Plans to reopen Totton - Fawley/Hythe (again!)

[fgwrich]

Wonder where the unit(s) will be resourced from? Do SWR have any spare?

Luckily, yes. The cancellation of the Bristol services last December frees up at least 2 158 / 159 sets, and with commuter traffic still remaining not at pre-pandemic levels, they can probably spare another unit or two from that (minus one 159/1 from the Salisbury incident though).

 

[zwk500]

As you say it has to be two, I’m wondering where they’d cross?

Between the capacity constraints and single track, I'd guess there aren't too many options around that.

 

[brad465]

Trying to imagine how long it would take. I think Totton can be done 6 minutes non-stop. Assuming the line speed is quite slow, I would imagine a further four to Marchwood, and then four again to Hythe in the best case, so 14 minutes. So basically unless you allow 1-min turnarounds (a recipe for disaster), 2tph with one unit isn't going to happen.

Wonder where the unit(s) will be resourced from? Do SWR have any spare?

The line speed is max 30mph, but key level crossings and the Marchwood passing loop are lower (there's at least 1 10mph stretch over a level crossing). I would have thought plans to reopen for passenger use though would need to see much higher speeds installed to be feasible, with key speed restrictions also removed/eased, but modernising the track and level crossings should be able to do that.

As you say it has to be two, I’m wondering where they’d cross?

Are there any parts of the route that used to be double track that are not currently, and could be reinstated to increase passing options?

 

[zwk500]

Are there any parts of the route that used to be double track that are not currently, and could be reinstated to increase passing options?

No

 

[brad465]

No

Yes when I just watched a Drivers Eye view of the route again it looked like there weren't any; there is plenty of space to double large sections if the trackbed was widened and some foliage cut back, but the level crossings would make this pointless. Depending on pathing options, passing would have to take place at any of Totton, Marchwood, or wherever the terminus point is, if it's given 2 platforms.

 

[zwk500]

Yes when I just watched a Drivers Eye view of the route again it looked like there weren't any; there is plenty of space to double large sections if the trackbed was widened and some foliage cut back, but the level crossings would make this pointless. Depending on pathing options, passing would have to take place at any of Totton, Marchwood, or wherever the terminus point is, if it's given 2 platforms.

The terminus won't be given 2 platforms, because that will drive a massive signalling change. It will have 1 platform adjacent to the existing line. Passing can take place anywhere between Southampton and Totton, and at Marchwood itself although given that Marchwood is only 4/5 minutes from the terminus I think it unlikely trains would pass there.

 

[Gloster]

I don’t think there was ever a second platform at Marchwood, so provision of one would add to the cost if you want trains to cross there. Arranging the timetable so that as soon as one train left the single line at Totton the next one entered it would probably be possible, but tight and so likely to impact on reliability: it might be necessary to carry out signalling works at Totton, but this would add to the cost. Ideally, it would be possible for trains from Hythe to cross over to the Up Main Fast as soon as they come around the corner, so that the train to Hythe could wait in the Loop for the line to be clear, but this would cost so much that it would finish off the project.

 

[nw1]

I guess they could always run an hourly service and - if pathing allows - increase the frequency to something like 45-minutely during the peaks with just one unit?

I've seen examples of shuttles which do this (Henley I think?) though these are obviously easier to operate as they only run on the branch and never use the mainline.

 

[444045]

There never was a second platform at Marchwood, just a foot crossing that the Signalman used to collect or give a key token to the
driver of a train using the loop line.

 

[zwk500]

I guess they could always run an hourly service and - if pathing allows - increase the frequency to something like 45-minutely during the peaks with just one unit?

I've seen examples of shuttles which do this (Henley I think?) though these are obviously easier to operate as they only run on the branch and never use the mainline.

This wouldn't fit with the service pattern at Southampton. And you'd be pushing turnrounds at both ends fairly tight considering it's the best part of 20 minutes each way. Henley Branch also has the advantage of being entirely separate from the mainline.

 

[30907]

A few minutes with RTT suggests to me that Fawley-Chandlers Ford-Salisbury using approximately the present path of the "6" service would work at Tunnel Jn and require slight flexing through Redbridge (currently xx27 up xx45 down), giving 30-35 min for a round trip Totton-Fawley-Totton.
I've not checked against the Maritime paths admittedly.

 

[zwk500]

A few minutes with RTT suggests to me that Fawley-Chandlers Ford-Salisbury using approximately the present path of the "6" service would work at Tunnel Jn and require slight flexing through Redbridge (currently xx27 up xx45 down), giving 30-35 min for a round trip Totton-Fawley-Totton.
I've not checked against the Maritime paths admittedly.

