Templecoombe Station

[STEVIEBOY1]

Has there been a rebuild at Templecoombe Station fairly recently. I Went through there a couple of days ago, and it looks like they have extended the unused platform forward and passengers in either direction now get out that side and have to go over a footbridge to reach the main side of the station where the ticket office and a rather nice looking garden is with a statue of a man reading.

I have not been on that line for a while.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Yes, the platform on the south side is a new build and probably just under a year old now. Eventually the old platform (with booking office in the old signal box, waiting room and toilets etc) will be taken out of use completely a new facilities built on the new platform. The changes are as a result of disabled access, it was easier to build it new rather than faff about with the old platform.

 

[martinsh]

Have they changed the spelling of the station name as well ??

 

[STEVIEBOY1]

Have they changed the spelling of the station name as well ??

Ahem, Just testing. Shall I write it correctly 100 times?

Thanks for info.

 

[lancastrian]

Yes, the platform on the south side is a new build and probably just under a year old now. Eventually the old platform (with booking office in the old signal box, waiting room and toilets etc) will be taken out of use completely a new facilities built on the new platform. The changes are as a result of disabled access, it was easier to build it new rather than faff about with the old platform.

All that is right, but with typical short sightedness that is so common on Britain's Railways, this new platform BLOCKS the trackbed and the track can now only be doubled by demolishing this new platform.

Once again the people that make these daft decisions are proving that they are only looking at things in the very short term and not considering any future capacity increases that will be needed on this line. It should really be fully redoubled.

 

[causton]

I agree. I was there a couple of weeks ago and I realised how lovely the old platform was... and now people won't be able to use it at all? And the line now can't be doubled? Brilliant thinking :roll:

 

[HSTEd]

It is highly unlikely that the West of England Main line will ever need redoubling, and there are other obstructions that would preclude a complete redoubling anyway. (There is another station where the space where the second platform was was sold with a covenant that it would never be compulsarily repurchased).

So its not really a major issue. Just because rail usage has been growing recently does not mean that it will keep growing geometrically forever, and if there were a few single track sections that consisted solely of station platforms it would not significantly reduce capacity as it is largely a passenger only railway.
And if things get really desperate a loop for non stopping trains could be accommodated by simply demolishing the old platform.

 

[fgwrich]

It is highly unlikely that the West of England Main line will ever need redoubling, and there are other obstructions that would preclude a complete redoubling anyway. (There is another station where the space where the second platform was was sold with a covenant that it would never be compulsarily repurchased).

So its not really a major issue. Just because rail usage has been growing recently does not mean that it will keep growing geometrically forever, and if there were a few single track sections that consisted solely of station platforms it would not significantly reduce capacity as it is largely a passenger only railway.
And if things get really desperate a loop for non stopping trains could be accommodated by simply demolishing the old platform.

No, whilst it may unlikely that the West of England Main line will ever need redoubling, it doesn't mean that it will still need it's loops extending within the next few years to provide a better service for it's current passengers. Don't forget that until the recent flexibility and expansion in services from the opening the Axminster Dynamic Loop too. Doubling may not be the way forward, but extending the loops are and as i said before, it's a shame that the present end of the double track section from Yeovil couldn't have been brought through the station allowing a better passing place there.

 

[MarkyT]

Whilst the new platform at Templecombe does indeed block a second line through the station, there's no reason such a modern modular platform could not be removed again fairly easily in the future making room for 2 tracks once again without significant realignment of the tracks. Recovered components might even be usable elsewhere! The important thing is to ensure any new buildings and facilities erected on the new side are constructed sufficiently far back from the platform edge they would remain suitable if that side is narrowed again.

 

[Eagle]

It is highly unlikely that the West of England Main line will ever need redoubling, and there are other obstructions that would preclude a complete redoubling anyway. (There is another station where the space where the second platform was was sold with a covenant that it would never be compulsarily repurchased).

That was I believe Tisbury (leading to the awkward situation where the passing loop is just to the east of the station, and it's not uncommon for one train to have to wait there several minutes for another to pass).

 

[Zoe]

So its not really a major issue. Just because rail usage has been growing recently does not mean that it will keep growing geometrically forever

While it likely won't continue forever, if you look at how congested the roads are you can see the scale of potential growth from the modal shift away from the private car.

