Signalling in Chester & Surrounding areas

[krus_aragon]

The Liverpool - Chester service is causing a capacity constraint because its having to return from Chester and not running through to Llandudno Jn.

But if it were running through to Llandudno Jn (after dividing for a Shrewsbury portion?) there'd be a return working in the station at roughly the same time, wouldn't there? I'd have described two services having to pass each other on the through platforms (in the future) as more of a capacity constraint.

I take your point that progressively adding more services into the mix isn't helping things much.

 

[ElectroSoldier]

As opposed to using the bay platform, thus taking a bay from one of the two Manchester services?

Yes of course either way you are going to use capacity, but using a bay you dont really want to use uses more.

 

[sw1ller]

I know it’s pedantic, but 1D47 is a Manchester service. The Liverpool services are all 1Bxx

 

[sw1ller]

Any idea what this is all about? Normally the route drops out behind the train within a second or two, at most, of it clearing each track circuit.


It is (normally) enforced by the interlocking, yup. It's possibly the use of a restricted overlap causing the route into a through platform being approached released some times but not others?

not a clue sorry, just what I was told during training. It’s a bit of a pain having to wait for it while shunting about the station.

 

[ElectroSoldier]

I know it’s pedantic, but 1D47 is a Manchester service. The Liverpool services are all 1Bxx

It is. It was my mistake however I dont really think it matters so the point about just how busy that junction is, and given its restrictions it only makes it worse.

The layout of the sidings has changed a bit since I worked there, its a lot smaller now, but otherwise its all still the same.

 

[ElectroSoldier]

I know where the lines go. I sign them all. The roads are the up and down Warrington and the up and down Birkenhead. It's irrelevant where they go. That's the actual running line names. That's not being pedantic it's being factual.


The capacity is not solely down to the Lime Street service. It had about 5 mins turnaround at Chester.

The Northern Leeds service has a much longer soak time.

Also you've picked a day where the west end of Chester was shut, as the Crewe line was blocked. It's not representive of day to day running.

I don't think you know how the station works.

Ill roll with you then.
No trains from Liverpool use Chester East Junction. Halton Curve doesnt exist. A train that uses platforms 3a,b and 4a,b has more effect than a train that doesnt exist, Merseyrail runs to Birkenhead, The Leeds service stays longer so has more of an effect on said train that doesnt exist and the points situation plays no part in it at all.

Yeah...

 

[ElectroSoldier]

As an aside to all this.
Why does Northern run a service from Leeds to Chester?
Why dont they run it somewhere else, and then double up the coaches on the services that already operate there.

It just seems strange to me as there are in effect 3 service per hour to Manchester, even if one does go to Leeds.

I would imagine it more to do with the diagrams?

 

[Eccles1983]

Ill roll with you then.
No trains from Liverpool use Chester East Junction. Halton Curve doesnt exist. A train that uses platforms 3a,b and 4a,b has more effect than a train that doesnt exist, Merseyrail runs to Birkenhead, The Leeds service stays longer so has more of an effect on said train that doesnt exist and the points situation plays no part in it at all.

Yeah...

Just to clarify this - which bit are you saying I'm incorrect about? The running line names or the Lime Street service being little hindrance to day to day operations, whilst adding connections from North Wales to Liverpool airport.

And why is there a train from Chester to Leeds? Why run a train anywhere? Why have London trains from Chester when they could change at Warrington, Crewe or Liverpool?

 

[sw1ller]

As an aside to all this.
Why does Northern run a service from Leeds to Chester?
Why dont they run it somewhere else, and then double up the coaches on the services that already operate there.

It just seems strange to me as there are in effect 3 service per hour to Manchester, even if one does go to Leeds.

I would imagine it more to do with the diagrams?

It goes to Manchester Victoria rather than Piccadilly. It also misses Helsby and Frodsham. It’s a much better service to Manchester from Chester in my opinion and often uses a 3 car 158 or a 158 and 153. I think it’s a useful service and the peak trains for TfW seem to have eased a bit. Especially helpful at this time when we’re experiencing difficulties with stock shortages.

 

[Tomnick]

not a clue sorry, just what I was told during training. It’s a bit of a pain having to wait for it while shunting about the station.

Interesting - I've never heard anything like it before. All I can think is that it's how long certain routes take to time out if they're pulled, or perhaps a control for an approach-released route where you've changed ends behind the signal rather than having to be timed to a stand as normal. There's certainly no reason why it'd take that long for the interlocking to 'reset' behind any movement in general.

 

[sw1ller]

Interesting - I've never heard anything like it before. All I can think is that it's how long certain routes take to time out if they're pulled, or perhaps a control for an approach-released route where you've changed ends behind the signal rather than having to be timed to a stand as normal. There's certainly no reason why it'd take that long for the interlocking to 'reset' behind any movement in general.

