Bletchley disused platforms

londiscape · 29 Nov 2013

Hi All,

As a regular user of Bletchley station, I have noticed two disused terminus platforms at the west side of the current Platform 1, just to the north of the exit to the barriers and ticket office. These are now fenced off and not really visible to the public.

I'm struggling to work out what these were for! According to maps the former Varsity line from Oxford approaches BLY on an elevated bridge which joins the current station on the east side, while the line to Bedford also approaches the east. Therefore they could not have been for terminating trains on this line (right? wrong?)

I also couldn't think of any reason why trains from the north would terminate at BLY, even before MKC took over as the main express stop on the area - surely they'd all be London-bound?

Could anyone perhaps provide enlightenment on this?

Thanks,
Londiscape

RailUK Forums

Trog · 29 Nov 2013

Remains of through platforms originally used for the Oxford line, and then used for parcels, fed from the north end only.

DarloRich · 29 Nov 2013

Trog said:
Remains of through platforms originally used for the Oxford line, and then used for parcels, fed from the north end only.

severed now - connection taken out as part of the last round of remodeling works, latterly used for the storage of LM units: http://www.flickr.com/photos/darlo2009/5592615871

@OP - the fly over is later, i understand the Oxford trains ran into the through platforms that now forms the severed parcel bay and crossed the WCML to reach the Bedford line

MK Tom · 29 Nov 2013

Flyover opened in 1957 I think? Originally the Oxford line met the WCML at a triangle junction. If you go down Water Eaton Road you can still see the original bridge abutments, now dwarfed by the flyover, which only saw passenger traffic for ten years and must've seemed like a massive white elephant at the time.

I can remember Silverlink using that bay to store 321s often during the 1990s. The width of the platform 1 at Bletchley is also a clue to there being more platforms once.

londiscape · 29 Nov 2013

Ah OK, thanks guys. I hadn't considered that the flyover bridge could have been a later addition, I had assumed the Varsity always went this way. That makes more sense now.

Cheers,
Londiscape

-------new post
Does anyone know how the proposed Varsity line re-opening, ie resumption of through services from Oxford, will be dealt with at Bletchley? Do we think they'll reopen the flyover and build new platforms at BLY to connect with the Marston Vale line?

DarloRich · 29 Nov 2013

londiscape said:
Ah OK, thanks guys. I hadn't considered that the flyover bridge could have been a later addition, I had assumed the Varsity always went this way. That makes more sense now.

Cheers,
Londiscape

the idea is, i think, that when the (not quite) Varsity line is rebuilt there will be a platform on the flyover

londiscape · 29 Nov 2013

DarloRich said:
the idea is, i think, that when the (not quite) Varsity line is rebuilt there will be a platform on the flyover

Wow - that's going to be some serious construction given that the current flyover looks only to be wide enough to accommodate 2 tracks. So we'll have a Bletchley Low Level and High Level, a la Willesden Junction?

Railcar B · 30 Nov 2013

MK Tom said:
Flyover opened in 1957 I think? Originally the Oxford line met the WCML at a triangle junction. If you go down Water Eaton Road you can still see the original bridge abutments, now dwarfed by the flyover, which only saw passenger traffic for ten years and must've seemed like a massive white elephant at the time.

The flyover was never used for regular passenger trains. Ironically it was built as part of a scheme (which was never completed) to provide an East-West trunk freight route! It was thus intended to take the heavy East-West freight traffic (which never materialised) across the busy WCML without conflict. The flyover has been referred to as "Robertson's Folly" after Sir Brian Robertson, who was chairman of the Railway Executive at the time it was built.

Passenger services from Oxford and Buckingham terminated in the platforms referred to by Londiscape. Through trains between Oxford and Cambridge crossed the south end of Bletchley station and used the platforms on the east side currently used by the Bedford service.

The Oxford-Cambridge line was operated in two parts: Oxford-Bletchley, and Bletchley-Bedford-Cambridge. When I used to use the line in the early 60s, there were only 3 through O-C trains each way per weekday, and no Sunday service at all. The most frequent service was Bletchley-Bedford with around 16 trains each way at irregular intervals. Some of these were extended to Cambridge (7 in all including the through Oxford trains). Bletchley-Oxford had about 9 services each way including the through trains. There was also an odd Oxford-Bicester short working.

None of the through O-C trains was timed so you could set out from one University city and have a full day in the other. If you wanted to travel from east of Bletchley to west of Bletchley and vice versa, apart from the 3 through trains you would have had at least half an hour to wait at Bletchley, often longer. With poor connections to the WCML at Bletchley it's not surprising that passenger services were withdrawn, especially when there was no incentive at the time to change existing services to suit the travelling public's needs. That said, the Bletchley-Bedford service was timed to suit a quite heavy local traffic, and it survived.