Unfortunately, slightly more detailed work than a few minutes with RTT has demonstrated that it doesn't work.

 

[swt_passenger]

Unfortunately, slightly more detailed work than a few minutes with RTT has demonstrated that it doesn't work.

And as has been mentioned a few times before in the various Fawley reopening threads, the local authorities do not want the Salisbury-Romsey-Southampton stopper to run the long way round.

 

[zwk500]

And as has been mentioned a few times before in the various Fawley reopening threads, the local authorities do not want the Salisbury-Romsey-Southampton stopper to run the long way round.

Indeed, which is why the Salisbury-Southampton was always running via the Test Valley.

 

[30907]

Unfortunately, slightly more detailed work than a few minutes with RTT has demonstrated that it doesn't work.

Fair enough.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Are there any parts of the route that used to be double track that are not currently, and could be reinstated to increase passing options?

Would there be much point in doing that? I make it about 5.6 miles from the main line junction near Totton to the likely site of Hythe station. With a some line speed increases and if you have a fairly short turnaround time at Hythe, it should be possible for a train to complete the entire loop well under 30 minutes (Without line speed increases I admit it would be pushing it a bit), so you should be able to run a half-hourly timetable with a small margin for delays without a passing loop. So, assuming the plan will provide line speed increases, it looks to me like a passing loop would add very significant expense for only marginal benefit.

(Of course if the service was in the future extended to Fawley and you were still planning a half-hourly service, then a passing loop would become essential).

 

[brad465]

Would there be much point in doing that? I make it about 5.6 miles from the main line junction near Totton to the likely site of Hythe station. With a some line speed increases and if you have a fairly short turnaround time at Hythe, it should be possible for a train to complete the entire loop well under 30 minutes (Without line speed increases I admit it would be pushing it a bit), so you should be able to run a half-hourly timetable with a small margin for delays without a passing loop. So, assuming the plan will provide line speed increases, it looks to me like a passing loop would add very significant expense for only marginal benefit.

(Of course if the service was in the future extended to Fawley and you were still planning a half-hourly service, then a passing loop would become essential).

I think line speed increases would not only be necessary to make better path use on the loop, but to make the service attractive. Trundling along at 30mph, while good for the scenery, isn't going to attract passengers if local buses can keep up. If an extension to Fawley was made, a passing loop may not be essential if Fawley was going to get 2 platforms, thus allowing 1 unit to arrive and the another unit to depart almost immediately after.

 

[nw1]

Would there be much point in doing that? I make it about 5.6 miles from the main line junction near Totton to the likely site of Hythe station. With a some line speed increases and if you have a fairly short turnaround time at Hythe, it should be possible for a train to complete the entire loop well under 30 minutes (Without line speed increases I admit it would be pushing it a bit), so you should be able to run a half-hourly timetable with a small margin for delays without a passing loop. So, assuming the plan will provide line speed increases, it looks to me like a passing loop would add very significant expense for only marginal benefit.

It'll certainly be possible I think to have a half-hourly service with one unit down the branch at any one time, certainly if it only goes to Hythe. You'll still need two units for the whole service, but hopefully they can cross on the mainline.

 

[PTR 444]

It'll certainly be possible I think to have a half-hourly service with one unit down the branch at any one time, certainly if it only goes to Hythe. You'll still need two units for the whole service, but hopefully they can cross on the mainline.

They would probably be best suited to crossing at the point of the Totton LC to reduce barrier down time, although being so close to the branch I’m not sure if the signalling would allow one train to enter very shortly after the other has left.

 

[zwk500]

They would probably be best suited to crossing at the point of the Totton LC to reduce barrier down time, although being so close to the branch I’m not sure if the signalling would allow one train to enter very shortly after the other has left.

The signalling is perfectly fine with that. As soon as the rear of the train has cleared the junction which is about 1/4 mile beyond Totton Station, the route for the down train can be set.

The single line between Totton and Marchwood doesn't need a token, it only needs Marchwood to clear the slot for the signal protecting the end of Totton loop. The poster above who's worked the box may be able to give a more technical explanation.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

It'll certainly be possible I think to have a half-hourly service with one unit down the branch at any one time, certainly if it only goes to Hythe. You'll still need two units for the whole service, but hopefully they can cross on the mainline.

Agreed. I can see a couple of operational advantages too: If both units are crossing somewhere on the main line (and therefore nearer to the Southampton end of the route), that would imply a longish layover at Southampton and only a short one at Hythe. That's presumably better for drivers because I'm sure facilities at Southampton would be far superior to anything that gets built at Hythe. Also, the main line is where delays are most likely to occur - particularly travelling to Southampton because when travelling in that direction, the train has to cross opposing lines at the two junction with the lines to Bournemouth and Salisbury. If - as seems likely - the plan is to use platform 4B at Southampton, then trains arriving will have to cross the opposing lines again. Southampton would therefore seem the most logical place to have lots of recovery time.

