• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Felixstowe branch: a bit of double track at Trimley

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

AndrewE

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
5,075
1 mile of double track hardly counts as a dynamic loop, so it's a bit of a surprise that such an improvement in traffic will become possible ...
and having seen the numbers of passengers on the Falmouth branch last week I would say that almost any passenger line needs to
offer 2 trains an hour - unless complete lack of funding or an exceptionally sparse rural population means that higher usage is inconceivable.
 

class 9

Member
Joined
18 Nov 2010
Messages
948
If a Right of Way is designated as a Bridleway, then even if no horses actually use it it must be maintained as accessible for equestrian traffic. I'm surprised they got away with a design that requires riders to dismount to be honest. The alternative would be essentially to go through the very complicated process of completely shutting the Right of Way.

There are plenty of bridleways that cross lines on user worked crossings that require riders to dismount, often on OHL areas.
 

eastdyke

Established Member
Joined
25 Jan 2010
Messages
1,923
Location
East Midlands
1 mile of double track hardly counts as a dynamic loop, so it's a bit of a surprise that such an improvement in traffic will become possible ...
and having seen the numbers of passengers on the Falmouth branch last week I would say that almost any passenger line needs to
offer 2 trains an hour - unless complete lack of funding or an exceptionally sparse rural population means that higher usage is inconceivable.
The Felxstowe passenger service will stay (forever) at 1tph. To go to 2tph would require trains to cross at Derby Road and that would not only take up (say) 16 paths per day but also remove the ability to path 'following' freights on the single line sections.

The passenger service will benefit from the new stock in a couple of years time when the dogbox is replaced by a 3 car Stadler Flirt. That may have an impact on numbers but of course does not provide any basic service improvement.
 

eastdyke

Established Member
Joined
25 Jan 2010
Messages
1,923
Location
East Midlands
Well, yes, but I thought that was what "privatisation" and unbundling the system was all about - or partly about - the ability to assign costs. Now it seeems - it doesn't help!
I don't know how much Hutchison Ports are paying (for this scheme) but from documents that I have read Network Rail are paying 'the greater part'.
Oh dear. But step by stop, I suppose. That's 4 TPD each way?
Yes.
I suspect there are people out there who wish the passenger service could be withdrawn and just let them get on and run freight. But of course, if the rest of the network can only deal with 4 TPD, it wouldn't count for that much.
As regards passenger traffic - just WHO uses the branch? Do most just go into Ipswich for work, or does a sizeable proportion go foreward to London? Is the branch used by port workers?
On my last visit the branch seemed to be used by people who typically may not have the full use of a car. Young people, school/college students, part families, older people. The service would not be of much use to Port workers, the Port is very well connected to the A14 and is 2 miles at its nearest point from the station (4 miles to the furthest point). Whilst I am sure that some London commuting takes place it would not be a large share.
The passenger numbers seem to be in a small declining trend and the annual usage from Felixstowe of around 200,000 is low for a population of 25,000. As a nearby example usage is similar to that from nearby Woodbridge (pop. 8,000) on the East Suffolk line which also only has 1tph.
I would say that the Felixstowe branch, by virtue of the circuitous route from Ipswich (station not particularly central) and a journey time of 26 minutes, does not compete well with road for towns around 12 miles apart via the A14. The A14 offers the perception of a quick journey but any gains can actually be lost if you need to go near Ipswich centre at peak times (typically gridlocked!).
 

70014IronDuke

Established Member
Joined
13 Jun 2015
Messages
3,686
I don't know how much Hutchison Ports are paying (for this scheme) but from documents that I have read Network Rail are paying 'the greater part'.
......

Thank you for the insights. An interesting operation that has kind of survived, kept the branch open, but which is now a kind of nuisance!
 

eastdyke

Established Member
Joined
25 Jan 2010
Messages
1,923
Location
East Midlands
Thank you for the insights. An interesting operation that has kind of survived, kept the branch open, but which is now a kind of nuisance!
Cheers! It does enable the Network to earn very good freight revenue with the potential for (lots) more.
It is only a 'nuisance' insofar as the challenges that it throws up.
I lived for most of the first 23 years of my life adjacent to the line on the east side of Ipswich, about 60m from the track. Properties further along are within 10m of the track and now following new builds exist on both sides within that distance.
 

70014IronDuke

Established Member
Joined
13 Jun 2015
Messages
3,686
...
It is only a 'nuisance' insofar as the challenges that it throws up.....