The Bletchley Flyover certainly was something of a white elephant, but having survived to the present day it will soon finally find the use it was originally intended for!

al green · 30 Nov 2013

londiscape said:
Ah OK, thanks guys. I hadn't considered that the flyover bridge could have been a later addition, I had assumed the Varsity always went this way. That makes more sense now.

Cheers,
Londiscape

I don't think re-inforced concrete had been invented 150 years ago!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

londiscape said:
Wow - that's going to be some serious construction given that the current flyover looks only to be wide enough to accommodate 2 tracks. So we'll have a Bletchley Low Level and High Level, a la Willesden Junction?

Yes there will be Bletchley Low Level and High Level but High Level platforms will not be on flyover itself. They will be on the embankment parallel to existing station, roughly where the junction of lines to MKC and Bedford is.

mr_jrt · 30 Nov 2013

You can see the train there on Google maps.

I wonder, post HS2 when the southern WCML service patterns are recast, would there be merit in using these former platforms and knocking back through southwards to create loop platforms on the fast lines (if they could be aligned so as to not impinge on the line speeds)? I know MK gets the fast stops now (and would continue to do so), but with EWR open Bletchley will be the more useful rail interchange, even if MK is a greater single traffic generator, so stopping at both would seem a good idea.

HowardGWR · 30 Nov 2013

mr_jrt said:
You can see the train there on Google maps.

I wonder, post HS2 when the southern WCML service patterns are recast, would there be merit in using these former platforms and knocking back through southwards to create loop platforms on the fast lines (if they could be aligned so as to not impinge on the line speeds)? I know MK gets the fast stops now, but with EWR open Bletchley will be the more useful rail interchange, even if MK is a greater single traffic generator.

In contrast to that suggestion, would it not be simple to construct the remaining side of an eastern triangle to the north of Bletchley? There only appears to be a mainly empty factory site in the way. Trains terminating from the Bedford direction would just run into MK whereas through trains would run over the 'high level' link station.

dysonsphere · 30 Nov 2013

In contrast to that suggestion, would it not be simple to construct the remaining side of an eastern triangle to the north of Bletchley? There only appears to be a mainly empty factory site in the way. Trains terminating from the Bedford direction would just run into MK whereas through trains would run over the 'high level' link station.

Having looked at the google map you would have to sever all the connections to the yard and other sidings im sure the current users would have something to say about that not to mention the problems of crossing all the main line on the flat would cause more problems than it solved.

HowardGWR · 30 Nov 2013

dysonsphere said:
Having looked at the google map you would have to sever all the connections to the yard and other sidings im sure the current users would have something to say about that not to mention the problems of crossing all the main line on the flat would cause more problems than it solved.

Thanks, i didn't realise such a move would have to cross all the lines. :oops:

mr_jrt · 30 Nov 2013

dysonsphere said:
Having looked at the google map you would have to sever all the connections to the yard and other sidings im sure the current users would have something to say about that not to mention the problems of crossing all the main line on the flat would cause more problems than it solved.

I think HowardGWR meant on a flyover, like the current south to north chord, so you wouldn't be severing anything, just taking away from Bletchley's service provision (and congesting the slow lines between MK and Bletchley).

Trog · 30 Nov 2013

If you were going to build such a chord it would join the Bedford Branch to the bottom end of the Flyover lines down towards Denbigh Hall South junction. That way you avoid putting another set of points in the main lines, conflicting moves and having the chord long enough to stand a train on without blocking the lines it attaches to is operationally useful.

DarloRich · 1 Dec 2013

Trog said:
If you were going to build such a chord it would join the Bedford Branch to the bottom end of the Flyover lines down towards Denbigh Hall South junction. That way you avoid putting another set of points in the main lines, conflicting moves and having the chord long enough to stand a train on without blocking the lines it attaches to is operationally useful.

The problem with a chord form the main to the marston vale line ( and thus avoiding Bletchley) is that there are several structures in the way depending on the alignment:

1) The flyover lines embankment
2) and industrial estate
3) The carriage sidings
4) The OTM sidings
5) The Depot
6) The Bletchley ring road (meaning a new bridge)
7) Tesco
8) Fenny Stratford Station and flyover junction.

