Why is the GEML always closed on weekends?

[Bald Rick]

Apparently there’s something called ballast memory, in that whatever you do the ballast settles back where it came from unless you dig it right out and start again. Hence the long running 50 TSR. Didn’t realise the blades were missing (you’ll have a better view than me these days). The missing blades may be co-incidental, don’t know.

Ballast memory is a very real phenomenon! It usually occurs when the formation has failed, typically where there is clay underneath, as is the case here. If the switches are out there is a small possibility that the plain lined crossings are clamped in rather than welded, in which case that is max 50mph (and watch out for 20mph when it gets cold and the gaps open). I’m 90% sure they are standard switches though, albeit long, so they may be a special order.

 

[Class 170101]

Apparently there’s something called ballast memory, in that whatever you do the ballast settles back where it came from unless you dig it right out and start again. Hence the long running 50 TSR. Didn’t realise the blades were missing (you’ll have a better view than me these days). The missing blades may be co-incidental, don’t know.

There might currently be no access from the Main Lines into Ilford Depot via Ilford Depot L/End Jn or via Seven Kings if what I have read is correct.

 

[306024]

Getting the Romford - Upminster unit back to the depot will be a right zig-zag move with those points OOU.

 

[Terry Tait]

I think that the issue is that despite having endless weekend engineering works and closures at my sister's local station Ponders End she has seen zero improvement to the service for about thirty years and to add insult to injury the station office has been permanently closed.

 

[Bald Rick]

I think that the issue is that despite having endless weekend engineering works and closures at my sister's local station Ponders End she has seen zero improvement to the service for about thirty years and to add insult to injury the station office has been permanently closed.

Ponders End isn’t on the GEML.

What is more, weekend engineering works there are rather limited - usually no more than a handful of weekends each year, because of Stansted services. There have been more in the last couple of years because of the new track and station up to Meridian Water, but that’s done now.

 

[Geswedey]

No worries. When would you like aged infrastructure upgraded to deliver a better service? Please set out your workings here:

A certain MP complained to NR and GA that the Southend OHLE renewals were taking too long and that his constituents were fed up with buses in the evenings on weekdays and at weekends so a week long block took place with bus replacements Wickford Southend during half term to appease him and there were complaints about that you can't win with some people.

 

[stuu]

I think that the issue is that despite having endless weekend engineering works and closures at my sister's local station Ponders End she has seen zero improvement to the service for about thirty years and to add insult to injury the station office has been permanently closed.

Somewhat missing the point that without the engineering works there may not be any service at all

 

[Class 170101]

I think that the issue is that despite having endless weekend engineering works and closures at my sister's local station Ponders End she has seen zero improvement to the service for about thirty years and to add insult to injury the station office has been permanently closed.

At least its only a short walk to a Seven Sisters route station unlike the GEML.

Somewhat missing the point that without the engineering works there may not be any service at all

The amount of work needs to be managed and the number of possessions controlled. It had become noticeable in the past how many of the two track blocks south of Shenfield didn't take place as there was no work on Sundays to be done despite NR claiming they needed 27hrs each Sunday. North of Shenfield Rudd Haket had the right idea, if not perhaps the right execution, saying eight weekends per year. This number is probably too few but the current number seems excessive.

A certain MP complained to NR and GA that the Southend OHLE renewals were taking too long and that his constituents were fed up with buses in the evenings on weekdays and at weekends so a week long block took place with bus replacements Wickford Southend during half term to appease him and there were complaints about that you can't win with some people.

And he is a waste of space, the sooner he is slung out of Parliament the better.

 

[Bald Rick]

North of Shenfield Rudd Haket had the right idea, if not perhaps the right execution, saying eight weekends per year. This number is probably too few but the current number seems excessive.

It wasn’t his idea. And I’m not saying whose it was!

The ‘right’ number is surely the number required to deliver a safe and reasonably reliable railway?

 

[Trainfan344]

The best solution would be to 6 track up to Chelmsford with 4 tracks from there to Norwich.

