Extensions of East-West Rail Past Oxford

[AlastairFraser]

I know it seems illogical, but to save platform capacity at Oxford, I wouldn't send EWR down the mainline towards Didcot, but rather down the proposed branch line to Blackbird Leys and the Kassam Stadium/Oxford Science Park. It would enable the service to stable off the congested Cherwell Valley line, and provide a useful through service to MK and beyond for away fans travelling to Oxford City matches and the numerous STEM businesses in the area.

An influx of passengers would also originate from the other major clusters of university-related STEM businesses in the Didcot/Harwell/Abingdon area - currently there is no public transport option with a realistic journey time.

 

[The Planner]

I know it seems illogical, but to save platform capacity at Oxford, I wouldn't send EWR down the mainline towards Didcot, but rather down the proposed branch line to Blackbird Leys and the Kassam Stadium/Oxford Science Park. It would enable the service to stable off the congested Cherwell Valley line, and provide a useful through service to MK and beyond for away fans travelling to Oxford City matches and the numerous STEM businesses in the area.

An influx of passengers would also originate from the other major clusters of university-related STEM businesses in the Didcot/Harwell/Abingdon area - currently there is no public transport option with a realistic journey time.

Oxford City? United surely, and they are meant to be moving to a new stadium in Kidlington by Oxford Parkway.

 

[cle]

It does make sense to develop the Cowley route. - I think on its own merit (see the extra stations in Cambridge, admittedly on mainlines - and their demand/justification, as that economy diversifies and thrives away from the historic centre) - but also as a long stabling/platform facility to clear Oxford. Oxford will see more services in future, and even with the new platform, this would be very useful - in addition to its own benefits.

The debate is whether to send Chiltern there or EWR. Or indeed a future Moor St 1tph. But given the single line, it'll ideally need to be something rigorously clockface - which Chiltern Oxford is no longer. And EWR is shaping up to be.

Also for the Science Park etc - where is the core demand? Where removes the most road congestion? Car or bus? Possibly getting to Bicester via Parkway makes no difference (i.e. are people coming to Cowley from London directly? Or High Wycombe? How about MK? - does it matter beyond a certain distance?)

 

[AlastairFraser]

Oxford City? United surely, and they are meant to be moving to a new stadium in Kidlington by Oxford Parkway.

Yes, United! I hadn't heard about the move to be fair, but the Science Park is still the main attraction, and the line has strong potential to aid regeneration (Blackbird Leys near the end of the branch is one of the most deprived council estates in the South East, or used to be).

It does make sense to develop the Cowley route. - I think on its own merit (see the extra stations in Cambridge, admittedly on mainlines - and their demand/justification, as that economy diversifies and thrives away from the historic centre) - but also as a long stabling/platform facility to clear Oxford. Oxford will see more services in future, and even with the new platform, this would be very useful - in addition to its own benefits.

The debate is whether to send Chiltern there or EWR. Or indeed a future Moor St 1tph. But given the single line, it'll ideally need to be something rigorously clockface - which Chiltern Oxford is no longer. And EWR is shaping up to be.

Also for the Science Park etc - where is the core demand? Where removes the most road congestion? Car or bus? Possibly getting to Bicester via Parkway makes no difference (i.e. are people coming to Cowley from London directly? Or High Wycombe? How about MK? - does it matter beyond a certain distance?)

Agreed totally with the first paragraph.

As for the train to extend, the advantage EWR gives is also a same platform change at Bicester Village, should someone wish to head towards HW/Marylebone. London/Birmingham/Reading would change at Oxford as normal.

There's quite a strong demand central Oxford to the Science Park, and if you've ever been to Oxford, congestion on the arterial routes into the centre can be horrendous.
So bus isn't really competitive for a lot of journeys.
Train with a reliable 10 min journey to the station would be useful, however - with a 5 min walk to Westgate, the train still beats the 25 mins timetabled bus, presupposing you're not traveling in the peak.

 

[cle]

As for the train to extend, the advantage EWR gives is also a same platform change at Bicester Village, should someone wish to head towards HW/Marylebone. London/Birmingham/Reading would change at Oxford as normal.

Is this not the same for both - same platform at Bicester Village to change for EWR (if Chiltern Marylebone went to Cowley) ?

Maybe, if they could line up, or be interworked, there could be 1tph from each route? A London service and a EWR one.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Is this not the same for both - same platform at Bicester Village to change for EWR (if Chiltern Marylebone went to Cowley) ?