 

[Bedpan]

That was I believe Tisbury (leading to the awkward situation where the passing loop is just to the east of the station, and it's not uncommon for one train to have to wait there several minutes for another to pass).

Don't you get the same situation at Templecombe when the timetable is interrupted, with the double track section finishing immediately to the west of the station?

 

[HSTEd]

While it likely won't continue forever, if you look at how congested the roads are you can see the scale of potential growth from the modal shift away from the private car.

Yes, but the West of England Main Line between Salisbury and Exeter St Davids is essentially a rural route with the name being little more than an artifact.

Increasing investment in the Great Western route will only further weaken the case for end to end journeys.

This is not the kind of route we can expect large scale modal shift from private cars on.

And the majority of trains over this section are only three cars long right?
Come back when ten car trains are running through from Exeter to Waterloo regularly.

 

[Zoe]

And the majority of trains over this section are only three cars long right?
Come back when ten car trains are running through from Exeter to Waterloo regularly.

While the demand for extra services between Waterloo and Exeter may not significantly increase (the Great Western will remain the intercity route to London), if the private car is no longer an option for most people then there may well be a significant increase in demand for regional services on the Basingstoke and Exeter line.

 

[The Ham]

While it likely won't continue forever, if you look at how congested the roads are you can see the scale of potential growth from the modal shift away from the private car.

Also there is still plenty of room for growth on the lines to the SW. Electrify down to at least Exeter with line speed enhancements and the time the train takes to get from Waterloo to Exeter rather than from Paddington to Exeter could be a small enough differance to make it a realistic alternitive for those who would need to travel for more than a few minutes to get to Paddington.

Add to that the fact that it could be used to run direct services from North Devon to London without the need for a change or reversal at Exeter and there is plenty of opertunity for future growth on the line.

Also if the line to Salisbry was electrified the current electic trains which run the stopping services out to Basingstoke could be extended to run stopping services to Sailsbury which would enable the existing services to run faster. Which would improve the frequency and provide better conectivity between stations either side of Basingstoke - this could further encorage passenger numbers without increasing the demand into London overly much.

 

[MarkyT]

Electrify down to at least Exeter with line speed enhancements and the time the train takes to get from Waterloo to Exeter rather than from Paddington to Exeter could be a small enough differance to make it a realistic alternitive for those who would need to travel for more than a few minutes to get to Paddington.

One Sunday late last year I travelled back to Torbay from Three Bridges that way, changing at Clapham Junction and Exeter. I actually caught the Exeter train an hour before the one I expected to make due to early running on the extended 'engineering' timings being operated on the Brighton line, but unfortunately further west my train was caught in the aftermath of a previous problem with the new signalling on the single line. After waiting at Yeovil for the first delayed train coming the other way, we became the sacrificial lamb, pulling in for extended waits at both Chard and Honiton whilst subsequent up trains all passed seemingly on time. Arrival at Exeter was about 40 minutes down and the train was quickly emptied and straight away dispatched back towards Salisbury almost on time. Not long after, the next train from Waterloo (the one I thought I would catch from CJ) arrived on time. Even with the late running I could not have travelled via Paddington to Torbay any quicker allowing reasonable times to transfer between terminals in London; I would expect that to be the case for large areas of south west London and the south east generally. It was the end of half term I think as there were hordes of children on the SWT service heading for west country boarding schools.

 

[Eagle]

Yes, but the West of England Main Line between Salisbury and Exeter St David's is essentially a rural route

Being my local line I'd classify it as a London commuter route as far as Templecombe, if not Yeovil. Certainly Gillingham has a sizable commuting population.

 

[The Ham]

One Sunday late last year I travelled back to Torbay from Three Bridges that way, changing at Clapham Junction and Exeter. I actually caught the Exeter train an hour before the one I expected to make due to early running on the extended 'engineering' timings being operated on the Brighton line, but unfortunately further west my train was caught in the aftermath of a previous problem with the new signalling on the single line. After waiting at Yeovil for the first delayed train coming the other way, we became the sacrificial lamb, pulling in for extended waits at both Chard and Honiton whilst subsequent up trains all passed seemingly on time. Arrival at Exeter was about 40 minutes down and the train was quickly emptied and straight away dispatched back towards Salisbury almost on time. Not long after, the next train from Waterloo (the one I thought I would catch from CJ) arrived on time. Even with the late running I could not have travelled via Paddington to Torbay any quicker allowing reasonable times to transfer between terminals in London; I would expect that to be the case for large areas of south west London and the south east generally. It was the end of half term I think as there were hordes of children on the SWT service heading for west country boarding schools.