 

[Bald Rick]

The best solution would be to 6 track up to Chelmsford with 4 tracks from there to Norwich.

Best in what context? You couldn’t run any more trains into Liverpool St.

 

[Trainfan344]

Best in what context? You couldn’t run any more trains into Liverpool St.

You could if you double deck Liverpool Street.

 

[O L Leigh]

The best solution would be to 6 track up to Chelmsford with 4 tracks from there to Norwich.

You could if you double deck Liverpool Street.

“Why is the GEML closed every weekend...?”

 

[Trainfan344]

I mean if they were double decking Liverpool Street and put the extra tracks in, eventually they wouldn't need to close the GEML at weekends. Just shut parts...

 

[Bald Rick]

You could if you double deck Liverpool Street.

It has been double decked. Two new platforms underneath.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

You could if you double deck Liverpool Street.

I assume this isn't a serious suggestion...

 

[Bald Rick]

I assume this isn't a serious suggestion...

Hell what’s a few billion spent on some of the most expensive real estate in the country when you’re building 2 new tracks to Norwich!

 

[trebor79]

The best solution would be to 6 track up to Chelmsford with 4 tracks from there to Norwich.

There's absolutely no need for 4 tracks to Norwich. Maybe as far as Colchester or Ipswich.
From Ipswich it's a half hourly service, with the odd Ipswich - Peterborough and some freight sharing the line to just north of Stowmarket. If there's ever a need for more capacity Ipswich - Norwich, that can be unlocked by improving the signalling, which I believe is currently 3 aspect with long sections.
And you'd need to build a new bridge at Trowse.

 

[Trainfan344]

It has been double decked. Two new platforms underneath.

Then build another deck on top

I assume this isn't a serious suggestion...

This is a serious, if money were no object sort of suggestion

Hell what’s a few billion spent on some of the most expensive real estate in the country when you’re building 2 new tracks to Norwich!

I see you're finally coming around to my suggestions.

 

[O L Leigh]

I mean if they were double decking Liverpool Street and put the extra tracks in, eventually they wouldn't need to close the GEML at weekends. Just shut parts...

But how disruptive would it be to do all this work in the first place? How many weekend closures do you imagine might be needed to deliver it?

I get your point, but only up to a point. If the infrastructure existed, works would be less disruptive. But creating this infrastructure in the first place would be a massive undertaking that would see huge disruption to services on a par with the Reading upgrades. Also, the works required would cover a large amount of the maintenance and upgrades already taking place along the GE route, so there would be no need for weekend closures because all the work would have already been done thereby undermining the need for the massively increased upgrades.

But the real kicker is that such works would be both unnecessary on this route and wildly expensive. It simply isn’t the answer.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

The rail blogger UKrail proposed a relief line that ran from Stratford to Stansted/Chelmsford along the M11. Which could be useful for the Great Eastern.

As for Liverpool Street, just build a SW-NE Crossrail taking over the Lea Valley Lines.

 

[dk1]

There's absolutely no need for 4 tracks to Norwich. Maybe as far as Colchester or Ipswich.
From Ipswich it's a half hourly service, with the odd Ipswich - Peterborough and some freight sharing the line to just north of Stowmarket. If there's ever a need for more capacity Ipswich - Norwich, that can be unlocked by improving the signalling, which I believe is currently 3 aspect with long sections.
And you'd need to build a new bridge at Trowse.

From Ipswich it's half hourly with plans for three an hour, the odd Peterborough is two hourly again with plans to go hourly, but you overlooked mentioning the hourly Cambridge which also stops at Needham. Plenty of freight uses the route as far as Haughley too & this is growing all the time. Add to this Stadlers which return to Crown Point for fuel & its busier than you think. I'm nowhere near implying quadrupling is necessary or needed but as you say at the least resignalling to 4-aspect has been overdue for years now. The original set up here was designed for a less busy & declining railway in the 1980s.

