FirstGWR Pembroke Dock Services - Staff Issues 2016

[MotCO]

That was different though, Hastings was an issue of stock being too wide, this is an issue of stock being too long (ie ends of carriages clipping the tunnel as it goes round a curve)

Is the Narberth tunnel 2 x single bore, or a twin bore tunnel? If twin bore, can the track be centralised so as to be a single track working?

 

[Rhydgaled]

Sounds like they are trying to answer the question of whether a class 800 will fit down the branch or not.

I think I read somewhere in theory that class 80x stock should fit anywhere cleared for Mk 3s, on account of the space between the bogies and therefore the mid vehicle overhang being the same, also the ends of the coaches are tapered. Obviously route clearance would be necessary.

The mid-vehicle overhang might be the same, but although the ends are tapered I doubt they are tapered enough to make it exactly the same as a mrk3. I have a feeling the original plan to not include the Pembroke & Tenby line in the IEP was based on a hunch that they probably would not fit, but now they are being forced to actually look into it properly. Just a guess mind you.

I believe I am right in saying that when tunnels near Hastings had insufficient clearance for new stock, the two tracks were replaced by a single track. Is this solution possible in the Narbeth tunnel to provide sufficient clearance for the new class 800 trains?

Nope, the Narberth tunnel is already single track. The only double track on the entire branch is now the loop at Tenby, since Network Rail removed the track in the long-disused second platform at Pembroke Dock a year or two back.

There is no hunch... it is not happening next year onwards.

Who says it isn't a hunch? My interpretation of the GWR franchise SLC is that they will have to run it in 2018, but after that it is debatable whether the service will continue.

 

[Quakkerillo]

Is the Narberth tunnel 2 x single bore, or a twin bore tunnel? If twin bore, can the track be centralised so as to be a single track working?

Single-bore single-track. Nothing to be changed there, and I don't expect anyone to dig out millions of pounds to dig a few extra inches either side of the tunnel to make it fit.

 

[Envoy]

Nope, the Narberth tunnel is already single track. The only double track on the entire branch is now the loop at Tenby, since Network Rail removed the track in the long-disused second platform at Pembroke Dock a year or two back.
.

Why would Network Rail remove the track from the disused platform at Pembroke Dock? Surely, it could have been used as a parking area for steam specials (if nothing else) therefore allowing the main platform to be used for regular trains? This is just as short sighted as removing the double track from Cockett to Lougher and Wrexham to near Chester. Who knows, perhaps the south Pembrokeshire line might one day have an hourly service?

 

[Greenback]

I admit that on my last visit to Pembroke Dock I was surprised to the see the track in the second platform still in situ. It was very rusty, and clearly hadn' seen much use at all in the previous few years.

To be honest, I;m not surprised it's gone. It's a bit short sighted, but I've come to expect that from Network Rail.

 

[Envoy]

I admit that on my last visit to Pembroke Dock I was surprised to the see the track in the second platform still in situ. It was very rusty, and clearly hadn' seen much use at all in the previous few years.

To be honest, I;m not surprised it's gone. It's a bit short sighted, but I've come to expect that from Network Rail.

They seem to do things like this with no consultation. For instance, who knew in advance that they would single track routes that were once dual track? Then they want a load of money to put back dual track routes when the need arises. Another crazy thing was when they built the A483 expressway in the Wrexham area and did not make a bridge wide enough for the twin track railway to be re-installed.

 

[philthetube]

Maybe the condition of it meant that it had to be replaced before being fit for use.

 

[D1009]

Another crazy thing was when they built the A483 expressway in the Wrexham area and did not make a bridge wide enough for the twin track railway to be re-installed.

That was in BR days, there is now a procedure known as Network Change, which prevents removal of infrastructure unless no-one wants it. (That may be a slight exaggeration).

 

[Rhydgaled]

Why would Network Rail remove the track from the disused platform at Pembroke Dock? Surely, it could have been used as a parking area for steam specials (if nothing else) therefore allowing the main platform to be used for regular trains? This is just as short sighted as removing the double track from Cockett to Lougher and Wrexham to near Chester. Who knows, perhaps the south Pembrokeshire line might one day have an hourly service?