Although under normal conditions it is officially faster to go Three Bridges-Redhill, Redhill-Reading, Reading-Exeter, Exeter-Torre.

 

[Zoe]

Although under normal conditions it is officially faster to go Three Bridges-Redhill, Redhill-Reading, Reading-Exeter, Exeter-Torre.

I'm not sure changing at Exeter rather than Newton Abbot is always the best idea. Some of the local trains get overtaken at Dawlish Warren by the train from London(the 1006 and 1206 for example) and you'd have a wait of about 45 - 50 minutes for the next Paington train at Exeter whereas if you stayed on to Newton Abbot you'd only have to wait 10 - 12 minutes.

 

[MarkyT]

Although under normal conditions it is officially faster to go Three Bridges-Redhill, Redhill-Reading, Reading-Exeter, Exeter-Torre.

On the sunday in question I did look at going via Reading but I would have fallen into the same service I would have caught at Paddington and the other problem was a long connection time at Newton Abbot. On the Saturday I had travelled via Reading in the other direction deliberately to look at the new station progress.

I'm not sure changing at Exeter rather than Newton Abbot is always the best idea. Some of the local trains get overtaken at Dawlish Warren by the train from London(the 1006 and 1206 for example) and you'd have a wait of about 45 - 50 minutes for the next Paington train at Exeter whereas if you stayed on to Newton Abbot you'd only have to wait 10 - 12 minutes.

I nearly always go to Newton Abbot to change coming from Reading or Paddington (almost all trains stop there) on the basis that if things go pear shaped I'm much closer to my final destination and could get a bus, taxi or even blag a lift if necessary.

 

[Bedpan]

And the majority of trains over this section are only three cars long right?
Come back when ten car trains are running through from Exeter to Waterloo regularly.

People are attracted to the railway by the frequency of service, not the length of the trains (subject of course to overcrowding). That's why the trend has been towards a more frequent service of shorter trains oer the years.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Also there is still plenty of room for growth on the lines to the SW. Electrify down to at least Exeter with line speed enhancements and the time the train takes to get from Waterloo to Exeter rather than from Paddington to Exeter could be a small enough differance to make it a realistic alternitive for those who would need to travel for more than a few minutes to get to Paddington.

Yes, look at the growth on the secondary London - Birmingham route following the improvements over the last few years.

 

[fgwrich]

People are attracted to the railway by the frequency of service, not the length of the trains (subject of course to overcrowding). That's why the trend has been towards a more frequent service of shorter trains oer the years.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Yes, look at the growth on the secondary London - Birmingham route following the improvements over the last few years.

And why many services on the route are either worked with 3/6 or 9 car services, with (as highlighted in the SWT Expansion thread) a few of the peak services going up to 8 car services in the near future, so coming back when the services are 8-10 Car? No, i'd rather upgrade the line while the passenger numbers are increasing, allowing for further service improvements and services, not after the problem has occurred.

 

[HSTEd]

Even if you want to increase services to accelerate growth (as growth appears to be moving rather handsomely as it is) it will be a long time before a pair of single track stations become serious capacity bottlenecks.

Even if you went to half hourly I doubt it would matter that much, you could make up for it with additional loops elsewhere.

Until that time we are fine, and this is a sensible cost saving measure. Just because we don't have to do everything on a shoestring doesn't mean we have to be pointlessly profligate.

 

[The Ham]

Even if you want to increase services to accelerate growth (as growth appears to be moving rather handsomely as it is) it will be a long time before a pair of single track stations become serious capacity bottlenecks.

Even if you went to half hourly I doubt it would matter that much, you could make up for it with additional loops elsewhere.

Until that time we are fine, and this is a sensible cost saving measure. Just because we don't have to do everything on a shoestring doesn't mean we have to be pointlessly profligate.

