Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I have always been most annoyed that the railways, since time immemorial, have constructed their infrastructure to carry the projected traffic efficiently, safely and economically, with nary a thought for the desire of the modeller for complex track formations, minimal signalling, impressive (and yet tiny) buildings etc. There should be a law against it.

  • Funny 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, burgundy said:

 Hint - you will not need too many turnouts to build a model.

 

 

But I'm pleased to see what looks like a proper station building and not just a shelter. I wonder if there's any possibility it might be staffed.

 

And I see a link by that story to an earlier one that I missed https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/metrowest-project-extended-gloucester-4245736

 

If MetroWest is extended to Gloucester, I should think that would make it much more likely that Charfield and Stonehouse Bristol Road might be reopened.

Edited by Andy Kirkham
  • Like 4
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, burgundy said:

The process to reopen the Portishead branch grinds forward.

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/new-images-portisheads-long-awaited-4540943

The public examination that forms part of the Development Consent Order process begins next month.

There is also a visualisation of the proposed Portishead station. Hint - you will not need too many turnouts to build a model.

Best wishes 

Eric

North Somerset Council leader Councillor Don Davies said: "This is a hugely complex scheme that has to go through many stages in order to progress.

That says everything about why rail schemes take such a ridiculous time in the UK.  It is NOT complex, it is a single line a few kilometres long, where the track (needing replacement, obviously) is still in place and the land, except for the actual terminus site, is still owned by the railway authorities.  Yet apparently it's "complex" to build and re-open it.  That's because in Britain we actively look for people to object to things, then when we don't find them, look again, employ some environmental consultants to explain why it can't be done because they've discovered a rare newt (that apparently only exists on planned construction sites), get some unrelated planning offsets included for a few more million........ Meanwhile tens of thousands of people get into their cars and sit in queues trying to get into Bristol every day, for a few more years.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 7
  • Friendly/supportive 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, burgundy said:

The process to reopen the Portishead branch grinds forward.

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/new-images-portisheads-long-awaited-4540943

The public examination that forms part of the Development Consent Order process begins next month.

There is also a visualisation of the proposed Portishead station. Hint - you will not need too many turnouts to build a model.

Best wishes 

Eric

No doubt more 'consultants' creaming off their cut.

  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a few reasons why you want to hire a consultant. The first is to be able to pass the blame if it doesn't work out. The second is because you know sfa about the project. The third is because you accept bribes. Historically, the folk on most councils have never been the sharpest knives in the box, certainly few have any technical knowledge, and often they promote themselves since they have vested interests in the area, builders, whatever. So, to someone whose main interest is possibly drinks at the golf club, a railway line construction will be highly complex. The trouble is, that not all idiots are harmless. I have no knowledge of the people involved, just my general opinion of this sort of situation. Maybe those directly affected do a bit of digging into the apparent can of worms.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, raymw said:

There are a few reasons why you want to hire a consultant. The first is to be able to pass the blame if it doesn't work out. The second is because you know sfa about the project. The third is because you accept bribes. Historically, the folk on most councils have never been the sharpest knives in the box, certainly few have any technical knowledge, and often they promote themselves since they have vested interests in the area, builders, whatever. So, to someone whose main interest is possibly drinks at the golf club, a railway line construction will be highly complex. The trouble is, that not all idiots are harmless. I have no knowledge of the people involved, just my general opinion of this sort of situation. Maybe those directly affected do a bit of digging into the apparent can of worms.

I don't doubt what you say here.

Hiring consultants would probably have been cheaper in the 1980s/1990s/2000s/2010s.

Hopefully by the 2030s no consultants will still be getting a cut for work on a proposed Portishead passenger service!

 

cheers

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/09/2020 at 10:51, talisman56 said:

 

As well as the split-box 45 and the TTG 47. I mourn every time I go southbound out of BTM...

 

 

Split box 45 yes TTG47 no. It is in the original two tone green livery. Warships had all long gone by the time TTG came in.

Edited by 40F
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 40F said:

 

 

Split box 45 yes TTG47 no. It is in the original two tone green livery. Warships had all long gone by the time TTG came in.

 

Don't quite understand what you're saying there - surely TTG 47 in the original post meant two tone green?

Are you confusing green and grey?

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, 40F said:

 

 

Split box 45 yes TTG47 no. It is in the original two tone green livery. Warships had all long gone by the time TTG came in.

TTG at that time and in this instance does mean two-tone green... :)

Edited by talisman56
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

BBC reporting that stations in the South West could be made step-free.

 

They include Lawrence Hill station in Bristol where the southbound platform is accessible only by steps.

 

Among the other stations in line for improvements are Bristol Temple Meads, Bath Spa, Avonmouth, Keynsham and Weston-super-Mare.


 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-54536167

Edited by Dagworth
  • Informative/Useful 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

The decrepit concrete steps at Lawrence Hill were replaced only a few years ago with steel ones.  I was surprised at the time that they didn't put in a long ramp to the island like the ones at Stapleton Rd.  (Northbound has flat access via Lidl car park for those of you who haven't been there lately.)

What on earth are they going to do at Keynsham?  The station was virtually rebuilt only a couple of years ago.

Edited by D6975
  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 18/09/2020 at 21:31, ForestPines said:

Network Rail are currently saying the bridge move will be in 5 to 7 weeks from now, from October 24th to November 7th.

 

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-the-railway/our-routes/western/great-western-mainline/south-gloucestershire/

Got an email update from South Glos Council, with this included at the bottom:-

 

"Preparations for the bridge move at Gipsy Patch Lane, Stoke Gifford, are going well. Overhead power equipment has been moved out of the way, track has been cut out and we’re digging out around the bridge. For the latest updates see our Facebook page."

