Running Swindon–Cheltenham–Gloucester services

[Pete_uk]

It's been changed a few times. I've always thought it silly to slow to 40, then accelerate up a hill only to have to stop for Stonehouse a moment later.

 

[JonathanH]

Why would passengers have to leave the train if it reversed in sidings? Surely just a case of the driver/guard swapping cabs?

Sidings may not be signalled or be maintained to the standards required for passenger use. The driver may also need to walk through the train.

 

[MarkyT]

There must be a reason for only 40mph. It has been 40 since the route was reduced from 4 tracks to 2 in the mid 1970s. Has the pointwork been unchanged since then? If so, it must be getting pretty worn by now.

The junction was renewed in the 1990s and converted from single lead to double. There were probably space constraints as to what would fit between bridges, signals positions, overlaps etc. without moving every signalpost halfway to Bristol. Longer turnouts are also more expensive than shorter ones and more complex and potentially failure-prone, having additional backdrives, actuators, detection sensors. I wonder if this junction was reduced in speed when doubled. The extra flexibility and resilience of the double junction might have won out in the option analysis at a small cost in speed. A resignalling could offer a chance to speed things up if combined with junction track renewals.

 

[The Planner]

The junction was renewed in the 1990s and converted from single lead to double. There were probably space constraints as to what would fit between bridges, signals positions, overlaps etc. without moving every signalpost halfway to Bristol. Longer turnouts are also more expensive than shorter ones and more complex and potentially failure-prone, having additional backdrives, actuators, detection sensors. I wonder if this junction was reduced in speed when doubled. The extra flexibility and resilience of the double junction might have won out in the option analysis at a small cost in speed. A resignalling could offer a chance to speed things up if combined with junction track renewals.

Gloucester is due to be resignaled in a couple of years.

 

[deltic08]

The junction was renewed in the 1990s and converted from single lead to double. There were probably space constraints as to what would fit between bridges, signals positions, overlaps etc. without moving every signalpost halfway to Bristol. Longer turnouts are also more expensive than shorter ones and more complex and potentially failure-prone, having additional backdrives, actuators, detection sensors. I wonder if this junction was reduced in speed when doubled. The extra flexibility and resilience of the double junction might have won out in the option analysis at a small cost in speed. A resignalling could offer a chance to speed things up if combined with junction track renewals.

Even so, 30 year old switches must be getting near replacement. I agree with you that hopefully resignalling will result in an improvement in turnout speed.

 

[MarkyT]

Even so, 30 year old switches must be getting near replacement. I agree with you that hopefully resignalling will result in an improvement in turnout speed.

The timing looks quite hopeful for a remodelling together with the upcoming resignalling, or they might design the new signal layout to allow for a subsequent easy junction upgrade. If there was a new Gloucester South station to be built nearby where Golden Valley trains stopped, that might influence layout options.

 

[JJmoogle]

As someome who's used both stations countless times I can't say the reversal is too much of a pain and any attempts to save time for Cheltenham commuters would be better spent increasing the line speeds along the whole route and its junctions.

It would also be nice to see an enhanced service between Gloucester and Cheltenham as it really takes very little time to actually get between the two by rail, and if timed right removes the pains of certain services passing Gloucester.

 

[The Planner]

The timing looks quite hopeful for a remodelling together with the upcoming resignalling, or they might design the new signal layout to allow for a subsequent easy junction upgrade. If there was a new Gloucester South station to be built nearby where Golden Valley trains stopped, that might influence layout options.

Dont expect enhancements, its already been deferred once on cost.

 

[MarkyT]

Dont expect enhancements, its already been deferred once on cost.

I won't! Passive allowance for a future longer junction should be fairly cost-neutral.