Nuneham Viaduct shut - Didcot- Oxford

[sammyg901]

Short forms on the MYB-Oxfords tonight which is far from ideal I imagine!

 

[Pete_uk]

Friend at NR sent me this from last week

Definitely needs a bit of grouting there

 

[12LDA28C]

Surely, if GWR are running less trains and Chiltern are running more, it would make sense for GWR to hire some 165s to Chiltern. Chiltern already have 165s, so driver knowledge isn’t a problem. It would provide the capacity Chiltern needs to run extra London - Oxford trains.

Not as simple as that. Chiltern drivers won't sign GWR 165s and you're assuming there's capacity on the Chiltern network to run more trains to Oxford, with plenty of spare drivers sitting around to drive them?

These aren't normal circumstances though.

That won't matter to the good denizens of Marylebone and their delicate ear drums.

It depends what else is using the platforms and whether there's space to juggle them around if they need to. The Marylebone platform plan is a remarkable piece of timetabling, but it's oh so very tight. There's a hell of a lot of top working and units dropping off and onto each other to strengthen or form additional trains through the day, and then you have the flat crossing at Neasden Jn to contend with not far out of the station.

The flat crossing at Neasden Jn?

 

[geoffk]

Where's the freight going? That's probably a bigger concern at the moment as at least there's an alternative Oxford - London route for passengers.

 

[12LDA28C]

Could GW send 165s to Chiltern and use the spare 80xs from not operating to Oxford to backfill?

Given the high demand to Oxford and this going on for a while, there would be an argument for Chiltern implementing an emergency timetable to increase their capacity to Oxford; people from Birmingham have the choice of Avanti and LNR so don't need the third option.

No, as stated Chiltern drivers would not sign GWR 165s.

 

[Class15]

Where's the freight going? That's probably a bigger concern at the moment as at least there's an alternative Oxford - London route for passengers.

WCML, Acton Canal Wharf

 

[zwk500]

The flat crossing at Neasden Jn?

Neasden south, sorry. Up Bicester trains crossing down Aylesbury trains not overly far out of Marylebone.

Where's the freight going? That's probably a bigger concern at the moment as at least there's an alternative Oxford - London route for passengers.

Via Acton or nowhere, it seems.

 

[webweasel]

Here's an interesting article on this bridge..
https://culhamticketoffice.co.uk/bits/hidden-pages/nuneham-bridge.html

Interesting. It says:

A similar pier is built where the new structure adjoins the old at the western end; and the abutment at the opposite end has been faced to harmonise.

I wonder if this implies the ‘east’ abutment (south, surely) actually dates from 1850? From the pictures posted it’s this end that has subsided.

From satellite photos, it looks like there is a usable unpaved road from Thame Lane to the red dot.

 

[12LDA28C]

Neasden south, sorry. Up Bicester trains crossing down Aylesbury trains not overly far out of Marylebone.

Via Acton or nowhere, it seems.

Neasden South is not really what you'd call a 'flat crossing', as you might find at say Newark. Just a standard two-track railway junction.

 

[zwk500]

I wonder if this implies the ‘east’ abutment (south, surely) actually dates from 1850? From the pictures posted it’s this end that has subsided.
From satellite photos, it looks like there is a usable unpaved road from Thame Lane to the red dot.

Some drone shots available on twitter https://twitter.com/PaulCliftonBBC/status/1643283254244458502?s=20 indicate it's the South east corner they're quite concerned about, and that the temporary road has a temporary compound at the bridge site.

Neasden South is not really what you'd call a 'flat crossing', as you might find at say Newark. Just a standard two-track railway junction.

Flat junction then, but that's a semantic point. It's trains crossing 'on the flat' and therefore care needs to be taken that you don't stuff up the margins if you're moving trains around at Marylebone.

 

[Bletchleyite]

No, as stated Chiltern drivers would not sign GWR 165s.

How different are they? Could be a very short conversion?

 

[12LDA28C]

Some drone shots available on twitter https://twitter.com/PaulCliftonBBC/status/1643283254244458502?s=20 indicate it's the South east corner they're quite concerned about, and that the temporary road has a temporary compound at the bridge site.


Flat junction then, but that's a semantic point. It's trains crossing 'on the flat' and therefore care needs to be taken that you don't stuff up the margins if you're moving trains around at Marylebone.

Indeed, although with only 2 trains per hour (or only hourly at some points during off-peak) during the day heading north down the Harrow lines (ie crossing the Up 'Western') there is only limited scope for 'stuffing it up'.

 

[zwk500]

How different are they? Could be a very short conversion?

Different ATP for a start, and do the GWR ones have DAS? It could be a very short conversion, but equally Chiltern could rejig their services and offer a London-Banbury and London-Oxford service with Cross country offering Birmingham-Oxfords (either a shuttle or doubling up Voyagers on existing paths) to free up units to strengthen the Oxfords.

 

[12LDA28C]

How different are they? Could be a very short conversion?

Identical at time of build I believe (1991/2?) but many modifications in the intervening 30 years, certain cab equipment in a different place, and so on. Probably a one-day conversion course, but that would cost a lot of money for what could be literally three or four weeks benefit. I would say it was incredibly unlikely to happen.

 

[zwk500]

Indeed, although with only 2 trains per hour (or only hourly at some points during off-peak) during the day heading north down the Harrow lines (ie crossing the Up 'Western') there is only limited scope for 'stuffing it up'.

limited scope but big impact. I'm not saying it's an impossible feat, just that it's not the sort of thing you want control to be trying to manage without somebody looking at the plan. I certainly had delays when I was a planner that my manager was a little annoyed with me for finding the only train in the hour to clash with.

