Havant ASC resignalling

[pompeyfan]

I’m led to believe that the area currently under Havant ASCs control has moved up the list and will be the next resignalling project on Wessex’s patch and will follow on from the Portsmouth Direct project, with Havant also moving to Basingstoke.

This being said I can’t find any documentation or press release. Does anyone have any further information?

 

[moley]

Surely there are areas of the country that need resignalling in priority to Havant which was only resignalled in 2005?

What technology is due to be used?

 

[pompeyfan]

I would imagine the same set up as the other work stations going into BROC, axle counters and VDUs.

 

[swt_passenger]

Surely there are areas of the country that need resignalling in priority to Havant which was only resignalled in 2005?

What technology is due to be used?

Won’t a Havant to Basingstoke transfer be more likely to be a recontrol of the existing signalling?

 

[pompeyfan]

Won’t a Havant to Basingstoke transfer be more likely to be a recontrol of the existing signalling?

I would hope the current equipment is replaced, as it’s very unreliable. I believe the Siemens work station currently in place is the main problem.

 

[swt_passenger]

I would hope the current equipment is replaced, as it’s very unreliable. I believe the Siemens work station currently in place is the main problem.

Back when there was a published national plan I think the transfer to Wessex ROC was intended to be about 2035.

 

[apinnard]

Won’t a Havant to Basingstoke transfer be more likely to be a recontrol of the existing signalling?

A bit like Manchester South, the Havant kit needs ripping out and starting again as it’s so unreliable.

 

[Lucy1501]

I would hope the current equipment is replaced, as it’s very unreliable.

If I’m remembering correctly, back when it was being commissioned it went massively over time and budget due to the sheer amount of issues during installation. To the extent that they had to recommission two of the old Portsmouth signal boxes which hadn’t been used in decades, and introduce absolute block working, as the closure had gone on for so long.

It was called “Absolute Block for the 21st Century” and included all sorts of quirks like treadles used for train detection as there were no insulated blocks for track circuits.

 

[MadMac]

If I’m remembering correctly, back when it was being commissioned it went massively over time and budget due to the sheer amount of issues during installation. To the extent that they had to recommission two of the old Portsmouth signal boxes which hadn’t been used in decades, and introduce absolute block working, as the closure had gone on for so long.

It was called “Absolute Block for the 21st Century” and included all sorts of quirks like treadles used for train detection as there were no insulated blocks for track circuits.

While all this was going on, Siemens showed up at LA Metro to hawk their product: as soon as they heard that I was ex-BR, they knew the game was up…..

 

[DelW]

If I’m remembering correctly, back when it was being commissioned it went massively over time and budget due to the sheer amount of issues during installation. To the extent that they had to recommission two of the old Portsmouth signal boxes which hadn’t been used in decades, and introduce absolute block working, as the closure had gone on for so long.

It was called “Absolute Block for the 21st Century” and included all sorts of quirks like treadles used for train detection as there were no insulated blocks for track circuits.

If it was the occasion I remember, it was all supposed to be commissioned during a Christmas and/or New Year possession, but it didn't work. The old system had all been ripped out, so Portsmouth ended up with about 1tph using pilotman working south of Portcreek Junction, which lasted until another big possession at Easter cobbled some signalling together*. Services didn't get fully back to timetable until the autumn.

*(edit: or rather earlier, see post 13)

 

[MadMac]

If it was the occasion I remember, it was all supposed to be commissioned during a Christmas and/or New Year possession, but it didn't work. The old system had all been ripped out, so Portsmouth ended up with about 1tph using pilotman working south of Portcreek Junction, which lasted until another big possession at Easter cobbled some signalling together. Services didn't get fully back to timetable until the autumn.

I seem to recall it going on until some time in October…..

 

[DelW]

I seem to recall it going on until some time in October…..

Yes, I think the autumn half term was the final commissioning stage.

 

[Gloster]

The Odeon-style box at Portsmouth Harbour was reopened on 5 February 2007 and closed again on 29 October the same year, the same day as Portsmouth & Southsea box closed. Portsmouth & Southsea was the old Portsmouth panel which had been kept open and renamed on 5 February.

Fratton-Portsmouth Harbour was temporary Absolute Block from 5 February until 2 April 2007 when Track Circuit Block was reinstated Fratton-Portsmouth & Southsea; Fratton Block Post was in Portsmouth & Southsea box. Absolute Block retained Portsmouth & Southsea-Portsmouth Harbour until Havant ASC opened 29 October.

Source: Signalling Record Society Signal Box Register, Volume 4, 2009.

 

[DelW]

So it looks like the "cobbled together signalling" I recalled was put into service in early February rather than at Easter.

 

[moley]

If I recall, in early January, nothing ran south of Fratton until pilotman pilotman working into Portsmouth & Southsea which was two trains an hour. Even then, my vague memory suggests up services ran from/into platform 2 to Fratton which had been newly upgraded to bidirectional running. All other services which made it beyond Havant/Fareham terminated at Fratton platforms 2/3. Luckily, the newly installed switch north of Fratton from down line to up line had been commissioned during the Christmas block.