 

[Class 170101]

For me it unless its a direct service beyond Southampton to London, for example, I can't see how it would encourage people to use it. If most people lived there wanted a local journey they would either drive or get the bus and beyond that they would probably drive to Southampton Airport Parkway as that would surely be quicker to reach London (and elsewhere) vice a change of trains at Southampton Central?

 

[nw1]

For me it unless its a direct service beyond Southampton to London, for example, I can't see how it would encourage people to use it. If most people lived there wanted a local journey they would either drive or get the bus and beyond that they would probably drive to Southampton Airport Parkway as that would surely be quicker to reach London (and elsewhere) vice a change of trains at Southampton Central?

I don't think you can have a through service from everywhere to everywhere though, and a through service would require electrification otherwise you're going to have to find some extra DMUs to make the whole journey to London.

It may well be the case that the bus still has the main share of local journeys from south of Hythe (though I suspect the train will have a good proportion from Hythe itself). However the real advantage of a train is when you want to go somewhere beyond Southampton, whether that be Portsmouth, Bournemouth, London, Reading or anywhere else people might want to go. It means you only have to buy one ticket and can do a simple in-station change.

Run it at a 30-min frequency and you'll probably have acceptable connections to most places. (The big problem with St Denys IMO is the effectively hourly frequency, which somewhat limits its usefulness as a local station - but it's still well used even considering that).

Maybe if they make a success of a shuttle for a few years and grow usage, they can then electrify and consider some sort of through service e.g. extension of Waterloo-Southampton semi-fasts.

I would agree though that a 'branch-line-only shuttle' from Totton would be a poor idea, but thankfully that is not the proposal (and there is not, AFAIK, infrastructure to support that anyway).

 

[zwk500]

For me it unless its a direct service beyond Southampton to London, for example, I can't see how it would encourage people to use it. If most people lived there wanted a local journey they would either drive or get the bus and beyond that they would probably drive to Southampton Airport Parkway as that would surely be quicker to reach London (and elsewhere) vice a change of trains at Southampton Central?

The roads through Hythe and Totton themselves are fairly congested, and Southampton Airport Parkway doesn't get the connections to Portsmouth and Brighton that Southampton Central gets. And I'd guess a reasonable proportion of the traffic from Hythe is heading for Southampton itself anyway.

I would agree though that a 'branch-line-only shuttle' from Totton would be a poor idea, but thankfully that is not the proposal (and there is not, AFAIK, infrastructure to support that anyway).

You can do it at Totton, but it's awkward and not something you'd want to do all day every day. AFAIK nobody has ever seriously suggested Totton-Fawley as a service, it's always been intended to run at least to Southampton.

 

[nw1]

The roads through Hythe and Totton themselves are fairly congested, and Southampton Airport Parkway doesn't get the connections to Portsmouth and Brighton that Southampton Central gets. And I'd guess a reasonable proportion of the traffic from Hythe is heading for Southampton itself anyway.

Very true - a very good point. Also Parkway is quite a hike to get to by car.

You can do it at Totton, but it's awkward and not something you'd want to do all day every day. AFAIK nobody has ever seriously suggested Totton-Fawley as a service, it's always been intended to run at least to Southampton.

Exactly, as I said. I was trying to contrast the usefulness of a Southampton shuttle versus the limited utility of a theoretical Totton shuttle for which the "why would people use it?" argument might be valid.

 

[zwk500]

Exactly, as I said. I was trying to contrast the usefulness of a Southampton shuttle versus the limited utility of a theoretical Totton shuttle.

Indeed. Direct <20min train to large city with good connections vs c.10min hop to wayside halt and the connection into/out of the Bournemouth stopper will be horrendous at least one way.

The connections into and out of the London service at Southampton Central for the 2tph option given the layover for the branch train there are potentially pretty good. Especially London-Hythe, which would ordinarily be cross-platform.

 

[nw1]

I realise this is probably a bit premature but has anyone thought about the actual paths the service might use?

A very quick thought experiment suggests that in one side of the hour it ought to be relatively straightforward, as there is no XC to conflict with. You could run a service out of Central at approximately xx00 (AFAIK no conflicts; this would have a good connection with the xx35 ex Waterloo) and this could return around xx40 (making the cross over in front of the down XC) or around xx48 (making the cross over behind the down XC but keeping it ahead of the up Poole stopper).

