified in the Sectional Appendix.

But 800 and 805/807 have differences anyway.

For this line the class 8XX meeting IEP KE11 are included.

 

[PLY2AYS]

I see that on Wednesday and Thursday both trains will be running through the Claydon Loops which they did not do today.
Am I right in thinking these loops are for the bin liners when they resume?

Loops were certainly used today as I overtook 005 as it was patiently waiting… cannot confirm how many loops were used though.

 

[12LDA28C]

Loops were certainly used today as I overtook 005 as it was patiently waiting… cannot confirm how many loops were used though.

Assume you mean Bicester Depot Goods Loop, not Claydon loops.

 

[cle]

I can’t imagine that 2 car services will be workable on this service, in very short order.

 

[PLY2AYS]

Assume you mean Bicester Depot Goods Loop, not Claydon loops.

Yes! Why are you still awake?!

 

[A S Leib]

I can’t imagine that 2 car services will be workable on this service, in very short order.

How common is overcrowding between Oxford and Bicester (currently the most popular flow from Oxford except for Paddington) on existing services? I doubt it would happen frequently, but it wouldn't be good if demand for Bicester ends up leaving too little space for Winslow / Milton Keynes passengers.

 

[317362]

An 800 is on the way again from Paddington

 

[zwk500]

Possibly needs a new thread to move to Operations questions, but does anybody in the know on Data feeds know why between Claydon and Bletchley the 'Line' field on RTT is reporting the track code, not the line code?

Here's what is booked today: https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:K21463/2024-10-22/detailed, Showing no line codes at all.

And here's what's been reported from yesterday's run, https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:K21463/2024-10-21/detailed, with what are apparently the track directional abbreviations (Down-Down Line, Down-Platform 2, Down-Platform 7) rather than the line codes. More interested than anything else, especially as I've not seen this elsewhere (replacement of Slow Line with Up Slow makes sense if the train used the wrong-road functionality).

Apologies if this should be a new thread.

 

[Sun Chariot]

Does any reader know which IET is doing the honours today? I've photographed the 5Q41 and 5Q42 turns at Launton; but I couldn't read the vehicle numbers. Many thanks.

I planned to snap 5Z01 (the 168s) passing the IET at this spot. But 5Q42 has run about 11 minutes earlier than booked...

 

[swt_passenger]

Possibly needs a new thread to move to Operations questions, but does anybody in the know on Data feeds know why between Claydon and Bletchley the 'Line' field on RTT is reporting the track code, not the line code?

Here's what is booked today: https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:K21463/2024-10-22/detailed, Showing no line codes at all.
View attachment 167710
And here's what's been reported from yesterday's run, https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:K21463/2024-10-21/detailed, with what are apparently the track directional abbreviations (Down-Down Line, Down-Platform 2, Down-Platform 7) rather than the line codes. More interested than anything else, especially as I've not seen this elsewhere (replacement of Slow Line with Up Slow makes sense if the train used the wrong-road functionality).
View attachment 167709
Apologies if this should be a new thread.

Might be better to ask about what could be a specific RTT issue in the long running RTT thread?

 

[RGM654]

The 800 was route learning and PTI testing.
The plan is for ECS moves via the WCML and onto North Pole from the West London Line.
The train is already gauged cleared otherwise it wouldn’t be allowed to run!


This was the 800

I don't understand that. If you want to go between the WCML and North Pole, why would you go all those miles via Oxford instead of via Willesden?

 

[hwl]

I don't understand that. If you want to go between the WCML and North Pole, why would you go all those miles via Oxford instead of via Willesden?

You wouldn't, but there are very few available paths per hour via Willesden. The only thing that makes sense is potential Oxford and Cotswold stations further west to London capacity during GWML blocks at OOC. GWR could run shuttles from Oxford to Bicester, Bletchley and MK spreading the into London load across 2 lines and 3 operators.

 

[Bletchleyite]

You wouldn't, but there are very few available paths per hour via Willesden. The only thing that makes sense is potential Oxford and Cotswold stations further west to London capacity during GWML blocks at OOC. GWR could run shuttles from Oxford to Bicester, Bletchley and MK spreading the into London load across 2 lines and 3 operators.

Shuttles to Bicester would be a bit pointless as Chiltern already operate direct from Oxford. People aren't going to walk between the two Bicester stations, it's quite a long way, probably about half an hour.

Shuttles to Bletchley/MKC might not be a terrible idea in the light of reduced RRB availability, though pathing on the WCML wouldn't allow frequent operation.

 

[zwk500]

Shuttles to Bicester would be a bit pointless as Chiltern already operate direct from Oxford. People aren't going to walk between the two Bicester stations, it's quite a long way, probably about half an hour.

Shuttles to Bletchley/MKC might not be a terrible idea in the light of reduced RRB availability, though pathing on the WCML wouldn't allow frequent operation.

There is turnback facility at Bletchley for trains from the West in either platform, so running Oxford-Bletchley services with strengthened LNWR formations on WCML trains stopping at Bletchley would certainly be a possible option, inconvenient as the change would be.