Well, that is sort of how I meant it. I suspect some operating staff would be happy to see the passenger service disappear, however.
Looking at the usage figures and geography, one wonders if there has been thoughts to building another station somewhere around the Norwich Rd bridge, in central-north Ipswich. I suppose the extra stop would jigger the ability of a single unit to do the round trip in an hour. It would surely get more usage than Westerfield, which is a small village, really. Very strange how the line goes out into rural England, only to come back into western Ipswich!
Derby Rd gets ok usage though - 45,000 average per year.
 

LAX54

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2008
Messages
3,754
The cost of rule of law and respect for traditional rights is high, isn't it?

On a more direct railway theme - how does this awfully expensive 1 mile of new track fit into the big scheme of things? That is to say, I assume NR sees this as the "most critical - and affordable - bit" in its efforts to increase capacity on the entire Felixstowe to Midlands/London/Everywhere freight route.

It will lift capacity of the branch from 33 to 47 freight trains per day - almost 50%. That is no mean improvement (relatively). But the next question(s) must be: where can these trains go? Can the North London line take any more? If not, I assume the increase must go via Bury St Edmunds and Ely? So in that case, where is the next pinch point restricting capacity? Soham to Ely, perhaps? Or the various Ely junctions? Or ....?

Also, in absolute terms, how important are these extra 14 trains? Or, put another way, what is the tonnage coming and going into Felixstowe carried by rail now and with this enhancement compared to the total port throughput?


This is only a part of a bigger picture of the Felixstowe to Nuneaton improvement work, needs Haughley and Ely at least to come into play before any extra traffic is run to / from the Port, however it will allow traffic to get back to normal when there is late running, as the loop will be bi-di as will Derby Road loop

The line as it is cannot cope with the current level of traffic, it is restricted by the signal sections and the passenger service, it only takes one train to be 10 late or so now, and the line plays catch up for at least 4 or 5 hours !
 

AC47461

Member
Joined
13 Feb 2017
Messages
222
Location
RAYLEIGH, ESSEX
I guess the increase of 14 trains per day is 7 in each way? Even then I'm struggling to see how a mile of track is going to allow that, given there will still be a significant stretch of single track to the Derby Rd loop. Assuming it will be a loop, does that mean Trimley becomes a 2-platform station again as well, in which case there would be a cost to reinstate the Ipswich bound platform? Or will there be crossings on the Ipswich side of the level crossing?
 

GB

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
6,457
Location
Somewhere
Its not just a mile of track. The signalling sections are going to be much smaller to allow trains to follow a lot more closely. Theres no plan to reinstate the second platform at Trimley as far as I am aware.

A significant pinch point still remains though. And that is the single line NQ branch and acceptance of trains into North and Central terminals.
 
Last edited:

AC47461

Member
Joined
13 Feb 2017
Messages
222
Location
RAYLEIGH, ESSEX
Its not just a mile of track. The signalling sections are going to be much smaller to allow trains to follow a lot more closely. Theres no plan to reinstate the second platform at Trimley as far as I am aware.

A significant pinch point still remains though. And that is the single line NQ branch and acceptance of trains into North and Central terminals.

Doh! I didn't think of the signalling....makes perfect sense....:rolleyes:
 

eastdyke

Established Member
Joined
25 Jan 2010
Messages
1,923
Location
East Midlands
I guess the increase of 14 trains per day is 7 in each way? .....
It is 14tpd each way on the branch in the future. But to get the 14 requires significant further investment on the wider network.
The current works will allow just 4tpd each way across the network without further work.
But as @swills points out there will be a short term improvement to the resilience of the passenger timetable.
 

AC47461

Member
Joined
13 Feb 2017
Messages
222
Location
RAYLEIGH, ESSEX
It will be interesting to see if there is an upsurge in passenger usage when the Flirts arrive, and then whether there's talk of actually dualling the lot (or at least Trimley - Derby Road, I appreciate Derby Road to Westerfield would be a little harder because of the viaduct over Spring Road) to accommodate, say, a half-hourly passenger service. I'm not sure there would be enough of an increase personally, but neither would I surprised if there was.
 

