Yes it certainly is. Doubt passenger numbers will really take off until an hourly service is provided. Will just have to tick along until then.
No - "along with" is not the same as "and". (Think of the sentence "I am going into town with my friends" as opposed to "My friends and I are going into town") "Network Rail" is still the Subject - it's just the word order of the sentence that confuses matters. Not sure about "their" contractor though - as a corporate body, NR is surely an "it"?
I suppose that would mean the connection could be made if the Soham trains also stopped at Kennett? Won't happen, I'm sure, because of the extra running time needed - would mess up pathing at the key junctions
Wrong hour for the connections, according to Real Time Trains, unfortunately for Soham to Cambridge. About 20 or so minutes from Cambridge to Soham.
Perhaps its most valuable market with the current service will be long distance pax for Peterborough, then onward travel?
I tend to agree with that mate.
I would tend to agree with you, this market won't grow unless it gets an hourly service (at least), but thats at least most of this decade away sadly.
Unless as hinted a bi-hourly Ipswich-Ely service can be brought in sooner.
Are there recommended margins in timetables for turn around times?
If its overlayed with the current Peterborough service the turnaround at Ely will be around 95 minutes.
95 minutes? Could something useful be done with that time ... say reverse and head into Cambridge? 5 minutes to reverse, 20 minutes to get to Cambridge, multiply by two to get back, and you've still got 45 minutes left for a turnaround at Cambridge. This would give you a direct service from Soham to Cambridge with no connections to worry about, that was being discussed upthread as a key driver for new passengers.
I wondered that but Ipswich & Colchester traincrew that are the only ones that work the Haughley to Ely route do not sign Cambridge to Ely. I would imagine it would just scoot off to the sidings then back later.
This underwrites one of the reasons why rail is so inflexible (and I understand the reasons that you explain). If one started a bus service, you would just say to the driver (as typically on a rail replacement bus) 'drive to X' please.
Which is of course why double-deckers turn into open-top buses under bridges....
There is a loop at Dullingham - about 1.5km long, and a siding just west of Fulbourn station that could provide a second loop.A loop (and probably station) about halfway between Newmarket and Cambridge (Fulbourn?) at the very least. I suspect that's been done to death in other threads.
Or how about full-crayon and a new line from Thetford via Mildenhall to Soham (approaching from the south) and then on to Ely. EMR could use that for the Norwich-Liverpools and solve the Ely North bottleneck at the same time
It's not only the bus driver. Aircraft crews do not need to train and "sign" for every airport they use, whose arrangements are far more varied than the standard signalling and layout on the railway. And of course the train driver is quite happy to drive their car at end of shift down roads they have not used before, absolutely without issue. Even driving their family on holiday to the South of France.
I’m a train driver & i am never happy to drive my car. I only use it for work & Sainsbury's going the same way every time that it could almost drive itself. It would send shivers down my spine to drive to the English Riviera in Devon let alone the French one. Train every time almost everywhere for me.
What is a likely cost of the referred-to chord and all its associated infrastructure that will be required? I see a figure of £20 million being mentioned.
There is a thread somewhere, and a very interesting one. So yes it has been done to death. Unsure as to whether potential costs were discussed. But there were diagrams of a very elaborate in and out two train one platform system for Newmarket station.