Maybe, if they could line up, or be interworked, there could be 1tph from each route? A London service and a EWR one

That's a decent idea. I see the bulk of traffic using EWR on the via Bicester corridor, rather than changing for London to be honest (approx. 50 mins vs 1hr20).

 

[The Planner]

There's quite a strong demand central Oxford to the Science Park, and if you've ever been to Oxford, congestion on the arterial routes into the centre can be horrendous.
So bus isn't really competitive for a lot of journeys.
Train with a reliable 10 min journey to the station would be useful, however - with a 5 min walk to Westgate, the train still beats the 25 mins timetabled bus, presupposing you're not traveling in the peak.

5 minute walk from the station? How fast do you walk! The vast amount of Blackbird Leys is away from the railway line. They will still catch the bus, especially as its a much higher frequency. Lets face it, if the branch reopens its going to be one train in section, probably like Aylesbury Vale Pwy where you could lock the train in whilst a BMW train runs.

 

[Falcon1200]

I know it seems illogical, but to save platform capacity at Oxford, I wouldn't send EWR down the mainline towards Didcot, but rather down the proposed branch line to Blackbird Leys and the Kassam Stadium/Oxford Science Park.

But it doesn't save platform capacity at Oxford if trains still run through the station! IMHO EWR trains should continue to Didcot, replacing the current GWR locals, the only issue being that they would need to make the latter service's calls at Radley, Culham and Appleford. Didcot of course provides excellent onward connectional opportunities.

The vast amount of Blackbird Leys is away from the railway line. They will still catch the bus, especially as its a much higher frequency.

I would agree, the high frequency 1 and 5 buses serve the areas where people live far better than the proposed train service and stations could; The main benefit of the latter would be connections to other rail routes at Oxford, or through rail journeys depending on the service pattern adopted, rather than taking people into Oxford.

 

[mangyiscute]

I would agree, the high frequency 1 and 5 buses serve the areas where people live far better than the proposed train service and stations could; The main benefit of the latter would be connections to other rail routes at Oxford, or through rail journeys depending on the service pattern adopted, rather than taking people into Oxford.

Yeah if people from that area are taking a train from Oxford, I would imagine they'd certainly travel by train from Cowley since then there would be integrated ticketing, guarantee of travel in case of delays and much faster. Personally, I expect this would be generate enough traffic to justify the branch line on itself. A lot of people in Oxford currently drive to Thornhill and then take the Oxford Tube when going to London, this would provide another alternative without having to go through Oxford city centre.

 

[The Planner]

Yeah if people from that area are taking a train from Oxford, I would imagine they'd certainly travel by train from Cowley since then there would be integrated ticketing, guarantee of travel in case of delays and much faster. Personally, I expect this would be generate enough traffic to justify the branch line on itself. A lot of people in Oxford currently drive to Thornhill and then take the Oxford Tube when going to London, this would provide another alternative without having to go through Oxford city centre.

It might help for the Science Park area, but I doubt there is a huge demand for travel outside the local area for Blackbird Leys.

 

[JamesT]

My understanding of the current proposal for the Cowley Branch is that it would be served by the Chiltern Marylebone trains twice an hour.
Is the suggestion that the EWR trains would be better than those? Or that it would be possible to fit them in as well?

It might help for the Science Park area, but I doubt there is a huge demand for travel outside the local area for Blackbird Leys.

According to the 2011 census, 79% of commuters from Blackbird Leys worked in other parts of the city, so I agree the train is unlikely to be much help. Though Blackbird Leys is not a uniform mass of deprivation, there are people living here on above median incomes who would use it. The increasing cost of housing does push professionals out to the cheaper areas of the city.

 

[AlastairFraser]

5 minute walk from the station? How fast do you walk! The vast amount of Blackbird Leys is away from the railway line. They will still catch the bus, especially as its a much higher frequency. Lets face it, if the branch reopens its going to be one train in section, probably like Aylesbury Vale Pwy where you could lock the train in whilst a BMW train runs.

I'm usually running to the X40 from an inevitably late train at Oxford so fast, hahaha.

As for your point about catching the bus over train, I doubt it. If they want to go anywhere but Oxford city centre, the bus takes an age!

1 train in section wouldn't prevent a 2tph service if planned properly, no?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Jan 2024 ==

But it doesn't save platform capacity at Oxford if trains still run through the station! IMHO EWR trains should continue to Didcot, replacing the current GWR locals, the only issue being that they would need to make the latter service's calls at Radley, Culham and Appleford. Didcot of course provides excellent onward connectional opportunities.