It’s something to do with timing out I think. Now you’ve said that I recall those exact words being mentioned.

there are a few quirks to the signalling. Like M is for Crewe, not Manchester. Manchester Liverpool trains need a D in the theatre box. You can get caught speeding when you’re not speeding on P4 in that direction too. If you get the “cats eyes” and a red for shunting movements, you need to approach at 15mph, even though it’s 20mph at the signal.

 

[ElectroSoldier]

It goes to Manchester Victoria rather than Piccadilly. It also misses Helsby and Frodsham. It’s a much better service to Manchester from Chester in my opinion and often uses a 3 car 158 or a 158 and 153. I think it’s a useful service and the peak trains for TfW seem to have eased a bit. Especially helpful at this time when we’re experiencing difficulties with stock shortages.

Yes!
I know that one, it comes off the Chat moss.
Im just not sure why.
I wonder if there are many end to end tickets sold on it.

Ive caught it a few times myself from Warrington BQ as its was handy for me then.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Isn't it all part of the Northern Hub plan to increase frequencies and connectivity across the north?
In this case particularly from Calder Valley stations (Bradford, Halifax, Rochdale etc).
The Northern plan was to extend Calder Valley services from Victoria to Chester and Liverpool via the Chat Moss route - we are still waiting for the Liverpool service.
Another consideration was Leeds-Warrington after the TPE Liverpool-Scarborough was diverted away from the CLC route last year.
I think the pairing with Chester is partly about where best to send a Connect diesel service across Victoria.
Huddersfield was marked down as an electric route so works best towards Liverpool, with Calder Valley trains staying diesel and projected towards Chester/Southport.
Chester (and Wales) also complained about lack of through services beyond Manchester, and the 1tph TfW stopper isn't considered attractive (the CLC being even slower).

 

[8H]

Found this thread really interesting, especially as I am rather clueless on the subject of signalling.
Having acknowledged this! why doesnt additional platform provision suggestions include putting something back on the GWR side, could Merseyrail services use one such platform if another was provided? That would make it much more convenient for pax solely to and from Chester city centre and for many connections to from North Wales. Hybrid type trains off the Route from Birkenhead could also reverse back out toward North Wales destinations too?

 

[ElectroSoldier]

Isn't it all part of the Northern Hub plan to increase frequencies and connectivity across the north?
In this case particularly from Calder Valley stations (Bradford, Halifax, Rochdale etc).
The Northern plan was to extend Calder Valley services from Victoria to Chester and Liverpool via the Chat Moss route - we are still waiting for the Liverpool service.
Another consideration was Leeds-Warrington after the TPE Liverpool-Scarborough was diverted away from the CLC route last year.
I think the pairing with Chester is partly about where best to send a Connect diesel service across Victoria.
Huddersfield was marked down as an electric route so works best towards Liverpool, with Calder Valley trains staying diesel and projected towards Chester/Southport.
Chester (and Wales) also complained about lack of through services beyond Manchester, and the 1tph TfW stopper isn't considered attractive (the CLC being even slower).

Wow, so they plan on beefing up Manchester with the railways even more then, in the same way railways beefed up Warrington and Crewe?

 

[rich.davies]

Chester has its own PSB, dating from 1985 (similar to the installation at Crewe).
Over the years it has extended its area to Hooton, Connah's Quay, Wrexham (Llay) and Tattenhall Road, but controls only a mile or so down the Warrington line.
It also seems to be a very restricted layout with severe approach control on most lines, notably the Warrington one.
In fairly recent times, Mickle Trafford and Frodsham Jn have been upgraded when you might have expected control to migrate to Chester (or Manchester ROC), but it's not happened.
There's also Beeston Castle as a semaphore outpost causing a long section between there and Crewe (Steel Works).
There are probably plans to upgrade the lot, but as usual schemes elsewhere will have run off with the money.
Halton Jn (Runcorn end of the curve) has been upgraded into Manchester ROC and has a decent turnout of 40mph.

Cardiff ROC now controls Rockliffe Hall to Llysfaen (Colwyn Bay), so interfaces with Chester PSB west of Connah's Quay.

Pleas may i ask what the Wrexham (Llay) item is. Im from the village and the nearest lines run through the Alyn valley below Gresford and the borderlands line through Cefn-y-Bedd.

I'm not familiar with the signaling side of the railways but im just intrigued as to what Llay has to do with it all.

