East-West Rail (EWR): Alternative options and speculation

[The Planner]

Current performance is really, really not representative of normal, and what can be expected once passengers (and full service) return. In fact, it surprises me the number of poorly performing trains you highlight in the current relatively "easy" operating conditions. Hardly a "right time railway"

Totally agree, not sure how far Raildar goes back but I doubt the performance is stellar pre COVID.

 

[JamesT]

Presumably this would have to be in conjunction with an expansion of Oxford station to provide more through platforms which would alleviate some of the issues of current services being delayed with each other?
Even better would be quad tracking Oxford-Didcot.

Though one thing I’m not entirely clear on, if EWR services were to be extended to Didcot or a Cowley branch, are they going to end up crossing all the lines on the flat to go North back onto EWR? (Or indeed to come out of a Cowley branch). Is that likely to become a problem constraining capacity?

 

[The Planner]

Though one thing I’m not entirely clear on, if EWR services were to be extended to Didcot or a Cowley branch, are they going to end up crossing all the lines on the flat to go North back onto EWR? (Or indeed to come out of a Cowley branch). Is that likely to become a problem constraining capacity?

Never let operational details like that cloud peoples suggestions here! but yes, coming off Cowley and then on to EWR provides conflicts even with the various bi-di options.

 

[cle]

Cowley to EWR is surely better than Didcot to EWR?

The days of even Reading to EWR, let alone Bristol/Cardiff, seem long behind us.

 

[The Planner]

Cowley to EWR is surely better than Didcot to EWR?

The days of even Reading to EWR, let alone Bristol/Cardiff, seem long behind us.

Cowley (not that it is Cowley in reality) isn't even a funded or certain scheme though.

 

[David Goddard]

The planners (and the speculators) need to answer the question "Is this the East-West Railway or the Oxford-Cambridge Railway"
If the former then running services beyond the "Varsity core" should be part of the aim. If the latter then they can leave it as that.

I am in no way proposing a half hourly train from Bristol to Norwich, but strongly believe that to make this work as a joined up piece of railway it needs to do more than just the central section.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The planners (and the speculators) need to answer the question "Is this the East-West Railway or the Oxford-Cambridge Railway"
If the former then running services beyond the "Varsity core" should be part of the aim. If the latter then they can leave it as that.

I am in no way proposing a half hourly train from Bristol to Norwich, but strongly believe that to make this work as a joined up piece of railway it needs to do more than just the central section.

I could certainly see the case to extend to Didcot, possibly replacing the existing Oxford-Didcot stoppers, which would improve connectivity onto the GWML.

 

[David Goddard]

I could certainly see the case to extend to Didcot, possibly replacing the existing Oxford-Didcot stoppers, which would improve connectivity onto the GWML.

Indeed, I agree that this is a logical extension, with (paths permitting) one on to Reading and one to Swindon.

 

[Bald Rick]

I could certainly see the case to extend to Didcot, possibly replacing the existing Oxford-Didcot stoppers, which would improve connectivity onto the GWML.

Fairly sure the Oxford - Didcot stoppers will be tagged on to the London - Didcot services before too long.

 

[JamesT]

Fairly sure the Oxford - Didcot stoppers will be tagged on to the London - Didcot services before too long.

Betting that Oxford to Didcot will be wired before EWR is built?

 

[Bald Rick]

Betting that Oxford to Didcot will be wired before EWR is built?

Unlikely to be much in it. Certainly not enough to start an EWR service to Didcot, build up some connectivity, and then cut it off.

 

[David Goddard]

Well this is where a bit of joined up thinking (remember that?) may work.
Assuming that the wires will appear on this stretch at some point (either from Didcot as completion of the GW scheme or from Oxford as part of EW), then a hybrid service solution could satisfy multiple needs.
Take one of the London to Didcot trains through to Oxford, while one of the East West services is extended to Didcot and then Reading.
Intermediate stations in the main being served by the former, and the Banbury extensions move to IETs which would otherwise terminate at Oxford.

 

[camflyer]

The planners (and the speculators) need to answer the question "Is this the East-West Railway or the Oxford-Cambridge Railway"
If the former then running services beyond the "Varsity core" should be part of the aim. If the latter then they can leave it as that.

I am in no way proposing a half hourly train from Bristol to Norwich, but strongly believe that to make this work as a joined up piece of railway it needs to do more than just the central section.

I thought one of the aims of EWR was to reduce the number of people connecting in London. if you can't do Norwich to Bristol direct on EWR then it may still be quicker to go via London.

 

[Ianno87]

I thought one of the aims of EWR was to reduce the number of people connecting in London. if you can't do Norwich to Bristol direct on EWR then it may still be quicker to go via London.

The core focus (read: Business case) now seems to have shifted to connecting new housing to jobs growth in the Oxford-MK-Bedford-Cambridge arc than "avoiding London"; any "orbital" long distance journey opportunities are more a side-effect than the core purpose of the scheme. There simply isn't enough demand for journeys like Norwich-Bristol for the scheme to wash its face purely based on these.