 

[AM9]

... Add to this Stadlers which return to Crown Point for fuel & its busier than you think. ...

A far cheaper solution for this than four-tracking would be to establish a fuelling point at Ipswich.

 

[dk1]

A far cheaper solution for this than four-tracking would be to establish a fuelling point at Ipswich.

There have been plans but nothing can happen until Freightliner move out if it is followed up. 4-tracking is never happening South of Colchester let alone on this stretch

 

[30907]

The rail blogger UKrail proposed a relief line that ran from Stratford to Stansted/Chelmsford along the M11. Which could be useful for the Great Eastern.

I hope he meant Stansted and Colchester? The idea had occurred to me too, but you still have to put the trains somewhere in London, so needs a variant on Crossrail 2.

 

[GB]

The rail blogger UKrail proposed a relief line that ran from Stratford to Stansted/Chelmsford along the M11. Which could be useful for the Great Eastern.

As for Liverpool Street, just build a SW-NE Crossrail taking over the Lea Valley Lines.

Someone should probably tell the blogger the M11 doesn't go to Chelmsford.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

http://ukrail.blogspot.com/search/label/angliarelief This was the plan, although yes I think a spur to Colchester would be better.

 

[Alfie1014]

From Ipswich it's half hourly with plans for three an hour, the odd Peterborough is two hourly again with plans to go hourly, but you overlooked mentioning the hourly Cambridge which also stops at Needham. Plenty of freight uses the route as far as Haughley too & this is growing all the time. Add to this Stadlers which return to Crown Point for fuel & its busier than you think. I'm nowhere near implying quadrupling is necessary or needed but as you say at the least resignalling to 4-aspect has been overdue for years now. The original set up here was designed for a less busy & declining railway in the 1980s.

Having travelled over the route a couple of times again recently and enjoying watching real time movements using the likes of East Anglia Signal Maps, (who needs train sims when you can watch the real thing in real time!) the infrastucture is pretty much at its limits these days, (as acknowledged in NR's GEML Study published in July). The increase in liners from Felixstowe since the Trimley doubling seems to have moved the pinch points further north (and west). The single lead junction at Haughley and the long(ish) signal sections constrain operations. I didn't realise until recently that until a train is pretty much in the platform at Stowmarket a second cannot be signalled off of the Bury line at Haughley. Add in any minor disruption and delays can snowball. Haughley Junction re-doubling is in NR's Study but it is not yet funded or programmed so is a good few years off yet. Though with the closure of the factory on the land adjacent to the up side of the track here makes me dream of a flyover to grade seperate traffic! Whilst NR's study does mention grade seperation, the suggested intervention proposes simply restoring the former double track layout for parallel moves. So I doubt grade seperation will ever happen even though it services one of the most valuable freight routes in the country, I suspect it will become yet another housing estate and an opportunity will lost for good!

Interestingly hidden in the report is the aspiration for an hourly Norwich in 90 service, though this and other aspirations can only be achieved following the completion of the series of improvements including in the document, namely;

* Bow Junction remodelling,
* Beaulieu new station (though only a 3 platform layout with centre turn back/overtaking road. i.e. no dynamic loop(s) for overtaking freights or slower passenger services),
* Bizarrely a new down loop at Marks Tey, utilising the Sudbury platform and
* Haughley Junction doubling.

To cope with longer term growth 3/4 tracking Shenfield to Chelmsford and Ipswich to Haughley Jn is recommended, as is Trowse bridge doubling.

I'm surprised that no mention is made specifically of Digital Signalling, only closing up of signals and reductions in headways, even though Bow Junction remodelling is claimed to deliver up to 10 extra trains an hour (where?) - 30 trains per hour between Bow Jn and Shenfield - surely not deliverable with conventional signalling and the mix of stops and traffic types in the peak?

