The Sleaford Avoiding Line...

[trainfanatic]

...appears to be open!

At least the thrice weekly sand hopper train originating at Middleton Towers (Kings Lynn) destination Goole Glassworks appears to have used the avoiding line several times over the last week.

I shall miss the roar of the GBRF 668xxx picking up speed through Sleaford Platform 1 en route to Lincoln and Doncaster.

This will be mitigated of course by (hopefully) Inter Modal freight using the route freeing up paths along part of the ECML.

At a Public Meeting late last month hosted by NR, it was stated that the line would open mid April, so more or less on time at a cost of £300 Million. Oh, and the closure of Sleaford South and North boxes as well as replacement road/rail bridges and LC's.

 

[Welshman]

I was interested to read the Sleaford Avoiding line is now re-opened in both directions, so thank-you for posting that information.

It's a few years since I've last been in Sleaford, so do you know what progress has been made on the road bridge in the centre of the town, allowing Sleaford station level crossing to be closed?

 

[trainfanatic]

Hi Welshman (from a Welshman too boyo), .....

The closure of the Sleaford East LC, and the design/erection of the new footbridge to compensate is still undecided.

This is all tied up with the redevelopment of Sleaford South which includes a new road traffic overbridge close to the long closed Advanta seed site where a new Tesco superstore planned and indeed has received planning permission from North Kesteven District Council.

This road overbridge will emerge on to Boston Road and needs to pass through a recreational area owned by Sleaford Town Council who hold this area in perpetuity for the benefit of Sleafordians.

The whole thing is a mess and the last I heard was that NKDC are looking to place a compulsory purchase order on STC.

This is much as I know just now and it seems that until someone gives way, the status quo will remain.

 

[Whistler40145]

How many years has it been since the Sleaford Avoiding line could only be done in one direction & what was the reason for this?

 

[Welshman]

Thank you, trainfanatic, for that further information.

So, no real progress then, since I lived in the area about 4 years ago!

 

[trainfanatic]

How many years has it been since the Sleaford Avoiding line could only be done in one direction & what was the reason for this?

I have no information on that, but guess it was due to rail overbridge weight restrictions.

 

[class26]

I have no information on that, but guess it was due to rail overbridge weight restrictions.

It may be but also one line was totally abandoned and over grown, way beyond use.

 

[RichmondCommu]

It may be but also one line was totally abandoned and over grown, way beyond use.

Which in turn was probably due to a reduction in the number of trains using the line. For many years the railways were in serious decline.

 

[trainfanatic]

It may be but also one line was totally abandoned and over grown, way beyond use.

That would be the down line. Shrubbery, Weeds and other fast growing vegetation abounded.

The up line remained open however and was very useful and used extensively during ECML blockades.

 

[G0ORC]

How many years has it been since the Sleaford Avoiding line could only be done in one direction & what was the reason for this?

It had been severely damaged in a derailment and, due to its low usage, the cost of repairing it was deemed prohibitive.

 

[linkyork]

Lets hope when the line is fully completed and the excuse for the poor train service, cost of manning the many signal boxes and crossings, from Lincoln to Peterborough is improved from the last Lincoln departure of around 16.00.

 

[CockneySparrow]

How many years has it been since the Sleaford Avoiding line could only be done in one direction & what was the reason for this?

Just a long shot guess here, but perhaps the original decline started when the Spalding to March line was lifted if not the preceding years before, once this line was lifted perhaps it was deemed that there wasn't any real need for it as the volume of freight had decreased and what was left could just run through the station

Perhaps others might confirm this

 

[corin paul]

When is the line due to be finished, but I did notice Sleaford South box is no more, on way pass today.

 

[a good off]

The Joint closed between March and Spalding at the same time as the Lincoln Avoiding Line closed. There was a notice issued at the same time for the closure of the Sleaford Avoiding line but it was never actually disconnected or lifted.

 

[trentside]

When is the line due to be finished, but I did notice Sleaford South box is no more, on way pass today.

All the boxes north of Blotoft have now closed - Lincoln now controls from there all the way to Gainsborough Trent Junction (via Avoiding Line). Sleaford North, Blankney, Stow Park and Gainsborough Lea Road still stand - but Sleaford South, Scopwick and Saxilby have been demolished.

South of Blotoft a lot of the new signalling is already in place - so I think it's only a matter of time for most of the boxes and manned crossings. I'm afraid I can't find the exact timescale, but did hear that the project isn't quite running to schedule.

 

[corin paul]

Yes trentside, I saw alot of men out working on the crossing gate and barriers in that area. And the overbridges and underbrigers look nearly all look finished all the way to Peterborough.

 

[linkyork]

Some dates for signal box closures onwards to Spalding and Werrington Junction are
Blotoft - Gosberton and Mill Green
OPEN till Phase 4 commission starts 25/07 to 11/08
Spalding - Littleworth - St. James Deeping
OPEN till Phase 5 commission starts 24/10 to 3/11
THis info and more is available on Yahoo group
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/SignalWatch/

 

[ultrabox]

Apologies to bring up an old topic but does anyone know what's wrong with the avoiding line at Sleaford.