 

[ElectroSoldier]

Theres a signal box at Cefn-y-Bedd. LLay has little or anything to do with it apart from that. Not that I remember.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Pleas may i ask what the Wrexham (Llay) item is. Im from the village and the nearest lines run through the Alyn valley below Gresford and the borderlands line through Cefn-y-Bedd.
I'm not familiar with the signaling side of the railways but im just intrigued as to what Llay has to do with it all.

Yes you're right, I meant Gresford, should know better.
Having checked the Sectional Appendix the boundary between Chester PSB and Croes Newydd box (and now between the two NR Regions) is just short of Wrexham North Jn,
Llay was served by a colliery line from Caergwrle on the Bidston line.

 

[rich.davies]

Yes you're right, I meant Gresford, should know better.
Having checked the Sectional Appendix the boundary between Chester PSB and Croes Newydd box (and now between the two NR Regions) is just short of Wrexham North Jn,
Llay was served by a colliery line from Caergwrle on the Bidston line.

No problem, i had a feeling it may have been Gresford that you meant. And yes, there was a line to Llay Main Colliery but sadly almost nothing remains of it.

 

[Eccles1983]

Theres a signal box at Cefn-y-Bedd. LLay has little or anything to do with it apart from that. Not that I remember.

No there isn't. No since 1945 anyway.

There is a signal box at Penyfford.

 

[Tomnick]

It’s something to do with timing out I think. Now you’ve said that I recall those exact words being mentioned.

there are a few quirks to the signalling. Like M is for Crewe, not Manchester. Manchester Liverpool trains need a D in the theatre box. You can get caught speeding when you’re not speeding on P4 in that direction too. If you get the “cats eyes” and a red for shunting movements, you need to approach at 15mph, even though it’s 20mph at the signal.

Any specific examples, if you don't mind? Just curious - it sounds like one of those things that's perpetuated over the years, but clearly there's some basis to it, and it'd be interesting to try to work out what it is.

"Speeding" - TPWS OSS approaching the signal? We used to have one like that, which caught a lot of drivers out - the TPWS is still active with a calling-on route set from the signal and the signal already cleared. No idea why it was tolerated when it's perfectly acceptable to be doing more than 15mph beyond the signal, let alone approaching it having already identified that it's off.

 

[sw1ller]

Theres a signal box at Cefn-y-Bedd. LLay has little or anything to do with it apart from that. Not that I remember.

There may have once been a signal box at Cefn y bedd but there’s not one now. The first box from Wrexham is pennyffordd. But that’s off topic anyway.

Any specific examples, if you don't mind? Just curious - it sounds like one of those things that's perpetuated over the years, but clearly there's some basis to it, and it'd be interesting to try to work out what it is.

"Speeding" - TPWS OSS approaching the signal? We used to have one like that, which caught a lot of drivers out - the TPWS is still active with a calling-on route set from the signal and the signal already cleared. No idea why it was tolerated when it's perfectly acceptable to be doing more than 15mph beyond the signal, let alone approaching it having already identified that it's off.

Examples of what? The timing out? If that’s what you mean then, let’s say two trains waiting to leave P4 & P5. a signal has been put back to red for whatever reason (normally a delay to the service) and there’s another train waiting for the road that’s now late due to the other train. The delayed trains signal will go back to red, but if there’s a conflict, the other train can’t be cleared for 43 seconds.

The speeding is indeed TPWS OSS. It’s only P4 in the east direction that catches anyone out. And it’s only when a subsidiary signal clears with a red. The line is 30mph down to 20mph at the signal. But will still catch you. Now I believe you can hit it at 20mph and it MIGHT not go off, but 21mph and it will. We’ve been told to hit the grids at 15 as it can still trigger below 20mph.

edit

I will say (and I can’t get rid of this underline, sorry) that none of what I’ve said had been written down and given to me officially. It’s just what’s been told to me by much more experienced drivers than me.

 

[Tomnick]

Examples of what? The timing out? If that’s what you mean then, let’s say two trains waiting to leave P4 & P5. a signal has been put back to red for whatever reason (normally a delay to the service) and there’s another train waiting for the road that’s now late due to the other train. The delayed trains signal will go back to red, but if there’s a conflict, the other train can’t be cleared for 43 seconds.

The speeding is indeed TPWS OSS. It’s only P4 in the east direction that catches anyone out. And it’s only when a subsidiary signal clears with a red. The line is 30mph down to 20mph at the signal. But will still catch you. Now I believe you can hit it at 20mph and it MIGHT not go off, but 21mph and it will. We’ve been told to hit the grids at 15 as it can still trigger below 20mph.

edit

I will say (and I can’t get rid of this underline, sorry) that none of what I’ve said had been written down and given to me officially. It’s just what’s been told to me by much more experienced drivers than me.