 

[swt_passenger]

Unlikely to be much in it. Certainly not enough to start an EWR service to Didcot, build up some connectivity, and then cut it off.

I think the early EWR proposals about extending to Didcot would have been written long before the final decision not to wire EWR. I think they’re given way too much significance in present discussions, and as you say if the Oxford stoppers rightly become EMU extensions from Paddington we‘re very unlikely to get EWR there as well.

 

[cle]

The Didcot stoppers were the Oxford stoppers, before the wires fiasco, so I would expect they return once that part is extended. EWR terminating at Didcot could be interesting, as it offers connections from the West - but not as many as Reading, and without XC/SWT too. So it would still feel incomplete in that regard.

Appreciate Cowley is not funded or official, but equally, it could be completed much sooner than EWR or wires, if fired up. Not to mention Oxford station itself. Chiltern have been mentioned as most likely, but I'm sure it will all change.

 

[mr_jrt]

It's fine, it's fine, get EWR to Didcot then when they reopen the DN&SR EWR can terminate at Southampton

 

[The Planner]

Appreciate Cowley is not funded or official, but equally, it could be completed much sooner than EWR or wires, if fired up. Not to mention Oxford station itself. Chiltern have been mentioned as most likely, but I'm sure it will all change.

Which bit of EWR

 

[Nicholas43]

If Didcot-Oxford gets wired, but not Oxford-Bletchley, then I can see why the (absurdly named) East West Rail Company is worried about platform and turnback capacity at Oxford for trains from Bletchley (and, maybe, beyond).
If the Govt is serious about decarbonising, and given that batteries and hydrogen are speculation with knobs on, wires Didcot to Bletchley make sense. And these wires would allow 2 electric stopping trains per hour Paddington Reading Oxford Bletchley Milton Keynes Central. (Edit: the Paddington Didcot bit being in the paths of the existing Electrostar stoppers)
To me, passenger service to Morris Cowley only makes sense if it is metro-like several trains an hour. That implies (expensive) passing loops on the branch, and putting back both the up (hard) and down (a bit easier?) relief lines between Oxford and Kennington Junction.

 

[zwk500]

If Didcot-Oxford gets wired, but not Oxford-Bletchley, then I can see why the (absurdly named) East West Rail Company is worried about platform and turnback capacity at Oxford for trains from Bletchley (and, maybe, beyond).

Why is EWR absurdly named? the line goes broadly east to west.

If the Govt is serious about decarbonising, and given that batteries and hydrogen are speculation with knobs on, wires Didcot to Bletchley make sense. And these wires would allow 2 electric stopping trains per hour Paddington Reading Oxford Bletchley Milton Keynes Central.

Why would you run Paddington-MKC? Why transfer delay from Reading onto EWR? At least terminating at Reading makes sense as you'd be able to limit the impact (if you can find a platform), even then it doesn't make very much sense.

To me, passenger service to Morris Cowley only makes sense if it is metro-like several trains an hour. That implies (expensive) passing loops on the branch, and putting back both the up (hard) and down (a bit easier?) relief lines between Oxford and Kennington Junction.

It makes no sense to bring EWR through Oxford in any event, because it means you're forcing crossing moves at Oxford North Junction. If you terminate EWR at Oxford they can stay on the eastern side and not conflict with through traffic.

 

[daodao]

Why is EWR absurdly named? the line goes broadly east to west.

Why would you run Paddington-MKC? Why transfer delay from Reading onto EWR? At least terminating at Reading makes sense as you'd be able to limit the impact (if you can find a platform), even then it doesn't make very much sense.

It makes no sense to bring EWR through Oxford in any event, because it means you're forcing crossing moves at Oxford North Junction. If you terminate EWR at Oxford they can stay on the eastern side and not conflict with through traffic.

If EWR services terminate at Oxford, potential connectivity to points further west is not provided and the service will only be useful for travel to Oxford itself. Passengers from Bletchley and beyond travelling to Swindon and points further west would continue to travel via Paddington. I had thought that the purpose of EWR was to enhance longer distance connectivity and not just to re-open a local line.

 

[zwk500]

If EWR services terminate at Oxford, potential connectivity to points further west is not provided and the service will only be useful for travel to Oxford itself. Passengers from Bletchley and beyond travelling to Swindon and points further west would continue to travel via Paddington. I had thought that the purpose of EWR was to enhance longer distance connectivity and not just to re-open a local line.

My understanding was that it's primary purpose for passengers was to enhance connectivity into Oxford (and eventually Cambridge) from areas planned for substantial housing development. And to relieve a chronically overloaded section of the road network. It's a regional line, somewhat similar to Reading-Redhill (although a bit higher standard). I may be very wrong on this, but it wasn't meant to become another higher-speed main line carrying traffic from one side of the country to the other.

 

[tspaul26]

Surely the answer is to design it so as not to preclude westward service extensions in the future?

Walk before we can run, &c.

I also note that there is an aspiration for 6tph on the section between Bedford and Cambridge in the future as stage 3.5, but no equivalent at the Oxford end. This may leave scope to bolt on westerly services as ‘stage 3.75’ in the future.

