East-West Rail (EWR): Consultation updates [not speculation]

[The Planner]

Which is why passive provision for a station at Steeple Claydon is included on E-W

 

[Railwaysceptic]

The British Disease indeed......chronic under investment in infrastructure, expediency instead of ambition, no long-term vision, excessive focus on cost. Building a double track railway isn't "gold-plating", it's doing a proper job to cater for future growth that ought to include cross country inter city trains as well as local services and freight. The EWR cop-out is a classic example of why we're on the way to becoming a third rate nation

Do you believe the route between Oxford and Bletchley will not be a two-track railway?

 

[DarloRich]

Do you believe the route between Oxford and Bletchley will not be a two-track railway?

there may be a couple of single track sections such as over the canal and A5 at Fenny Stratford but generally the answer is yes.

 

[Andyjs247]

The East West Rail and expressway are part of building links betwenn the high tech high growth towns North and West of London. This area classified as ROSE (Rest Of South East) in geography terms has been a population growth zone since the late 1960's. The government is not laying down billions of cash and not getting any tax generating output back. The plan is for this infrastructure to allow to fit in another 2 million people in the next 30 years or so.

The rail line is seen as important as improving links between city centres and the expressway for linking business and industrial parks etc. These routes are expected to lined with dense housing and business development. There's an interesting EasWest rail document testing different new town build options.

This strteches from over 50 small new towns over 30,000 up to 8 new towns the size of Reading to just two new cities of almost a million each, one at a massivley rebuilt Sandy/ St Neots and another at Calvert, also implying a new station of HS2 in such a case.

What I find most likely is that the first big push will occur around Milton Keynes as that already had the base infrastructure and an almost exceptance that it will expand (earlier talk has already been about expanding it to 400,000 people). I expect MK to grow to 500,000. There's a lot of talk at rebuilding Sandy, so expect something there. Clavert/Quintain is just to tempting with all it's flat land half between Oxford and MK, exoect a lrge new town here at some level.

For example with C2 - C semmingly the favourite route for the new rail line, Bassingbourn near Royston has been suggested as new town of 31000 on an old MOD site.

Either way the new rail line is going to an intensive fast commuter route. I can see a max of four new railway stations and associacted new towns. Some scenarios see a new express line South of parts of the Marshton Vale line and the old line converted into a tram train line with tens of thousands of new houses, South of Bedford.

Have you seen the National Infrastructure Commission report Partnering for Prosperity: A new deal for the Cambridge-Milton Keynes-Oxford Arc by any chance?

This was the report that recommended government commit “£1bn to deliver the infrastructure necessary for a high quality and resilient rail commuter service between Bicester and Bedford ... to a target date of 2023”. Page 36 has this to say...

If East West Rail and the Expressway were to be developed along the same broad corridor then, analysis of land constraints suggests that key opportunities for growth over the next 30 years could include:

• the re-establishment of Milton Keynes as a development location of national significance, through the intensification and expansion of the town to a population of at least 500,000, in line with local aspirations. This presents an immediate opportunity for growth;
• development between Bicester and Bletchley, unlocked through the combination of East West Rail and the Expressway, with the potential to grow to city-scale, ultimately supporting a population in the hundreds of thousands. This could be the first new town in over a generation;
• concentrated growth in the Marston Vale between Milton Keynes and Bedford, focused around a few key rail nodes in the area, and providing the critical mass to expand local services;
• major development around Bedford, supported through the introduction of East West Rail services and the wider connections that exist via the Midland Mainline;
• expansion in and around the Sandy area in central Bedfordshire, and along the A1 corridor, potentially supporting the development of a large town, exploiting new East West Rail and existing north-south connectivity via the East Coast Main Line. Delivering major growth may require other changes such as the re-alignment of the A1, and potentially relocating the existing East Coast Main Line station; and
• a new garden town west of Cambridge, supported by a new station on East West Rail, and providing a satellite for those working in the city.

 

[Railwaysceptic]

there may be a couple of single track sections such as over the canal and A5 at Fenny Stratford but generally the answer is yes.

