Ferrybridge-Goole Resignalling Project.

[Novern Uproar]

I've noticed in my local paper that Alstom have been awarded a £28m contract by Network Rail for the above scheme. The project includes the closure of Cutsyke, Prince of Wales & Boothferry Road (Goole) signalboxes. Why spend all that money when the line between Goole & Hensall at least is used by just a handful of trains ?

 

[waverley47]

Because those boxes have to be staffed. By spending 28m you turn an ongoing operational expenditure into a single one off payment.

Cheaper in the long run basically to shut them and tag on an extra panel somewhere, presumably York but I'm happy to be corrected.

 

[WestRiding]

Because those boxes have to be staffed. By spending 28m you turn an ongoing operational expenditure into a single one off payment.

Cheaper in the long run basically to shut them and tag on an extra panel somewhere, presumably York but I'm happy to be corrected.

Its getting bolted onto Brough Workstation in the ROC i believe. I think Goole Bridge will cease to be a block post and operation will be like Selby Swing Bridge,effectively worked by release from the supervising Box.

 

[YorksLad12]

I've noticed in my local paper that Alstom have been awarded a £28m contract by Network Rail for the above scheme. The project includes the closure of Cutsyke, Prince of Wales & Boothferry Road (Goole) signalboxes. Why spend all that money when the line between Goole & Hensall at least is used by just a handful of trains ?

A handful of *passenger* trains but isn't there freight traffic as well? RTT has lots passing through Hensall during the day.

 

[WestRiding]

A handful of *passenger* trains but isn't there freight traffic as well? RTT has lots passing through Hensall during the day.

The Hensall part stays under Ferrybridge Control. I believe York ROC Brough will control the SL and will Fringe with Ferrybridge somwhere between the SL and the junction for Drax.

 

[TSG]

Why spend all that money when the line between Goole & Hensall at least is used by just a handful of trains ?

I don't know the place but resignalling is not always done because you need higher capacity. It may be any combination of:

1. Unacceptable risk inherent with the equipment (e.g. level crossing upgrades)
2. Unacceptable risk due to the condition of the equipment (e.g. degradation of wiring, cables, equipment housings)
3. Excessive maintenance costs due to intensity of work required (e.g. mechanical signalling)
4. Obsolescence of equipment making it difficult to find spares/get repairs (e.g. 40 year old remote control systems)
5. Obsolescence of equipment making it difficult to find people with the requisite skills (e.g. mechanical locking fitters)

As others have alluded to, there may be operating efficiencies too. However, if you can't repair it or it may become unsafe that can be a more pressing problem than signallers wages.

 

[Novern Uproar]

Cheers, understand in another article re the project that much of the signalling / lineside equipment is life expired. Shame about the box closures. Wonder if there will be even bigger delays for road users in Goole (currently a large backlog of traffic quickly builds up at the level crossing every time the barriers are lowered).

 

[Class 170101]

Cheers, understand in another article re the project that much of the signalling / lineside equipment is life expired. Shame about the box closures. Wonder if there will be even bigger delays for road users in Goole (currently a large backlog of traffic quickly builds up at the level crossing every time the barriers are lowered).

Would an MCB with Obstacle Detectors be any better than and MCB - CCTV in terms of barrier downtime?

 

[WestRiding]

Would an MCB with Obstacle Detectors be any better than and MCB - CCTV in terms of barrier downtime?

In theory should be down more or less exactly the same with Signalling sequence.

 

[TSG]

In theory should be down more or less exactly the same with Signalling sequence.

MCB-OD is slightly shorter than MCB-CCTV (even with auto lower) because the crossing clear function is automated. If it's busy it's likely to be CCTV anyway.

Cheers, understand in another article re the project that much of the signalling / lineside equipment is life expired. Shame about the box closures. Wonder if there will be even bigger delays for road users in Goole (currently a large backlog of traffic quickly builds up at the level crossing every time the barriers are lowered).

Resignalling can give the opportunity to reposition signals protecting the crossing which may improve down times, especially where there are stopping trains

 

[Bald Rick]

Would an MCB with Obstacle Detectors be any better than and MCB - CCTV in terms of barrier downtime?

MCB-OD is slightly shorter than MCB-CCTV (even with auto lower) because the crossing clear function is automated. If it's busy it's likely to be CCTV anyway.


Resignalling can give the opportunity to reposition signals protecting the crossing which may improve down times, especially where there are stopping trains

But we’re talking a handful of seconds.

 

[IanXC]

The Hensall part stays under Ferrybridge Control. I believe York ROC Brough will control the SL and will Fringe with Ferrybridge somwhere between the SL and the junction for Drax.

So does that mean that Cutsyke and Prince of Wales are abolished with control moving to Ferrbybridge?

 

[WestRiding]

So does that mean that Cutsyke and Prince of Wales are abolished with control moving to Ferrbybridge?

As I understand it yes.

 

[IanXC]

As I understand it yes.

Interesting, thanks.

I guess the selection must be to do with life expired equipment. Otherwise it's odd go put them together and to end up with Castleford remaining.

 

[WestRiding]

Interesting, thanks.

I guess the selection must be to do with life expired equipment. Otherwise it's odd go put them together and to end up with Castleford remaining.

No doubt Castleford and Kirkgate will form the basis of a seperate scheme in the future, maybe with Horbury and Barnsley.

 

[balne-wonderer]

I've noticed in my local paper that Alstom have been awarded a £28m contract by Network Rail for the above scheme. The project includes the closure of Cutsyke, Prince of Wales & Boothferry Road (Goole) signalboxes. Why spend all that money when the line between Goole & Hensall at least is used by just a handful of trains ?

There has been a recent campaign by one of the local MP's (Brigg and Goole) to get more rail services on this line.

It would be excellent for us in Snaith to have a more regular service to Leeds. I've used the (one) morning service to Leeds a few times but it's so early that it doesn't really work for people wanting to spend the day shopping or drinking.

Snaith is a growing town so hopefully there will be progress

 

[Bald Rick]

doesn't really work for people wanting to spend the day ... drinking.

One my my mates grew up in Snaith, and spending all day drinking was quite a popular thing for the locals.

 

[Finfanero]

There has been a recent campaign by one of the local MP's (Brigg and Goole) to get more rail services on this line.

It would be excellent for us in Snaith to have a more regular service to Leeds. I've used the (one) morning service to Leeds a few times but it's so early that it doesn't really work for people wanting to spend the day shopping or drinking.

Snaith is a growing town so hopefully there will be progress

Totally Agree, but not the earlier morning service is no good of office hours.

 

[YorksLad12]

One my my mates grew up in Snaith, and spending all day drinking was quite a popular thing for the locals.

We need Portillo to do it as alternative to the Ale Trail via Marsden. That'll get patronage up...