 

[Nicholas43]

Why is EWR absurdly named? the line goes broadly east to west.

"East West Rail" has me hoping for Samarqand to Sampford Courtenay (for example). All we are actually getting is (1) another layer of management on top of the restored service from Bletchley south-westwards to Oxford which Network Rail were already working on; (2) an improvement of the existing service from Bedford south-westwards to Bletchley; (3) years of argument about a projected new railway from Cambridge westwards to Bedford.

Why would you run Paddington-MKC? Why transfer delay from Reading onto EWR?

Because the electrostars are now running a reliable service Paddington to Didcot, were planned to continue to Oxford, and ought to be able to struggle on to Bletchley; and I don't accept the counsel of despair that the post-Williams unified railway won't be able to run reliable services over routes longer than 60 miles.

It makes no sense to bring EWR through Oxford in any event, because it means you're forcing crossing moves at Oxford North Junction.

Platforms 3 and 4 ( as now re-numbered) at Oxford are already reversible. A train proceeding from Didcot to Bicester does not have to conflict at Oxford North Junction with a train proceeding from Banbury to Didcot. The Oxfordshire rail corridor study believed that there is demand Didcot (and beyond) to Bicester (and beyond).

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't think it makes sense to run to Paddington, but Didcot would be a decent "prize" to connect to GWML destinations. I'm less sure about the other end.

I retain my view that it should be electrified from day one even if it means it's delayed a year or two opening.

 

[zwk500]

"East West Rail" has me hoping for Samarqand to Sampford Courtenay (for example). All we are actually getting is (1) another layer of management on top of the restored service from Bletchley south-westwards to Oxford which Network Rail were already working on; (2) an improvement of the existing service from Bedford south-westwards to Bletchley; (3) years of argument about a projected new railway from Cambridge westwards to Bedford.

It's a regional connectivity project. What you are getting is brand new line and services between MK and Oxford, Bedford and Oxford and possibly Mk and Aylesbury., along with 2 and 3.

Because the electrostars are now running a reliable service Paddington to Didcot, were planned to continue to Oxford, and ought to be able to struggle on to Bletchley; and I don't accept the counsel of despair that the post-Williams unified railway won't be able to run reliable services over routes longer than 60 miles.

It's not about 'struggling on', it's about a useful service. If EWR could reliably get as far as Reading, that'd be enough for the journeys people are going to be making. Extending the Didcot terminators & wires (back) to Oxford and not running diesels under the wires is a reasonable compromise. Capacity at Paddington is better saved for people wanting to get in and out of London itself.

Platforms 3 and 4 ( as now re-numbered) at Oxford are already reversible. A train proceeding from Didcot to Bicester does not have to conflict at Oxford North Junction with a train proceeding from Banbury to Didcot. The Oxfordshire rail corridor study believed that there is demand Didcot (and beyond) to Bicester (and beyond).

A train proceeding from Didcot to the Up Platform at Oxford will conflict with a train from the Up platform to Didcot, by definition. You will also take up at least 2 right-direction slots in the platform by wrong-road working. Trains waiting for the line to Bicester can hold on the Down Relief and let Banbury trains pass outside them on the Down Main, which will be far better for the network overall than wrong-road working and using the Up relief/Jericho (whatever it's called, the easternmost line).

I don't doubt the demand. I doubt the ability of the railway to reliably deliver the total service if it tried to run through Oxford at this moment in time.

 

[cle]

Wires Didcot to Bletchley (and Coventry for that matter!) are essential.

That said, I think Reading is a better goal than Paddington.

It has tons of regional and long distance connections, is a major destination in itself (vs Didcot), and a big high value/tech jobs market, much in the way of Cambridge and Oxford.

If this is really an arc, then Reading is the other logical 'regional hub/smallish city that punches above its weight' like the others are.

 

[Bald Rick]

I had thought that the purpose of EWR was to enhance longer distance connectivity and not just to re-open a local line.

The purpose of EWR is, and always has been, a housing project.

 

[Nicholas43]

A train proceeding from Didcot to the Up Platform at Oxford will conflict with a train from the Up platform to Didcot, by definition. You will also take up at least 2 right-direction slots in the platform by wrong-road working. Trains waiting for the line to Bicester can hold on the Down Relief and let Banbury trains pass outside them on the Down Main, which will be far better for the network overall than wrong-road working and using the Up relief/Jericho (whatever it's called, the easternmost line).

In my experience, the signallers sometimes choose to put Chiltern's [up!] silver train Hinksey sidings > Oxford > Marylebone into the reversible platform 3, closely sandwiched between trains bound towards Didcot.

 

[zwk500]

In my experience, the signallers sometimes choose to put Chiltern's [up!] silver train Hinksey sidings > Oxford > Marylebone into the reversible platform 3, closely sandwiched between trains bound towards Didcot.

The 68-hauled sets are too long for the bays, the signaller doesn't have much choice about it and it's built into the timetable. But the odd train at certain times is manageable whereas if you were doing it twice every hour you'd find trains quickly suffering time penalties.