Yes, that's what I thought and have always gleaned from various statements from the parties involved. I don't understand why there are so many post complaining about downgrading. We are getting a 100mph twin track railway between Oxford and Bletchley, plus a new service from Aylesbury via Bletchley to, probably, Milton Keynes plus an enhancement of the Marston Vale line.

If Chiltern can run a very successful service with DMUs from London to Oxford and Birmingham on a two track railway, why does Oxford to Bletchley require something bigger and more expensive?

 

[cle]

Yes, that's what I thought and have always gleaned from various statements from the parties involved. I don't understand why there are so many post complaining about downgrading. We are getting a 100mph twin track railway between Oxford and Bletchley, plus a new service from Aylesbury via Bletchley to, probably, Milton Keynes plus an enhancement of the Marston Vale line.

If Chiltern can run a very successful service with DMUs from London to Oxford and Birmingham on a two track railway, why does Oxford to Bletchley require something bigger and more expensive?

A new railway shouldn't be built for diesel operation. A proper express railway between big places and a mix of traffic types - before anyone jumps in about the Borders line, very different. It connects with electric railways throughout too, is noisy, polluting and heavier.

Getting the railway is great - and twin-track 100mph is what we need - but we shouldn't settle there. Our 'competitors' (laughable these days as the country descends to ****) - would not engineer this as a diesel railway. HS2 is not, obviously. It's absurd.

Somebody needs to take on electrification - almost as a government ministry and make it work. It is behind, over-budget and being culled all over the country. We need to crack it, so that it doesn't become something NR and government fear. But something we get good at, do efficiently, train workforces to permanently learn and expand... and therefore it becomes cheaper and quicker.

 

[gallafent]

[…]Our 'competitors' (laughable these days as the country descends to ****) - would not engineer this as a diesel railway.[…]

Somebody needs to take on electrification - almost as a government ministry and make it work. It is behind, over-budget and being culled all over the country. We need to crack it, so that it doesn't become something NR and government fear. But something we get good at, do efficiently, train workforces to permanently learn and expand... and therefore it becomes cheaper and quicker.

Exactly. To take an example from one of our competitors:

https://www.globalrailnews.com/2018...ations-launched-on-ethiopia-djibouti-railway/

“Passenger services on a standard gauge railway connecting landlocked Ethiopia to Djibouti have been launched in Africa.

“Built by the China Rail Engineering and the China Civil Engineering Construction corporations, the 756km electrified railway runs from Ethiopia’s capital city, Addis Ababa, to the port of Djibouti, providing Ethiopia with access to the sea.

“The railway is believed to have cost around $4 billion – supported with finance from the Export-Import Bank of China – and be the longest electrified railway in Africa, cutting the travel time from around three days to 10 hours.”

In the real world, taking inward investment from China is really quite a good way to get infrastructure built. It's also (as an aside) strongly arguably a good way for smaller companies to accelerate growth and output. There's a huge push in China at the moment to make investments overseas, since there's a need there to take the country's very rapid development to the next stage, and it's clear that it's not a zero-sum game: businesses “here” get access to large quantities of capital to allow growth, businesses and institutions “there” get access to large quantities of expertise and IP. It's win-win. Requires bravery though, on both sides.

 

[Non Multi]

As electrification resources are in demand elsewhere, the initial services on the western section would have to be diesel anyway. If the Chiltern lines and Didcot to Oxford were electrified already it would be an obvious choice. I would not be surprised if the western section is part of a future Chiltern electrification project.

 

[mr_jrt]

I don't understand why any upgrade of the Marston Vale line for EWR would retain the single track section at Fenny Stratford unless the proposed service provision required literally no work on that section of the line at all? Sticking in another bridge deck alongside the existing one over the A5 should not be hard, the entire formation is double track as it formerly was, and there's already a double track bridge over the canal?

...does anyone know what the plan is for the level crossing?

 

[route:oxford]

Our 'competitors' (laughable these days as the country descends to ****) - would not engineer this as a diesel railway. HS2 is not, obviously. It's absurd.

