Bridge that Gap: Great Central Railway News

My copy has just dropped through the door, and it's interesting to see it comes with a leaflet entitled "Cherishing and developing the legacy: The GCR Business Plan 2023 - 2028". I've yet to do more than open the envelope, but am already impressed at the fact of it being prepared and circulated in this way.

 

I played around with some timetables many moons ago and everything that came back showed that the sectional running times didn't quite work out so you'd be left with lengthy dwell times in Loughborough or Rothley. The occupation time on the Leicester section is approximately 35mins for a loco hauled set. To maximise capacity at both ends doesn't work and if you have shuttles from Loughborough to Leicester they don't quite fit in either. If you had the double track to Leicester it frees up a lot of constraints and means you could potentially path trains for Loughborough or beyond with different restrictions, eg one every 75mins and one every 60mins.

 

Would a more affordable alternative not include more passing loops on the section north of Loughborough?

Presumably when it is complete, the “gap” will always be a single track section and be a bottleneck even if the entire rest of the 18 mile route was double track?

 

The question is where the train goes, which is where the analysis by @Jamie C. Steel is interesting - it shows that the pattern is constrained by that 35 minute round trip from Rothley to Leicester North. Reading between the lines, I suspect that then constrains operation on the single line section so that a commercially viable timetable is very difficult to achieve. Such sections exist on other railways, and can be a real pain.

 

Would it be possible to install more track and turnouts at Leicester North so that a down train could leave very soon after an up train arrives, and the loco of the up train then run round before the next up train arrives? And if so, would that help at all with the timetabling or make it even worse?

 

It’s a similar situation on the NYMR. Everyone thinks the long Goathland-Levisham section is the bottleneck but the fact is it’s the shorter Levisham-Pickering section that limits capacity. It gets suggested that a train could leave Pickering as soon as one arrives but that ends up with sets and locos sitting around waiting for the next path and poor utilisation . I.e. a forty minute run round instead of a twenty minute one.

 

Not under the current signalling system - the Rothley - L. North section is single staff worked, so any modifications would have to have a revision of the S&T, rules etc. in addition to the track changes. I've no experience or knowledge on how much this would cost, but to my mind you wouldn't be getting much value for your money over going the full distance on double-tracking.

 

Not sure I agree there. Very similar signalling infrastructure costs would be incurred at Leicester North whether it were double track or kept single track but with the option to have two trains "pass" at Leicester... However the double track option would have a huge amount of extra cost laying the...erm...several miles of the second track.

Surely it would be significantly cheaper to signal Leicester North to take two trains, than to double track to there? (And yes I realise that the GCR's long term aim is to do just that, but the immediate conversation was about capacity increase costs)

Sent from my moto g(8) power lite using Tapatalk

 

The issue is that once you signal Leicester North to take two trains (double or single track arriving makes no difference) you need a signalman to operate it every day the railway operates. The advantage of double track in this regard is that you can switch Rothley out on quiet days and move the rostered signalman to Leicester North. Stick with single track but a 'box at the far end, and you need three instead of two signalmen to operate the railway, even if it's a quiet weekday with only one train ambling up and down.

Once we have a line north from Loughborough there'll be a further demand on signalmen in that direction, but at least passing loops on a single line can also be switched out so it should be limited to one or possibly two more at the far end (assuming that Ruddington gets some working signalling at some point; at the moment the only 'box which needs to be manned up there is the Asher Lane crossing 'box).

 

Initially why not use a simpler No Signaller Token section arrangement. Don't the North Yorkshire Moors have something where you could have 2 trains at Whitby but there is no signaller there?

 

Whitby is part of Network Rail, not NYMR.

On the GCR, You would still require a signalman at Rothley, on the basis that it is Absolute Block from Loughborough and either No Signalman Key Token or One Train only working.
You would need a signalman to change the points at the Leicester North end.

 

No you wouldn't. At Whitby there is a travelling ground frame operator but that it for convenience rather than necessity as it saves a lot of walking with the ground frame located where it is. The TGO also does the ground frame at Grosmont. If necessary, these tasks can be done by the fireman. I believe that the fireman also undertakes this task at Mallaig. It was certainly the case on my last visit, admittedly a few years ago, now. NSKT is an easy fix which would be necessary for more than one train working. Road set for Pl.1 as a normality and ground frame unlocked by token. First train stops at ground frame and route set for Pl.2. Points indicator shows yellow allowing train to proceed into Pl.2. When safely in, route set for Pl.1 for loco to run round. Once done route set for Pl.1 and token placed in instrument ready for Train 2 to obtain token and run into Pl1,
As I don't think there are any level crossings between Loughborough and Leicester, (shows how often I visit!) I don't think it would be beyond the wit of the GCR S&T team to devise a one engine in steam system between these two places for use on quiet days. Hydraulic points with point indication at Rothley or make one line bi-directional That assumes they'd want to, though. Probably a lot of work for little real benefit.

 

That's exactly what we have at Alton - open the box when there's a need for two trains, or to access the Network Rail connection, but on quieter days it's closed, one train working and the auto-working system takes care of the run-round.

 

That would not necessarily have to be the case. There is so much that can be done signalling wise for flexibility, and I think in preservation we are going to be seeing an increase in this way of thinking as we seek to upgrade or expand but with limited volunteer signalman availability.

I can't see why the system in place at Holt (North Norfolk Rly) couldn't equally work at Leicester North. On one train working the guard operates a ground frame (outside the box) to control runround. On busier or gala days, box is switched in and full control and train capacity unlocked.

Sent from my moto g(8) power lite using Tapatalk

 

Oh Right. Thanks for the info.

 

Back in the early days,1986 onwards, This time of year during Santa specials, BR took a T3 possession of platform 2 at Alton and our steam train would after the loco ran around the train, shunt from platform 3 to platform 2.
This required three signalmen, One to man the Box, one to operate the station and Link to Platform 2 ground frames, and the third to be stationed at the Medstead end of the Meon loop to hand wind the motor points. We used to swap around during the day.

 

That didn't last for too long, did it? I can't remember whether it was a change of BR timetable (needing P2 all day) or a change of attitude on BR's part. Much better to have total control of the operation, with the added feature of a signalled connection jointly operated by Woking (WK) and Alton (AT), (to cope with the flood of interchange traffic!).
Pat

 

I too have been impressed with the fact that we now have a more detailed plan for the next five years. The double track to L North and the desire for a museum at L North are both explicit long term aims. I'm sure the GCR S & T dept are very capable of planning for the maximum flexibility and economic operation of this work.
It will be good to see the track being put in place over the A 60 bridge as well.

 

What is also in the latest news is that the total raised for the "Factory Flyover" section is now more than £2 Million pounds! This achievement is really magnificent and a tribute to all who are supporting this project.

 

I’m probably going to bring the kids for a visit in the coming days - is it possible to see / read about the plans and status of these various schemes at the railway (eg purchasing a copy of the magazine)?