Jump to content
 

IoW light rail conversion proposed


Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold
3 hours ago, John M Upton said:

Network Rail seem to be making much more use of co-acting signals nowadays.  London Victoria (South Central Side) has some now located in the six foot to serve right hand side platforms (15, 17, 19 and probably others) as sitting in the drivers seat of a full twelve car 377 or 387, I cannot actually see the platform mounted starter signal (especially the Right Away RA indicator now we are all DOO) without craning my neck around as there is the bulk of the corridor connector and associated bits in the line of sight.

 

A good idea all around.

Is this somebody's bright idea, or an inevitable consequence of the drive to maximise train lengths?

 

Either way, it's nice to see solutions being applied that don't involve a ton of technological overkill.

 

John

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

Is this somebody's bright idea, or an inevitable consequence of the drive to maximise train lengths?

 

Either way, it's nice to see solutions being applied that don't involve a ton of technological overkill.

 

John

 

Bright idea, or that horrific, bureaucratic spectacle of the modern era: proper risk assessment?

 

Barstewards. How dare they muck up a perfectly serviceable history of correcting stuff after accidents had already occurred!

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Overnight, some little thieving so and so stole the whistle off car 126.  Removed carefully apparently. 

 

An appeal for its anonymous return has appeared on social media. 

  • Friendly/supportive 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully you can see this linkedin post by the signmaker AJ Wells, showing the signage at Brading - I remain totally baffled by the foot crossing, the fencing is above head height yet it still looks like the crossing will remain open with only a stern warning to look both ways. Quite bizarre.

 

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/ajwellsandsonsltd_architecture-branding-construction-activity-6859134600984190976-7MEU

 

...on closer inspection some of the fencing on the far side has been cut down, but the view towards Sandown is still obstructed. There's been a lot of activity at Brading this week I gather, presumably trying to sort this out?

Edited by Christopher125
  • Like 3
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Christopher125 said:

Hopefully you can see this linkedin post by the signmaker AJ Wells, showing the signage at Brading - I remain totally baffled by the foot crossing, the fencing is above head height yet it still looks like the crossing will remain open with only a stern warning to look both ways. Quite bizarre.

 

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/ajwellsandsonsltd_architecture-branding-construction-activity-6859134600984190976-7MEU

 

...on closer inspection some of the fencing on the far side has been cut down, but the view towards Sandown is still obstructed. There's been a lot of activity at Brading this week I gather, presumably trying to sort this out?


Interesting that even the new signage retains the retro-style totems and green-and-white signage.  Given that the “new” trains are in the latest SWR livery I’m surprised they didn’t go for standard SWR signage.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Christopher125 said:

Hopefully you can see this linkedin post by the signmaker AJ Wells, showing the signage at Brading - I remain totally baffled by the foot crossing, the fencing is above head height yet it still looks like the crossing will remain open with only a stern warning to look both ways. Quite bizarre.

 

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/ajwellsandsonsltd_architecture-branding-construction-activity-6859134600984190976-7MEU

 

...on closer inspection some of the fencing on the far side has been cut down, but the view towards Sandown is still obstructed. There's been a lot of activity at Brading this week I gather, presumably trying to sort this out?

Thats good a local company carrying out the work not sure where they are in Aylesbury but its a good job.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
On 28/10/2021 at 22:08, RichardLong said:


Interesting that even the new signage retains the retro-style totems and green-and-white signage.  Given that the “new” trains are in the latest SWR livery I’m surprised they didn’t go for standard SWR signage.

AIUI, following the rearrangement of the rail industry, including SWR, further application of the livery (e.g. to that portion of the Class 159 fleet still in ex-SWT colours) has been suspended.

 

That will logically apply also to station branding.

 

John 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Bit of a weird day. 

 

- Signalling issue at Ryde in the morning.

- Poor timekeeping, presumably due to dwell times, new speed limits and TPWS?

- Lineside fire near Sandown kyboshed the service mid-afternoon.

- Surprisingly they used the horn instead of the whistle for crossings - I did wonder how they'd get that past the ORR tbh, even though it's distinctive and what people here expect.

 

Edited by Christopher125
  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

The units are timetabled to run a return trip every hour but they were losing a few minutes every trip. The reason was stated to be the doors but not sure why?

 

To make up time, after lunch they terminated a service at Ryde Esplanade - but the people on the train and waiting on the platform who had luggage, and who wanted to go to the end of the pier to catch a ferry, were really not happy. The poor unfortunate driver was getting a lot of unnecessary abuse. A bit sad as it was great to see trains running again and there seemed to be plenty of passengers

  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite talk of level boarding at Brading and significant work replacing the adjacent cattle creep with a culvert, underpinning the platforms and excavating the trackbed... the track itself appears no lower now than before.

 

Presumably it's been descoped at some point - no great surprise - but it's left the 484's wheelchair ramps somewhat inadequate. Anyone know more?

