The changing face of Bristol

[The Stationmaster]

4 hours ago, rodent279 said:

Electric trains at Parkway! Finally, God's Wonderful Railway joins the 20th century!

And during my recent trips to or via that station all the trains I have been on have all been running on electrickery to the east of Parkway (except when passing Steventon of course).

 

Regrettably, for whatever reason, The good Captain seems to have been somewhat late for the luncheon gathering at Stoke Gifford  which took place the week before his visit

[Tim V]

Back when footbridges were a more 'sensible' size.

[Mike Storey]

21 hours ago, 101 said:

 

I've not been up the bank since I retired - what a monstrosity that is 

 

Such ramps tend to be unusually large. The regulations require either 1 in 40 throughout, or 1 in 20 where level landings are provided at maximum distances (I forget the maximum distance, but it is quite short). The distance and structure needed to meet those regulations is immense, especially where allowance has to be made for OLE, which makes the height even greater. I have played a part in installing many of them in the past. I vos then only obeying zee instructions. Nowadays, I am very glad of those regulations. Try pushing someone in a wheelchair up a slope far less than 1 in 40, as I have to very often for my wife (especially here in France, where until relatively recently, the disabled, unless war veterans, were neither seen nor heard), and then make your argument. I don't dispute the in-yer-face god-awful aesthetics, but society, as in our elected representatives, has thankfully decided that the needs of people like me outweigh the eye of the beholder. Perhaps someone, someday, can design a more pleasing structure, at an acceptable cost.

 

I do concur that it is strange that screening was not required to protect the privacy of neighbours. I recall we had to do this at several locations, which added significantly to cost, both from the materials/labour, but also due to making the structure even more robust due to greater wind resistance.

 

The alternative is (are?) lifts, but where a station is not manned throughout the train service, there has been reluctance to provide them (it has been done, obviously), due to potential failures. This would then rely on the emergency comms connection to the lift maintenance company, whose nearest out-of-hours engineer could be several hours away. Failure of the comms too (very possible on a power failure) would then involve the men in white helmets. Not a great scenario, especially if the meeja got wind....possibly from someone like me. 

[Mike Storey]

22 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

How very interesting, Mike.

 

I was the operational lead at the time, working for the Area General Manager at Bristol.

 

Do you remember the 'Gold Control' we set up in Bristol Panel for the duration of the major blockade?

 

2004 was quite a busy year for engineering works, as I recall!

 

 

Were you Gold Control? I thought that was in Swindon, and that Bristol was Silver? Hey Ho. What's in a colour? Hopefully, we gave you little cause for concern - I know we over-ran on one Monday morning, due to a crane failure (one of those new, giant, 360, 100-tonners that looked like something out of H G Wells), but it was only about an hour-ish.

 

The two weekends we did the critical cross-over installations were the ones I sweated - I even stayed the whole weekend at each, together with Roger Dickinson - because of the new fangled, Swedish built, and Swedish-manned, lifting machines we were using to do it. But they went flawlessly, despite virtually none of them understanding a word of Bristolian. (All the welders were either Geordies or Taffs anyway, so it would not have helped. I could barely understand them....).

 

Yes, 2004 was a busy year. Filton was just one of 12 different projects I had on the go that year, but Filton was the biggest.

 

[The Stationmaster]

16 hours ago, Mike Storey said:

 

Such ramps tend to be unusually large. The regulations require either 1 in 40 throughout, or 1 in 20 where level landings are provided at maximum distances (I forget the maximum distance, but it is quite short). The distance and structure needed to meet those regulations is immense, especially where allowance has to be made for OLE, which makes the height even greater. I have played a part in installing many of them in the past. I vos then only obeying zee instructions. Nowadays, I am very glad of those regulations. Try pushing someone in a wheelchair up a slope far less than 1 in 40, as I have to very often for my wife (especially here in France, where until relatively recently, the disabled, unless war veterans, were neither seen nor heard), and then make your argument. I don't dispute the in-yer-face god-awful aesthetics, but society, as in our elected representatives, has thankfully decided that the needs of people like me outweigh the eye of the beholder. Perhaps someone, someday, can design a more pleasing structure, at an acceptable cost.

 

I do concur that it is strange that screening was not required to protect the privacy of neighbours. I recall we had to do this at several locations, which added significantly to cost, both from the materials/labour, but also due to making the structure even more robust due to greater wind resistance.

 

The alternative is (are?) lifts, but where a station is not manned throughout the train service, there has been reluctance to provide them (it has been done, obviously), due to potential failures. This would then rely on the emergency comms connection to the lift maintenance company, whose nearest out-of-hours engineer could be several hours away. Failure of the comms too (very possible on a power failure) would then involve the men in white helmets. Not a great scenario, especially if the meeja got wind....possibly from someone like me. 

