GWML Electification

[Northroader]

Oxford is a mystery wrapped in an enigma wrapped in a chip paper. I think when the old GWR wooden buildings were replaced it was a big step forward, the large reception hall upside is much better, although the ticket barriers show that even more space should have been allowed. You would expect that there would be a long bay or two facing London, for the local services to use, but there never has been, always just a main up and down, leading to congestion. If they’re now reversible, it may help a bit, but another platform is badly needed. Sorry to hear I was wrong in claiming the wires had got there, another job that is badly needed.

Edited October 21, 2018 by Northroader

[SouthernMafia]

In the new track/signalling diagrams, there is an additional position 2 junction indicator OOU on the Down Main signal giving access to platform 4...could this be for access to a new platform 5 making platform 4 an island in the future?

[caradoc]

Oxford is a restricted-width site, with only two through platforms and no bays for trains terminating from the south. It's platforms are narrow and facilities inadequate. I am sure that whatever has been done with track layout and signalling will be more flexible and useful. As to the station itself, which is what the passenger experiences, it was built with 'temporary' wooden buildings which lasted until the 1960s and were replaced by new 'temporary' buildings which have more recently been modernised with (I think) a new booking hall. Nevertheless, for a city of Oxford's standing, with large numbers of international visitors, it's station still falls far short of being satisfactory, in my view. (CJL)

 

Indeed, the melee on Platform 3 when passengers from a Down arrival are streaming off the footbridge at the same time a crowd is waiting for an Up train has to be seen to be believed. A simple solution would be separate exit barriers behind the buffers of the bay platforms 1 and 2. When I first started spotting Oxford station had just had its buildings replaced, only for them to be replaced again in the 1990s ! Perhaps it will be third time lucky......

[caradoc]

Very good to hear. But we could do that at Ramsgate (not for Worcester or Didcot admittedly), nearly 40 years ago. The latest, East Kent, re-signalling makes it even more flexible there, I gather. How come it took so long for the Western?

 

Possibly Ramsgate being an almost entirely multiple unit railway made such things much more useful than at Oxford where loco-hauled commuter trains were commonplace ? Having said that, the lack of any south-facing bays for terminating trains has always been a surprising omission at Oxford.

[Fat Controller]

In the new track/signalling diagrams, there is an additional position 2 junction indicator OOU on the Down Main signal giving access to platform 4...could this be for access to a new platform 5 making platform 4 an island in the future?

I'm sure I have seen a plan (perhaps in Modern Railways) of a loop behind the Down platform in the final iteration of the track layout.

[Jonboy]

Still not sure how the plans to reopen the Cowley branch to local passenger services fit into such a congested piece of track...

[Fat Controller]

Still not sure how the plans to reopen the Cowley branch to local passenger services fit into such a congested piece of track...

Wasn't the idea there to start some Chiltern services to London there?

[caradoc]

Wasn't the idea there to start some Chiltern services to London there?

 

I believe so, but IMHO to be a viable alternative any such urban/suburban train service has to run (at least) half-hourly, which would mean extending all the Chiltern services to Cowley. Which would of course make the north end bay platforms at Oxford largely redundant, and increase congestion between Oxford and Kennington Jc. I still think that south-facing bays on the site of Beckett Street car park were the answer, but it has been explained elsewhere that this is not possible.  

[Zomboid]

It seems to my uneducated eyes that a fair number of the problems at Oxford could be eased by dividing the platforms in two, as at Reading and Birmingham New Street to name just a couple of examples, since most trains there do not use the whole platform length. Add in the possible platform 5 on the down side (5a & 5b...) and I bet it would all work a bit more smoothly.

[Ron Ron Ron]

Redevelopment of Oxford Station has been in the pipeline for a few years.

Inevitably, there is some dispute between NR and the city council over who pays for what.

 

http://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/Rail-News/plans-for-125m-oxford-station-revamp-unveiled-

 

 

Some of the design proposals can be seen here....

 

https://www.oxford.gov.uk/info/20182/regeneration_and_development/949/oxford_station_masterplan

 

https://consultation.oxford.gov.uk/consult.ti/oxfordstationcomp/consultationHome

 

 

They won't be choosing this bold design though.....

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

Edited October 21, 2018 by Ron Ron Ron

[Ron Ron Ron]

https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/16301722.rail-bosses-must-grab-bull-by-the-horns-and-rebuild-failing-oxford-station/

[Phlogiston]

And here we have the moment when the truth of the unfolding debacle of GW electrification is revealed to the senior project director in NR:

 

https://www.captiongenerator.com/101348/Robbie-discovers-the-truth-about-GWRM

 

To the best of my knowledge, the names have not been changed to protect the innocent guilty.

