East-West Rail (EWR): Consultation updates [not speculation]

DarloRich · 15 Jul 2019

higthomas said:
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.

this rolling stock procurement is only for the Bedford - Oxford section of the line and only for 11 units. It seems sensible for the first phase. How many carriages should be procured per train for this section?

BTW - the X5 is not a slow unconformable coach. it is very good quality.

JonathanH said:
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.

On paper Bletchley looks most sensible but LNWR are using it much more to base their 230's and their 319's.

richieb1971 said:
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.

I know that you are often baffled by real world building work not meeting the arbitrary timescales you assign but could it be that building a bridge is not the only or most complicated work going on at this location? It is worth of noting the length of the road closure also delivers a benefit of keeping the railway line open while the work goes on. I suspect that is the key driver on the time line. The most obvious demolition or rebuilding work will have to take place during possessions. In them olden days I am sure the bridge would have been dynamited ( as happened near me when the ECML was rebuilt) but that is frowned on these days sadly!

I still maintain: Building a bridge is, in the grand scheme of things, a simple engineering/construction project but I suspect out views on what is a simple project differ if only on experience of size! .

As for Bedford please try to grasp that it is not the centre of the universe and is simply a small, run down and rather insignificant commuter town. There has been an awful lot of guff in the local media about the downgrading of service and other such nonsense. Bedford still has a good train service, especially to London. The problem seems to be that the good Burghers of Bedford object to the style of train they are provided with and that they have to change trains to go north which conveniently overlooks the fact the vast majority of people are going south!

RailUK Forums

higthomas · 15 Jul 2019

DarloRich said:
BTW - the X5 is not a slow unconformable coach. it is very good quality.

For a coach. Most people (myself included) will not take 3 hour coaches if possible/if at all. This is borne out by the fact that National Express say they have 19 million passengers per year. UK rail has >1 billion.
And yes it is very slow, it takes about 3.5 hours to do about 75 miles (as the crow flies). That's about 22mph. I the flat lands of southern England that is very slow.

A dramatically better rail service would attract many more passengers.

P.S. Yes, I have taken it all the way. I did vow never again.

Clayton · 15 Jul 2019

higthomas said:
For a coach. Most people (myself included) will not take 3 hour coaches if possible/if at all. This is borne out by the fact that National Express say they have 19 million passengers per year. UK rail has >1 billion.
And yes it is very slow, it takes about 3.5 hours to do about 75 miles (as the crow flies). That's about 22mph. I the flat lands of southern England that is very slow.

A dramatically better rail service would attract many more passengers.

P.S. Yes, I have taken it all the way. I did vow never again.

My god yes that coach is dreadful! Just get the railway built

Class 170101 · 15 Jul 2019

JonathanH said:
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

The only other place I would consider would be Reading if East West Rail goes there (I think it should).

As for services to the west beyond Oxford, I would say Reading is a good place to go and possibly Bristol via Foxhall curve but I imagine that will depend upon whether 100mph paths can be found for DMUs (or maybe bi-modes) between the 125mph electric services.

To the east Shepreth Branch Jn to Cambridge North and Bury St Emunds is going to be the major problem. Cambridge station is basically full now - extra services on Platforms 1, 4, 7 and 8 are going to be a challenge and as for the single line to Bury St Edmunds thats injecting unreliability into the EWR.

Insofar as comments about Norwich to Liverpool / Birmingham services missing Ely no chance of that. Ely generates revenue and connectivity for EMT. That stop won't be deleted even for the faster journey time that running via Ely West Curve would give.

As for Manningtree why there? Terminating at Ipswich or running through to Colchester would seem more worthwhile. The bay platforms at Manningtree and Colchester aren't accessible from the Ipswich direction though.

The only thing I would add is extending the Bedford to Bletchley service to Milton Keynes.

Tobbes · 15 Jul 2019

Class 170101 said:
and as for the single line to Bury St Edmunds thats injecting unreliability into the EWR.

Yes, but redoubling Cambs - Newmarket, and from the eastern portal of the tunnel to the junction with the Ely-Bury line is long overdue anyway.

Class 170101 said:
As for Manningtree why there? Terminating at Ipswich or running through to Colchester would seem more worthwhile. The bay platforms at Manningtree and Colchester aren't accessible from the Ipswich direction though.

That's sensible - Manningtree would be a very odd choice. I'd suggest Ipswich - there's plenty of Ipswich to Colchester trains already.

edwin_m · 15 Jul 2019

Class 170101 said:
As for services to the west beyond Oxford, I would say Reading is a good place to go and possibly Bristol via Foxhall curve but I imagine that will depend upon whether 100mph paths can be found for DMUs (or maybe bi-modes) between the 125mph electric services.

To the east Shepreth Branch Jn to Cambridge North and Bury St Emunds is going to be the major problem. Cambridge station is basically full now - extra services on Platforms 1, 4, 7 and 8 are going to be a challenge and as for the single line to Bury St Edmunds thats injecting unreliability into the EWR.