As a commuter, it was chaos.

A particular quirk (if I remember the details correctly) was that due to the short platforms, a 10/12 carriage Desiro would arrive, open the front 5/8 doors (444/450 respectively) on SDO. The driver would remain in the southern driving cab until departure time, at which point the guard closed the doors on the southern of the units then walk through to the driving cab on the northern unit which was 3/4 carriage lengths beyond the platform and then key-in and take the train north.

 

[TSG]

Surely there are areas of the country that need resignalling in priority to Havant which was only resignalled in 2005?

Some background here https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/signalling-problems-on-the-portsmouth-direct-line.242522/ . If its 100 years old but you can still get the parts and lots of people understand how to make any changes you need, you can keep it rolling. If it's 10 years old, hard to maintain in the first place, the parts aren't made any more, and nobody is competent to change the data for alterations then it may as well go in the skip.

I would imagine the same set up as the other work stations going into BROC, axle counters and VDUs.

It is axle counters and VDUs already. Just not ones that anyone is able or willing to support

Won’t a Havant to Basingstoke transfer be more likely to be a recontrol of the existing signalling?

Dear god no. Realistically this would require the creation of an IP interface to carry it over the telecom network to BROC. Siemens won't even support it continuing to do what it does now, let alone new functionality/interfaces. Almost everything out there is bespoke to the system that was put in and incompatible with everything else. Without support (infeasible due to the tiny installed base; Bournemouth, Portsmouth, that's probably it because I think they said thanks but no thanks when it came to Glasgow Central after the fiasco at Portsmouth) nobody will fund creating interfaces. Skip it. Put widely supported kit in.

 

[zwk500]

Some background here https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/signalling-problems-on-the-portsmouth-direct-line.242522/ . If its 100 years old but you can still get the parts and lots of people understand how to make any changes you need, you can keep it rolling. If it's 10 years old, hard to maintain in the first place, the parts aren't made any more, and nobody is competent to change the data for alterations then it may as well go in the skip.

It is axle counters and VDUs already. Just not ones that anyone is able or willing to support

Dear god no. Realistically this would require the creation of an IP interface to carry it over the telecom network to BROC. Siemens won't even support it continuing to do what it does now, let alone new functionality/interfaces. Almost everything out there is bespoke to the system that was put in and incompatible with everything else. Without support (infeasible due to the tiny installed base; Bournemouth, Portsmouth, that's probably it because I think they said thanks but no thanks when it came to Glasgow Central after the fiasco at Portsmouth) nobody will fund creating interfaces. Skip it. Put widely supported kit in.

Thanks for this info, it explains why it might have jumped up the list quite quickly!

 

[moley]

I recall that this was the second scheme following Bournemouth. Has/is Bournemouth been redone?

 

[Tim M]

Just a quick reminder. Where references are made in this thread to Siemens, this is the German company before they bought out Invensys/Westinghouse in the U.K. in 2013. One of the reasons Siemens won the Bournemouth and Portsmouth Contracts was to enter the U.K. market, but using their own products based on German practice proved to be a bad move and wasn’t repeated. The alternative was to buy into the U.K., something Siemens had wanted to do for some years, but recognised that Chippenham products were key to success.

Aside No. 1: Siemens (Germany) won the signalling and train control Contract for Crossrail but used WESTRACE as the interlocking with what was then called Invensys as their sub-contractor.

Aside No. 2: DB like the WESTRACE installed in Germany in the 1990’s which is more than can be said of NR’s view of Siemens SIMIS.

 

[zwk500]

I recall that this was the second scheme following Bournemouth. Has/is Bournemouth been redone?

Bournemouth is still showing as controlling the line from the fringe with Brockenhurst box (between Sway/New Milton) to the fringe with Basingstoke ROC, Poole Workstation (between Parkstone and Poole) in the latest Sectional Appendix available on NR's website. So if it has been redone, it wasn't put in to the ROC.

 

[pompeyfan]

From observation Bournemouth ASC doesn’t suffer from anywhere near the same number of issues as Havant, but they do suffer the same sort of issues. That said the layout is far more complicated at Havant so I wonder whether the increased flexibility affects reliability.

Bournemouth only have the station area and the entrance to the depot which isn’t plain line running

 

[PhilH]

I’m led to believe that the area currently under Havant ASCs control has moved up the list and will be the next resignalling project on Wessex’s patch and will follow on from the Portsmouth Direct project, with Havant also moving to Basingstoke.

This being said I can’t find any documentation or press release. Does anyone have any further information?

Network Rail's CP7 plan at https://www.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Southern-CP7-Delivery-plan.pdf includes this brief mention "Renewal of the SIMIS-W signalling system in Havant which is facing an obsolescent risk" on page 25.

 

[TSG]

I recall that this was the second scheme following Bournemouth. Has/is Bournemouth been redone?

Not yet. From memory it should be in the next 10 years. Getting Havant out may release some 'part-worn' spares to keep Bournemouth running a while longer, as long as nobody wants to change any interlocking data.

