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

[camflyer]

Another call for a northern approach from a "a scientist, local resident and keen builder of transport networks in computer games"

East West Rail: Why a northern approach via Northstowe should be considered

Opinion: Scientist and local resident James Perry shares his thoughts on the route.

www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk

At least this one accepts that a new chord across Coldhams Common would be unfeasible.

 

[bspahh]

Another call for a northern approach from a "a scientist, local resident and keen builder of transport networks in computer games"

East West Rail: Why a northern approach via Northstowe should be considered

Opinion: Scientist and local resident James Perry shares his thoughts on the route.

www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk

At least this one accepts that a new chord across Coldhams Common would be unfeasible.

I enjoyed the suggestion for Oxford to London via Cambridge. What could possibly go wrong?

 

[Ianno87]

I enjoyed the suggestion for Oxford to London via Cambridge. What could possibly go wrong?

It's OK, he did it in Transport Tycoon and it made some money.

 

[tspaul26]

I enjoyed the suggestion for Oxford to London via Cambridge. What could possibly go wrong?

Combine it with some of the talk about the Oxford end and you could end up with through services from London Paddington to London Liverpool Street.

Join it up to Crossrail and voila: Outer Outer Circle line.

This railway designing is pish easy!

And anyone north or east of Cambridge can get lost.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 27 Apr 2021 ==

Another call for a northern approach from a "a scientist, local resident and keen builder of transport networks in computer games"

East West Rail: Why a northern approach via Northstowe should be considered

Opinion: Scientist and local resident James Perry shares his thoughts on the route.

www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk

At least this one accepts that a new chord across Coldhams Common would be unfeasible.

Where does Dr Perry live? Rather non-specific about that, isn’t he.

Also, can we put aside this nonsense about “it will be so much easier to electrify upfront”?

Completely ignoring the fact that half the route already has trains running on it so retro-fitting would be required come-what-may, unless the plan is that everyone is forced to change trains at Bedford!

 

[ABB125]

Combine it with some of the talk about the Oxford end and you could end up with through services from London Paddington to London Liverpool Street.

Join it up to Crossrail and voila: Outer Outer Circle line.

Post of the year!

 

[camflyer]

I enjoyed the suggestion for Oxford to London via Cambridge. What could possibly go wrong?

Ha! I was too busy laughing at the rest of the article that I missed that particular joke. This scientist but be an expert in multidimensional geometry if he this that is a reasonable route.

All of these alternative route suggestions have one thing in common - they think that any issues with the southern approach are insurmountable but any problems with a northern route are easily fixed or ignorable.

 

[tspaul26]

any problems with a northern route are easily fixed or ignorable

And even if they’re right, in ways that could equally well apply to a southern approach.

For example, burying the railway in a concrete trench...

 

[camflyer]

And even if they’re right, in ways that could equally well apply to a southern approach.

For example, burying the railway in a concrete trench...

I'm sure those complaining about the "Great Wall of Cambridgeshire" would soon switch to moaning about the Grand Canyon of Cambridgeshire if a concrete trench was proposed.

 

[gingerheid]

One thing that is a genuine shame about the proposal, and that is quite a bad indicator for the future of rail in the UK, is that there are no stations proposed for all the little villages that EWR would go near / round / through / between. I fully understand that given what a station in this era needs consist of they can't have stations, but in an era where stations could be platforms to either side of a level crossing or two platforms with a foot bridge between them, they could have been.

 

[zwk500]

One thing that is a genuine shame about the proposal, and that is quite a bad indicator for the future of rail in the UK, is that there are no stations proposed for all the little villages that EWR would go near / round / through / between. I fully understand that given what a station in this era needs consist of they can't have stations, but in an era where stations could be platforms to either side of a level crossing or two platforms with a foot bridge between them, they could have been.

Are you saying that it's a shame every little hamlet doesn't get a station nowadays when in the Victorian era they would have? Or are you saying it's a shame today's requirements prevent us building more low-key stations to enable stations at smaller places?

