Landslip at Hook, Waterloo to Basingstoke route closed

[The Stationmaster]

7 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

Easy to do in BR days, perhaps, when all resources responded to the same call. But these days? And while the PW guys might manage to do the slews, I am a lot less certain about modern signalling, and the certification thereof, permitting anyone to mess with anything on such an ad hoc basis. The multiple contractual relationships, resulting from the balkanisation of the network and its suppliers, do not imply the likelihood of a swift and effective response on such occasions as this. 

Big process nowadays - drawings to produce and sign off and that's just the start of it.  Probably not a big job to get the contractor resources but you cab reckon ona full possession being needed for S&T testing as well.  

 

Far better to put in simplified bi-directional signalling on the two lines in teh centre of the formation as we did when we got to the detailed planning for my re-quadrification scheme between Wantage Road and Challow which only added a tiny amount to the overall scheme cost.  But quite another thing superimposing it on existing signalling.

[30368]

18 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

Easy to do in BR days, perhaps, when all resources responded to the same call. But these days?

 

Spot on Ian. Even something as trivial as a reliability mod to, say, and EMU took for ever for all the reasons you oulined above.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard B

[Legend]

You soft southerners having a lot of rain ?  

[spamcan61]

34 minutes ago, Legend said:

You soft southerners having a lot of rain ?  

Yep, down here in the sunny south it gas been a tad moist overnight, this is the road at the edge of a local field they're going to build 100 houses on this year. <rolls eyes>

 

[john new]

2 hours ago, Nick C said:

From looking at RTT and Tracksy at various points today, it looks like they've been running some of the WOE trains (generally the ones to-from Exeter, rather than the shorter workings from Salisbury) to Reading. Some of the Weymouths have been running through, reversing over the crossover at Farnborough to run WD on the Up Fast - but that was taking about half an hour per train to do the two reversals. Everything else seems to be CAPEd at Basingstoke. I believe there was also flooding at Hamble this morning blocking the Portsmouth-Southampton line, which didn't help with diversions!

 

I'm not on Twitter, but from what I've read most of the complaints were more about SWR's handling of things - for example not allowing ticket acceptance via Reading (which is, after all, the same company - First Group).

Re the ticketing, how to really annoy your customer base even if different TOCs are involved.

[Northmoor]

Fortunately I no longer commute from Brookwood, from where half the services have been suspended this week.  I now travel in from the Alton line, but I would expect this to be indirectly affected as some Fleet/Winchfield regulars drive across to Farnham or Aldershot (assuming SWR will honour the tickets from these locations).

[Dunsignalling]

1 hour ago, spamcan61 said:

Yep, down here in the sunny south it gas been a tad moist overnight, this is the road at the edge of a local field they're going to build 100 houses on this year. <rolls eyes>

 

Caveat emptor! Big time!

 

Developer deserves to get sued out of existence.

 

Hope the local council had to be overruled by HMG for it to go ahead.

[Wickham Green too]

2 hours ago, spamcan61 said:

... a local field they're going to build 100 houses on this year. ...

No problem building houses on flood plains ........................................... just put the things in stilts !

[stewartingram]

Or if F.Bodger & Son build them, put a drain in the middle of the living room...

[john new]

23 hours ago, john new said:

Line capacity round via Guildford & Fareham will be an issue for routeing around it. No longer an option to go over the alps and round via Alton like the last time there was a big landslip at Hook.

 

Video link - 

https://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/video-major-disruption-expected-after-landslip-at-hook-hampshire-damages-main-line-from-waterloo-to-basingstoke-southampton-and-the-west
 

Out of curiosity how close is this one to the last big one at Hook in the 1960s?

[Grovenor]

6 hours ago, Oldddudders said:

Easy to do in BR days, perhaps, when all resources responded to the same call. But these days? And while the PW guys might manage to do the slews, I am a lot less certain about modern signalling, and the certification thereof, permitting anyone to mess with anything on such an ad hoc basis. The multiple contractual relationships, resulting from the balkanisation of the network and its suppliers, do not imply the likelihood of a swift and effective response on such occasions as this. 

Its all Network Rail, if they can't manage these things then they are not fit for purpose, all S&T would need to do is bond for the track circuits, or maybe move an axle counter head, it would just use the existing down fast signalling with a TSR.

[MarkC]

12 hours ago, stewartingram said:

Or if F.Bodger & Son build them, put a drain in the middle of the living room...

😵

 

Don't give the swine ideas... 

[adb968008]

Looking at the schedules, it would seem SWR has given up running Basingstoke to Reading today.

 

Theres a train every 90 minutes to Woking.

 

So Basingstoke is end of the line, not even sure theres buses.

 

If they can get away with that, you have to wonder if SWR really needs the services to London it espouses, do you even need a 4 track line ?