I noticed from the 153 the other day that both lines have a 20mph TSR.

Anyone care to explain?

 

[davetheguard]

Apologies to bring up an old topic but does anyone know what's wrong with the avoiding line at Sleaford.

I noticed from the 153 the other day that both lines have a 20mph TSR.

Anyone care to explain?

Could it be because they've both been recently relaid? I don't know; it's just a guess considering the location and the speed of the temporary speed restriction.

 

[trainfanatic]

Could it be because they've both been recently relaid? I don't know; it's just a guess considering the location and the speed of the temporary speed restriction.

I think the answer lies in RTT....There was a Tamper movement very early this morning (Thursday) from Heckington to Sleaford Tamper siding (yes! one exists!) with said tamper arriving at SLR 05h40.

I hope this clears up the query

 

[atraindriver]

Apologies to bring up an old topic but does anyone know what's wrong with the avoiding line at Sleaford.

I noticed from the 153 the other day that both lines have a 20mph TSR.

Anyone care to explain?

Reopening this old topic once more...

There isn't a 20 on both lines, it was (and is) only on the relaid Down line, which is now bi-directional, hence the commencement boards at both ends.

It's there simply because of the relaying.

 

[Welshman]

There isn't a 20 on both lines, it was (and is) only on the relaid Down line, which is now bi-directional, hence the commencement boards at both ends.

I'm interested in your saying the down line is now bi-directional.

Do you know the reason why?

Surely it's not now the intention to single the avoiding lines, having spent so much money and effort recently in bringing the down line back into use?

If so, then why did they not simply abandon the down line altogether and make the former up line bi-di?

 

[atraindriver]

I'm interested in your saying the down line is now bi-directional.

Do you know the reason why?

Dynamic loop apparently, although why they've only felt it necessary to provide a "loop" for Up trains and nothing for Down trains I have no idea.

Surely it's not now the intention to single the avoiding lines [...]

Nope.

 

[Welshman]

Dynamic loop apparently, although why they've only felt it necessary to provide a "loop" for Up trains and nothing for Down trains I have no idea.

Thank you.
The fortunes of the cut-off have certainly reversed - from being nearly abandoned to being laid-out to allow up trains to overtake on it within 5 years or so.

 

[atraindriver]

Thank you.
The fortunes of the cut-off have certainly reversed - from being nearly abandoned to being laid-out to allow up trains to overtake on it within 5 years or so.

It'll be interesting to see if (and indeed how) the dynamic loop is ever used.

 

[Tomnick]

Is it really a dynamic loop? I thought the purpose of such a thing was to allow trains to pass (usually crossing in opposite directions) without either stopping - which certainly won't be possible in this case unless the slower one is really slow! As for the question of why the down and not the up - simply, I suspect, because the track layout (with crossovers at either end as part of the single lead junctions) physically allows it, and it's relatively trivial to provide it as part of the signalling over such a short distance nowadays.

 

[atraindriver]

Is it really a dynamic loop? I thought the purpose of such a thing was to allow trains to pass (usually crossing in opposite directions) without either stopping - which certainly won't be possible in this case unless the slower one is really slow!

I always thought a dynamic loop was simply a "loop" created by using a running line in the opposite direction to allow trains running in the same direction to pass.

But I'm probably wrong!

As for the question of why the down and not the up - simply, I suspect, because the track layout (with crossovers at either end as part of the single lead junctions) physically allows it, and it's relatively trivial to provide it as part of the signalling over such a short distance nowadays.

That's certainly logical.

But... this is the GN+GE upgrade we're talking about here, where cost cutting is allegedly the name of the game (hence AHBs not being upgraded to ODs, even though the manual gates on quieter roads have been replaced with ODs, that sort of thing).
I'm surprised that it hadn't been cut out to save 50p on signalling costs.

 

[Tomnick]

I'm open to correction or enlightenment as I've never had anything to do with a dynamic loop myself, but my understanding is that they're just long crossing loops on a single line!

As for the AHB to MCB-OD conversion (or lack of) - don't get me started. They're busy trumpeting the new crossings, saying how brilliant they are and how much they're reducing risk - when the reality is that the risk has barely been reduced at all, and the highest risk crossings still remain unchanged. It's not about risk reduction, it's entirely about reducing operating costs. When will people understand that all level crossings aren't equal?!

 

[LowLevel]

That and they're unreliable rubbish that drop the barriers far too early and cause people to jump them or miss trains - they come down over 5 mins before stopping services are due in some areas.

 

[Tomnick]

I wonder how the HSE views that aspect of their operation (I understand from discussions elsewhere that they they, or the signalling systems controlling them, don't differentiate between stopping and non-stopping trains) - they have issued improvement notices in similar circumstances in the past.