Signalling York to Scarborough

[nuneatonmark]

I am now a fairly regular user of this line but may start to use the car as the service can be so unreliable, including today. It often seems to be signalling issues and note that it's a combination of semaphore and colour light signals. Are there any plans to upgrade the signalling on this line?

 

[John Webb]

The 2010 Network Rail 'Masterplan' for resignalling the country had the Scarborough line down for this year, 2025. But politicians/lack of money have lead to severe modifications to that 'Masterplan'. I'm not aware from sources available to me (I'm not directly connected to the railways) if there is any new date yet fixed.
Most of the line does have colour light signalling - it is mainly at level crossings where 'gate boxes' are still in use that the mechanical semaphores are retained.

 

[Sultan1056]

I understand that the route is signalled with Absolute Block throughout; the route being controlled by York, Strensall, Barton Hill, Kirkham Abbey, Malton, Weaverthorpe and Seamer.
IMO resignalling the route and controlling it from a single centre would not bring any direct benefits to passengers; it would only bring cost savings to Network Rail.

 

[Gloster]

I think it is Track Circuit Block from York out to a fringe at Strenshall, then Absolute Block to Seamer, which controls Scarborough station. Malton and possibly other intermediate boxes have colour lights instead of semaphores.

 

[dk1]

All back to normal running again.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Mar 2025 ==

Looking at the last few days it seems to have been very reliable with most trains arriving/departing Scarborough on time or very close to it.

 

[John Webb]

Strensall is fitted with a panel, not mechanical signalling, Malton and Seamer likewise.
Mechanical signalling remains at Barton Hill, Kirkham Abbey and Weaverthorpe, all controlling level crossings. Howsham, a 'gate box' isn't mentioned in post #3 by sultan1056 but that too is mechanical.

 

[dodecahedron67]

It is AB from Strensall (Bootham LC) to Malton station, TCB within Malton Station, and then AB to Scarborough iirc

 

[Gloster]

It is AB from Strensall (Bootham LC) to Malton station, TCB within Malton Station, and then AB to Scarborough iirc

Scarborough is all controlled by Seamer, so AB ends at the latter and it is track-circuited beyond. At Malton it appears that although the station area is colour lights worked by two small panels, it is AB both ways unless the track circuiting extends all the way to one (or both) of them.

 

[Annetts key]

If the signalling is controlled by a panel, it's likely to be track circuit block for the area controlled or supervised by the panel.

 

[Legolash2o]

Mix of TCB and AB signalling.

 

[Lucy1501]

At Malton it appears that although the station area is colour lights worked by two small panels, it is AB both ways unless the track circuiting extends all the way to one (or both) of them.

Malton's two BR(NE) panels were replaced by a single TEW 48mm tiled panel at 03:55 on 03/07/2020. It is absolute block both ways, however a large portion of the line to Weaverthorpe is track circuited (I believe it was intended to abolish Weaverthorpe at some point but that never happened).

 

[The Planner]

I understand that the route is signalled with Absolute Block throughout; the route being controlled by York, Strensall, Barton Hill, Kirkham Abbey, Malton, Weaverthorpe and Seamer.
IMO resignalling the route and controlling it from a single centre would not bring any direct benefits to passengers; it would only bring cost savings to Network Rail.

You will have to explain that one. As long as the block sections aren't replaced like for like then its an improvement.

 

[Sultan1056]

You will have to explain that one. As long as the block sections aren't replaced like for like then its an improvement.

I am assuming that if and when the route is re-signalled it will be on a like for like basis. I am not aware of any enhancements that have been proposed to increase capacity or raise line speeds. The signalling renewal would therefore replace equipment in modern form. My opinion is that the existing electro-mechanical signalling controlled locally is fairly robust and quite reliable. Introducing new signalling controlled from York ROC will bring its own issues. From past experience following a signalling renewal scheme there are little benefits to the passenger only to the operator.

 

[The Planner]

I am assuming that if and when the route is re-signalled it will be on a like for like basis. I am not aware of any enhancements that have been proposed to increase capacity or raise line speeds. The signalling renewal would therefore replace equipment in modern form. My opinion is that the existing electro-mechanical signalling controlled locally is fairly robust and quite reliable. Introducing new signalling controlled from York ROC will bring its own issues. From past experience following a signalling renewal scheme there are little benefits to the passenger only to the operator.