It is such a long way around compared to the road I doubt there would ever be the demand for an hourly train service west of Tenby. An non-stop bus from Pembroke Dock to Carmarthen in the other hours to the train maybe... Did the disused platform at Pembroke Dock have the facility to 'lock-in' a train anyway, otherwise a train occupying it would still have possession of the single-line token for Tenby - Pembroke Dock, preventing anything else running.

The latest Modern Railways (May 2017) reports that the loop at Milford Haven has been removed too, meaning all three Pembrokeshire branches now have basic single-line termini with no loop.

 

[headshot119]

It is such a long way around compared to the road I doubt there would ever be the demand for an hourly train service west of Tenby. An non-stop bus from Pembroke Dock to Carmarthen in the other hours to the train maybe... Did the disused platform at Pembroke Dock have the facility to 'lock-in' a train anyway, otherwise a train occupying it would still have possession of the single-line token for Tenby - Pembroke Dock, preventing anything else running.

The latest Modern Railways (May 2017) reports that the loop at Milford Haven has been removed too, meaning all three Pembrokeshire branches now have basic single-line termini with no loop.

You couldn't lock in at Pembroke Dock in recent years. Whether you used to be able to I don't know.

 

[Envoy]

That was in BR days, there is now a procedure known as Network Change, which prevents removal of infrastructure unless no-one wants it. (That may be a slight exaggeration).

So, who did ‘Network Change’ inform of the intention to remove a track at Milford Haven station?

 

[muddythefish]

Blimey, I remember when they were sidings at Milford full of parcels vans, fish vans and general goods wagons. Not to mention storage for the overnight London sleeper! A freight came down to Milford around 11am from Margam I believe and went back in the late evening, usually pulled by a Hymek or EE Type 3.

 

[jimm]

So, who did ‘Network Change’ inform of the intention to remove a track at Milford Haven station?

The relevant train operating companies, so Arriva Wales and probably the freight firms, in case any of them had a sudden desire to start running something into Pembroke Dock that might have required a siding. Clearly no one was bothered.

The Network Change procedure is explained here

http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/4907/pr08-partG_amends.pdf

 

[krus_aragon]

So, who did ‘Network Change’ inform of the intention to remove a track at Milford Haven station?

A copy of the letters sent are available here, but there appear to have been no responses.

 

[Envoy]

Many thanks for the details of the Network Rail letter. Still seems a bit short sighted to me to effectively remove an additional platform at Milford Haven & Pembroke Dock.

 

[BestWestern]

...Yes you can run them in multiple but I don't like the idea of portion working with units that don't have UEGs, that's not in the best interests of passengers

This appears to be the intention for anything running beyond what you might call a 'core route' - i.e. the very first run is intended to be a Pad - Taunton formed of 2×5, with a split at Temple Meads. I agree that it is less than ideal, particularly with the significant numbers of passengers who board late at Paddington and join the rear of the train. The potential delay/disruption incurred in moving them all at the point the train splits, particularly if luggage is involved in substantial volumes, will remain to be seen. With the suggestion of timing issues resulting from running on diesel for a large chunk of some routes, these seemingly small issues could indeed prove to be problematic overall.

 

[james60059]

The latest Modern Railways (May 2017) reports that the loop at Milford Haven has been removed too, meaning all three Pembrokeshire branches now have basic single-line termini with no loop.

Not sure about Milford Haven, but the loop at Fishguard Harbour hadn't been used for many years, think since the last ATW loco-hauled service ran (2006??), I know the Northern Belle sometimes goes for a little jolly down but of course that's always top-n-tailed

 

[jimm]

Many thanks for the details of the Network Rail letter. Still seems a bit short sighted to me to effectively remove an additional platform at Milford Haven & Pembroke Dock.

Why? There are rather more important and urgent things for Network Rail to spend money on than retaining and maintaining assorted points, track and a platform that are never used and haven't been for a long time - hence the inquiry as to whether any operators might have any potential use for them in the foreseeable future - the answer was clearly 'no'.

 

[2HAP]

Hastings was an issue of stock being too wide

No, it was an issue of the tunnels being too narrow.

 

[30907]

Many thanks for the details of the Network Rail letter. Still seems a bit short sighted to me to effectively remove an additional platform at Milford Haven & Pembroke Dock.

Melford Haven lost a run-round loop not a platform - indeed ISTR it only ever had the one.