Didcot is a decent idea for a 1tph extension off EWR/Chiltern to Marylebone services in the interim, but once Oxford gets electrified in the near future, that Oxford to Didcot stopper will be the GWR stopper into London that currently originates from Didcot.

 

[zwk500]

1 train in section wouldn't prevent a 2tph service if planned properly, no?

Depends on how long it takes to clear the section. And then there's the question of planning vs actual. You want the train to have some leeway because inevitably things will happen.

Didcot is a decent idea for a 1tph extension off EWR/Chiltern to Marylebone services in the interim, but once Oxford gets electrified in the near future, that Oxford to Didcot stopper will be the GWR stopper into London that currently originates from Didcot.

There does seem to be a certain amount of 'trains must run the most mileage possible' to EWR extension proposals.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Depends on how long it takes to clear the section. And then there's the question of planning vs actual. You want the train to have some leeway because inevitably things will happen.

There does seem to be a certain amount of 'trains must run the most mileage possible' to EWR extension proposals.

1) Fair point, but it's up to the railway to make best use of the capacity.
2) Indeed

 

[A S Leib]

There does seem to be a certain amount of 'trains must run the most mileage possible' to EWR extension proposals.

More demand may come with direct services, but some do seem at least a bit like that.

For example, Bristol Temple Meads is the 59th most common origin / destination for Ipswich; Cardiff Central is 62nd, and Oxford is 64th. Outside the East of England, Liverpool Street and Stratford, the most common destinations are Leeds (36th), Edinburgh (40th), Nottingham (42nd), York (43rd) and Newcastle (45rd), so whilst I'm not opposed to any EWR services to Ipswich I suspect putting in the necessary upgrades to run Ipswich–Peterborough hourly would be more popular there.

 

[zwk500]

More demand may come with direct services, but some do seem at least a bit like that.

There's definitely an interchange penalty but there does have to be proportionality as you mention.

For example, Bristol Temple Meads is the 59th most common origin / destination for Ipswich; Cardiff Central is 62nd, and Oxford is 64th. Outside the East of England, Liverpool Street and Stratford, the most common destinations are Leeds (36th), Edinburgh (40th), Nottingham (42nd), York (43rd) and Newcastle (45rd), so whilst I'm not opposed to any EWR services to Ipswich I suspect putting in the necessary upgrades to run Ipswich–Peterborough hourly would be more popular there.

Although on this point I will note that 1. Ranking is an extremely poor metric to judge the worth of a through service, and 2. There are some stations which will act much more strongly as feeder/distributer stations that the passenger numbers hide somewhat - e.g.. Cardiff for the Valleys lines, because the interchange penalty comes down with service interval.

 

[A S Leib]

Although on this point I will note that 1. Ranking is an extremely poor metric to judge the worth of a through service,

That's true - to be more precise, to / from Ipswich it's Bristol Temple Meads 1150, Cardiff Central 850, Oxford 799, Leeds 3328, Edinburgh 2407, Nottingham 2373, York 2286, Newcastle 2045.

and 2. There are some stations which will act much more strongly as feeder/distributer stations that the passenger numbers hide somewhat - e.g.. Cardiff for the Valleys lines, because the interchange penalty comes down with service interval.

I wonder if that could partly explain part of the dominance of London termini, because of the lack of through ticketing to most tube stations (with far more passengers on the tube than Manchester Metrolink, NET etc.).

 

[The Planner]

1 train in section wouldn't prevent a 2tph service if planned properly, no?

Depends where the train is coming from for the turnaround. If you assume a 5 minute turnaround you dont want the running time from Kennington Jn to the end of the line to be more than 10 minutes. Even that needs everything to be absolutely spot on and when the car train runs you lose a passenger path. Otheriwse you are in the realms of double tracking it and the cost starts to sky rocket with double platform stations etc.

 

[MarkyT]

Depends where the train is coming from for the turnaround. If you assume a 5 minute turnaround you dont want the running time from Kennington Jn to the end of the line to be more than 10 minutes. Even that needs everything to be absolutely spot on and when the car train runs you lose a passenger path. Otheriwse you are in the realms of double tracking it and the cost starts to sky rocket with double platform stations etc.

