Stop talking sense!
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
East-West Rail (EWR): Consultation updates [not speculation]
- Thread starter aylesbury2
- Start date
- Status
Stop talking sense!
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
edwin_m
Veteran Member
What reason is there for overtaking on the Down Fast? It's never needed except in very out of course running, and if it had to be done then the train to be overtaken would just cross to the Slows. Also any loop turnouts would be on the curve mentioned, which would almost certainly reduce further the permitted speed for non-stopping trains.
richieb1971
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 1,975
Why would we wait for ewr to choose a route?
All trains will terminate at Bedford for years before all that gets built.
Not just the tracks and layout, the car park is full at 0730am. Station is currently running at full capacity already. It's shameful and blind hope that any of this is considered beforehand. The station plans should be first, then build the railway.
The length of the train procurement is definitely important at this stage as Bedford cannot park more trains in p1 or P2 that would be ridiculous.
All trains will terminate at Bedford for years before all that gets built.
Not just the tracks and layout, the car park is full at 0730am. Station is currently running at full capacity already. It's shameful and blind hope that any of this is considered beforehand. The station plans should be first, then build the railway.
The length of the train procurement is definitely important at this stage as Bedford cannot park more trains in p1 or P2 that would be ridiculous.
If the route to the North is chosen then that station could become the terminating point for TL, meaning that station capacity at Bedford is then released for free.
Yes look at concept options, but waiting 12-18 months isn't going to be a deal breaker.
If a Southern route or Central route are chosen then works to the station could be done early to facilitate what's needed, which could still be a station to the North to act as a turn back point for TL services and to connect with potential new development.
Running 4-5 miles to the North would add ~10 minutes to turn around times, although you could still turn back at Bedford during times of disruption to gain back those minutes.
richieb1971
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 1,975
I get the options. There are many option to procrastinate should be taken off the list.
Railways are a very sensitive issue at Bedford due to events happening in the past 18 months. The sensitivity doesn't end there.
Car park is at capacity, would the car park be further restricted during any works?
If you wait until the EWR railway is complete from Oxford to Bedford and then you decide to rebuild Bedford. Yeah that would NOT go down popular as traffic at rush hour is already grid locked as Bromham road bridge is out. The Wellingborough replacement special bus probably takes 1 hour plus as it takes the diversionary route that EVERYONE IS TAKING. Thameslink have given Bedfordians absolute hell for 18 months already. Something needs to be talked about now.
Bedford is a huge huge part of EWR. If Bedford isn't done right, none of it is.
Railways are a very sensitive issue at Bedford due to events happening in the past 18 months. The sensitivity doesn't end there.
Car park is at capacity, would the car park be further restricted during any works?
If you wait until the EWR railway is complete from Oxford to Bedford and then you decide to rebuild Bedford. Yeah that would NOT go down popular as traffic at rush hour is already grid locked as Bromham road bridge is out. The Wellingborough replacement special bus probably takes 1 hour plus as it takes the diversionary route that EVERYONE IS TAKING. Thameslink have given Bedfordians absolute hell for 18 months already. Something needs to be talked about now.
Bedford is a huge huge part of EWR. If Bedford isn't done right, none of it is.
Last edited:
edwin_m
Veteran Member
EWR terminating at Bedford is a few years away. EWR running through to Cambridge is many years away. If the decision is rushed on what to do at Bedford then there is a risk of building something unnecessary (because you provided for EWR to pass through and it ended up taking another route or didn't happen at all) or building something that only lasts a few years (because you assumed EWR would take a different route and it ended up passing through Midland). That's exactly the sort of situation where the railway is accused of wasting money.
The Wellingborough issue arises from delays to Corby electrification. I get that it is sensitive but starting a big re-modelling that inconveniences everyone further isn't really going to help this - especially if it later proves to be a unnecessary. On the car parking issue there is a choice between expanding the parking at Midland or providing parking elsewhere, which again depends on EWR as it could be at a Wixams interchange or a new station to the north. It's very likely that any works at Midland would reduce the car parking, if only temporarily to make space for a site compound.
richieb1971
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 1,975
But doesnt buying a 4 car unit procurement next week kind of force the issue if that were to happen?
Basically im only mentioning Bedford because of the notification that ewr are asking vendors for design ideas and that spec will include the amount of seats and carriage stock per unit. So Bedford will be the bottleneck in that decision making process. Or at least it will potentially force a rebuild of Bedford to some degree. Otherwise Bedford is not fit for purpose.
I don't like knowing one bit without the other. Shouldn't be procuring stock without a planned route.
Basically im only mentioning Bedford because of the notification that ewr are asking vendors for design ideas and that spec will include the amount of seats and carriage stock per unit. So Bedford will be the bottleneck in that decision making process. Or at least it will potentially force a rebuild of Bedford to some degree. Otherwise Bedford is not fit for purpose.