eastdyke

Established Member
Joined
25 Jan 2010
Messages
1,923
Location
East Midlands
It will be interesting to see if there is an upsurge in passenger usage when the Flirts arrive, and then whether there's talk of actually dualling the lot (or at least Trimley - Derby Road, I appreciate Derby Road to Westerfield would be a little harder because of the viaduct over Spring Road) to accommodate, say, a half-hourly passenger service. I'm not sure there would be enough of an increase personally, but neither would I surprised if there was.
I hope that there is an upsurge in passenger use but for reasons 'up thread' a half hourly service would simply not be possible without destroying the ability to run extra (and very valuable) freights.
The only way to deal with all the Felixstowe freight predictions for far into the future, whilst continuing to develop passenger services across Anglia, would be to build a new freight line from Trimley to Werrington Junction - and that would of course still leave work to be done beyond. How much for that? Estimate anyone?
Might be cheaper to develop Immingham as a container port to make use of the rail freight capacity from there now available following the reduction in bulk cargoes.
 

mr_jrt

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2011
Messages
1,400
Location
Brighton
Would rebuilding the stations on loops help mitigate the impact on freight? I'd imagine enabling the freight to sail past the passenger services would help immensely...
 

AC47461

Member
Joined
13 Feb 2017
Messages
222
Location
RAYLEIGH, ESSEX
There's only one station without a loop, and that's Trimley, where the line to the North terminal dives off. There's nothing between Trimley and Derby Rd (which has a very long loop) except the site of the closed Orwell station. I would think if you were going to put a loop there, you may as well double the section between Trimley and Derby Rd and have done with it.

As already mentioned up-thread, the junction at Westerfield is a bit of a constraint too, and will only get worse if the East Suffolk Line ever gets a further increase in services.
 

mr_jrt

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2011
Messages
1,400
Location
Brighton
Sorry, what I meant was regarding the comments that even if you doubled the whole line you wouldn't get a frequent passenger service due to the need for so many freight paths. My query related to putting the platforms on loops a-la the stations on the Chiltern mainline such as Beaconsfield, Princes Risborough, et al.
 

GB

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
6,457
Location
Somewhere
Once the works are done Trimley the station will also be within a loop. This means a passenger (or freight) heading towards Felixstowe can run *towards Trimley station while a freight or passenger train is either coming off the north Quay branch or from Felixstowe on the new Trimley loop.

*Train can't enter the station if one is coming from Felixstowe as the protecting signal will be before the station.
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
8,027
Location
SE London
Sorry, what I meant was regarding the comments that even if you doubled the whole line you wouldn't get a frequent passenger service due to the need for so many freight paths.

I'm not sure I understand the reasoning. If you doubled the whole line and had a reasonable signalling system then surely you ought to be able to run a train every 5-10 mins without any major difficulties? Even if you say ran a passenger train every half hour and wanted trains no more often than every 10 minutes for most of the line, that would still give you 4 freight paths an hour. Would that really be insufficient?
 

snowball

Established Member
Joined
4 Mar 2013
Messages
7,674
Location
Leeds
Press release

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/feeds...freight-and-more-reliable-passenger-services/

Important engineering works to upgrade the Felixstowe branch are set to begin in April 2018, bringing a significant step change for the transportation of freight as well as improved reliability for passenger services.

As a part of Network Rail’s Railway Upgrade Plan, engineers will start a £60.4m programme of works to transform the single track branch line to allow more freight being transported by rail to and from the Port of Felixstowe by installing a 1.4km track loop near Trimley Station. This additional track will allow the line to operate more effectively, giving the flexibility needed to run more freight trains as well as improve the reliability of existing passenger services.

The work on the branch line in this area will support up to 10 additional trains in each direction to move goods to and from the Port of Felixstowe. With each additional freight train taking the equivalent of up to 76 lorries off the roads, the upgrade works will help to reduce congestion and pollution for the local community and the wider region.

In addition to the track re-doubling, works will include the upgrade of several level crossings to make them safer and new bi-directional signalling infrastructure to support the demand for more freight trains. Once complete, there will be a more reliable service, improving journeys for all passengers.

Meliha Duymaz, Network Rail’s route managing director for Anglia, said: “This is a significant upgrade to one of the most important freight routes in the country. This work will help us to meet the demand for freight to and from Felixstowe port, and at the same time, increase reliability for passenger services. The long term strategy to move more freight by rail is good for the UK economy and will lessen the traffic on busy roads like the A14.”