Our competitors still do. It's only a few weeks since the opening of a diesel operation, 79mph "high seed" route, without positive train controls and 30mph single track curves in Washington State.

 

[Andyjs247]

Getting the railway is great - and twin-track 100mph is what we need - but we shouldn't settle there. Our 'competitors' (laughable these days as the country descends to ****) - would not engineer this as a diesel railway. HS2 is not, obviously. It's absurd.

I agree. But having just been to one of the consultations I can confirm that, due to descoping, certain bridges (6 in total) are not now being replaced. Replacements would be required were electrification to go ahead. So although signalling will be immunised for electrification it won’t just be a fairly simple case of putting up the wires at a later date.

 

[richieb1971]

I don't understand why any upgrade of the Marston Vale line for EWR would retain the single track section at Fenny Stratford unless the proposed service provision required literally no work on that section of the line at all? Sticking in another bridge deck alongside the existing one over the A5 should not be hard, the entire formation is double track as it formerly was, and there's already a double track bridge over the canal?

...does anyone know what the plan is for the level crossing?

You do know the track going up to the flyover is single track right? Even if they double track the A5 its only buying a few hundred yards at best. But Don't listen to me i'm always wrong.

I can see that signal light going over the A5 halting quite a bit of traffic.

 

[mr_jrt]

No, actually, I didn't. The line over the flyover is double track and there are two tracks reducing to one west of Fenny Stratford, I've always just missed the single track bridge over Saxon Street! A curious choice when they built it...?

 

[richieb1971]

Was 2 tracks in the beginning (this is 1904). Look how pretty Fenny Stratford is in this picture . So either there was a double track bridge originally over the canal and the (not existing yet) A5 and it was replaced by a single track bridge sometime later (must have been quite a bit later considering how modern it looks). Or its always been single track further down.

Picture taken from the disused-stations.org website.

 

[edwin_m]

The aerial view on Bing maps shows the canal bridge is double track width but with only one track.

The A5 bridge is single width, this would date from whenever the original A5 route past Fenny Stratford station was bypassed by the current dual carriageway. Just to the west of the A5 there is another single width bridge over the river Ouzel. Presumably there would have been a double track bridge here originally but it is very close to the A5 bridge and possibly there is so little embankment between them that making the gap for the A5 undermined the other bridge? There is also a single width bridge where the flyover ramp descending towards Fenny Stratford crosses Saxon Street, but trains to and from the existing Bletchley station use the adjacent bridge (double but only one running line, the other being a headshunt/trap for the sidings.

The single line section is from just west of Saxon Street through the station to just east of the current A5. Doubling this section for EWR trains (via the flyover not the existing platforms) would therefore require re-building of all three fairly large structures or providing parallel ones for the second track. The parallel option looks difficult at Saxon Street as space is limited.

 

[mr_jrt]

The canal bridge (if its the one I'm thinking of) has a disused northern span, and the old down line from Bletchley terminates on the double track bridge over Saxon St. There is however a curious gap immediately east of that bridge where it looks like a later footpath only provided for a single track. Most curious.

 

[FordFocus]

You wont get a whole lot more out of 125 vs 100 between Bicester and Bletchley to be worth it.

Not to mention the new 3 aspect signalling will need upgrading to 4 aspect for braking distances.

£££££

 

[DarloRich]

Yes, that's what I thought and have always gleaned from various statements from the parties involved. I don't understand why there are so many post complaining about downgrading. We are getting a 100mph twin track railway between Oxford and Bletchley, plus a new service from Aylesbury via Bletchley to, probably, Milton Keynes plus an enhancement of the Marston Vale line.

If Chiltern can run a very successful service with DMUs from London to Oxford and Birmingham on a two track railway, why does Oxford to Bletchley require something bigger and more expensive?

You tell me. We are getting a new railway that will be of great use to the community and wider. Seems a good news story to me even if it is not as fantastic as many experts would like.