I don't like knowing one bit without the other. Shouldn't be procuring stock without a planned route.
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
Would you need to build anything at Bedford Midland prior to Bedford-Cambridge construction? A very plausible scenario once Oxford-Bletchley is open is that, besides the existing 1tph to Bletchley, Bedford will see 1tph to Oxford. Looking on Google Maps, platform 1A looks long enough for 4-car trains (conveniently, Google maps shows a train in the station, making it very easy to compare the platform length) and I doubt E-W Rail will see trains longer than that during its first few years of service. It ought to be possible to terminate 2tph in that platform, surely? Even 3tph must surely be possible (albeit not very robust) with careful timetable planning and short turnarounds - after all, terminal platforms handling 3tph aren't unknown on the network as it is.
richieb1971
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 1,975
You know, I never really thought a 4 car train could fit in 1A, but it does. The buffers aren't even at the end of the track and may need pushing a bit further up. Since i've only ever seen 2 car units in it I never thought 2 more carriages would fit.
so I guess 1A can be used as a swap platform (Vale and EWR). The approach would be really slow though as the EWR trains would need to touch the buffers to get it all in on the platform.
so I guess 1A can be used as a swap platform (Vale and EWR). The approach would be really slow though as the EWR trains would need to touch the buffers to get it all in on the platform.
According to RAIL magazine (See https://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/tender-set-to-be-issued-for-east-west-rail-rolling-stock ) EWR are going for 3 carriage trains initially.
Also EWR are talking about 1tph Bedford to Oxford initially (See https://eastwestrail.co.uk/the-project/western-section).
Of course the Oxford to Bedford service will be faster than the existing Vale trains so there will be some "catching up" but as we are only talking 2tph, the existing platform 1A at Bedford will be fine.
The choice of route for the Bedford to Cambridge section and what happens at Bedford station are closely bound together though.
It was unfortunate that the consultation didn't explicitly say what works would happen at Bedford (and the likely temporary impact).
Also EWR are talking about 1tph Bedford to Oxford initially (See https://eastwestrail.co.uk/the-project/western-section).
Of course the Oxford to Bedford service will be faster than the existing Vale trains so there will be some "catching up" but as we are only talking 2tph, the existing platform 1A at Bedford will be fine.
The choice of route for the Bedford to Cambridge section and what happens at Bedford station are closely bound together though.
It was unfortunate that the consultation didn't explicitly say what works would happen at Bedford (and the likely temporary impact).
DarloRich
Veteran Member
Despite the wobble here Bedfors is a minor part of e-w and a part that can be fixed quite easily.
It needs p1a extending, the station building knocked down and a replacement built slightly to the right. It isn't a difficult problem.
It also isn't a problem that needs fixing until the e-w route is fixed.
Please stop making out this is a Sisyphean task.
EDIT: Something similar was recently completed at Edinburgh Waverley
daodao
Established Member
The existing single platform at Bedford Midland used for the Marston Vale stopping service will suffice for 2 tph to Bletchley and beyond. It will be many years (if ever) before a new Bedford-Cambridge line is built; in the meantime Bedford Midland station doesn't need redesigning. If the fast train from Oxford to Bedford is to be extended towards East Anglia, it could be routed via Corby and a new curve near Manton to Peterborough.
Have you looked on a map at the relative positions of Bedford, Stamford and Ely? There is no point in running through trains on that route even if the cost of such a curve at Manton was small.
richieb1971
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 1,975
Haha, tell that to Bedford commuters about the time table changes.
Very simple changes can have severe repercussions. Moving anything to the right will eat into the taxi lay by and potentially spill out into Ashburnham road. If P1A is extended north of the current station building that will take away the motorcycle and cyclists storage area. There isn't space that is currently expendable without losing something important.
I think with what Dynamicspirit said, a 4 car train will fit into 1A as it is, so my concerns are only real concerns if one of the cross country trains breaks down at Bedford. Which I accept is a reasonable risk.
If P1A goes through the station as you suggest it will alleviate more of the problems and future proof services. But at the cost of shunting or destroying some facilities in the station.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
Goodness me. Bedford has a small architecturally insightful box as a station building and few facilities. There is loads of space available to move it.
Best not do that be use the taxi rank might be impacted and car parking spaces moved? Are you being serous? You could easily double parking space by decking the car park like on the wall and a bit of planning easily fixes everything
As for the timetable nonsense. The issue is the good people of Bedford have to get a thameslink train. Tough. Insert handshake icon.
richieb1971
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 1,975
I remember about a year ago I had concerns over the Bromham Road bridge and you said its a simple switch over to a new bridge and happens all the time. Network rail have stated the road is now closed for 11 months.