 

People will still travel, coupled with strikes etc, the car is the winner here, and once its been bought, its a 3 year commitment before they consider going back to train.

 

I think not running to Reading is a mistake, it shows the dft, how irrelevant much of SWRs services are, if it can be cut back, without consideration to passengers and still get away with it.

 

Long term, maybe they dont need 159’s to London at all, and cut services back to Basingstoke. Additionally maybe reduce Portsmouth/Weymouth capacity and start split/joining services enroute.

 

This incident is demonstrating huge amounts of fat cutting potential on SWRs route capacity.

 

 

[Dunsignalling]

9 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

Looking at the schedules, it would seem SWR has given up running Basingstoke to Reading today.

 

Theres a train every 90 minutes to Woking.

 

So Basingstoke is end of the line, not even sure theres buses.

 

If they can get away with that, you have to wonder if SWR really needs the services to London it espouses, do you even need a 4 track line ?

 

People will still travel, coupled with strikes etc, the car is the winner here, and once its been bought, its a 3 year commitment before they consider going back to train.

 

I think not running to Reading is a mistake, it shows the dft, how irrelevant much of SWRs services are, if it can be cut back, without consideration to passengers and still get away with it.

 

Long term, maybe they dont need 159’s to London at all, and cut services back to Basingstoke. Additionally maybe reduce Portsmouth/Weymouth capacity and start split/joining services enroute.

 

This incident is demonstrating huge amounts of fat cutting potential on SWRs route capacity.

 

 

 

It's been strongly rumoured for some time that SWR would like to offload their diesel services anyway.

 

[The Stationmaster]

14 hours ago, john new said:

Out of curiosity how close is this one to the last big one at Hook in the 1960s?

Interesting question.  I had a look at Google Maps yesterday and I found what looks something like a previous slip site which appears from current signal positions to be the same site as the present one.  The state of tree growth on this particular site suggest to me that it is quite a few decades behind tree growth on the embankment either side of it.  

 

So is my surmise correct and is it the site of the slip you mention?

 

3 hours ago, adb968008 said:

Looking at the schedules, it would seem SWR has given up running Basingstoke to Reading today.

 

Theres a train every 90 minutes to Woking.

 

So Basingstoke is end of the line, not even sure theres buses.

 

If they can get away with that, you have to wonder if SWR really needs the services to London it espouses, do you even need a 4 track line ?

 

People will still travel, coupled with strikes etc, the car is the winner here, and once its been bought, its a 3 year commitment before they consider going back to train.

 

I think not running to Reading is a mistake, it shows the dft, how irrelevant much of SWRs services are, if it can be cut back, without consideration to passengers and still get away with it.

 

Long term, maybe they dont need 159’s to London at all, and cut services back to Basingstoke. Additionally maybe reduce Portsmouth/Weymouth capacity and start split/joining services enroute.

 

This incident is demonstrating huge amounts of fat cutting potential on SWRs route capacity.

 

 

There are three passenger trains an hour in the booked service between Basingstoke and Reading and I see that some GWR services are running as three cars today.   So basically people can change at Basingstoke to get to London via Reading although that is not being spelt out on the National Rail/SWR website - possibly in order too avoid overcrowding(?).   I'm not sure where the question of honouring another operator's tickets now lies since DafT have got involved in collecting (occasionally) all the fare revenue.  is there now a need for them to get involved or are contracted operators still allowed to talk to each other in the way franchisees spoke to each other?  

 

But inevitably the big question will be one of capacity - platform capacity at Reading to allow trains from SWR from the west to terminate there; capacity 'somewhere' (i.e GWR and XC as the only passenger train operators on the route) to provide Conductor Drivers for those trains, and capacity in SWR's  set & crew diagrams to facilitate it.  Capacity in the west end bays at Reading is limited although there is some additional capacity due to XC no longer using one of the bays for many (all?) of their trains but that won't cater for anything longer than = 5 car Class 22X train.  The trains that used a bay now use Platforms 7 & 8 in addition to those already booked to use those platforms.  Longer trains can't go over to the north side because Crossrail, aka Liz Line, trains take up two platforms more or less continuously with no room left for a second train in the platform they occupy.  So planning anything additional into Reading would be limited to a relatively short 159 formation - assuming it can be reliably pathed and crewed (and the latter would probably be the biggest problem).  Is there room in a Class 159 cab for Conductor Driver I wonder?

 

But I do agree with your point that it seems SWR have, in many respects, given up and has simply said to intending passengers 'don't travel'.  That in itself is a poor reflection on a railway industry which is struggling to rebuild its passenger business.  But equally don't forget that DafT controls the purse strings and expecting anybody there to react to the need for quick decisions (i.e made in less than a year) and, even worse, agreeing to spend real money is in the realms of fab ntasy.  i hate to think what would heppen if they got their hands on an even more completely nationalised railway than they've already gathered under their control.