A new railway shouldn't be built for diesel operation. A proper express railway between big places and a mix of traffic types - before anyone jumps in about the Borders line, very different. It connects with electric railways throughout too, is noisy, polluting and heavier.

Getting the railway is great - and twin-track 100mph is what we need - but we shouldn't settle there. Our 'competitors' (laughable these days as the country descends to ****) - would not engineer this as a diesel railway. HS2 is not, obviously. It's absurd.

Somebody needs to take on electrification - almost as a government ministry and make it work. It is behind, over-budget and being culled all over the country. We need to crack it, so that it doesn't become something NR and government fear. But something we get good at, do efficiently, train workforces to permanently learn and expand... and therefore it becomes cheaper and quicker.

But that electrification is pointless is it creates an island in a diesel sea. This line need sot be done in conjunction with both Chilterns, GW Oxford & MML!

I don't understand why any upgrade of the Marston Vale line for EWR would retain the single track section at Fenny Stratford unless the proposed service provision required literally no work on that section of the line at all? Sticking in another bridge deck alongside the existing one over the A5 should not be hard, the entire formation is double track as it formerly was, and there's already a double track bridge over the canal?

...does anyone know what the plan is for the level crossing?

The plan is for the crossing to remain. The suggestions i saw for the replacement of the level crossing with a bridge/bridges proposed the demolition of almost all of Simpson Road from Beyond Bairstow Close to Travis Perkins.

You do know the track going up to the flyover is single track right? Even if they double track the A5 its only buying a few hundred yards at best. But Don't listen to me i'm always wrong.

I can see that signal light going over the A5 halting quite a bit of traffic.

Correct - BTW what signal light?

Was 2 tracks in the beginning (this is 1904). Look how pretty Fenny Stratford is in this picture . So either there was a double track bridge originally over the canal and the (not existing yet) A5 and it was replaced by a single track bridge sometime later (must have been quite a bit later considering how modern it looks). Or its always been single track further down.

Picture taken from the disused-stations.org website.

The canal bridge (if its the one I'm thinking of) has a disused northern span, and the old down line from Bletchley terminates on the double track bridge over Saxon St. There is however a curious gap immediately east of that bridge where it looks like a later footpath only provided for a single track. Most curious.

To clarify:

• The Saxon Street Bridge is double track sized ( with the flyover line climbing away on a seperate single track bridge)
• At the Fenny Stratford end of the Saxon Street bridge the tunnel carrying the footpath under both bridges has been cut back leaving a gap
• The line runs on an embank of varying heights between Saxon Street & Bow Brickhill.
• Immediately after that pedestrian tunnel a Tesco store has been built very close to the embankment
• I doubt the embankment at this point could accommodate another track, although Fenny Stratford did have two platforms in the past, so it must have done so in the past.
• I doubt a line could be drawn from the buffer stops on the Saxon Street Bridge to Fenny without passing into Tesco.
• The site of the second platform at Fenny is now industrial units but is not insurmountbale
• There is enough space from under the Watling Street Bridge to the end of the canal bridge to run two tracks
• The canal bridge is a single deck double track bridge
• The Ouzel viaduct is, I suspect, a double track bridge ( I haven't looked that closely as it has been covered by trees for years) as it is much older than the A5 bridge
• The A5 bridge is single track

The big issue for me is the embankment between the A 5 bridge and the canal bridge. I am not convinced it is wide enough for two tracks. if you look at the track envelope after the track widens to double track just before Bow Brickhill and that envelope along the embankment after the A5 the difference is clear. It is worth noting that the embankment curves away very quickly from the crest

 

[HowardGWR]

^^^From above, the Ouzel viaduct looks of a piece with the A5 bridge and looks as though it was constructed when they broke through the embankment to build the Watling St A5 bypass: in other words, also single track.

 

[Dunnyrail]

The East West Rail and expressway are part of building links betwenn the high tech high growth towns North and West of London. This area classified as ROSE (Rest Of South East) in geography terms has been a population growth zone since the late 1960's . The government is not laying down billions of cash and not getting any tax generating output back. The plan is for this infrastructure to allow to fit in another 2 million people in the next 30 years or so.

