Trains can't be guaranteed to be compatible based on the signalling system used. Clearance is geographically limited to where the train has been tested (or otherwise assured) to be compatible.
No they weren't. That is when I was heading north and there was periodic congestion on the M40, the most notable at junction 9 where the A34 meets. A ton of drivers trying to join the M40 northbound combined with the inability to zip-merge equates to stop-start.
You are correct about Essex. My daughter went back to school on Tuesday. I'd booked this week off based on London school holiday timings.... Doh....
Back when the regularly updated NR enhancement delivery plan was a thing, route clearance of Reading to Waterloo via Ascot for GW IETs was definitely in there, but I don’t think it was ever actually tested or proven. But both Mk3 hauled stock and HSTs had major speed restrictions through Ascot, but of course the relatively high profile diversions for the Reading area rebuild closures didn’t run that way; their HSTs ran from Westbury to Salisbury then up via Basingstoke and Woking. The first period of diversions then went via the Byfleet curve and into the Windsor side at Waterloo, then later on they ran via Wimbledon.
it’s possible, but previous discussions have suggested they can probably build OOC gradually from north to south without many full closures of the route. As the overall finished site will be much wider, enough for 8 running lines and four wide islands, there’s no real reason for the tracks through it ever closing fully.
I set out in the morning, but it was close to midday by the time I reached the M40 due to the usual traffic waves on the M25.
This is to get rid of some long standing TSRs which are a performance problem and to sort out a set of points at Tyseley TMD that fail due to the extra tonnage of the recent increase in Small Heath freight trains. It is being put in to get it done for the Commonwealth Games as is you have trouble with getting units off Tyseley when the games are on isn't going to look good (not that its good at any time)The Snow Hill Lines have a weekday closure for engineering works scheduled from June 20th - 23rd (Monday - Thursday).
No trains between Dorridge and Birmingham Snow Hill from Monday 20 to Friday 24 June | West Midlands Railway
www.westmidlandsrailway.co.uk
Thank goodness it's a few weeks after my final uni exam, although will make me think twice about applying for jobs where a train would be needed to commute.
Not only is it being done ahead of the Commonwealth Games, but also ahead of the introduction of class 196s on that line.
The Games are the driver for it.
doubt they will take any notice of findings and just carry on as they've always done
Well you are mis-informed. This is only telling people what was already known. Plenty of blockades are planned instead of disparate weekends. However its a two way process and as much as people go on about leisure travel the industry needs revenue and thats still higher midweek.
Oh please God no.
I think you forgot “using loco hauled heritage coaches”…
I think you forgot “using loco hauledheritage coaches442s”…
Multi day blocks are always much, much, more efficient (vs repeated short closures) both in terms of cost and total disruption, due to the start-up and clear-down activities required for each period of work e.g. organizing protection, moving plant, materials and personnel into place. Anyone who has actually worked on track will find this very obvious; on an overnight possession the actual working time is often less than half the window.
With the huge overhead on time and resources taking and giving up possessions let alone the added burden of electrical isolations as well then blockades or at least min 27hr possessions is the way to go. Midweek nights are sub optimal for anything except emergencies. However, NR is still sub optimal with blockades which tend to be driven by major projects on timing though whilst better than they were still optimise the work plan around what they are doing and let other deliverers in on the margins. This inevitably results in the usual level of cyclic possessions remaining so no net reduction in engineering hours are achieve in terms of passenger disruption. I also wonder with operators under NRCs where is the incentive on NR to hold down engineering access when sch4 payments are just part of the money go round now. Presumably when GBR comes into being they will have to work out what the right balance is to maximise farebox revenue over engineering access needs.
Or is it a bit short sighted to stage the Great South Run on a weekend when there is major engineering work in the Portsmouth/Southampton area?
Is that the same date every year?
We are massively driven by what TOCs and FOCs accept.
GBR certainly needs to fix that dynamic but as i say to get balance the right between maximising the farebox over the cost of maintaining and renewing the railway.