Measures ~2.5 miles from Kennington Junction to the bridge entering the mini plant, the furthest a passenger train is ever likely to go. Trains could plausibly cross on the main line near the junction. At average speed of 15mph including intermediate stop, one way might be accomplished in 10 minutes. An intermediate signal in either direction on the single line could plausibly allow the freight to run flighted in the same direction with the passenger trains so a passenger service doesn't need to be dropped each time a freight runs. Here's my sketch from 2014: http://www.townend.me/files/cowley.pdf




With the performance risk from the single line, probably best to match Cowley with the Milton Keynes EWR service as the shortest route from Oxford. Should be manageable with opportunities to short turn and recover at Oxford and Bletchley.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Depends where the train is coming from for the turnaround. If you assume a 5 minute turnaround you dont want the running time from Kennington Jn to the end of the line to be more than 10 minutes. Even that needs everything to be absolutely spot on and when the car train runs you lose a passenger path. Otheriwse you are in the realms of double tracking it and the cost starts to sky rocket with double platform stations etc.

Measures ~2.5 miles from Kennington Junction to the bridge entering the mini plant, the furthest a passenger train is ever likely to go. Trains could plausibly cross on the main line near the junction. At average speed of 15mph including intermediate stop, one way might be accomplished in 10 minutes. An intermediate signal in either direction on the single line could plausibly allow the freight to run flighted in the same direction with the passenger trains so a passenger service doesn't need to be dropped each time a freight runs. Here's my sketch from 2014: http://www.townend.me/files/cowley.pdf

View attachment 149808


With the performance risk from the single line, probably best to match Cowley with the Milton Keynes EWR service as the shortest route from Oxford. Should be manageable with opportunities to short turn and recover at Oxford and Bletchley.

Thank you both for your sensible suggestions.
I agree it needs some careful and precise planning, but it seems it is possible. The Milton Keynes EWR service as the initial service I particularly agree with - as long as it ends up in MK Central and not Bletchley.

 

[JamesT]

Thank you both for your sensible suggestions.
I agree it needs some careful and precise planning, but it seems it is possible. The Milton Keynes EWR service as the initial service I particularly agree with - as long as it ends up in MK Central and not Bletchley.

I’ll ask again as it didn’t seem to get a response. The official proposal for the Cowley Branch is for it to be served by the twice hourly Marylebone service, not EWR. Why would they send EWR instead, or are you suggesting they try and send both down the branch?

 

[Falcon1200]

The official proposal for the Cowley Branch is for it to be served by the twice hourly Marylebone service, not EWR. Why would they send EWR instead, or are you suggesting they try and send both down the branch?

It could only be one or the other, for the capacity reasons discussed above, but it is certainly worth considering which service would offer the most benefit to passengers; Personally I would agree with the Milton Keynes rather than the Chiltern trains.

Didcot is a decent idea for a 1tph extension off EWR/Chiltern to Marylebone services in the interim, but once Oxford gets electrified in the near future, that Oxford to Didcot stopper will be the GWR stopper into London that currently originates from Didcot.

Fair point, but that assumes that Didcot/Oxford does get electrified ('near future' sounds rather unlikely at current rate of progress!), also that the pre-electrification service pattern is restored.

 

[The Planner]

I’ll ask again as it didn’t seem to get a response. The official proposal for the Cowley Branch is for it to be served by the twice hourly Marylebone service, not EWR. Why would they send EWR instead, or are you suggesting they try and send both down the branch?

Thsy would soon alter that if the timetable didnt work.

 

[AlastairFraser]

I’ll ask again as it didn’t seem to get a response. The official proposal for the Cowley Branch is for it to be served by the twice hourly Marylebone service, not EWR. Why would they send EWR instead, or are you suggesting they try and send both down the branch?

The official proposal has been gathering dust for a while, and the Marylebone service offers less direct connections than EWR. Hence EWR takes priority.
EWR also has the advantage of multiple interchanges with the Marylebone service to offer many of the benefits of extending Chiltern's London service to Cowley without the risk.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Jan 2024 ==

Fair point, but that assumes that Didcot/Oxford does get electrified ('near future' sounds rather unlikely at current rate of progress!), also that the pre-electrification service pattern is restored.

Yes, indeed, any prospective plan in the Oxford area should be considered with a healthy dose of caution, but this plan is quite high up the priority list.

 

[JamesT]

The official proposal has been gathering dust for a while, and the Marylebone service offers less direct connections than EWR. Hence EWR takes priority.
EWR also has the advantage of multiple interchanges with the Marylebone service to offer many of the benefits of extending Chiltern's London service to Cowley without the risk.

It’s hardly gathering dust, they’ve just approved another half million for design work - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-67868495

 

[AlastairFraser]

It’s hardly gathering dust, they’ve just approved another half million for design work - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-67868495

The plan has been in the works for decades though.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

I’ll ask again as it didn’t seem to get a response. The official proposal for the Cowley Branch is for it to be served by the twice hourly Marylebone service, not EWR. Why would they send EWR instead, or are you suggesting they try and send both down the branch?