That’s what I meant, sorry, yes. It sounds like a normal approach locking arrangement, where the interlocking holds the route for a pre-determined time to make sure that the train really is at a stand - the time is sufficient, if it *wasn’t* already stationary when the signal was put back, for it to have either come to a stand in rear of the signal or to pass the signal at danger (which will then hold the route directly). The time varies according to various factors - it’s usually between two and four minutes for a main aspect, but the low speed here presumably reduces that. When the train passes the signal normally though, this doesn’t apply, so the route will drop out immediately behind the train as it clears each track circuit in turn - it shouldn’t delay or otherwise affect the normal signalling of trains, only as you say when something’s gone a bit wrong and a signal needs to be taken back.

 

[Belperpete]

When the train passes the signal normally though, this doesn’t apply, so the route will drop out immediately behind the train as it clears each track circuit in turn - it shouldn’t delay or otherwise affect the normal signalling of trains, only as you say when something’s gone a bit wrong and a signal needs to be taken back.

This may not apply where you have mid-platform signals, if the rear of the train doesn't pass the mid-platform signal, or if you make a call-on move from a mid-platform signal. In such cases, there may not be sufficient track-circuits operated/cleared to safely prove that the train has passed the signal. In such cases, it may be necessary for the signaller to manually cancel the route and time it out.

However, 43 seconds is an odd time for route release "timing out" - these times are normally 30 seconds for shunt routes, or 1, 2, 3 or 4 minutes for main routes. 43s sounds more like the time for timing a train to a stand. For example, when a train enters a platform, the overlap beyond the destination signal will remain locked until the train is timed to a stand at that signal. Depending on the length of the overlap and the layout, this overlap may lock points and prevent the setting of routes that conflict with it (e.g. routes in or out of adjacent platforms), until the train has timed to a stand in the platform and released the overlap locking.

 

[Belperpete]

"Speeding" - TPWS OSS approaching the signal? We used to have one like that, which caught a lot of drivers out - the TPWS is still active with a calling-on route set from the signal and the signal already cleared. No idea why it was tolerated when it's perfectly acceptable to be doing more than 15mph beyond the signal, let alone approaching it having already identified that it's off.

The TPWS standards used to say that the OSS should remain active for subsidiary aspects, such as call-ons. It meant that the OSS and TSS had to have separate control circuits. I think the theory was that the subsidiary aspect shouldn't clear with the train that far in rear it should only clear once the train has been timed nearly to a stand at the signal.

I think on more modern installations the OSS and TSS can both be controlled together, which simplifies the circuits, and removes this trap for drivers.

 

[ElectroSoldier]

No there isn't. No since 1945 anyway.

There is a signal box at Penyfford.

Far enough, Ill bow to you on that one, its been 20-30 years since I worked there at least.
I have vague memories of taking a T2H with a local box down there to dig out wet beds and cut back vegetation but otherwise little to nothing ever happened on that line.

 

[6Gman]

Found this thread really interesting, especially as I am rather clueless on the subject of signalling.
Having acknowledged this! why doesnt additional platform provision suggestions include putting something back on the GWR side, could Merseyrail services use one such platform if another was provided? That would make it much more convenient for pax solely to and from Chester city centre and for many connections to from North Wales. Hybrid type trains off the Route from Birkenhead could also reverse back out toward North Wales destinations too?

It would be convenient for the passengers, but would also block the west end of the station eight times in each hour.

An additional platform (8?) beyond 7 would be more useful, but also more inconvenient for the passengers.

 

[markymark2000]

It would be convenient for the passengers, but would also block the west end of the station eight times in each hour.

An additional platform (8?) beyond 7 would be more useful, but also more inconvenient for the passengers.

I wouldn't put in a platform 8, trains just need a way to bypass 7B to get into 7A by way of more points but it would end up with trains stopping at the extreme end of 7A to ensure the points can be reset.

 

[sw1ller]

I like the idea of a 7C. Basically a 3car bay platform where 7B is now. Any 6 car trains can carry on and use 7A. This means two merseyrail a services could be at the station at the same time, longer lay overs for crews, less conflicts with 7A and you could use the through platform a lot more.

 

[markymark2000]

I like the idea of a 7C. Basically a 3car bay platform where 7B is now. Any 6 car trains can carry on and use 7A. This means two merseyrail a services could be at the station at the same time, longer lay overs for crews, less conflicts with 7A and you could use the through platform a lot more.

Merseyrail don't like long layovers. That is the case for all Wirral Line services. West Kirby and New Brighton have the ability to take 2 trains at a time but the only time this happens is early because they try and get trains in position and then split them or late because of the frequency reduction.

7A needs using more, that much we know. They only used to use it by slotting in the TFW Manchester train just in between Merseyrail arriving and departing. This could still be done now but I think they prefer to be safe and just use P4.