 

[D1009]

Not sure about Milford Haven, but the loop at Fishguard Harbour hadn't been used for many years, think since the last ATW loco-hauled service ran (2006??), I know the Northern Belle sometimes goes for a little jolly down but of course that's always top-n-tailed

I think the loop has been used for charter trains since then, but as you say, these days charter trains visiting routes like that adopt top and tail working, because it's more efficient time wise and cost effective. I don't think there is much future for run round loops at the end of branch lines where there is no prospect
of freight use.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Real Time Trains suggests the FirstGWR Pembroke Dock services ran as planned today; but next week are terminating at Swansea. The GWR Mixing Deck journey planner suggests there are not even going to provide replacement buses, but ATW with running their summer service that leaves at least one gap of over 4 hours in the schedule at Tenby and Pembroke Dock!

The fact the journey planner is showing these gaps in the service means not running the train service is planned, so surely there should be no excuses for not planning replacement road transport.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Real Time Trains suggests the FirstGWR Pembroke Dock services ran as planned today; but next week are terminating at Swansea. The GWR Mixing Deck journey planner suggests there are not even going to provide replacement buses, but ATW with running their summer service that leaves at least one gap of over 4 hours in the schedule at Tenby and Pembroke Dock!

The fact the journey planner is showing these gaps in the service means not running the train service is planned, so surely there should be no excuses for not planning replacement road transport.

Next weekend is the Champions League Final in Cardiff. I think you'll find there are a very large number of missing services throughout the day across Wales, conserving trains and train crew for the post match timetable.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Next weekend is the Champions League Final in Cardiff. I think you'll find there are a very large number of missing services throughout the day across Wales, conserving trains and train crew for the post match timetable.

I thought it might be to do with the Champions League final, but the year-round PAD-Carmarthen appears unaffected as does, without detailed examiation, the Milford Haven branch.

If they need to cancel the Pembroke Dock IC125s to free up some sets for crowd busting next week then fair enough, but surely they ought to provide replacement road transport.

 

[PHILIPE]

I thought it might be to do with the Champions League final, but the year-round PAD-Carmarthen appears unaffected as does, without detailed examiation, the Milford Haven branch.

If they need to cancel the Pembroke Dock IC125s to free up some sets for crowd busting next week then fair enough, but surely they ought to provide replacement road transport.

Rather than rant on here which won't go any further, why not suggest buses to GWR who would have to take the initiative as it is their services that are withdrawn. ATW wouldn't be interested for that reason.

 

[PHILIPE]

The later train from Paddington to Pembroke which returns at 1455 terminated at Bristol Parkway on the Down todayafter being caught up in the aftermath of an HST fire at Swindon. ATW covered Carmarthen/Pembroke Dock/Swansea and an HST ran ECS from St Philips Marsh to Swansea to cover forward. On Summer Saturdays, ATW have a unit laying over at Carmarthen off 1335 ex Swansea and then stabled until going ECS to Swansea for 1735 to Carmarthen so came in useful today. Is actually booked a Pacer.

 

[Kite159]

That was good that ATW had a spare unit in the right place to take up the otherwise 4 hour (?) gap in services for the branch line.

 

[Blindtraveler]

Hope the HST fire wasnt serious?

 

[43096]

Hope the HST fire wasnt serious?

Trumpton were in attendance, but probably not too serious, depending where the foam has gone... Set went ECS to Old Oak, but the good power car failed at Southall!

 

[Rhydgaled]

On Summer Saturdays, ATW have a unit laying over at Carmarthen off 1335 ex Swansea and then stabled until going ECS to Swansea for 1735 to Carmarthen so came in useful today. Is actually booked a Pacer.

Do you mean the 12:35 ex-Swansea? The timetable booklet I have shows the 13:35 as running through to Pembroke Dock.

At arround 16:45 today I saw a class 150 at Ferryside, which I assume was the unit in question covering for the GWR service, so it was a slightly better train than a Pacer. Last week I saw what I think was the 12:35 Swansea to Carmarthen service formed of a 150 with 153362 attached. That's quite a lot more train sat arround Carmarthen for hours than the booked Pacer.

Anyway, well done to ATW for stepping in today. I imagine the 150 was rammed out of Tenby though, the weather certainly brought the crowds out further east today (even some of the IC125s I saw were full and standing leaving Swindon).