 

[hwl]

Shuttles to Bicester would be a bit pointless as Chiltern already operate direct from Oxford. People aren't going to walk between the two Bicester stations, it's quite a long way, probably about half an hour.

There is lots of local Oxford - Bicester traffic so Chiltern would ideally need strengthening/lengthening if GWR didn't run something. If going Oxford - Bletchley you might as well stop

Shuttles to Bletchley/MKC might not be a terrible idea in the light of reduced RRB availability, though pathing on the WCML wouldn't allow frequent operation.

Stop and turn at Bletchley and let LNWR pick up all the extra load - the blocks will usually be at Xmas-NY period when commuter volumes should be less.

 

[jfowkes]

Not that I particularly want to kill the thread off, but now that trains are running, is this section now "constructed" and there should be a new "EWR Oxford-Bletchley Commissioning and Operations Updates" thread, or similar?

 

[RGM654]

You wouldn't, but there are very few available paths per hour via Willesden. The only thing that makes sense is potential Oxford and Cotswold stations further west to London capacity during GWML blocks at OOC. GWR could run shuttles from Oxford to Bicester, Bletchley and MK spreading the into London load across 2 lines and 3 operators.

Surely there are as many available paths per hour via Willesden as there are into Euston (if not more, as there are more tracks) . And when there is a block at OOC, is it not still possible to turn left at Acton and get to Euston that way rather than divert umpteen miles via Oxford and Bletchley?

Not that I particularly want to kill the thread off, but now that trains are running, is this section now "constructed" and there should be a new "EWR Oxford-Bletchley Commissioning and Operations Updates" thread, or similar?

Good idea!

 

[louis97]

Possibly needs a new thread to move to Operations questions, but does anybody in the know on Data feeds know why between Claydon and Bletchley the 'Line' field on RTT is reporting the track code, not the line code?

Here's what is booked today: https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:K21463/2024-10-22/detailed, Showing no line codes at all.
View attachment 167710
And here's what's been reported from yesterday's run, https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:K21463/2024-10-21/detailed, with what are apparently the track directional abbreviations (Down-Down Line, Down-Platform 2, Down-Platform 7) rather than the line codes. More interested than anything else, especially as I've not seen this elsewhere (replacement of Slow Line with Up Slow makes sense if the train used the wrong-road functionality).
View attachment 167709
Apologies if this should be a new thread.

They are all SMART reports, RTT is yet to be updated with its own data set for the route, so is using the data from NR. Typically on SMART line data the first character is the direction the train is travelling and the second is whatever has been specified for that movement report.

 

[sqwizz]

Station Rd Bridge just now, somewhere between Winslow and Bletchley

 

[The Planner]

Surely there are as many available paths per hour via Willesden as there are into Euston (if not more, as there are more tracks) . And when there is a block at OOC, is it not still possible to turn left at Acton and get to Euston that way rather than divert umpteen miles via Oxford and Bletchley?

Some of the proposed blocks extend west of Acton so no access to Euston.

 

[sqwizz]

New footbridge 13A just West of the previous clip

 

[hwl]

Surely there are as many available paths per hour via Willesden as there are into Euston (if not more, as there are more tracks) . And when there is a block at OOC, is it not still possible to turn left at Acton and get to Euston that way rather than divert umpteen miles via Oxford and Bletchley?

But GWR services wouldn't be travelling from Bletchley/MK to Euston, people would change on to existing LNWR or Avanti ones so there would be no path requirement into Euston - it gets around the path limits.
This is only really relevant for those around Oxford or the Cotswolds.
The current 51-55minute GWR best journey times for Oxford to Paddington increase to 80minutes for Oxford - Marylebone with Chiltern (with normal stopping pattern) or 37 minutes for Oxford to Bletchley and 30minutes on LNWR for Bletchley to Euston so could potentially still be quicker than Chiltern even with wait and interchange at Bletchley and Euston may be a more useful London destination for some.

 

[sqwizz]

Winslow Station just now. Don't worry, last video from me today!

 

[cle]

O/T a little, but do we think Chiltern will ever go back to competing on journey time on Oxford - ie will they revert to a pre-covid timetable - or are their Oxfords now resigned for intermediate journeys and connections, vs London-Oxford speed? I personally think a mix would be good (Oxford Parkway users I am sure would like the fast services) - maybe eventually 3tph with 1 fast and 2 of varying patterns.

Back on topic, this would of course up the Oxford-Bicester frequency to 5tph. And if additional services are added to Bletchley/Bedford, we'd see 6-7. Not counting my chickens on Cambridge just yet.

Another slightly tangential question - do we think there might be interest in starting up a second Marston service, replicating the faster EWR stopping pattern - to start to seed that connection at Bletchley, and the demand for faster journeys across there? It could feed an Oxford service, timetable-wise. Or would the MV section require a lot of improvement work which means it's not worth investing in building the customer base and pattern up?