 

(484001 being delivered last year and a video uploaded today)

 

Brading140.jpg.11cc0dce56f8cff5bdc704dfef777d18.jpg

 

 

Edited by Christopher125
  • Like 2
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

This letter does a good job explaining why - without finding some time between Ryde and Brading - passing trains at the new loop is looking problematic.

 

https://www.countypress.co.uk/features/19727028.brading-passing-loop-island-lines-major-problem/

 

Quote

Running time from Ryde Pier Head to Brading on the old timetable was 14 minutes which was quite tight and trains often ran a little late in the summer period, particularly if a stop at Smallbrook Junction was required.


There was a seven minute turnaround at the Pier Head which meant that a train took 35 minutes to get from Brading to the Pier Head and back.

Brading Station is only ten minutes travel time from Shanklin which means the passing loop is nowhere near halfway along the line.

 

Edited by Christopher125
  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 24/11/2021 at 16:23, Christopher125 said:

This letter does a good job explaining why - without finding some time between Ryde and Brading - passing trains at the new loop is looking problematic.

 

https://www.countypress.co.uk/features/19727028.brading-passing-loop-island-lines-major-problem/

 

Reading the letter, one does wonder which is uppermost in the minds of SWR, minimising crewing costs or providing a service that satisfies the desires of the passengers. If you have a railway that runs to the pier head, it becomes a given that trains should connect with the ferry service, and not just for passengers travelling beyond Ryde Esplanade either. In the absence of the now long lost pier tramway and the other railway services, the railway provides an important link from the ferry to the bus services that serve the rest of the island.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 27/11/2021 at 08:11, jim.snowdon said:

Reading the letter, one does wonder which is uppermost in the minds of SWR, minimising crewing costs or providing a service that satisfies the desires of the passengers. If you have a railway that runs to the pier head, it becomes a given that trains should connect with the ferry service, and not just for passengers travelling beyond Ryde Esplanade either.

 

SWR though are constrained by what subsidy the Treasury is willing to tolerate as mentioned, but also by the realities of the infrastructure - locations of passing loops, length of track, speed limits - that they have.

 

Also a bit unfair to put the blame entirely on SWR and not also on the ferry service who are theoretically an equal partner in attempting a linked up timetable.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 27/11/2021 at 14:45, corneliuslundie said:

But is it SWR or HM Treasury which is now making such decisions?

Jonathan

 

No change in that respect - it has always been the DfT (and thus eventually HM Treasury). The only thing that has changed is that revenue responsibility now also rests with DfT and not the TOC. The TOC just gets a management fee, for which bonuses (or theoretically, penalties) are applied based on a set of performance and customer service metrics.

  • Agree 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mdvle said:

 

SWR though are constrained by what subsidy the Treasury is willing to tolerate as mentioned, but also by the realities of the infrastructure - locations of passing loops, length of track, speed limits - that they have.

 

Also a bit unfair to put the blame entirely on SWR and not also on the ferry service who are theoretically an equal partner in attempting a linked up timetable.

 

The former is true, but the latter is almost unachievable, If SWR cannot maintain a half hourly service (to whatever timetable the ferries agree), then there could be an accumulative delay throughout the day (unless one or more services is cancelled to restore running). Should the ferries do the same, given the majority of their customers do not, at least currently, use the train service?

 

The issue is whether the new Brading loop is the answer to providing a half hourly service. I expressed reservations about this some time ago on this thread, but was shot down for whatever reason. However, the letter published in the Press does not take into account the recoveries available from the St Johns/Esplanade section, nor the Shanklin and the new Brading sections. My issue is that a third (or fifth) set and crew should be available during peak weeks/days, to enable recovery when needed. That is the issue that is no doubt the subject of negotiation between SWR and the DfT at present, but cuts elsewhere do not bode well, and the slow growth of return to rail post-pandemic does not help either. Only if crammed trains, full of disgruntled passengers, who keep missing connections, were to result in the MP's seat, or the local council control, becoming marginal, will any change be forthcoming. Somehow, given the IOW's voting record over the past 20 years, I doubt it, but who knows?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
3 hours ago, mdvle said:

 

SWR though are constrained by what subsidy the Treasury is willing to tolerate as mentioned, but also by the realities of the infrastructure - locations of passing loops, length of track, speed limits - that they have.

 

Also a bit unfair to put the blame entirely on SWR and not also on the ferry service who are theoretically an equal partner in attempting a linked up timetable.

The ferry company, however, have to carefully balance their timetable in order to avoid connecting with as many trains as possible at Portsmouth...

  • Round of applause 1
  • Funny 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 28/11/2021 at 23:19, PhilJ W said:

Another silly idea, the only sensible route is using the Isle of Wight steam railways line to Newport, and then build them a new line from Sandown to Newport. Network Rail could ship loads of unwanted lengths of 'scrap' rail from around the network to a site on that line or better still replace 'ALL' the steam railways route with concrete sleepered welded flatbottom and relay the New IOW steam railways line (Newport to Sandown) for them using there own rails.

 

The IOW steam railway would gain from a 'Brand new' new route and provide a line from the seaside to the Capital.  Win Win I think.

 

Charlie 

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...