Just a quick reminder. Where references are made in this thread to Siemens, this is the German company before they bought out Invensys/Westinghouse in the U.K. in 2013. One of the reasons Siemens won the Bournemouth and Portsmouth Contracts was to enter the U.K. market, but using their own products based on German practice proved to be a bad move and wasn’t repeated. The alternative was to buy into the U.K., something Siemens had wanted to do for some years, but recognised that Chippenham products were key to success.

Correct. The Braunschweig factory. Acronyms from English words? Too easy! The SIMIS-W manual starts with a long list of acronyms formed from German words, most of which contain a 'z' somewhere. Viel Glϋck!

From observation Bournemouth ASC doesn’t suffer from anywhere near the same number of issues as Havant, but they do suffer the same sort of issues. That said the layout is far more complicated at Havant so I wonder whether the increased flexibility affects reliability.

Bournemouth only have the station area and the entrance to the depot which isn’t plain line running

SIMIS-W uses a vast amount of cables to go to a central point, so the maintenance problems tend to increase exponentially with a longer and more complex railway. And SIMIS-W, being SIMIS-W, doesn't use standard cables, obviously. No, special cables through special locs to the special signals and special axle counters and special point interfaces...

 

[Backroom_boy]

Is Bournemouth pencilled in to be a subROC or will everything still be recontrolled to Basingstoke eventually?

 

[MarkyT]

Not yet. From memory it should be in the next 10 years. Getting Havant out may release some 'part-worn' spares to keep Bournemouth running a while longer, as long as nobody wants to change any interlocking data.

I expect Siemens would be able to organise data changes through Chippenham managing activity occurring in Germany. Simis W is still an actively sold and supported product overseas. They might even be able to reengineer the existing Havant system to use the new 'Eulix' distributed object controller architecture to save much of the cabling.

SIMIS-W uses a vast amount of cables to go to a central point, so the maintenance problems tend to increase exponentially with a longer and more complex railway.

That was always my major concern with the technology. It didn't save on cabling over the previous relay paradigm, always a major selling point for SSI. Siemens lost a large framework contract for the south including East Kent resignalling, which was later completed by others using SSI family equipment. Siemens eventually developed a more distributed i/o architecture for SIMIS-W with their new object controller, but soon after they acquired the Invensys rail division so it wasn't relevant anymore for new sales to the UK.

And SIMIS-W, being SIMIS-W, doesn't use standard cables, obviously. No, special cables through special locs to the special signals and special axle counters and special point interfaces...

For the points, ISTR the SIMIS point outputs were 440VAC 3-phase, standard in much of Europe, but RT would only buy traditional single phase or DC machines, so a custom interface module had to be created. Standard UK signal heads needed a minor rewire to suit the lamp status monitoring, I think.

 

[TSG]

Is Bournemouth pencilled in to be a subROC or will everything still be recontrolled to Basingstoke eventually?

BROC is the latest I've seen but who knows by the time they get to doing it.

I expect Siemens would be able to organise data changes through Chippenham managing activity occurring in Germany. Simis W is still an actively sold and supported product overseas. They might even be able to reengineer the existing Havant system to use the new 'Eulix' distributed object controller architecture to save much of the cabling.

Not sure to what extent the UK specific 'principles' layer of the software may need updates or whether particular expertise is required to prepare data for the UK version. Anything is possible I guess, but whether the supplier wants to do it at a credible price and whether the customer thinks it presents value are different questions. I gather the answers are no and no in this case.

For the points, ISTR the SIMIS point outputs were 440VAC 3-phase, standard in much of Europe, but RT would only buy traditional single phase or DC machines, so a custom interface module had to be created. Standard UK signal heads needed a minor rewire to suit the lamp status monitoring, I think.

I think the heads have some weird halogen lamp or the like. Whilst it might be possible to modify them theoretically, that isn't happening last I heard. The lack of support for SIMIS-W means there's not really any way to stage it. Single commissioning will be big enough without having a rewire then test of every aspect into the bargain. I think all the heads will be replaced with test soak of a new plug coupled head then mostly put them in final position on the existing structure at commissioning. No good choices available there unfortunately

 

[Tim M]

For the points, ISTR the SIMIS point outputs were 440VAC 3-phase, standard in much of Europe, but RT would only buy traditional single phase or DC machines, so a custom interface module had to be created.

Some Siemens point machines are designed with combined motor and detection over the same four wires. On a Contract in Finland with WESTRACE interlocking and Siemens point machines a complex relay interface had to be designed that cost a small fortune. Presumably SIMIS takes this into account in its base design.

It’s also worth noting that d.c. machines tend to be more powerful, a single machine plus back drives on NR might see two or three machines on the same turnout in Germany. GEC-General Signal had to prove this to a German trackwork supplier for a job in Iraq (just before the first Iraq war, but that’s a whole story in its own right). The Germans said one machine wasn’t adequate. An HW was loaded into a van and taken to their yard in Germany, connected up and tested. No problem of course.