[Gilbert]

17 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

No problem building houses on flood plains ........................................... just put the things in stilts !

Keynsham - between Bath and Bristol...the old Fry's site...a photo from our local FB page by Chris Cardwell...the old railway loading area was in front of the tall building with towers

 

[adb968008]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

Interesting question.  I had a look at Google Maps yesterday and I found what looks something like a previous slip site which appears from current signal positions to be the same site as the present one.  The state of tree growth on this particular site suggest to me that it is quite a few decades behind tree growth on the embankment either side of it.  

 

So is my surmise correct and is it the site of the slip you mention?

 

There are three passenger trains an hour in the booked service between Basingstoke and Reading and I see that some GWR services are running as three cars today.   So basically people can change at Basingstoke to get to London via Reading although that is not being spelt out on the National Rail/SWR website - possibly in order too avoid overcrowding(?).   I'm not sure where the question of honouring another operator's tickets now lies since DafT have got involved in collecting (occasionally) all the fare revenue.  is there now a need for them to get involved or are contracted operators still allowed to talk to each other in the way franchisees spoke to each other?  

 

But inevitably the big question will be one of capacity - platform capacity at Reading to allow trains from SWR from the west to terminate there; capacity 'somewhere' (i.e GWR and XC as the only passenger train operators on the route) to provide Conductor Drivers for those trains, and capacity in SWR's  set & crew diagrams to facilitate it.  Capacity in the west end bays at Reading is limited although there is some additional capacity due to XC no longer using one of the bays for many (all?) of their trains but that won't cater for anything longer than = 5 car Class 22X train.  The trains that used a bay now use Platforms 7 & 8 in addition to those already booked to use those platforms.  Longer trains can't go over to the north side because Crossrail, aka Liz Line, trains take up two platforms more or less continuously with no room left for a second train in the platform they occupy.  So planning anything additional into Reading would be limited to a relatively short 159 formation - assuming it can be reliably pathed and crewed (and the latter would probably be the biggest problem).  Is there room in a Class 159 cab for Conductor Driver I wonder?

 

But I do agree with your point that it seems SWR have, in many respects, given up and has simply said to intending passengers 'don't travel'.  That in itself is a poor reflection on a railway industry which is struggling to rebuild its passenger business.  But equally don't forget that DafT controls the purse strings and expecting anybody there to react to the need for quick decisions (i.e made in less than a year) and, even worse, agreeing to spend real money is in the realms of fab ntasy.  i hate to think what would heppen if they got their hands on an even more completely nationalised railway than they've already gathered under their control.

 

totally agree,

but yesterday SWR were running hourlies from Yeovil/Exeter/Salisbury to Reading

take this one for example with 158884 and 159013..

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:25238/2023-01-16/detailed#allox_id=0
(admittedly several were canceled or ran late).

 

Today they are not running, and the service seems to not be in the rest of the week plan.

 

As for franchisees talking to each other.. SWR and GWR are one and the same… Firstgroup, so its one person at one desk spinning his chair around and talking to his mate sat in the other.

 

Something changed, I hope its not reduced demand, for their sake.

But it feels like they just gave up.

 

Edited January 17, 2023 by adb968008

[Dunsignalling]

10 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

 

totally agree,

but yesterday SWR were running hourlies from Yeovil/Exeter/Salisbury to Reading

take this one for example with 158884 and 159013..

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:25238/2023-01-16/detailed#allox_id=0
(admittedly several were canceled or ran late).

 

Today they are not running, and the service seems to not be in the rest of the week plan.

 

As for franchisees talking to each other.. SWR and GWR are one and the same… Firstgroup, so its one person at one desk spinning his chair around and talking to his mate sat in the other.

 

Something changed, I hope its not reduced demand, for their sake.

But it feels like they just gave up.

 

The service yesterday fell apart pretty quickly due to the paths on the two routes not lining up. Generally better today just running BSK to EXD though one ended up an hour late. Just left Exeter RT coming up.  Fortunately not wanting to get to London. If I did I'd be going up the Western!

[Mike_Walker]

33 minutes ago, adb968008 said:

 

totally agree,

but yesterday SWR were running hourlies from Yeovil/Exeter/Salisbury to Reading

take this one for example with 158884 and 159013..

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:25238/2023-01-16/detailed#allox_id=0
(admittedly several were canceled or ran late).

 

Today they are not running, and the service seems to not be in the rest of the week plan.

 

As for franchisees talking to each other.. SWR and GWR are one and the same… Firstgroup, so its one person at one desk spinning his chair around and talking to his mate sat in the other.

 

Something changed, I hope its not reduced demand, for their sake.

But it feels like they just gave up.