The rail line is seen as important as improving links between city centres and the expressway for linking business and industrial parks etc. These routes are expected to lined with dense housing and business development. There's an interesting EasWest rail document testing different new town build options.

This strteches from over 50 small new towns over 30,000 up to 8 new towns the size of Reading to just two new cities of almost a million each, one at a massivley rebuilt Sandy/ St Neots and another at Calvert, also implying a new station of HS2 in such a case.

What I find most likely is that the first big push will occur around Milton Keynes as that already had the base infrastructure and an almost exceptance that it will expand (earlier talk has already been about expanding it to 400,000 people) . I expect MK to grow to 500,000. There's a lot of talk at rebuilding Sandy , so expect something there. Clavert/Quintain is just to tempting with all it's flat land half between Oxford and MK, exoect a lrge new town here at some level.

For example with C2 - C semmingly the favourite route for the new rail line, Bassingbourn near Royston has been suggested as new town of 31000 on an old MOD site.

Either way the new rail line is going to an intensive fast commuter route. I can see a max of four new railway stations and associacted new towns. Some scenarios see a new express line South of parts of the Marshton Vale line and the old line converted into a tram train line with tens of thousands of new houses, South of Bedford.

Can you point me to any of the documentation that points to a "one at a massivley rebuilt Sandy/ St Neots" please.
JonD

 

[Andyjs247]

Can you point me to any of the documentation that points to a "one at a massivley rebuilt Sandy/ St Neots" please.
JonD

Look in the National Infrastructure Commission report “Partnering for Prosperity” pp36. See post #1230 also #1594

 

[Andyjs247]

Although outside the scope of EWR2 the subject of Bicester London Road level crossing has been raised again.

Apparently Network Rail is working with Oxfordshire County Council on a solution and has provided this statement....

"The London Road Level Crossing in Bicester was upgraded as part of East West Rail Western Section Phase 1 and does not form part of EWR2 to which this consultation relates. Whilst the train services introduced by EWR2 will result in an increase of the barrier down time at this crossing, the overall duration of closure is still considered acceptable from an operational perspective.”

"Network Rail is working with Oxfordshire County Council in identifying technology that can be positioned at specific decision points and provides potential crossing users with live information on the position of the barriers. In the meantime, Network Rail is reviewing if any reasonable changes can be introduced to the signal control system for London Road to reduce the existing and anticipated future barrier down time."

I've not heard of "live information" as an option in this sort of situation; does anyone know where it is in use? And is this live information any use to pedestrians or cyclists?

 

[DarloRich]

^^^From above, the Ouzel viaduct looks of a piece with the A5 bridge and looks as though it was constructed when they broke through the embankment to build the Watling St A5 bypass: in other words, also single track.

I think the River Ouzel bridge is somewhat older ( stone/masonary). I haven't been able to look at it closely as until quite recently it was surrounded by mature tress. The trees have bene cut back all along the embankment.

It would be hard to widen the embankment as just after the canal ( but before the river) on the right hand side in the Bedford direction a new housing estate has been built.

 

[Dunnyrail]

Look in the National Infrastructure Commission report “Partnering for Prosperity” pp36. See post #1230 also #1594

Thanks for that. I believe that the reference is to the Proposed developments at Tempsford which does not appear to mean wholesale destruction of St.Neots which was my main concern, the proposals have in part in places suggested the closure of Sandy Station to be replaced by a new one at Tempsford (well re opened actually). Other worries were of a major interchange around Barford where an Expressway/East West Line Interchange was proposed. This more than likely may have resulted in St.Neots Station Closure, that plan is I believe very much on the back burner now.

What worries me about much of the postulating in such reports that have the effect of lifetime changes to people who have chosen to live near Railway Stations to get to work only to find them moved elswhere, thus putting people who had made concious lifestyle decisions to make their Commute Car Free back into cars to get to the Station.

 

[jimm]

Although outside the scope of EWR2 the subject of Bicester London Road level crossing has been raised again.