Either way, even if there were stations at all these tiny villages, barely any trains would stop because they'd pick up fewer passengers than you'd lose from the bigger places to alternative modes because of the journey time increase.

 

[camflyer]

One thing that is a genuine shame about the proposal, and that is quite a bad indicator for the future of rail in the UK, is that there are no stations proposed for all the little villages that EWR would go near / round / through / between. I fully understand that given what a station in this era needs consist of they can't have stations, but in an era where stations could be platforms to either side of a level crossing or two platforms with a foot bridge between them, they could have been.

How long would an Oxford to Cambridge service take it it stopped at every village and hamlet along the route?

 

[tspaul26]

How long would an Oxford to Cambridge service take it it stopped at every village and hamlet along the route?

The old ‘Varsity’ service between Bletchley and Cambridge alone took about 1hr 50mins, I believe (not that such through ‘all stops’ trains actually ran).

I understand that the target for ‘modern’ East West Rail is about 50mins with 5 Marston Vale stops then Bedford Midland, ECML, Cambourne and Cambridge South.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The old ‘Varsity’ service between Bletchley and Cambridge alone took about 1hr 50mins, I believe (not that such through ‘all stops’ trains actually ran).

I understand that the target for ‘modern’ East West Rail is about 50mins with 5 Marston Vale stops then Bedford Midland, ECML, Cambourne and Cambridge South.

If they do the "5 stops" version it's the Bletchley to Cambridge service that will serve them, not the Oxford to Cambridge. And don't forget Winslow and probably Oxford Parkway.

 

[mwmbwls]

With the propensity to flooding in the Greater Cambridge area - will there be a "Great Wall of Cambridge" that would impede drainage? Would viaducts not be a better solution?

 

[30907]

While it is easy to laugh at Mr Perry, I haven't seen much in the way of refutation of his core proposal, ie the route via Oakington and north of Milton.
It looks pretty straighforward, apart from road bridges.

As far as I can see, the major issue is Fen Road LC (between Cambridge North and the river bridge) which would surely require replacing with a bridge, and I can't see how you would do that without demolishing houses.

Quadrupling in from Milton to Coldham's Lane would be possible, but require the demolition of business properties and what look like "park homes."

The freight curve across Coldham's Common looks perfectly feasible, though it would be unpopular - the more serious issue is freight traffic across the LCs at Cherry Hinton, but that would apply if any amount of freight used EWR East of Bedford.

I expect to be told how wrong I am

 

[zwk500]

As far as I can see, the major issue is Fen Road LC (between Cambridge North and the river bridge) which would surely require replacing with a bridge, and I can't see how you would do that without demolishing houses.

Tbh Fen road looks fairly simple, given there's land to the north reasonably available.

Quadrupling in from Milton to Coldham's Lane would be possible, but require the demolition of business properties and what look like "park homes."

The A14 bridge will need widening/doubling. Immediately south of the A14 there a substation tight to the eastern boundary of the line and then about 100 yards south an industrial property is tight to the western boundary. Neither of these are cheap or simple to move, so 4 tracks to fit between these pinch points requires a compromised alignment on linespeed. I'm not sure on the impact.
The business properties and park homes are still peoples livelihoods, living space and assets, so expect a challenge. This being Cambridge, expect that challenge to be excellently presented to serious people. It will not be cheap to sweep away a 10m corridor of land. I'd also expect a very stiff challenge to be made about the loss of land on Stourbridge common by the river - flood mitigation may well require expensive solutions

The freight curve across Coldham's Common looks perfectly feasible, though it would be unpopular - the more serious issue is freight traffic across the LCs at Cherry Hinton, but that would apply if any amount of freight used EWR East of Bedford.