 

They may both be FirstGroup companies but GWR's head office is in Swindon and SWR's at Waterloo so "one person at one desk spinning his chair around and talking to his mate sat in the other" is not possible.  Given the very close working relationship between Mark Hopwood (GWR) and Clare Mann (SWR) there are probably very good reasons for things being handled as they are.

[brushman47544]

2 hours ago, Gilbert said:

Keynsham - between Bath and Bristol...the old Fry's site...a photo from our local FB page by Chris Cardwell...the old railway loading area was in front of the tall building with towers

 

 

Rail replacement buses? You're more likely to need boats with all this flooding.

 

Hook has to be one of the easier locations on the rail network to divert passengers via other routes - even if it means overcrowding on the existing services on those routes - so for me any failure to advise passengers to use those diversionary routes and/or the non-acceptance of tickets on them is far more concerning given the difficulties in setting up a service over the two remaining lines, which may anyway need to close once a reinstatement plan has been instigated.

[Dunsignalling]

I'd imagine many passengers coming up from Weymouth/Bournemouth/Southampton will probably divert themselves via Fratton even if SWR aren't doing it for them.

Edited January 17, 2023 by Dunsignalling

[jonhall]

1 hour ago, Dunsignalling said:

The service yesterday fell apart pretty quickly due to the paths on the two routes not lining up. Generally better today just running BSK to EXD though one ended up an hour late. 

 

I'm sure the railway runs better like that, but a reliable service that still doesn't get the paying passenger to his or her destination is little better than nothing at all.

 

Jon

[Dunsignalling]

32 minutes ago, jonhall said:

 

I'm sure the railway runs better like that, but a reliable service that still doesn't get the paying passenger to his or her destination is little better than nothing at all.

 

Jon

Works better if you run the SWR service up to Basingstoke then get people onto the GW service from Basingstoke to Reading which is designed to make proper connections at Reading. Trying to cut out a change of trains often creates even greater overall delay for the customer.

 

John

[Northmoor]

12 hours ago, adb968008 said:

I think not running to Reading is a mistake, it shows the dft, how irrelevant much of SWRs services are, if it can be cut back, without consideration to passengers and still get away with it.

 

Long term, maybe they dont need 159’s to London at all, and cut services back to Basingstoke. Additionally maybe reduce Portsmouth/Weymouth capacity and start split/joining services enroute.

 

This incident is demonstrating huge amounts of fat cutting potential on SWRs route capacity.

I assume you are being facetious?  To suggest that a 4-track railway - Basingstoke to Woking - that has at least seven trains per hour, with two different stopping patterns, could satisfactorily operate as a 2-track and that hardly anyone is using the railway, simply doesn't reflect reality.  Routinely splitting/joining trains would mean reducing the number of services towards the London end of the route, exactly where you need more services, not fewer. 

 

Even post-pandemic, Waterloo is back to being Britain's busiest station and a lot of that traffic is relatively long distance commuters.  I travelled in today and there were, I thought, a few more people than usual coming in on the Alton line; on the return tonight the 8-car was packed to maybe 125% loading (why these trains, one of the few forming a service to Woking, weren't strengthened, isn't clear).  However Waterloo was noticeably quieter than most Tuesdays, suggesting that most people have taken the advice not to travel which in the era of hybrid working, is not so disruptive.  People will cope for a week or maybe two.

Bear in mend also that the party of government has a huge deficit in the opinion polls.  Do you really think they would risk a cull of services through the region which contains most of their last remaining safe seats?

[Ncarter2]

On 16/01/2023 at 02:32, phil-b259 said:

 

Put it this way, if entire reconstruction* is required then that will be programmed in for a Christmas at some stage. Its simply not viable for the industry to say 'sod it' as far as passengers go on this route (unlike with the Redhill to Tonbridge line a couple of years ago when that suffered a massive embankment failure) - particularly as doing a 'ground up' reconstruction* will take time to do. In the meantime NR will simply be looking at ways of getting the 4 tracks back up and running quickly - with a temporary speed restriction if necessary thus buying time for a more comprehensive plan of works which can be programmed in with much less disruption to passengers.

 

 

*i.e excavate back to natural ground then build the embankment back up with layers of geotextile membrane and properly assessed / graded, easy draining fill material which is less likely to slip

The one point to consider is this site was not expected. There was no indication, track recording from less than a week prior shows no indication of any movement. The local team had no concerns. Other than being known as a site built on London clay etc. Until excavation begins, and the full extent of the instability is known, it is an unknown. There are genuine concerns within track and geo around the stability of the up fast and what any works to the down fast may cause. There is a positive attitude that works can be done swift and with as little disruption as possible. 
Bigger picture, questions are being asked around the down slow, this being the the latest in a line of closures due to the bank slipping over the recent years.