EWR themselves have said that, to achieve their projected 4tph, they’ll need either to run through to Cowley or to build a new turnback south of Oxford station.

https://eastwestrail.co.uk/proposed-route/routeupdate/route-update-report#RoutePreferences

 

[AlastairFraser]

EWR themselves have said that, to achieve their projected 4tph, they’ll need either to run through to Cowley or to build a new turnback south of Oxford station.

https://eastwestrail.co.uk/proposed-route/routeupdate/route-update-report#RoutePreferences

Nice, so it would kill two birds with one stone anyway.

 

[MarkyT]

EWR themselves have said that, to achieve their projected 4tph, they’ll need either to run through to Cowley or to build a new turnback south of Oxford station.

https://eastwestrail.co.uk/proposed-route/routeupdate/route-update-report#RoutePreferences

If EWR or Chiltern are looking for an additional local turnback south of Oxford, I suggest a simple Abingdon branch diverging at Radley, a single track spur about 2.5 miles long. Designed to allow short turnback in the separate branch platform at Radley to recover in the event of late running, including signalling to allow a second train onto the single line to access that platform if one is stuck ahead on the branch. Like the similar length Cowley proposal, the line should be able to handle a 30-minute interval service normally. At Abingdon, I'd put the simple single platform terminus in the Waitrose car park, right in the centre of town and accessible without any demolition via other car parks along the old alignment, although that would require a level crossing over a minor road 'Thames View' which might be a barrier (sorry!). The crossing would be within 400m of the buffer stops, so with the relatively low speeds arriving and departing, a locally monitored full barrier type with obstacle detection might be appropriate, as used at Ardrossan in Scotland. A station site just to the east of Thames View, avoiding the crossing, wouldn't be too bad a compromise or initial solution, under half a mile from the Market Place (notional centre). Note where I suggest building rail infrastructure in parts of existing car parks, a deck structure could be constructed by the railway in the remaining area to compensate for spaces lost. There's an Abingdon Science Park alongside the old alignment approaching the town that might deserve an additional station on the single line.

 

[AlastairFraser]

If EWR or Chiltern are looking for an additional local turnback south of Oxford, I suggest a simple Abingdon branch diverging at Radley, a single track spur about 2.5 miles long. Designed to allow short turnback in the separate branch platform at Radley to recover in the event of late running, including signalling to allow a second train onto the single line to access that platform if one is stuck ahead on the branch. Like the similar length Cowley proposal, the line should be able to handle a 30-minute interval service normally. At Abingdon, I'd put the simple single platform terminus in the Waitrose car park, right in the centre of town and accessible without any demolition via other car parks along the old alignment, although that would require a level crossing over a minor road 'Thames View' which might be a barrier (sorry!). The crossing would be within 400m of the buffer stops, so with the relatively low speeds arriving and departing, a locally monitored full barrier type with obstacle detection might be appropriate, as used at Ardrossan in Scotland. A station site just to the east of Thames View, avoiding the crossing, wouldn't be too bad a compromise or initial solution, under half a mile from the Market Place (notional centre). Note where I suggest building rail infrastructure in parts of existing car parks, a deck structure could be constructed by the railway in the remaining area to compensate for spaces lost. There's an Abingdon Science Park alongside the old alignment approaching the town that might deserve an additional station on the single line.

It is a good idea, but the problem is it'll never compete with the Cowley plans on cost.
And buses will always be a better choice into the centre of Oxford from Abingdon, due to the sprawling estates meaning most of the population is closer to the A34 than the centre, and the frequency of service compared to your proposed train.

What might be a good idea is a bus shuttle to Radley if/when Didcot to Oxford is electrified and the service extended, because that could well be faster than buses into the city centre and would provide a better link to Reading/London/InterCity services at Didcot.
You could time it for 10 mins each way on a shuttle basis.

Where I would reopen the railway in that part of Oxon is the old Oxford, Witney and Fairford as far as Lechlade - it serves a population of around 50k around the extremely congested A40 corridor, the alignment is mostly intact, the population is rapidly growing in the area at a faster rate than Abingdon, and you can link with a new alignment south from east of Lechlade skirting Highworth to the GWML (adding another 15-20k to the catchment).
So you have not just a route serving those towns, but you have a direct route to extend regional EWR/GWR services from Swindon or Oxford, largely without interaction with the GWML/Cherwell Valley Line.