Obviously we do not share the same definition of "simple" and "easy". I certainly do not think 11 months sounds "simple" or "easy". In fact, many people complained recently in the local paper that some bridges are replaced over a weekend with a single beam. So it baffles me why such simple things take so much time. The underground work was complete before the 11 month closure. Looking at it today they haven't even removed any of the old road yet and its been 2 weeks already. I'd love to get some Bedford commuters to come in here and share some of their experiences, like having being crushed into trains whilst EMT run half empty trains whizzing past them.
The biggest time issues are often around utilities not on the NR side.
Surely this risk is no worse (and indeed probably better) than the self same train breaking down at Bedford St. John's platform or elsewhere on the single line section?
richieb1971
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 1,975
The double line sections are not bi-directional. I believe the points west of STJohns are spring back types. Back in the day we had probably 15-20 locos between Bedford and Bletchley. Nowadays there are none.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
A DMU failure is probably either going to be either one engine or one of the safety systems. In either case the train can usually move itself at low speed and without passengers, so could be taken to a siding. If it really couldn't do this under its own power then it could be dragged out by the next DMU or even by an EMU using an emergency coupler.
richieb1971
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Jan 2013
- Messages
- 1,975
Considering these units will be new I wouldn't expect failures unless the propulsion system is a new type.
Is it guaranteed to be a dmu?
What acronym describes a hydrogen or bi mode unit? Has it been coined yet?
Is it guaranteed to be a dmu?
What acronym describes a hydrogen or bi mode unit? Has it been coined yet?
Class 170101
Established Member
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 7,933
I wonder where the train crew and maintenance depots are?
Bletchley would appear to be the obvious choice for the line's maintenance depot, at least in the first instance, since the one there would appear to have capacity. It wouldn't be too difficult to start services from the Bedford end with either empty or early passenger running from Bletchley. Two units outstabled at Oxford Carriage Sidings (if there is room) and a small train crew depot there might be appropriate.
Chiltern Railways use running empty from Banbury / Aylesbury and leaving units in the platforms at Oxford as the way of starting their services up.
This was the discussion in 2017 on this point.
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/east-west-rail-progress-and-updates.99892/page-38#post-3078533
Last edited:
Xenophon PCDGS
Veteran Member
Not sure of acronyms, but my personally-used nickname for bi-mode units are "Graylings", after that transport personage saw bi-mode use as superior to electrification of the Manchester to Leeds line.
kevin_roche
Member
- Joined
- 26 Feb 2019
- Messages
- 930
There is a new version of the Eastern-Section-Prospectus on the eastwestrail.org.uk web site.
https://www.eastwestrail.org.uk/wp-...062018-Item-7b-Eastern-Section-Prospectus.pdf
On Page 13 it has the statement:
I do hope they start a Reading to Cambridge service. I fear its still a long way off though as the middle part of the line is missing.
https://www.eastwestrail.org.uk/wp-...062018-Item-7b-Eastern-Section-Prospectus.pdf
On Page 13 it has the statement:
I do hope they start a Reading to Cambridge service. I fear its still a long way off though as the middle part of the line is missing.
higthomas
Member
- Joined
- 27 Nov 2012
- Messages
- 1,130
Hmm, I feel that if this happens they may get uncomfortably full pretty quickly. If a slow uncomfortable coach can maintain a 30 minute frequency, a 3 carriage train definitely can. What is it in this country with failing to build things properly. Seriosly, just electrify and use proper length trains. If done properly this could get very busy.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Depends on the price. The X5 is shockingly cheap for long distance journeys.
Also how much of the X5 traffic is through MK? Don't forget E-W Rail from the east won't directly serve CMK.
And the rail service from Bedford would be 2tph - a stopper to Bletchley and a semi-fast to Oxford. This matches the new plans for east of Cambridge (Ipswich, then later Norwich and eventually Gt Yarmouth and Manningtree) - a stopper to Cambridge/Stansted (existing GA service) and a semi-fast EW through service.
And the rail service from Bedford would be 2tph - a stopper to Bletchley and a semi-fast to Oxford. This matches the new plans for east of Cambridge (Ipswich, then later Norwich and eventually Gt Yarmouth and Manningtree) - a stopper to Cambridge/Stansted (existing GA service) and a semi-fast EW through service.
That URL is for a prospectus from July 2018.
This is the one for the one from January 2019. It is linked from the new article at www.eastwestrail.org.uk
https://www.eastwestrail.org.uk/wp-...st-Rail-Eastern-Section-Rail-Prospectus-3.pdf
Page 10 of the new document doesn't mention anything beyond Oxford in the list of rail improvement recommendations from the Eastern Section Rail Study.
kevin_roche
Member
- Joined
- 26 Feb 2019
- Messages
- 930
That's disappointing.
- Status