Of limited benefit for 1tph. It also requires building across a flood detention pond (or rebuilding Newmarket Road), will result in more common land being taken up (and restricted access to the triangle in the middle) and if there is the slightest hint of freight trains being detained on the chord the proverbial book will be thrown at the railway to mitigate the noise for residents at night time. The claims of noise problems will be expensive even to disprove, let alone mitigate.

 

[tspaul26]

With the propensity to flooding in the Greater Cambridge area - will there be a "Great Wall of Cambridge" that would impede drainage? Would viaducts not be a better solution?

More expensive, though, and high embedded carbon.

Flooding less likely to be an issue for routes approaching Cambridge from the south than the north.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Apr 2021 ==

As far as I can see, the major issue is Fen Road LC (between Cambridge North and the river bridge) which would surely require replacing with a bridge, and I can't see how you would do that without demolishing houses.

Quadrupling in from Milton to Coldham's Lane would be possible, but require the demolition of business properties and what look like "park homes."

Between 16 and 50-odd houses depending on exactly how you do it.

The freight curve across Coldham's Common looks perfectly feasible, though it would be unpopular -

Highly unlikely to get consent to build on the common without special parliamentary procedure - easily two year delay and you’re unlikely to get it anyway because approaching Cambridge from the south doesn’t require this chord at all i.e. it’s not necessary to achieve the project objectives so no ‘need’ case.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Apr 2021 ==

While it is easy to laugh at Mr Perry, I haven't seen much in the way of refutation of his core proposal, ie the route via Oakington and north of Milton.
It looks pretty straighforward, apart from road bridges.

The entire area is either floodplain or low-lying and highly susceptible to flooding, as happened earlier this year: the whole thing became a glorified lake.

Most of his ‘solutions’ involve reliance on gadgetbahn technology that may or may not be available. Is it wise for a railway be designed on this basis?

 

[camflyer]

While it is easy to laugh at Mr Perry, I haven't seen much in the way of refutation of his core proposal, ie the route via Oakington and north of Milton.
It looks pretty straighforward, apart from road bridges.

As far as I can see, the major issue is Fen Road LC (between Cambridge North and the river bridge) which would surely require replacing with a bridge, and I can't see how you would do that without demolishing houses.

Quadrupling in from Milton to Coldham's Lane would be possible, but require the demolition of business properties and what look like "park homes."

The freight curve across Coldham's Common looks perfectly feasible, though it would be unpopular - the more serious issue is freight traffic across the LCs at Cherry Hinton, but that would apply if any amount of freight used EWR East of Bedford.

I expect to be told how wrong I am

"Unpopular" must be the understatement of the decade. Imagine trying to run a freight line across Clapham Common in London or the Clifton Downs in Bristol.

 

[Ianno87]

The freight curve across Coldham's Common looks perfectly feasible, though it would be unpopular - t

"Feasible" in the sense of technically buildable. Operations, achieving consents, environmental impact, and local opinion on the other hand...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Apr 2021 ==

While it is easy to laugh at Mr Perry, I haven't seen much in the way of refutation of his core proposal, ie the route via Oakington and north of Milton.
It looks pretty straighforward, apart from road bridges.

EWR themselves have pretty clearly spelt out what a northern approach means. It's perfectly do-able, but generally more impactful than the alternative of the southern approach, to achieve broadly the same benefits.

 

[gingerheid]

Or are you saying it's a shame today's requirements prevent us building more low-key stations to enable stations at smaller places?

This one.

How long would an Oxford to Cambridge service take it it stopped at every village and hamlet along the route?

Doesn't need to be the same trains... The all the shacks services between Cambridge and Royston exist alongside non-stoppers!

"Unpopular" must be the understatement of the decade. Imagine trying to run a freight line across Clapham Common in London or the Clifton Downs in Bristol.

I'm as pro railway as they come and even I'll join the protest against that one. Coldham’s Common was sacred even before a year of lockdowns and meeting people outside! (All the same, I'm hoping not to have Christmas lunch there again...)