GWR seems to have somehow solved the potential problems of having passenger lifts at stations when they are unstaffed.  For example until comparatively recently the lifts at Twyford were only operational during the time staff were on duty but sometime last year something was done (not necessarily to the lifts themselves) to allow them to be used when the station isn't staffed - presumably something to do with routeing  alarms.  I suspect the same might apply at Goring where staffing hours are much more limited than Twyford (and the locals are far more vociferous as other threads have illustrated).

 

Somewhat strangely the situation at Tilehurst is very different because although the new footbridge has relatively shallow step heights no lift was provided when it was built.  However at the same time a wheelchair ramp was created into the waiting shelter on the Up Relief platform - which can nowadays only be reached via the footbridge.  However the last time I looked, some months after it was created, said wheelchair access was blocked off.  On the other hand the other intermediate stations between Reading and Didcot (Pangbourne and Cholsey) have subways and nothing has thus far been done to provide lifts.  However all these stations are now served by local trains which have disabled access toilets. (which will be lost on local trains east of Reading when Crossrail opens).

[Captain Kernow]

On 07/02/2019 at 12:00, The Stationmaster said:

Regrettably, for whatever reason, The good Captain seems to have been somewhat late for the luncheon gathering at Stoke Gifford  which took place the week before his visit

Sadly I wasn't going to be able to make that one after all, too many 'other duties'.

 

[Captain Kernow]

18 hours ago, Mike Storey said:

 

Were you Gold Control? I thought that was in Swindon, and that Bristol was Silver? Hey Ho. What's in a colour? Hopefully, we gave you little cause for concern - I know we over-ran on one Monday morning, due to a crane failure (one of those new, giant, 360, 100-tonners that looked like something out of H G Wells), but it was only about an hour-ish.

 

I did do a shift in the Gold Control, which was the name we gave to the position in the side office in Bristol Panel, but I generally let others cover that and I went 'out and about', visiting the sites and monitoring the diversions via Avonmouth first hand.

 

These days they do use Swindon Control as the 'gold', though.

 

[woodenhead]

On 06/02/2019 at 20:18, Captain Kernow said:

I had the opportunity to travel on a few local trains between Bristol TM and Bristol Parkway today and took a few photos at various locations, showing the new quadrupling works in operation, plus some on-going footbridge construction at Stapleton Road:

 

 

I hope that 'Container' with cutouts is a temporary shelter and not a sign of things to come.

 

37 minutes ago, Captain Kernow said:

I did do a shift in the Gold Control, 

 

I had to read that twice

[Captain Kernow]

2 hours ago, woodenhead said:

 

I hope that 'Container' with cutouts is a temporary shelter and not a sign of things to come.

 

No expense is spared for the comfort of the people of Bristol.

 

[The Stationmaster]

4 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

Sadly I wasn't going to be able to make that one after all, too many 'other duties'.

 

The next one is in 'indian country' - Wokingham.  Not a bad place notwithstanding being renamed and the food isn't bad as pub food goes.

[Mike Storey]

On 07/02/2019 at 15:33, Tim V said:

Back when footbridges were a more 'sensible' size.

 

Unless you were in a wheelchair, were infirm or with heavy luggage or a pram. Otherwise, brilliant!!

 

[Mike Storey]

6 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

GWR seems to have somehow solved the potential problems of having passenger lifts at stations when they are unstaffed.  For example until comparatively recently the lifts at Twyford were only operational during the time staff were on duty but sometime last year something was done (not necessarily to the lifts themselves) to allow them to be used when the station isn't staffed - presumably something to do with routeing  alarms.  I suspect the same might apply at Goring where staffing hours are much more limited than Twyford (and the locals are far more vociferous as other threads have illustrated).

 

 

Aren't Stapleton Road and Filton run by GWR, Mike?

 

[The Stationmaster]

17 minutes ago, Mike Storey said:

 

Aren't Stapleton Road and Filton run by GWR, Mike?

 

Yes they are but there can be all sports of reasons for not going for lifts.   e.g  Tilehurst where I understand they were not put in because of the cost, added to which the new footbridge doesn't have ramps either although I would presume that was due to lack of space to incorporate them.  On the other hand the new footbridge at Twyford, which pre-dated electrification by a few years, was given lifts right from the start.  Seems that GWR moves in its own mysterious ways when it comes to access provision at its various stations. 

[Mike Storey]

50 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

Yes they are but there can be all sports of reasons for not going for lifts.   e.g  Tilehurst where I understand they were not put in because of the cost, added to which the new footbridge doesn't have ramps either although I would presume that was due to lack of space to incorporate them.  On the other hand the new footbridge at Twyford, which pre-dated electrification by a few years, was given lifts right from the start.  Seems that GWR moves in its own mysterious ways when it comes to access provision at its various stations. 

