Is the Grimsby to Donny railway speeds strangled by freight?

[dstrat]

Just wondering about this one, why so slow (50/60mph over the course of the route). Now I can see there are some bendy bits post Scunny but 60mph for 16 miles of fairly straight track from Town to Barnetby?? Equally from Medge Hall to Donny - nice fairly straight track and other than a tiny tiny bit of 85 at Hatfield and Stainforth...its all chugga chugga the way through.

If it was the South East, they'd have EMUs doing 90, 100mph along stretches like that. Is there a general speed restriction mostly due to the amount of freight along the line?

Surely they can make this boring bit of line more exciting The good upstanding residents of Grimsby deserve it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I would add that for one passenger train an hour to Donny, one every 2 and a bit hours to Newark and the rare one to brigg....surely if the speeds are that slow because of freight, then why not just path them somewhere behind the TPEs?

 

[Oswyntail]

Could it be to do with the geology? Mining and subsidence at the west end, and watery bits further east

 

[eastdyke]

Just wondering about this one, why so slow (50/60mph over the course of the route). Now I can see there are some bendy bits post Scunny but 60mph for 16 miles of fairly straight track from Town to Barnetby?? Equally from Medge Hall to Donny - nice fairly straight track and other than a tiny tiny bit of 85 at Hatfield and Stainforth...its all chugga chugga the way through.

If it was the South East, they'd have EMUs doing 90, 100mph along stretches like that. Is there a general speed restriction mostly due to the amount of freight along the line?

Surely they can make this boring bit of line more exciting The good upstanding residents of Grimsby deserve it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I would add that for one passenger train an hour to Donny, one every 2 and a bit hours to Newark and the rare one to brigg....surely if the speeds are that slow because of freight, then why not just path them somewhere behind the TPEs?

dstrat, you could take a look at:
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...yICoBA&usg=AFQjCNE8ELTAfu2tBRxsvZgz8akud-krMw

The Network Rail Route Specifications 2011 - London North Eastern

In particular:

SRS H.14 Swinton Junction - Brocklesby Junction (includes Doncaster - Brocklesby Junction) - P204

Around 60 Freight Trains per day each way in places, over level junctions, lots of level crossings.
Planned infrastructure improvements include:
'Doncaster – Scunthorpe Journey Time improvements 2013/4 in development'.
'Wrawby – Barnetby Resignalling 2014-6 in development'

SRS H.19 Brocklesby Junction - Cleethorpes - P228

Doesn't seem to be anything to improve journey times on this section.

Mile for mile much of this line is certainly one of the more significant freight routes in the country.

 

[Ploughman]

And as it is primarily freight, then the track will be designed as such.
With curves canted for the heavier traffic rather than for higher speed.

 

[Sidious]

It is one of the slowest routes, with a 55 MPH Speed Restriction from Thorne Junction to Barnetby.

I have noticed that the 3 aspect signalling seems to be very close together on the Thorne - Scunthorpe section and possibly the reason for the slow speed is breaking distances. This could be improved by making the signalling 4 aspect, but given that the line was only resignalled onto LED signals in the last four or five years, this would be costly.

There are also speed restrictions at the Keadby Canal Bridge and the King George V Bridge at Althorpe to contend with.

 

[David]

Seeing as this is my local line, I'll wade in with my tuppence worth ....

Between Thorne and Keadby, the line runs next to a water course, with the natural undermining this causes over time. It was not that long ago that the line had to be closed for 3 months between Scunthorpe and Thorne for it to be under pinned and rebuilt due to the subsidence cause by said water course ....

Brocklesby Junction (and a few miles either side) are certified for 90mph running, something Railtrack (as it was then) made a big deal about in the local papers around here.

However, it's my opinion that the lack of capacity is caused by the signalling from Brocklesby Jn to Barnetby/Scunthorpe/Brigg/Lincoln, as by and large it is 2 aspect signals with signal blocks of several miles.

 

[Bald Rick]

Having spent a not-so-happy-winter digging up that line 11 years ago, the problem is what is underneath the ballast.

Keeping the line fit for anything above 60mph with the tonnage that goes over it would need very frequent tamping and/or a complete rebuild of the formation. And as the freight runs all night in te week, there is very little maintenance time to do it.

 

[paul1609]

Just wondering about this one, why so slow (50/60mph over the course of the route). Now I can see there are some bendy bits post Scunny but 60mph for 16 miles of fairly straight track from Town to Barnetby?? Equally from Medge Hall to Donny - nice fairly straight track and other than a tiny tiny bit of 85 at Hatfield and Stainforth...its all chugga chugga the way through.

If it was the South East, they'd have EMUs doing 90, 100mph along stretches like that. Is there a general speed restriction mostly due to the amount of freight along the line?

Surely they can make this boring bit of line more exciting The good upstanding residents of Grimsby deserve it.

Hate to disillusion you but the tracks of the South East aren't paved with gold either.
South of London 90/100 mph running is generally limited to relatively short stretches of the main lines up to town. 70-75 mph limits are the norm with many lines lower than that.
My local line Marshlink varies between 40 to 60 mph wheras in steam days it was 85 mph.

 

[Sidious]

Having spent a not-so-happy-winter digging up that line 11 years ago, the problem is what is underneath the ballast.

Keeping the line fit for anything above 60mph with the tonnage that goes over it would need very frequent tamping and/or a complete rebuild of the formation. And as the freight runs all night in te week, there is very little maintenance time to do it.