Apparently Network Rail is working with Oxfordshire County Council on a solution and has provided this statement....

"The London Road Level Crossing in Bicester was upgraded as part of East West Rail Western Section Phase 1 and does not form part of EWR2 to which this consultation relates. Whilst the train services introduced by EWR2 will result in an increase of the barrier down time at this crossing, the overall duration of closure is still considered acceptable from an operational perspective.”

"Network Rail is working with Oxfordshire County Council in identifying technology that can be positioned at specific decision points and provides potential crossing users with live information on the position of the barriers. In the meantime, Network Rail is reviewing if any reasonable changes can be introduced to the signal control system for London Road to reduce the existing and anticipated future barrier down time."

I've not heard of "live information" as an option in this sort of situation; does anyone know where it is in use? And is this live information any use to pedestrians or cyclists?

There is a mobile phone app for Thatcham level crossing, launched in 2014. I don't know the current state of play with it.

http://levelx.info/index.php

And a wider scheme using an app seems to be in development, called Level Crossing Countdown http://www.levelcrossingapp.co.uk

I guess the same data could be used to drive roadside signs too e.g. at Bicester at places along London Road, such as the Launton Road junction, and out on the A41 and A4421 to the east of the town.

 

[work-traveller]

I've not heard of "live information" as an option in this sort of situation; does anyone know where it is in use? And is this live information any use to pedestrians or cyclists?

Not sure about the live information, but with more traditional technology I think that the striking points for the signal controls are being reviewed. This with the aim of reducing the barrier downtime.

 

[richieb1971]

Correct - BTW what signal light?

For some reason I thought a light would exist here, since I have seen 6h10 parked on the bridge a few times as I drove underneath. I assumed the single line was blocked by an oncoming passenger working. According to the youtube I just watched there is no such signal where 2 lines merge into one, which seems rather strange.

Attachment shows a pic of the bridge which uses only the southern lane.

 

[DarloRich]

View attachment 41980


For some reason I thought a light would exist here, since I have seen 6h10 parked on the bridge a few times as I drove underneath. I assumed the single line was blocked by an oncoming passenger working. According to the youtube I just watched there is no such signal where 2 lines merge into one, which seems rather strange.

Attachment shows a pic of the bridge which uses only the southern lane.

that is the canal bridge

There is a signal before the Saxon street bridge opposite the depot with the next signal at Fenny Stratford Station - you may have seen the stone train ( assume that is 6h10) shunting

 

[richieb1971]

that is the canal bridge

There is a signal before the Saxon street bridge opposite the depot with the next signal at Fenny Stratford Station - you may have seen the stone train ( assume that is 6h10) shunting

The trains I saw were going west towards Bletchley in the early hours of 5am-6am. If the train is stopped on the A5 bridge it must mean it cannot pass further for some reason. On the occasion I saw the train at Bedford with 20+ hoppers and then saw it 30 minutes later on the A5 bridge stopped. Therefore the locomotive could not have been further than Fenny. I am surprised it would stop there rather than before the merge of the tracks. The train is loaded at that time of the morning, the empties run between 9am-11am in the other direction as I'm sure your aware. Perhaps it was a point change under the flyover to enter the discharge lane.

 

[DarloRich]

The trains I saw were going west towards Bletchley in the early hours of 5am-6am. If the train is stopped on the A5 bridge it must mean it cannot pass further for some reason. On the occasion I saw the train at Bedford with 20+ hoppers and then saw it 30 minutes later on the A5 bridge stopped. Therefore the locomotive could not have been further than Fenny. I am surprised it would stop there rather than before the merge of the tracks. The train is loaded at that time of the morning, the empties run between 9am-11am in the other direction as I'm sure your aware. Perhaps it was a point change under the flyover to enter the discharge lane.

misread your initial post - sorry

How long ago did you see it? I am surprised it was stopped as far back as the A5 bridge. I suspect it was a simple case of not clearing the route off quickly enough. The trains often get stopped at Fenny in both directions.