| Westbury - use like Malton, not done at Pilning. Robustness issues. Posted by grahame at 06:17, 17th July 2025 |     |
"A new platform at Westbury" (my highlighting)
I assume this actually means reinstating the old Platform 1. An article in Rail magazine in 2015 quoted a cost of £10.5 million to do this at that time. How much nowadays ? I suppose we could claim that we are getting our own Wiltshire version of HS2.............at least as far as costings go !
At Malton in Yorkshire, there is single platform at one side of a double track (is it still like that?) with trains headed for Scarborough calling on their normal track but trains headed for York crossing over before and after the platform.
It struck me the other evening that this modus operandi is in use at Westbury at times too; the other evening on the 19:29 from Portsmouth and Southsea to Trowbridge we came to a halt between Dilton Marsh and Westbury, waited for a train headed for Portsmouth to complete station duties at platform 1, and then crossed over to Platform 1 ourselves once it had passed us. There were two trains waiting in platform 2 - a Salisbury train AND a Swindon train, and I don't know what was in platform 3 at the time. Both Cardiff and Portsmouth trains often run from Platform 1 at Westbury - this use of a single platform in both directions on what is a double track line is common here. But at what cost in terms of robustness and limiting service operations and enhancement?
Edit note: Minor typos corrected, in the interest of clarity. CfN.
| Re: Westbury - use like Malton, not done at Pilning. Robustness issues. Posted by Witham Bobby at 09:47, 17th July 2025 | |
At Malton in Yorkshire, there is single platform at one side of a double track (is it still like that?) with trains headed for Scarborough calling on their normal track but trains headed for York crossing over before and after the platform. But at what cost in terms of robustness and limiting service operations and enhancement?
It's not ideal. Firstly there is the capital cost of installing a crossover at each end of the single platform, and associated new signals. Then there's ongoing maintenance costs for all this new kit.
Operationally, it would be a bit of a nightmare on busy routes, or on quieter lines where the signals might be many miles apart. I used to reckon (in the days of sharp railway operating) that to cross a train over added four minutes compared to running by at full speed. So you'd have that twice, plus the station stop. It's easy to see the "wrong" road being tied-up for ten minutes