Paul McMahon, Network Rail’s managing director for freight and national passenger operators, said: “This is a vital first step to growing capacity on the network to meet the needs of our customers. The £60m investment by the Strategic Freight Network is set to deliver an additional 10 paths in each direction by 2019. We know that there is more work to do on this busy corridor and we will continue to make the case for investment alongside our industry colleagues.”

Jamie Burles, Greater Anglia managing director, said: “Together with Network Rail, Greater Anglia is investing in transforming the railway in East Anglia. In a couple of years the Felixstowe line will be transformed with brand new longer trains with more seats running on an improved line. In the meantime, I’d like to reassure customers that they will be able to complete their journeys on this line during the works, even if part of it is by replacement bus.”

Clemence Cheng, managing director at Hutchison Ports Europe, said: Railfreight plays an essential role in distributing goods around the United Kingdom. Existing rail services from the Port of Felixstowe save over 100 million HGV miles per year from the roads, cutting carbon and easing congestion. We already have the widest range of rail services of any UK port with 66 freight train movements per day and there is strong demand for additional rail capacity. The works to improve the Branch Line will support sustainable UK economic growth and improve access to international markets for businesses across the country.

Work will begin from the weekend of 7 April 2018 and take place most weekends until autumn 2019. To allow a safe environment to undertake the work for our engineers, buses will replace trains between Ipswich and Felixstowe from 1850hrs Saturday evenings and all day Sunday when works are taking place. On Bank holidays (excluding Christmas Day and Boxing Day), rail replacement bus services will be in place to allow passengers to completed their journey. Passengers wishing to travel during weekends are advised to check before they travel at www.nationalrail.co.uk or www.greateranglia.co.uk.
 

66701GBRF

Member
Joined
3 Jun 2017
Messages
549
The extra track may well produce more paths but unfortunately the port is already at saturation/crippling point. Its going to take a lot more than a loop to make any extra train worthwhile as the port simply cannot handle what they currently have.
 

AndrewE

Established Member
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
5,075
The extra track may well produce more paths but unfortunately the port is already at saturation/crippling point. Its going to take a lot more than a loop to make any extra train worthwhile as the port simply cannot handle what they currently have.
Wouldn't more track make a better passenger service possible, as well as giving a bit of flexibility to the freights (i.e. better resilience & less knock-on delay on the rest of the network - & vv) ?
 

furnessvale

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2015
Messages
4,558
Wouldn't more track make a better passenger service possible, as well as giving a bit of flexibility to the freights (i.e. better resilience & less knock-on delay on the rest of the network - & vv) ?
The new (long) loop will provide an extra 12 freight paths each way per day which will transfer long distance traffic from road without needing any increase in the overall throughput of the port side of things.

AIUI once built, only about 8 of these paths each way will be able to be used until further improvements are made to locations such as Ely which will act as a bottleneck further inland. Hopefully the required improvements will be signed off quickly to avoid expensively provided capacity being unused.

I don't believe any of this expenditure is based on improving the passenger service or more freight resilience, it is all about more freight on rail.
 

LAX54

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2008
Messages
3,754
The new (long) loop will provide an extra 12 freight paths each way per day which will transfer long distance traffic from road without needing any increase in the overall throughput of the port side of things.

AIUI once built, only about 8 of these paths each way will be able to be used until further improvements are made to locations such as Ely which will act as a bottleneck further inland. Hopefully the required improvements will be signed off quickly to avoid expensively provided capacity being unused.

I don't believe any of this expenditure is based on improving the passenger service or more freight resilience, it is all about more freight on rail.

Until FL sort out their crew change issues, then in reality there are only about 2 or 3 extra paths that could used, FL stopping their trains at Stowmarket is a real Pain !
 

GB

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
6,457
Location
Somewhere
As said above, it may create extra paths but that doesn't mean there is room (or time) in the terminals to load or unload them. Though yes, probably would aid service recovery.

The Ipswich yard remodelling a few years ago and the lack of provisions for train crew relief on the curve is a bit of an own goal and a detriment to the efficient working of the branch even with the new loop.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,635
Thus permitting freight operators to obtain even more public money in subsidies....
 

furnessvale

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2015
Messages
4,558
Thus permitting freight operators to obtain even more public money in subsidies....
Your usual anti rail freight jibes!

In return I will again remind you that railfreight subsidies are given in recognition of rail's superior environmental performance, and in any case are a mere fraction of the massive subsidies given to road freight.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top