 

[nw1]

We've had about 6 inches of rain in March (measured about 12 miles from there) that's about 3 times average, and a lot in the past week.

The wettest March since 1981 across England, with 1947 being the only other wetter example. https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-...er-and-climate/2023/march-2023-weather-review

 

[Mcr Warrior]

The wettest March since 1981 across England, with 1947 being the only other wetter example. https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-...er-and-climate/2023/march-2023-weather-review

What's particularly noticeable from the map graphics is that there's been something of a marked North-South divide, and Nuneham Viaduct, in the Thames Valley, is fairly slap bang in the middle of the South of England.

 

[swt_passenger]

Where's the freight going? That's probably a bigger concern at the moment as at least there's an alternative Oxford - London route for passengers.

There was a discussion about the very limited alternate route availability yesterday, from about post #13 onwards.

 

[Kite159]

I'm surprised there isn't ticket acceptance on the Thames Travel X39/X40 bus services from Oxford to Reading, to help spread the loadings from the other buses where acceptance has been given plus the rail replacement services.

 

[plugwash]

Admittedly only very vaguely relevant, but I've just heard via my Google news feed that an emergency closure has just been put into place on the M62 near Castleford due to a rapidly-deteriorating overbridge....so far until the end of the day, but I suspect that it will probaly last considerably longer. It seems that it's not only our hundred-plus year old railway infrastructure that's collapsing!

Indeed.

The big difference is that the road network is much more able to "route around" damage than the rail network, both because there are far more roads than rails, and because there is no concept of "route knowledge" on the roads.

 

[pdeaves]

Identical at time of build I believe (1991/2?) but many modifications in the intervening 30 years, certain cab equipment in a different place, and so on. Probably a one-day conversion course, but that would cost a lot of money for what could be literally three or four weeks benefit. I would say it was incredibly unlikely to happen.

The two fleets have never been identical. The Chiltern fleet is geared for a lower top speed (75mph) and better acceleration; the Great Western fleet geared for faster running (90mph) at the cost of less impressive acceleration.

 

[Class 170101]

Reading are at home to Birmingham on Friday, so away fans will have a challenge

Birmingham to either Cheltenham, Gloucester or Bristol Parkway and change there for Reading (and Paddington) would be my first thought

 

[zwk500]

Birmingham to either Cheltenham, Gloucester or Bristol Parkway and change there for Reading (and Paddington) would be my first thought

M40 and A34 also a reasonably likely alternative.

 

[mangyiscute]

Or perhaps the Birmingham fans (and players) would fancy not turning up because reading really need those 3 points

 

[Class 170101]

M40 and A34 also a reasonably likely alternative.

No alcohol consumption though

 

[zwk500]

Or perhaps the Birmingham fans (and players) would fancy not turning up because reading really need those 3 points

Rarely are football fans that generous.

No alcohol consumption though

Only for 1 of the 5 in the car. And much that we might wish it didn't happen, it's hardly been unknown for people to drive when they aren't in a fit condition to.

 

[blue87]

Reading are at home to Birmingham on Friday, so away fans will have a challenge

Guess one option open to us Blues fans is Chiltern to Marylebone a short walk to Paddington then out to Reading as long as ticket acceptance allows.

 

[Jimini]

Guess one option open to us Blues fans is Chiltern to Marylebone a short walk to Paddington then out to Reading as long as ticket acceptance allows.

Looks like that's an option based on the NRE page covering off ticket acceptance.

 

[59CosG95]

Some drone shots available on twitter https://twitter.com/PaulCliftonBBC/status/1643283254244458502?s=20 indicate it's the South east corner they're quite concerned about, and that the temporary road has a temporary compound at the bridge site.


Flat junction then, but that's a semantic point. It's trains crossing 'on the flat' and therefore care needs to be taken that you don't stuff up the margins if you're moving trains around at Marylebone.

Paul Clifton was saying Mabey Bridge (a specialist contractor who fabricate temporary bridges) were on site today.

 

[JN114]

To further address the Chiltern/GW 165 points -

After the “Ride-height modification” the GW units received to allow them to work in the West; the two fleets became incompatible mechanically, as the couplers are now set at different heights. We’re not even allowed/able to rescue one another’s units anymore; never mind send them over to strengthen their services. Similarly that same RHM status invalidates their route clearance into Marylebone, RHM units aren’t cleared South of Aynho; and judging by the raft of minor platform works that had to be undertaken in the Thames Valley to accommodate RHMs, I expect it WOULDN’T just be a paper exercise to get them approved to run to Marylebone.

On ATP - GW units have never had ATP, although that wouldn’t be a reason to make them incompatible anyway. It is only the ATP in the leading vehicle of the formation that matters, the rest of the vehicles just dumbly/blindly follow brake commands on the normal train wires; there isn’t any feedback from other ATP-fitted cabs on the train. Lack of ATP wouldn’t be a hurdle; however in the past, particularly when Thames and Chiltern used to send each other units for strengthening much more regularly, the visiting units tended to be boxed in by native units; purely to allow native safety systems to each route (CH-ATP vs AWS/TPWS) to be used normally. It was a best-practice not a rule however; and now impossible due to incompatible couplers.

IETs on the other hand, are cleared on the Chiltern both via Greenford into Paddington and into Marylebone, although I think even a 9 car would be seriously pushing the platform lengths available. Route knowledge would be an issue, and I don’t believe platform validation was ever carried out at any intermediate station nor Marylebone; but perhaps if hurdles could be overcome peak-busters out of Paddington to Oxford via High Wycombe non-stop MAY be a viable option. Helped of course by IETs not being used on residual Paddington-Didcot services which may free up a unit or two…