[talisman56]

And here we have the moment when the truth of the unfolding debacle of GW electrification is revealed to the senior project director in NR:

 

https://www.captiongenerator.com/101348/Robbie-discovers-the-truth-about-GWRM

 

To the best of my knowledge, the names have not been changed to protect the innocent guilty.

Now you can reveal what MCS and EIS are?

[caradoc]

It seems to my uneducated eyes that a fair number of the problems at Oxford could be eased by dividing the platforms in two, as at Reading and Birmingham New Street to name just a couple of examples, since most trains there do not use the whole platform length. Add in the possible platform 5 on the down side (5a & 5b...) and I bet it would all work a bit more smoothly.

 

That was actually tried a few years ago, short Down trains (ie Class 165/166) ran right to the far end of the Platform 4 so that another train could come in behind, and there were posters on the station explaining this. However it no longer seems to happen, I can only think there were complaints about the long walk, with no shelter, back to the footbridge.

[Banger Blue]

In the new track/signalling diagrams, there is an additional position 2 junction indicator OOU on the Down Main signal giving access to platform 4...could this be for access to a new platform 5 making platform 4 an island in the future?

I'm sure I have seen a plan (perhaps in Modern Railways) of a loop behind the Down platform in the final iteration of the track layout.

You mean like this:

 

[SouthernMafia]

You mean like this:

 

61706F24-7DB9-418A-A69A-4E7B73BACA74.jpeg

Yes, doesn't really solve the congestion problem in the Up direction though apart from when they are fully bidirectional. Regularly see an Up Worcester held outside waiting for whatever has just come out the sidings in front of it to depart after a 10 minute dwell...

[Mike Storey]

Now you can reveal what MCS and EIS are?

 

Management Control System - described as a Black Box for senior management, or a method for recording otherwise unobservable matters...... we previously used just PMS, or Programme Management System, the outputs of which were fed raw to the Board. Times have obviously changed.

 

Environmental Impact Statement -  a description and scoring system trying to turn best guesses (seriously, a lot better than that with the right people) on the impact of what is being done, and the impact of how it is being done, on local wildlife and humans, potential pollution, aesthetic issues, and a number of other, growing matters, and what mitigations are possible, by people with ologies, into something measurable and actionable - been in use for years, but historical case histories, clarifications in law and greater awareness of lawyers and their clients (individuals or organisations) have made it more critical to project success these days.

[Mike Storey]

And here we have the moment when the truth of the unfolding debacle of GW electrification is revealed to the senior project director in NR:

 

https://www.captiongenerator.com/101348/Robbie-discovers-the-truth-about-GWRM

 

To the best of my knowledge, the names have not been changed to protect the innocent guilty.

 

Most excellently funny. However, how old is this? Robbie Burns planned to retire in 2016 (alongside one of my old bosses, Roger Dickinson, parachuted in to try to kick GWIP back into some form of life), or did he stay? Or is someone else called Robbie now in charge?

[Phlogiston]

However, how old is this? Robbie Burns planned to retire in 2016 (alongside one of my old bosses, Roger Dickinson, parachuted in to try to kick GWIP back into some form of life), or did he stay? Or is someone else called Robbie now in charge?

It's not that new to be fair and Robbie Burns has now gone, but he is definitely the 'Robbie' being referred to.

 

At the time, the clip was definitely known about within NR (don't know who the 'author' was) but such was the culture of fear around certain individuals, that many people were actually scared of viewing it on their work computers.

[Peter Kazmierczak]

Does Oxford need the non-platform through roads now? Granted there's still Freightliners and car trains passing through, but wouldn't a

better use of the (limited) space be to create at least one island platform.

[The Stationmaster]

Very good to hear. But we could do that at Ramsgate (not for Worcester or Didcot admittedly), nearly 40 years ago. The latest, East Kent, re-signalling makes it even more flexible there, I gather. How come it took so long for the Western?

 

It didn't.  All the through platforms except one (No.4) at Reading became bi-directional with the commissioning of the 1965 resignalling (53 years ago) and No. 4 was made bi-directional in the 1980s; all the platforms at Newport were made bi-directional in the 1962 resignalling (56 years ago); five (out of seven) through platforms at Plymouth were made bi-directional with the 1960 resignalling (58 years ago).  The platforms at Ramsgate were made bi-directional in the 1959 resignalling for electrification - one year before Plymouth (which was no doubt planned well before Ramsgate was commissioned).

 

Oxford has long had some operating constraints all of its own because it has only two through platforms and the idea of running trains to/through the other platform was really a non-starter because there has long been a situation where Up & Down trains are there simultaneously.  Hence I presume that is why it wasn't considered in the 1973 resignalling. Similarly although Oxford has long had a situation where Down Trains terminate and Up trains start they are often in a situation where platform reoccupation follows fairly closely so there's no case for reversing in the platform.   To leave the two platforms as uni-directional was pretty unusual in WR resignallings between 1960 and the end of the Region's existence and it is also likely that the cost of the additional crossovers simply could not be justified.