 

There is rarely a design or construction reason for not installing lifts these days, Mike, although of course there are always certain exceptions. The footprint necessary, even with the latest DDA turning regs for a wheelchair within a single entrance/exit lift car, do not exceed those of ramp landings and turns on a bridge. The lightweight (and often well-less) 16-person types we have installed over the last 20 years or so, are light years ahead of what BR used to install. They are also an awful lot cheaper to build than a full length (and width) compliant ramp (if additional support foundations or platform width are necessary). The modern capabilities were developed with the industry, by the retail industry and airports and was adopted in SRA days and now into the Access for All programme, which essentially covers the capital cost (or a large chunk of it) for TOCs/NR.

 

The reason these days will almost always be financial in terms of whole-life costs v predicted levels of use.  The trouble with the latter is that the predictions have almost invariably turned out to be wrong - usage is always far higher than historic data suggests, because there are far more older, infirm, disabled and families with kids, using the railways than there were before time began. The corresponding maintenance, repair and emergency response contracts have always been based on the number of lift movements against hours in service. Lifts are expensive to maintain, especially if a broad spread of out-of-hours cover is required within one hour response times. Apart from high vandalism locations, most faults can be rectified by a member of rail staff with a working finger, pressing a re-set sequence in the segregated, non-technician accessible side of the exterior control panel. If there are no staff, a chap or chapesse in a van to come and press those buttons PDQ, could cost almost as much as staffing the station for longer hours. Hopefully. GWR and others are finding a cost-effective solution somewhere in between. Or they may be relying on the DfT to support the Access for All capital funding with ongoing revenue support. I don't know.

 

But for the moment, I would guess gi-normous ramp bridges will continue to be the order of the day in those locations where usage is low outside peak hours, and there is little local or political pressure to do otherwise, simply because they do not break down.

 

 

Edited February 8, 2019 by Mike Storey

[Andy Kirkham]

According to this https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/local-news/opening-new-portishead-rail-line-2732666 , the Portishead reopening is now fully funded and is going ahead.

 

Dare I say "Hooray for Chris Grayling"?

 

 

Edited April 9, 2019 by Andy Kirkham

[Fat Controller]

45 minutes ago, Andy Kirkham said:

According to this https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/local-news/opening-new-portishead-rail-line-2732666 , the Portishead reopening is now fully funded and is going ahead.

 

Dare I say "Hooray for Chris Grayling"?

 

 

Not until it's finished..

[Captain Kernow]

I've been looking back through this thread for the date that the old girder viaduct at Stapleton Road was lifted out, ie. that which used to carry the old Up and Down Filton Mains, until these were removed in 1984, but I can't seem to find reference to it. Would anyone be kind enough to let me know the date it was removed, please?

 

Many thanks.

 

[bgman]

1 minute ago, Captain Kernow said:

I've been looking back through this thread for the date that the old girder viaduct at Stapleton Road was lifted out, ie. that which used to carry the old Up and Down Filton Mains, until these were removed in 1984, but I can't seem to find reference to it. Would anyone be kind enough to let me know the date it was removed, please?

 

Many thanks.

 

 

I may be able to help later-ish ?

 

G

[Captain Kernow]

1 minute ago, bgman said:

 

I may be able to help later-ish ?

 

G

Thanks, I've narrowed it down to some time between 27/7/17 and 14/8/17, thanks to this video on YouTube - 

 

 

[Mallard60022]

10 minutes ago, Captain Kernow said:

Thanks, I've narrowed it down to some time between 27/7/17 and 14/8/17, thanks to this video on YouTube - 

 

 

Was that the old 'Midland' route CK?

 

[JZ]

2 minutes ago, Mallard60022 said:

Was that the old 'Midland' route CK?

 

No. This was the old four track section. The Midland route left at Barton Hill and crossed this route just north of Lawrence Hill station. It is now part of the Bristol-Bath cycle track.

[Mallard60022]

11 minutes ago, JZ said:

No. This was the old four track section. The Midland route left at Barton Hill and crossed this route just north of Lawrence Hill station. It is now part of the Bristol-Bath cycle track.

Cheers JZ. Worth a look at then that route? Combine it with a visit to the S & DJR one maybe?

P

[JZ]

2 hours ago, Mallard60022 said:

Cheers JZ. Worth a look at then that route? Combine it with a visit to the S & DJR one maybe?

P

Most of the route can be seen on google maps or Earth, but a few parts have been obliterated by development.

[bgman]

5 hours ago, bgman said:

 

I may be able to help later-ish ?

 

G

 

5 hours ago, Captain Kernow said:

Thanks, I've narrowed it down to some time between 27/7/17 and 14/8/17, thanks to this video on YouTube - 

 

 

 

 

The date of demolition was the weekend of 29th July, 2017.

 

G

[JZ]

7 hours ago, bgman said:

 

 

 

The date of demolition was the weekend of 29th July, 2017.

 

G

It took a bit longer than that weekend. I think that date was for the road closure to remove the first span. Working on trains past the site 2, 4, 6 or 8 times a day, meant I had a good view of the demolition.