Quite a number of conversions of double junctions into single lead junctions were actually carried out to eliminate 1 in 8 obtuse crossings. It was found that certain diesel locos had a tendency to go down the wrong side of the crossing nose. At the time, raised check rails were not an option, thanks to the flangeless centre drivers on 9F locos.
It’s still on the Network Rail “wish” list, but like various other “upgrades”, until there is some specific external funding for it, nothing will happen.
IIRC this was singled when that section was electrified, to avoid rebuilding bridges which didn't provide sufficient clearance for the OLE?
Indeed in general what matters is transit time through the single section, this is one of the shortest there is. In planning it looks like it's one minute to one and a half minutes, in practice it looks like a few seconds.
It's on the Hertford East branch and I don't think getting rid of that would be a particularly good idea to be honest. Hertford North and Hertford East are quite close together so I guess an argument could be made that it doesn't need to go all the way but the station at Ware is not currently suited to be a terminus and it would be very difficult to expand it. So really this should be kept.
It’s extremely quick mate. In a perfect world it would be double track but it is what it is. To rectify would be a hugely expensive project that’s way down the pecking order.
There aren’t that many that run over it - I think it’s 8 each hour plus a very small amount of freight/non passenger. There are two London LS to Norwich and vice versa, and one Norwich to Cambridge/Stansted Airport and vice versa, as well as 1 Norwich to Liverpool Lime Street and vice versa.
There was a whole thread on Weston-Super-Mare fairly recently, including maps of the possibility of extending the double track sufficiently far to allow trains to clear the main line.
Apparently the bridge over the Ouse was not strong enough to support two trains at once, so to guarantee that two trains passing over it simultaneously would never occur, a short single section stub was made there. IIRC the bridge problems have been sorted, but now for redoubling the area needs to be resignalled.
Putting both tracks in the same signalling block would normally prevent two trains being on the bridge together. Putting both directions on the same track ensures that if any trains ignore the signals they will have a head-on collision. I can see why the former is a good idea, but I can't see why anyone would think the latter was a good idea.
I was told it was going to be singled Haughley Jn to Trowse with the loop at Diss too. Would be bonkers now with 4 passenger trains plus random freights and other ECS moves over that section these days.
A mile or so of double at each end might be useful to allow a train to clear the mainlines while waiting for single line branch clearance.
Difficult without sacrificing depot capacity. Around a train's length of extra double track close to the station could be useful, shortening the single line and allowing a departure to leave and clear its platform while waiting for an incoming train to clear the section. The existing carriage reception road might be repurposed for this with a new crossover near the footbridge where the buffer stops for the new sidings are.
That loop was supposed to be the site of Donegall Quay station I think. I totally agree that the single track Dargan Bridge and viaduct approaches was a stupid idea and probably the most pointless single track section in the UK mentioned on this thread.
I agree it was extremely short-sighted to build a brand new railway right in the middle of the city as a single track. The most urban trackage in Northern Ireland with such limited capability. I recall it had been a difficult time for rail there at the time. Politically and economically, the single track was likely the only realistic option, and was a positive development for the city and broader rail network. Was the idea that Donegal Quay would replace York Street, as they'd be very close with under half a mile between them? Donegal Quay looks a better site for serving that side of the city centre.
It might be worth doubling the section from York Street to the passing loop, leaving a shorter single line just crossing the Lagan. It'd likely need to be a second elevated viaduct alongside the existing. There aren't many buildings close to the line along this stretch.
Indeed, it was a very difficult time. NIR was outdated and had received bugger all investment for a long time before the Dargan Bridge was built. I don't think the plan was to replace it necessarily, York Street (Yorkgate at that time) is in a pretty inaccessible area, hemmed in alongside the motorway, and there's a really busy junction to cross on the way into the northern side of Belfast city centre.
Perhaps, although it might have to wait as the NI Government have plans to rebuild the whole disaster of an intersection just below the section of viaduct you're talking about and they are very complex, so we'll be waiting until the 2030s for anything to be done about that I think.
In order to be redoubled, that track section needs to have been double track at some point in the past.