Would a 55/75 line speed not be possible, with the higher figure for passenger and light engines?

While I appreciate that the geology of the area (particularly Thorne Moor) and the proximity to the canal must ramp up the maintenance, it can't be much different to say Peterborough to Ely which runs predominantly over fenland with canals and water courses along side.

It has a lower line speed for freight and a higher one for passenger, which is common elsewhere in the country.

 

[lincolnshire]

It is one of the slowest routes, with a 55 MPH Speed Restriction from Thorne Junction to Barnetby.

I have noticed that the 3 aspect signalling seems to be very close together on the Thorne - Scunthorpe section and possibly the reason for the slow speed is breaking distances. This could be improved by making the signalling 4 aspect, but given that the line was only re signalled onto LED signals in the last four or five years, this would be costly.

There are also speed restrictions at the Keadby Canal Bridge and the King George V Bridge at Althorpe to contend with.

I think you will find that it was only the signal heads that was changed to LED,s as the signalling was installed by Westinghouse between east of Stainforth signal box and west of Appleby Lincs signal box about 40 years ago. The signalling between Marshgate and Stainforth was installed about 30+ years ago. Other improvements over the years was the change from gate box to CCTV operation of Kirton Lane Crossing, the renewal of Thorne Junction about 5 years ago. The Up & Down goods loops at Crowle was removed as no longer required and to save money maintaining them, the down one had to go due to realigning the railway after subsidence on that side. Keadby Canal drawbridge has always been a problem with a speed restriction on it
When you consider the difference between trains then and now when the signalling was installed, its like then lots of un fitted freight trains, less passenger trains, most freight trains with a max of 45 mph, some requiring banking up Gunhouse Bank with the banker engine stabled there.
Look at the trains now a through passenger to Cleethorpes every hour and turn backs to Scunthorpe every hour as well as all the freight trains with a lot higher possible running speed and fully fitted braking now than 30 years ago.
A lot of problems are East of Scunthorpe where when you get past Wrawby signal box through to Grimsby your back to a lot of mechanical signalling and big sections.
The route is a possible a candidate for total re signalling to increase speeds and more paths for train running.

 

[Ploughman]

Would any advantage be gained by reopening the 4th track between Barnetby and Brocklesby?
In the mid 90s this stretch still had 4 tracks in place but the Southernmost of the lines had signals erected in the 4ft.

 

[lincolnshire]

Would any advantage be gained by reopening the 4th track between Barnetby and Brocklesby?
In the mid 90s this stretch still had 4 tracks in place but the Southernmost of the lines had signals erected in the 4ft.

Back in the mid 80.s there used to be Melton Ross signal box that also helped regulate trains, this was switched out and the signals pulled off for a while before been removed permanently and the signal box demolished so it became a big section from Barnetby East through to Brocklesby. When Brocklesby signal box are was redone and signals put in between to make more capacity on the line like what happened between Appleby and Elsham. This used to be another big section with no signals after leaving Elsham through to Appleby either way, as years ago there used to be a signal box that was switched in to help regulate trains between the two places.

 

[Tomnick]

Are there IB signals or something between Appleby and Elsham now? Last time I was there (not that long ago), it was still one AB section between the two, although Elsham's section signal was moved a fair bit closer to Appleby (thus allowing trains to approach it to await acceptance without being checked at the home signal), and possibly similar at Appleby in the Up direction.

 

[Rich_D3167]

Are there IB signals or something between Appleby and Elsham now? Last time I was there (not that long ago), it was still one AB section between the two, although Elsham's section signal was moved a fair bit closer to Appleby (thus allowing trains to approach it to await acceptance without being checked at the home signal), and possibly similar at Appleby in the Up direction.

No IB's at either Elsham or Appleby, although Elsham's Down Starter (towards Scunthorpe) is about a mile from the Signal Box. TCB from Scunthorpe to Appleby, then AB through to Brocklesby (on the Up Direction at least, TCB Brocklesby to Barnetby on the Down Main & Down Goods, then AB Barnetby to Appleby). Elsham is an unusual setup, having a Distant, Home & Starter signal on the Down, but only a distant & Starter on the Up (next signal after the Stop signal protecting Elsham MCB is Wrawby Jn's Distant).

The longest section is Elsham to Appleby, which is the limit for capacity on the Scunthorpe line at the moment. Freight can be sent via Brigg & Gainsborough to Doncaster to relieve congestion, but doesn't help when getting a path up the ECML to Shaftholme Jn. With the plan to build the new flyover to connect the Hatfield & Stainforth to Adwick line with the Askern branch, freight via Gainsborough may become more limited when it's open.

 

[Tomnick]

Thanks Rich, that was exactly my understanding and I didn't think anything had changed, but lincolnshire's post above suggested that wasn't the case!

 

[Sidious]

So why couldn't passenger trains have a speed limit higher than 55 MPH in places? Many other lines do this.

 

[boing_uk]

Between Thorne South and Althorpe, the formation is built on the Carrs which is one massive peat bog - hence there are significant ground movements throughout the year. To get a higher speed on there, you are looking almost at building a land bridge of some kind or significant land stabilisation to get anything above 60mph.

Similarly between Santon and Elsham the same problem exists - indeed quite often when I have travelled that section the alignment of the track leaves a lot to be desired at times.

Im not sure why between Barnetby and Grimsby the linespeed couldnt be increased, although I thould think that signal spacings would need to be adjusted to take into account the braking profile of the 185's.