The other side of the hour is a bit trickier as you have more conflicts to deal with (e.g up and down XC, down Poole stopper).

 

[swt_passenger]

I realise this is probably a bit premature but has anyone thought about the actual paths the service might use?

A very quick thought experiment suggests that in one side of the hour it ought to be relatively straightforward, as there is no XC to conflict with. You could run a service out of Central at approximately xx00 (AFAIK no conflicts; this would have a good connection with the xx35 ex Waterloo) and this could return around xx40 (making the cross over in front of the down XC) or around xx48 (making the cross over behind the down XC but keeping it ahead of the up Poole stopper).

The other side of the hour is a bit trickier as you have more conflicts to deal with (e.g up and down XC, down Poole stopper).

The current SWR timings won’t necessarily survive until Fawley reopens, so I expect you’re right about being premature.
There’s a few proposed changes in the consulted Dec 2022 timetable affecting things west of Southampton, such as the Poole stopper being split. That might presumably also alter platform workings significantly, depending if the new Waterloo to Southampton turns round in a platform, or shunts via a loop. The new Southampton - Bournemouth stopper might also sit in a country end platform eg 3b or 4b between services. I don’t think much detail is out there yet...

 

[Domeyhead]

As I said in the original thread, the frustration here is the lack of a single voice and clear leadership, as witnessed by the Okehampton reopening, which was driven by the three main parties working as a single virtual task force from its inception. WHat we have here is just and endless talking shop and no clear plan of what is needed. The Three Rivers Community Rail Partnership were meant to be taking a lead role as proponents (not sponsors). Well they aren't. Network Rail are nowhere to be seen, neither are the DfT, the ORR, and "Dr" Julian Lewis the local MP as always is a waste of space. Yes, David Harrison champions the reopening but doesn't argue persuasively with figures, depth or clarity. Contrast this with Okehampton. As for HCC their Transport Committee under Shaun Woodward never wanted to be involved in any expenditure at all and commissioned the fundamentally flawed Halcrow Report merely to put the whole thing to bed for ever. It's a shambles. Again as I said, nobody has even spoken with Exxon - how the heck does anybody know what is and is not feasible through and beyond the Refinery until they engage? "Fawley Parkway" at or around the old ISR plant at Hardley is a wasted opportunity and destroys a good business case, because Once Blackfield and Holbury people are on the A326 they'll stay on the A326. WHo in their right mind would get out of their car again after two miles, pay to park it, then enjoy a slow trundle to Soton Central that is no faster than their car? This proposal needs a champion and a vision. I have said several times that the REfinery is not the Berlin Wall and its internal land needs have changed - there is not a security risk if the existing perimeter fence is turned into a corridor for a single line, but where is there even a feasibility study? There is ample room for such a fenced corridor through the tank farm area far from the actual plant that is not a security risk, but a "real" Fawley Parkway at the southern end of the site accessed from Copthorne Lane would not only attract the Holbury/ Blackfield / Langley Marina Village hinterland but would be used as a freight raihead for the million tonnes or so of material to and from the new development. All that material is going on the A326 as it stands. This project needs leadership. As for signalling and infrastructure, it all needs relaying and ballasting anyway so given that fact why did the Halcrow report still talk about 30mph? The business case needs a 60-65mph line speed. Signalling does not need colour lights, nor does it need ETCS. We don't need Siemens proposing multi million pound case-killing solutiuons - It needs a cheap but proven innovation such as dynamic RETB as developed by Park Signalling here in the UK and used with great success on the Far North lines. We have had 25 years of talking and all that has happened is that we are still talking as on this thread - with bad ideas still being brought up over and over and over again.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Run it at a 30-min frequency and you'll probably have acceptable connections to most places. (The big problem with St Denys IMO is the effectively hourly frequency, which somewhat limits its usefulness as a local station - but it's still well used even considering that).

On the subject of suburban stations like St Denys, it occurs to me that one other big, immediate (and largely unmentioned) benefit of the line to Hythe could be turning Millbrook, Redbridge and Totton into usable commuter stations: As far as I can tell from Google maps, all three stations serve reasonable semi-urban areas, but none of them has the kind of regular service that would make them attractive to many people. I believe you can't even travel in the Bournemouth direction at all from either Millbrook or Redbridge without doubling back into Southampton first, despite both stations being on that line. If - as seems plausible - a half-hourly the Hythe service stops at all 3 stations, I could imagine that transforming passenger numbers at all of them, since it'll become much more feasible for some people to use them, either for commuting into Southampton or for connecting to trains to Bournemouth/Portsmouth/London/etc.