OK, this isn't a warehouse, or even a building, but this sight intrigued and I suspect some blog reader can probably enlighten me as to what is going on.
Between the tracks for platforms 1 and 2 at Reading station, there is a marked difference in the track levels. Platform 2 is very slightly higher. To accommodate this, a small concrete fence made of posts and panels retains the ballast.
I've not seen this before and don't understand why it's set up like this. The height difference is very small, smaller than many steps down from a train. Both platforms are in use. Platform 1 does appear to have wooden sleepers and 2 concrete.
Why not just build up the ballast for the track in platform 1 and have them at the same level, surely easier than sinking a fence.
It's a mystery to me, but I suspect not to everyone. Please explain in the comments.
6 comments:
This is guesswork, but a similar situation occurs at some local tram stops. In that case it's to keep the dead end platforms level.
Or is it cant ? I noticed the same thing recently at Reading while heading to London in an HST - the class 800 next door going in the opposite direction seemed MUCH higher than our train. I thought the class 800 might have higher floors, but on reflection much of it seems likely to be superelevation..
Steve C
Same at Leeds
Hi Phil,
Just asked the question to my boss, who is not only a modeller but was also heavily involved with the track design for the Reading Remodelling.
Although he's not sure on platforms 2 & 3, it could be the same principle for the level difference between Platforms 9 and 10.
Platform 9 is simply re-laid fixed directly to the subway deck underneath the station, where as Platform 10 is laid with ballast between the sleepers and subway deck. As Platform 10 was totally new, then they could raise it up to allow the ballast underneath the track, where as Platform 9 was existing (albeit re-numbered), so they couldn't rebuild it to a new raised level to accommodate extra ballast.
Although Platform 3 wasn't new for the re-modelling, it was re-laid for a different project, and could have had additional ballast inserted beneath, making it higher than Platform 2. The other thing to remember is that concrete sleepers are deeper than wooden ones.
Simon
P.S. Next time you're in Reading, come and say hello!
Hi Phil,
Just asked the question to my boss, who is not only a modeller but was also heavily involved with the track design for the Reading Remodelling.
Although he's not sure on platforms 2 & 3, it could be the same principle for the level difference between Platforms 9 and 10.
Platform 9 is simply re-laid fixed directly to the subway deck underneath the station, where as Platform 10 is laid with ballast between the sleepers and subway deck. As Platform 10 was totally new, then they could raise it up to allow the ballast underneath the track, where as Platform 9 was existing (albeit re-numbered), so they couldn't rebuild it to a new raised level to accommodate extra ballast.
Although Platform 3 wasn't new for the re-modelling, it was re-laid for a different project, and could have had additional ballast inserted beneath, making it higher than Platform 2. The other thing to remember is that concrete sleepers are deeper than wooden ones.
Simon
P.S. Next time you're in Reading, come and say hello!
Sleeper depth hadn't occurred to me. That would make sense.
And I don't plan to be in Reading on a regular basis but thanks for the offer!
Post a Comment