Although an isolated line with a single line with passing loops may well run fine, the problem is that these services have to get in and out of Waterloo where there is very little margin for error. As such what may well work having a train run 2 minutes late on other lines will not work running here, therefore it means that there needs to be many more passing loops than would be the norm. In which case, the argument for properly dueling most if not all of the line becomes stronger than it would be on say a self contained branch line or even a line where there are other gaps which the services can slot into.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

People are attracted to the railway by the frequency of service, not the length of the trains (subject of course to overcrowding). That's why the trend has been towards a more frequent service of shorter trains oer the years.

Good luck finding slots for the extra services east of Brookwood!!!

 

[Eagle]

Good luck finding slots for the extra services east of Brookwood!!!

If Exeter went half hourly it would still use the same number of paths east of Brookwood, as they'd be extensions of the current Salisbury terminators.

 

[The Ham]

If Exeter went half hourly it would still use the same number of paths east of Brookwood, as they'd be extensions of the current Salisbury terminators.

Fair point although several (non Exeter) services do not terminate at Salisbury, which then reduces the benefit of having a truly half hourly Exeter service. It would also mean that SWT's would need more DMU's as well as making it harder to partly electrify the line, which lowers the chances of it being electrified sooner rather than later.

 

[paul1609]

Don't you get the same situation at Templecombe when the timetable is interrupted, with the double track section finishing immediately to the west of the station?

I havent been down that way for some years but the situation was that just at the end of Templecombe platform a down loop started through to Yeovil Junction the other (former up Line) was the reversible main.
I used to travel that on the Sundays only Brighton to Exeter train which was one of the few services not to call at Templecombe. This was for several years scheduled to use the down loop. The driver used to brake for the approach controlled signal to the down loop and this would often cause the conductor in auto mode to announce that "we are shortly arriving at templecombe", just for the signal to clear and the driver open up again,"which we are passing through at some speed the next station stop will be sherbourne in five minutes time".
This non standard stopping pattern once caused the train to miss the Sherbourne stop. At Yeovil Junction a crowd of school children for the public school at Sherbourne emptied on to the platform, after a discussion between the staff on the platform the train then returned to Sherbourne to drop them off. Some very spirited running indeed then followed (most of the other passengers were travelling to Plymouth and had a tight connection) a deficit of 18 mins departing Yeovil for the second time was cut to only 3 mins by St Davids.

 

[Deeps]

Being my local line I'd classify it as a London commuter route as far as Templecombe, if not Yeovil. Certainly Gillingham has a sizable commuting population.

I must agree with that - recently caught the 0645 from Salisbury to Waterloo, was amazed at the number of people getting on at the "village" stops to Basingstoke. 10 coaches full, then non stop from Basingstoke to W'loo.

 

[MarkyT]

I havent been down that way for some years but the situation was that just at the end of Templecombe platform a down loop started through to Yeovil Junction the other (former up Line) was the reversible main.

Before recent resignalling this section was tokenless block (TB) on the reversible line and absolute block on the other (AB). Now it's all track circuit block (TCB), retaining bidirectional working on the up line.

With the current regular hourly timetable trains pass at Sherborne, approximately half way through the double track 'dynamic' section. Extending the double track through Templecombe station might be marginally useful in minimising knock on effects of a late running down train, but wouldn't really help normal operations significantly, and construction would be complicated not only by the recent new platform work but also by the road underbridge immediately at the London end which is only wide enough for single track and height limited for road traffic. By comparison a new double platform layout at Tisbury (ideally a long loop similar to Axminster) could allow a few minutes to be shaved from the down direction schedule, as down trains have to stop twice presently, taking 6 1/2 minutes from arrival into the loop to departure from the station.

 

[STEVIEBOY1]

That was I believe Tisbury (leading to the awkward situation where the passing loop is just to the east of the station, and it's not uncommon for one train to have to wait there several minutes for another to pass).

I wondered why there was the loop outside Tisbury, this anwers my query about that.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

People are attracted to the railway by the frequency of service, not the length of the trains (subject of course to overcrowding). That's why the trend has been towards a more frequent service of shorter trains oer the years.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Yes, look at the growth on the secondary London - Birmingham route following the improvements over the last few years.

Yes very true.