The suggestion of a new route from the 'London' area via Stansted to link up with the GEML north of Witham was made by Greengauge 21 http://www.greengauge21.net/wp-content/uploads/Beyond_HS2WEB-1.pdf when it looked at where next for High Speed Rail after HS2, though this is likely to be as probably as Haughley grade separation!

 

[LAX54]

Having travelled over the route a couple of times again recently and enjoying watching real time movements using the likes of East Anglia Signal Maps, (who needs train sims when you can watch the real thing in real time!) the infrastucture is pretty much at its limits these days, (as acknowledged in NR's GEML Study published in July). The increase in liners from Felixstowe since the Trimley doubling seems to have moved the pinch points further north (and west). The single lead junction at Haughley and the long(ish) signal sections constrain operations. I didn't realise until recently that until a train is pretty much in the platform at Stowmarket a second cannot be signalled off of the Bury line at Haughley. Add in any minor disruption and delays can snowball. Haughley Junction re-doubling is in NR's Study but it is not yet funded or programmed so is a good few years off yet. Though with the closure of the factory on the land adjacent to the up side of the track here makes me dream of a flyover to grade seperate traffic! Whilst NR's study does mention grade seperation, the suggested intervention proposes simply restoring the former double track layout for parallel moves. So I doubt grade seperation will ever happen even though it services one of the most valuable freight routes in the country, I suspect it will become yet another housing estate and an opportunity will lost for good!

Interestingly hidden in the report is the aspiration for an hourly Norwich in 90 service, though this and other aspirations can only be achieved following the completion of the series of improvements including in the document, namely;

* Bow Junction remodelling,
* Beaulieu new station (though only a 3 platform layout with centre turn back/overtaking road. i.e. no dynamic loop(s) for overtaking freights or slower passenger services),
* Bizarrely a new down loop at Marks Tey, utilising the Sudbury platform and
* Haughley Junction doubling.

To cope with longer term growth 3/4 tracking Shenfield to Chelmsford and Ipswich to Haughley Jn is recommended, as is Trowse bridge doubling.

I'm surprised that no mention is made specifically of Digital Signalling, only closing up of signals and reductions in headways, even though Bow Junction remodelling is claimed to deliver up to 10 extra trains an hour (where?) - 30 trains per hour between Bow Jn and Shenfield - surely not deliverable with conventional signalling and the mix of stops and traffic types in the peak?

The suggestion of a new route from the 'London' area via Stansted to link up with the GEML north of Witham was made by Greengauge 21 http://www.greengauge21.net/wp-content/uploads/Beyond_HS2WEB-1.pdf when it looked at where next for High Speed Rail after HS2, though this is likely to be as probably as Haughley grade separation!

Yes on the up CO699 (or CO396) will not clear until the previous is almost in Stowmarket Station, on the Down there is an additional signal between the two locations, one of the things that slows the Bury line down at Haughley is that the signal at the Junction is approach controlled, and quite a severe 'check' too ! without fail every freight that passes, 'fails' Haughley Barriers, such is the speed of the train by that point.

Signalling Haughley to Norwich is simply colour lights replacing the old semaphores and boxes, in almost the same places, with a couple more thrown in for good luck !

(Imagine if the original plan had taken place ...single line Haughley to Trowse, with a loop at Diss ! )

 

[TubeMapCentral]

“Why is the GEML closed every weekend...?”

I just don't get it. On the one hand we are told that the GEML is one of the busiest, most intensive track punishing operations in the country, so that it becomes one of the most closed-down routes at weekends (and let us not forget hated cramped 2+3 seating despite 12 coach trains because, even with the intensive service, it is still packed).

Then on the other hand we are told that any attempt to relieve or improve the route is unneccessary.

A little bit of consistency amongst opinions might go down better. Yes, cash is scarce, but some sort of deserved, official, aspirational plan wouldn't go amiss.

The complaints are that the endemic weekend closures (26 years in my case) are just there to patch things up and keep the wretched status quo in place for all eternity. I think the locals might be happier to put up with weekend closures if they thought that structural improvements might be the intention.