I am not sure a chord would be feasible or offer decent value for money, much as i am very keen to see better connections form the Vale to MK!

pablo · 2 Dec 2013

The current Varsity proposal includes a suggestion of a link from the flyover to the WCML down fast, in a northerly direction. Presumably it would require demolition of these bay platforms to make room?

poshfan · 2 Dec 2013

Way back, the line from the Oxford direction was used by the OWW when first opened, connecting at Handborough, and either reversing at Bletchley or using the west to south curve. This was due to a dispute with the GWR, the OWW was authorized as a broad gauge line but they had a change of mind and built it to standard gauge despite numerous injunctions and court orders, hence the dispute with the GWR and a temporary alliance with the LNWR.

Trog · 2 Dec 2013

DarloRich said:
The problem with a chord form the main to the marston vale line ( and thus avoiding Bletchley) is that there are several structures in the way depending on the alignment:

1) The flyover lines embankment
2) and industrial estate
3) The carriage sidings
4) The OTM sidings
5) The Depot
6) The Bletchley ring road (meaning a new bridge)
7) Tesco
8) Fenny Stratford Station and flyover junction.

I am not sure a chord would be feasible or offer decent value for money, much as i am very keen to see better connections form the Vale to MK!

1) Not if you join the chord to the flyover lines as I suggest.
2) True but businesses are more likely to move than residential if you offer them money.
3) Not if you join the chord to the flyover lines as I suggest.
4) Depends how big you make the chord, could be moved to the Bletchley end of the Cambridge Sidings.
5) The TMD is I think disused anyway.
6) I think you could start a chord from the Bletchley side of that.
7) How fast do you want to go round this chord?
8) As 7 but how many hundred MPH.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

pablo said:
The current Varsity proposal includes a suggestion of a link from the flyover to the WCML down fast, in a northerly direction. Presumably it would require demolition of these bay platforms to make room?

No you could put the lead outside the old power box, and connect to the flyover lines from there via the old chord formation on the south side of the flyover. The down side of that is that any stopping train would be using the DF platform. Providing a through platform would mean reinstating the old platform 2, which would need alterations to the booking office end of the foot bridge, and moving the LM train crew depot.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

poshfan said:
Way back, the line from the Oxford direction was used by the OWW when first opened, connecting at Handborough, and either reversing at Bletchley or using the west to south curve. This was due to a dispute with the GWR, the OWW was authorized as a broad gauge line but they had a change of mind and built it to standard gauge despite numerous injunctions and court orders, hence the dispute with the GWR and a temporary alliance with the LNWR.

Hence why that curve was known as the Worcester Curve. It was only used for that for about a year as for some reason the service switched from Euston to Paddington after the GWR bought the OWW.

MarkyT · 2 Dec 2013

al green said:
I don't think re-inforced concrete had been invented 150 years ago!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Yes there will be Bletchley Low Level and High Level but High Level platforms will not be on flyover itself. They will be on the embankment parallel to existing station, roughly where the junction of lines to MKC and Bedford is.

The site for the new high level platforms:

http://www.rail.co.uk/images/2112/original/3-bletchley-flyover-by-phil-marsh.jpg

The photographer is standing near the northern extremity of the flyover bridge looking north, and the existing junction switch tips are situated exactly at the bridge transition to a retained embankment with the same design of side parapet.

The proposal as I understand it is that new side platforms will be built on the wide retained embankment where the junction is now and the double junction replaced in the same form a little to the north, with gradients and levels adjusted to suit.

pablo · 3 Dec 2013

Trog said:
1) ..........No you could put the lead outside the old power box, and connect to the flyover lines from there via the old chord formation on the south side of the flyover........QUOTE]

From RailFuture meeting Jan 2013
".....Network Rail has still to determine the route track layout at Oxford to reach the two new platforms and Winslow station is expected to become a P&R station for Buckingham. Some level crossings may become bridges, a freight passing loop may be added at Swanbourne, and most ambitious of all is the possibility of a direct link onto the WCML down fast line. .......

The Planner · 3 Dec 2013

Will believe it when I see it....

al green · 5 Dec 2013

MarkyT said:
The site for the new high level platforms:

http://www.rail.co.uk/images/2112/original/3-bletchley-flyover-by-phil-marsh.jpg

The photographer is standing near the northern extremity of the flyover bridge looking north, and the existing junction switch tips are situated exactly at the bridge transition to a retained embankment with the same design of side parapet.

The proposal as I understand it is that new side platforms will be built on the wide retained embankment where the junction is now and the double junction replaced in the same form a little to the north, with gradients and levels adjusted to suit.

I've also seen plans for it to be an island platform at that location. But that was before NR took over.

