Reigate Expansion/Extension of Platforms. Still Going Ahead?

[DelW]

Yes, Weren't those 769s meant to enter service last year? I recently travelled on a 165 and the state of them makes you realise how much these new train are needed.
(I believe that there is another thread on this subject so I won't go too in depth on the 165s)

Planned to enter service around 3 years ago, according to post 35 on this thread, from a well-informed source:

GWR Class 769 information. (Units no longer with GWR - Off Lease March 23)

There are slightly older electric trains that still run on GWR metals - the Class 507 and 508 (dating back to 1978) that run on the Merseyrail routes to and from Chester. Not for much longer though. The replacenent Class 777 start arriving next year.

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Deepgreen]

Not sure how they come up with that figure but i suppose now drivers aren't suppose to stop at the signal but stand back 20m from RG21 then i guess that wouldn't leave a 100m and be able sight RG11.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Aug 2022 ==


Going to Gatwick gives them access to three sidings and if there full back to Bridges depot. CARS was a mad hatters scheme from an NR that had lost touch with reality fortunately now being restored under Haines leadership.

They used to put 8 cars in there so just need to clear all the vegetation over it!

which signals? Presumably you mean RG21 as we know as soon as you want to improve what we have today the whole lot has to be bought upto latest standard so that would add an additional 25m to an 8 car platform extension but there is a 100m to play with from RG23.

They spent a fortune developing Thameslink yet so much only became obvious at the last minute or more than likely people who were in the know weren't being listened to.

Agreed but im selfish i didn't want to lose Thameslink from Earlswood.

I see that from @JonathanH although i find it staggering how restrictive the railway is on itself.

Yes - surely restrictive sighting could be solved by a subisidiary lens unit which is clearly visible from an adjacent train cab? Early colour-light signalling had these side-lights so why not now? I have to say that I agree that the railway so often paints iself into a corner these days such that common sense is not allowed to prevail. I still see absolutely no reason why Reading-bound trains faced with a red signal at the level crossing are seemingly deemed to be at a greater risk of overrun than terminating ones and often require the barriers to be lowered on approach (notwithstanding the timing of two trains together there), and I used to see this so often when I commuted that way when only one train was involved, including, as I mentioned, delaying emergency road vehicles.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Yes - surely restrictive sighting could be solved by a subisidiary lens unit which is clearly visible from an adjacent train cab? Early colour-light signalling had these side-lights so why not now? I have to say that I agree that the railway so often paints iself into a corner these days such that common sense is not allowed to prevail. I still see absolutely no reason why Reading-bound trains faced with a red signal at the level crossing are seemingly deemed to be at a greater risk of overrun than terminating ones and often require the barriers to be lowered on approach (notwithstanding the timing of two trains together there), and I used to see this so often when I commuted that way when only one train was involved, including, as I mentioned, delaying emergency road vehicles.

There could potentially be restrictive control on RG23 if the barriers aren't down which would add delay onto anything Guildford bound

 

[MarkyT]

Yes - surely restrictive sighting could be solved by a subisidiary lens unit which is clearly visible from an adjacent train cab? Early colour-light signalling had these side-lights so why not now? I have to say that I agree that the railway so often paints iself into a corner these days such that common sense is not allowed to prevail. I still see absolutely no reason why Reading-bound trains faced with a red signal at the level crossing are seemingly deemed to be at a greater risk of overrun than terminating ones and often require the barriers to be lowered on approach (notwithstanding the timing of two trains together there), and I used to see this so often when I commuted that way when only one train was involved, including, as I mentioned, delaying emergency road vehicles.

Early colour lights had that extra aperture and lens on the side known as a 'pigs ear' for close-up viewing, as the main fresnel lens is focussed on a point far out near the AWS magnet so can be difficult to see. More modern heads replaced these with a 'hot strip' with altered optics in a small part of the main lens closest to the driver. The latest LED heads achieve something similar using various methods. The equivalent feature in the Unipart Dorman LED range is colloquially known as an 'eyebrow'. Where the stopping point is very close to the signal, especially if the signal is on the 'wrong' side as at Reigate, even these methods do not provide a good view of the signal state, but there might be an option for a so-called 'co-acting' head, a second signal, either on the same post or mounted elsewhere in the vicinity that repeats the aspect. These can be full-size heads or a miniature version.