 

Photo below shamelessly lifted from the email, credit South Glos Council.

 

unnamed (1).jpg

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/10/2020 at 14:47, D6975 said:

The decrepit concrete steps at Lawrence Hill were replaced only a few years ago with steel ones.  I was surprised at the time that they didn't put in a long ramp to the island like the ones at Stapleton Rd.  (Northbound has flat access via Lidl car park for those of you who haven't been there lately.)

What on earth are they going to do at Keynsham?  The station was virtually rebuilt only a couple of years ago.

 

There is zig-zag ramp at Keynsham on the down side ie Bristol platform. Been there a couple of years at least.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 16/10/2020 at 14:47, D6975 said:

The decrepit concrete steps at Lawrence Hill were replaced only a few years ago with steel ones.  I was surprised at the time that they didn't put in a long ramp to the island like the ones at Stapleton Rd.  (Northbound has flat access via Lidl car park for those of you who haven't been there lately.)

What on earth are they going to do at Keynsham?  The station was virtually rebuilt only a couple of years ago.

 

I'm always amused that at Stapleton Road the new footbridge was given those huge ramps to maintain step-free access to the Down platform; when at some places along the platform it's a 2ft step up from the platform to the train

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ForestPines said:

some places along the platform it's a 2ft step up from the platform to the train

Same at Nailsea & Backwell - last time I alighted, I was lucky not to fall over! :o

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ForestPines said:

 

I'm always amused that at Stapleton Road the new footbridge was given those huge ramps to maintain step-free access to the Down platform; when at some places along the platform it's a 2ft step up from the platform to the train

A couple of years ago, Network Rail had plans to build a raised section, or hump, on the platforms at both Lawrence Hill and Stapleton Rd. Plans were abandoned over fears of it being a trip hazard and the need for all trains to stop with a door exactly over the hump. Hopefully they will lower the trackbed if they ever relay the down.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Platform 1 said:

Same at Nailsea & Backwell - last time I alighted, I was lucky not to fall over! :o

A few years back, I was working a down train through NLS late one evening and the lighting had failed there. Fortunately, as I seem to remember, no passengers boarded or alighted in either direction.

 

  • Like 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 27/10/2020 at 17:23, rodent279 said:

Got an email update from South Glos Council, with this included at the bottom:-

 

"Preparations for the bridge move at Gipsy Patch Lane, Stoke Gifford, are going well. Overhead power equipment has been moved out of the way, track has been cut out and we’re digging out around the bridge. For the latest updates see our Facebook page."

 

Photo below shamelessly lifted from the email, credit South Glos Council.

 

unnamed (1).jpg


I'm surprised there are no posts on the status of the bridge which is (still)  ‘stuck in mud’ - all 4260 tonnes of it - some many meters away from its final location...
 

"Dear Stakeholder,



We are writing to you to provide information on the bridge replacement works currently taking place on Gipsy Patch Lane, as part of the Cribbs Patchway metrobus extension (CPME).

Despite detailed planning and preparation, our contractor, Network Rail, has encountered a significant issue moving the new 4,260-tonne Gipsy Patch Lane bridge into place.

The bridge, which is already built, is being moved into position on a number of independent hydraulic transporters. Having successfully moved two thirds of the way into place the bridge transporters are now stuck.

It is too early to say why the wheels have become stuck. This is a highly complex engineering project and is the heaviest lift of its kind ever undertaken in the UK, supported by detailed designs, modelling and preparatory work by Network Rail and its contractor Alun Griffiths. Understanding why this hasn’t worked will take time, and we are already working on that in parallel to our prime focus which is to get the work underway to move the bridge, free up the automated platform it is sitting on, and undertake the work required to get the bridge in place, and resume rail services.

Network Rail and its contractor Alun Griffiths are continuing to work around the clock to resolve the issue and currently undertaking detailed work on site so that the bridge can be moved into position. We will continue to update the community and our stakeholders on the work as it progresses.

We apologise for any inconvenience being caused by these ongoing works on Gipsy Patch Lane and we thank you for your patience."

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've not been that way since March, been working from home since then, and that's not likely to change before March, so I've no idea what's happening there. The latest S. Glos update didn't mention it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

We had an email saying not opening before 16th, but latest on the grapevine is the 23rd.

 

Bet people are wishing they hadn't been so hasty demolishing the old Severn Rail bridge.

 

Edited by JZ
  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JZ said:

 

Bet people are wishing they hadn't been so hasty demolishing the old Severn Rail bridge.

 

... which in the end probably cost more than its repair!

 

Martin

  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, JZ said:

 

Bet people are wishing they hadn't been so hasty demolishing the old Severn Rail bridge.

 

 

6 hours ago, martinT said:

 

... which in the end probably cost more than its repair!

 

Martin

Wasn't there insurance money paid out for the bridge?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, JZ said:

We had an email saying not opening before 16th, but latest on the grapevine is the 23rd.

 

Bet people are wishing they hadn't been so hasty demolishing the old Severn Rail bridge.

 

Quite an expensive way of avoiding the time penalty of going via Gloucester.  For the route to be useful, the East-North side of the triangle at Yate would have to have been retained, plus the South-facing junction from Berkeley.  I suspect most diesels would have exceeded the weight limits of the bridge.  To be honest, the bridge was virtually demolished by the tankers, BR just got rid of the remainder to remove the liability and hazard to shipping (ironic considering it was the shipping that was the hazard to the bridge!).  

  • Like 1
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
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.