MK Tom · 5 Dec 2013

The chord would only need the demolition of three industrial buildings, with no shortage of spare space in MK for those businesses to relocate. Depot lines would be cut off, which doesn't terribly matter when the depot last saw use in 2007. The chord would turn off on the Bletchley side of the V7 so doesn't need to bridge that or affect Tesco in any way. I wouldn't even call it a loss of service provision seeing as Fenny Stratford and Bletchley are essentially the same place. I'd also redouble the line through Fenny and add in a second platform and improved access there.

I would personally combine this scheme with Luton Borough Council's aspiration to put a chord in at Stewartby and run direct MKC-Luton services. That also opens up neat freight possibilities and creates a diversionary route for WCML closures.

Even if none of this happens and we only ever get the standard currently proposed E-WR service pattern, MKC still has all the same destinations as Bletchley so changing express stops really doesn't make sense.

swt_passenger · 5 Dec 2013

al green said:
I've also seen plans for it to be an island platform at that location. But that was before NR took over.

The side platforms were already in the EWR plans in the July 2010 study.
We discussed it quite recently, in a thread in early November here: http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=92465

I provided links to the report, and the relevant figures within it.

The EWR report I found a year or two back had an odd drawing that implied two platform faces but each would be bi-directional - one to/from Milton Keynes and the other for services to/from Bedford. Both would be at or alongside the high level junction.

I'll see if I can find it again...

Page 79, Fig 3.3 of the Grip 4 report - July 2010: http://www.eastwestrail.org.uk/sites...t-jul-2010.pdf

As I said - a really weird drawing, but the presence of two sets of lifts and stairs seems to be the giveaway. But then again if you read on to Figs 3.15/17/19 they all show the junction east of the two platforms.

mr_jrt · 5 Dec 2013

MK Tom said:
Even if none of this happens and we only ever get the standard currently proposed E-WR service pattern, MKC still has all the same destinations as Bletchley so changing express stops really doesn't make sense.

Well, you can't serve MK on a Reading/Oxford/Aylesbury-Bedford service without a reversal...so that's a winner for Bletchley.

MK Tom · 5 Dec 2013

Doesn't create a useful WCML interchange there though when services from all those destinations also run to MKC.

HowardGWR · 5 Dec 2013

MK Tom said:
The chord would only need the demolition of three industrial buildings, with no shortage of spare space in MK for those businesses to relocate. Depot lines would be cut off, which doesn't terribly matter when the depot last saw use in 2007. The chord would turn off on the Bletchley side of the V7 so doesn't need to bridge that or affect Tesco in any way. I wouldn't even call it a loss of service provision seeing as Fenny Stratford and Bletchley are essentially the same place. I'd also redouble the line through Fenny and add in a second platform and improved access there.

I would personally combine this scheme with Luton Borough Council's aspiration to put a chord in at Stewartby and run direct MKC-Luton services. That also opens up neat freight possibilities and creates a diversionary route for WCML closures.

Even if none of this happens and we only ever get the standard currently proposed E-WR service pattern, MKC still has all the same destinations as Bletchley so changing express stops really doesn't make sense.

When I proposed the MKC to Fenny Stratford chord a while back I was shot down, but AIUI, you have the knowledge that says we don't need a lot of new flyovers and so on, as the OP opined. As the slow lines are those on the left side looking south at MKC, i don't see how there is any conflict with the fast lines or the semi fast ones, unless I have misunderstood which lines do what at MKC. The E/W lines have their flyover already in place at Bletchley so the only beef is reversal at MKC. So what, if so? I expect someone can put me right.

MK Tom · 5 Dec 2013

Well yeah, I don't propose routeing the Oxford-Bedford trains via MKC anyway. Would just slow them down without giving MKC any extra destinations. I'm just saying the chord is easily viable and would be for faster MKC-Bedford trains, as well as MKC-Luton, freight and diversions.

Trog · 5 Dec 2013

A Milton Keynes to Fenny Chord at Bletchley is do able, but probably not worth the money. As it would not offer a great improvement, as every traveller it helped by making getting to Milton Keynes easier would be offset by making someone elses Bletchley or southbound journey worse.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

MK Tom said:
I would personally combine this scheme with Luton Borough Council's aspiration to put a chord in at Stewartby and run direct MKC-Luton services. That also opens up neat freight possibilities and creates a diversionary route for WCML closures.

That is a long way round to get from Luton to Milton Keynes, and would take forever.

I am sure the operating would just love a conflicting move junction across the MML fast lines as well. If they are so keen on running trains from Luton to Milton Keynes it is a shame they just ripped up the Dunstable Branch, for their bus way as that would have been an ideal starting point.

Bletchley disused platforms

Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member