Even like for like in modern form is better as you won't have to plan with the 2 minute AB allowance.

 

[Annetts key]

TCB is considerably different to AB.

If you are going to the effort and expense of re-signalling an AB / mechanical area / line, you don't normally even try for a like for like. You design a new scheme (from scratch) based on the stated operational requirements and on the funding that is available.

In many cases, the new signals will be in different positions to any existing signals. Some track circuits may be retained, some of these may be shortened or lengthened. The rest would be new. Or these days, axle counters may be used. All mechanical operated points would be converted to electrically powered points. Except maybe those for sidings where they may be retained but worked by a ground frame (GF).

Even back during the days of BR, on low priority local branch lines, where the AB sections were fairly short, BR did as I describe above.

One of the advantages of TCB from an operational point of view is that the length of the signal sections is fairly consistent. That's rather different to many AB areas where some signal boxes have closed or the spacing was uneven to start with.

 

[Metroman62]

If the proposed station at Haxby is built, would that require an upgrade to the signalling?

Also, does the double track going down to single line running for stopping trains at Malton increase complexity? Last Friday there was an issue that prevented York bound trains calling at Malton for a while. There can’t be many stations where double track running goes down to single line running to allow trains to stop at a single bi direction platform

 

[Gloster]

If the proposed station at Haxby is built, would that require an upgrade to the signalling?

Also, does the double track going down to single line running for stopping trains at Malton increase complexity? Last Friday there was an issue that prevented York bound trains calling at Malton for a while. There can’t be many stations where double track running goes down to single line running to allow trains to stop at a single bi direction platform

A new station at Haxby probably wouldn’t require an upgrade if the station is on a section of plain line not too close to a crossing; only if one of the signals, track-circuit breaks or other equipment are at exactly the same location. If Strenshall Box was abolished then the new work would have to factor in the possibility of trains stopping or not stopping at Haxby in the choice and design of the new crossing arrangements. All quite straightforward, particularly as the possibility of reopening is known in advance.

Anywhere where you must regulate is going to be a bit more of a problem than places where you can run straight through in both directions. The only stations like Malton that spring to mind are Maryport and Ware, but there may be others. There are also plenty of locations clear of stations where there is a section of single-track in a double line, from one-offs like Largin to repeating ones like the Hastings line.

 

[duffield]

If the proposed station at Haxby is built, would that require an upgrade to the signalling?

Also, does the double track going down to single line running for stopping trains at Malton increase complexity? Last Friday there was an issue that prevented York bound trains calling at Malton for a while. There can’t be many stations where double track running goes down to single line running to allow trains to stop at a single bi direction platform

Hartlepool was an example until recently, but P3 is now back in use, so it's just a normal setup now.

 

[bleeder4]

Would level crossings be a factor? For such a short stretch of track it has a significant number of them. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any line of comparable length that has so many level crossings.

 

[Annetts key]

Would level crossings be a factor? For such a short stretch of track it has a significant number of them. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any line of comparable length that has so many level crossings.

Yes, level crossings are a factor. This should all be considered during the development of the plan.

With regards to stations and level crossings, there are limitations on where signals can be positioned.

 

[High Dyke]

You will have to explain that one. As long as the block sections aren't replaced like for like then its an improvement.

Not always. For example, the East Nottingham scheme saw the boxes at Netherfield Jn, Rectory Jn, Bingham and Bottesford replaced. Signalling was actually reduced, by one or two signals and have made signalling sections longer and thus affecting train running. It certainly wasn't an improvement.

 

[The Planner]

Not always. For example, the East Nottingham scheme saw the boxes at Netherfield Jn, Rectory Jn, Bingham and Bottesford replaced. Signalling was actually reduced, by one or two signals and have made signalling sections longer and thus affecting train running. It certainly wasn't an improvement.

Which is why I said not replacing like for like, in your example it wasn't, but clearly it got accepted.

 

[nuneatonmark]

Thanks all, very interesting. I hope the line does get an upgrade and more services. All the trains I've been on recently have been very busy even with it being out of season. Also, since mentioning about cancellations, all the services I've used have been bang on-time. More 800 through services beyond York and 2 trains per hour York to Scarborough please!

 

[Notabene]

Northern were about to introduce an hourly service on the line just before covid. Since then, the proposals have been abandoned.