As regards the environmental impact... I wonder if they should be careful what they wish for. If they complain about diesel trains enough they might just get electric ones instead, with attendant higher visual impact.

As well as almost everything else (I presume he got his name right, and perhaps even some other things too...) the James Perry article is also wrong to say the Guided Busway was at capacity prior to Covid (not that Northstowe is EWR's problem anyway). Covid got in the way of peak services being fairly close to doubled in April 2020 (the buses had been acquired and the timetables uploaded to Traveline).

 

[tspaul26]

the James Perry article is also wrong to say the Guided Busway was at capacity prior to Covid (not that Northstowe is EWR's problem anyway). Covid got in the way of peak services being fairly close to doubled in April 2020 (the buses had been acquired and the timetables uploaded to Traveline).

Exactly. I have no idea as to the true genesis of this little nugget of misinformation.

Indeed, in 2019 during the last EWR consultation the county council specifically said that there was adequate public transport infrastructure in place or planned to meet the needs of the areas north and northwest of Cambridge. Is Dr Perry arguing that EWR Co should ignore the consultation feedback that it receives?

 

[Ianno87]

Exactly. I have no idea as to the true genesis of this little nugget of misinformation.

I suspect "at capacity" means "I read that the buses running pre-Covid were pretty full" (and ignoring the then planned increase in frequency to solve this)

 

[camflyer]

EWR responds:

East West Rail Company responds over debate on northern approach into Cambridge, freight and technology

The East West Rail Company has set out the reasons for its route choice in the debate over a northern approach.

www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk

 

[ABB125]

EWR responds:

East West Rail Company responds over debate on northern approach into Cambridge, freight and technology

The East West Rail Company has set out the reasons for its route choice in the debate over a northern approach.

www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk

And James Perry responds to the response in the comments...

 

[Tobbes]

And James Perry responds to the response in the comments...

Reasonably, too.

 

[tspaul26]

And James Perry responds to the response in the comments...

Reasonably, too.

Dr Perry’s entire angle smacks of Nelsonian blindness.

His main premise is that EWR Co has completely made up the need to add extra tracks north of Cambridge station if a northern approach is used in order to deliver the objectives for the project.

The ‘short stretches of Dutch trench’ concept is a nonsense: he himself argues that the topography is flat so is the railway to undulate up and down all the way for no reason?

And this trench would also have a 2 metre high concrete wall on each side: not so much ‘the Great Wall of Cambridge’, but an actual wall cutting across the floodplain north of Cambridge!

And the electrification canard again: what exactly does he envisage being electrified without affecting current services?

As for the gripe about ‘why aren’t they consulting on it’, that’s simple: DfT has specifically instructed EWR Co not to electrify!

Which once more gives me pause to wonder: where does Dr Perry live? Is it in a village southwest of Cambridge perhaps?

 

[30907]

East West Rail Company responds over debate on northern approach into Cambridge, freight and technology

The East West Rail Company has set out the reasons for its route choice in the debate over a northern approach.

www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk

Thanks for the link, and to others for all the other comments.

 

[camflyer]

Ok

I suspect "at capacity" means "I read that the buses running pre-Covid were pretty full" (and ignoring the then planned increase in frequency to solve this)

I have no idea what the minimum separation is on the busway but I suspect that they could easily double or treble capacity by adding more buses.

 

[David Goddard]

Ok


I have no idea what the minimum separation is on the busway but I suspect that they could easily double or treble capacity by adding more buses.

The same as any other road, so effectively "a safe distance". I have seen vehicles following each other down the busway on plenty of occasions.

 

[JamesT]

The same as any other road, so effectively "a safe distance". I have seen vehicles following each other down the busway on plenty of occasions.

I believe the speed limit for the busway is 55mph, the Highway Code stopping distance for 60mph is 73m/240ft. Though the changing speed between 55mph and 30mph when they cross public highways probably stops you having a steady stream of buses following each other at minimum distance.