 

As CJL has noted Oxford's original 'temporary' buildings were replaced in the late 1960s by what amounted to modern equivalents which were quickly in far worse condition than the old buildings they replaced.  The booking hall and various other areas on the Up side were later comprehensively rebuilt but from what I have seen are completely inadequate for the volume of usage.  But the problem seems to have long centred around what the city authorities will or won't permit and do or don't want and that has in recent years constrained the development of a proper plan.  But in any case the site is extremely cramped and was for many years constrained by the need to retain the level crossing at the south end of the station between it and the Botley Road underbridge although that requirement was eventually dropped but the site is still constrained in width and by the Botley Road bridge choking it at the south end although oddly the at one time preferred 1960s rebuilding scheme envisaged something akin to Port Talbot with an island platform and through lines outside the platform lines - a scheme which was rejected on cost grounds according to what the then DM told me.

 

Whether Oxford will ever be solved is an open question in my view, and no reason for not extending the wires there.

[Mike Storey]

It didn't.  All the through platforms except one (No.4) at Reading became bi-directional with the commissioning of the 1965 resignalling (53 years ago) and No. 4 was made bi-directional in the 1980s; all the platforms at Newport were made bi-directional in the 1962 resignalling (56 years ago); five (out of seven) through platforms at Plymouth were made bi-directional with the 1960 resignalling (58 years ago).  The platforms at Ramsgate were made bi-directional in the 1959 resignalling for electrification - one year before Plymouth (which was no doubt planned well before Ramsgate was commissioned).

 

Oxford has long had some operating constraints all of its own because it has only two through platforms and the idea of running trains to/through the other platform was really a non-starter because there has long been a situation where Up & Down trains are there simultaneously.  Hence I presume that is why it wasn't considered in the 1973 resignalling. Similarly although Oxford has long had a situation where Down Trains terminate and Up trains start they are often in a situation where platform reoccupation follows fairly closely so there's no case for reversing in the platform.   To leave the two platforms as uni-directional was pretty unusual in WR resignallings between 1960 and the end of the Region's existence and it is also likely that the cost of the additional crossovers simply could not be justified.

 

As CJL has noted Oxford's original 'temporary' buildings were replaced in the late 1960s by what amounted to modern equivalents which were quickly in far worse condition than the old buildings they replaced.  The booking hall and various other areas on the Up side were later comprehensively rebuilt but from what I have seen are completely inadequate for the volume of usage.  But the problem seems to have long centred around what the city authorities will or won't permit and do or don't want and that has in recent years constrained the development of a proper plan.  But in any case the site is extremely cramped and was for many years constrained by the need to retain the level crossing at the south end of the station between it and the Botley Road underbridge although that requirement was eventually dropped but the site is still constrained in width and by the Botley Road bridge choking it at the south end although oddly the at one time preferred 1960s rebuilding scheme envisaged something akin to Port Talbot with an island platform and through lines outside the platform lines - a scheme which was rejected on cost grounds according to what the then DM told me.

 

Whether Oxford will ever be solved is an open question in my view, and no reason for not extending the wires there.

 

I knew you would bite. Gotcha! I just knew it, knew it.....!!!     

Edited October 23, 2018 by Mike Storey

[The Stationmaster]

I knew you would bite. Gotcha! I just knew it, knew it.....!!!     

 

Well we can't let these ex-Southern folk go round spreading gossip can we

[Banger Blue]

With effect from the 28th October, Class 80x Trains in passenger service can use the OLE between Causeway Crossing & Swindon Stn in the DOWN direction only. This is to assist NR with lineside monitoring.

 

OLE between Causeway and Foxhall Jn (and west of Swindon Stn) is still not authorised for Passenger services so 80x will have to ‘pan down’ as normal at Moreton Cutting then ‘pan up’ at Causeway.

 

Trains not stopping at Swindon will switch to diesel mode just prior to Swindon station but stopping trains can switch over during the Station stop.

 

80x may be observed in the Didcot - Steventon stretch and between Bristol Parkway - Swindon with their pan up but these will be ECS involved with OLE testing.

Edited October 24, 2018 by Banger Blue

[St. Simon]

OLE between Causeway and Foxhall Jn (and west of Swindon Stn) is still not authorised for Passenger services so 80x will have to ‘pan down’ as normal at Moreton Cutting then ‘pan up’ at Causeway.

 

Hi,

 

I believe the OLE is fit for use, but due to Steventon Class 80x worked trains have to pan down at Foxhall and Pan Up at Steventon.

 

Simon