I'd say Bristol would be a much better destination than Reading. The extension from Oxford would just duplicate an already frequent service, and Reading to MK and Cambridge is probably still going to be quicker via London. Bristol to Oxford is an awkward journey at present and the service could also serve Bath, which like Oxford is on the tourist trail. But I agree paths between Foxhall and Wootton Bassett might be difficult.

At the Cambridge end I think it's moreorless a given that Shepreth Branch Jn would be grade separated with four tracks through the proposed Cambridge South and into the main station. I'm not sure if the reduced number of terminators would free up enough platform capacity for the station to work with extra through services.

Bletchleyite · 15 Jul 2019

There has been a Bristol to Oxford service before in the early 2000s, though. It was a 2 or 3-car Turbo, and it carried a lot of fresh air and almost no passengers.

I could see a case for going through to Didcot for connections west from places like MK though. Driving to Bristol, Gloucester and thereabouts from the MK area is nasty - there is no nice route - and by train you're either via London or Brum which involves going 2 sides of a triangle either way.

That said, Old Oak Common platforms on the WLL might achieve the same thing at a lower cost/level of awkwardness, so it might not be worth it.

JonathanH · 15 Jul 2019

edwin_m said:
The extension from Oxford would just duplicate an already frequent service

Simply running it from Didcot through to EWR would *replace* rather than duplicate an already frequent service and provide the 'one-change' connections from further west to places like Milton Keynes and Bedford and one day Cambridge.

Bletchleyite · 15 Jul 2019

JonathanH said:
Simply running it from Didcot through to EWR would *replace* rather than duplicate an already frequent service and provide the 'one-change' connections from further west to places like Milton Keynes and Bedford and one day Cambridge.

The long term plan is to reinstate the through Paddington to Oxford stopping service once the wires get to Oxford, isn't it? It being a shuttle at present is just because there aren't any "regional" bi-modes.

JonathanH · 16 Jul 2019

Bletchleyite said:
The long term plan is to reinstate the through Paddington to Oxford stopping service once the wires get to Oxford, isn't it? It being a shuttle at present is just because there aren't any "regional" bi-modes.

Is a through Paddington to Oxford stopper necessary? 8-car all the way? Seems to me that what there is at present (recognising that there are through stopping trains from Reading to Oxford for the Oxford peak) is actually fairly efficient in terms of unit use.

Paddington to Didcot and Didcot to EWR is possibly better than Paddington to Oxford and Oxford to EWR.

When are the wires being extended to Oxford? I don't think it is anytime soon.

JamesT · 16 Jul 2019

JonathanH said:
Is a through Paddington to Oxford stopper necessary? 8-car all the way? Seems to me that what there is at present (recognising that there are through stopping trains from Reading to Oxford for the Oxford peak) is actually fairly efficient in terms of unit use.

Paddington to Didcot and Didcot to EWR is possibly better than Paddington to Oxford and Oxford to EWR.

When are the wires being extended to Oxford? I don't think it is anytime soon.

Through services would avoid needing to terminate at Didcot. Admittedly it has more platforms than Oxford but still better to avoid tying them up unnecessarily. Also it might be more attractive to passengers on those intermediate stations to be able to travel directly to stations beyond Didcot.
You would also be able to reduce the requirement for a small rump of diesel stock being required when the rest of the area is electric or bi-mode and other areas are screaming out for more stock.
Wiring Oxford was deferred, but hopefully should be in the next batch whenever they announce that given how much sense it makes.

daodao · 16 Jul 2019

JamesT said:
Through services would avoid needing to terminate at Didcot. Admittedly it has more platforms than Oxford but still better to avoid tying them up unnecessarily. Also it might be more attractive to passengers on those intermediate stations to be able to travel directly to stations beyond Didcot.
You would also be able to reduce the requirement for a small rump of diesel stock being required when the rest of the area is electric or bi-mode and other areas are screaming out for more stock.
Wiring Oxford was deferred, but hopefully should be in the next batch whenever they announce that given how much sense it makes.

I wouldn't expect Didcot-Oxford to be electrified any time soon. There is no point in doing so when most fast trains from Reading to Oxford run either onto the OWW line or to Banbury and beyond, as both of these lines are non-electrified and will remain so for a very long time. It would be very useful to link the planned EW trains from MK/Bedford to Oxford to the Oxford-Didcot shuttles, facilitating 1-stop connections to the Bristol/Cardiff expresses that call at Didcot. It would reduce substantially the number of trains that need to terminate at Oxford.

si404 · 16 Jul 2019

Given the scheme isn't going through Aylesbury, I doubt it would take over the Didcot-Oxford shuttle (which runs through to Banbury quite often)!

DarloRich · 16 Jul 2019

Again: shall we get the thing built before we start worrying about nice to haves like Reading, Didcot, Bristol, Penzance or Baton Rouge

Maltazer · 16 Jul 2019

I don't understand the desire to extend simple services into ever longer meandering cross country routes.

Just look at the nonsense that is Thameslink's "new journey opportunities" - routes like Cambridge to Brighton sound great in theory but in practice who wants to take a stopper all that distance just to avoid changing trains in London?

Oxford-Cambridge would be just fine IMO, any extensions just increase the risk of delay to the service.

Mal

Richard Ingram · 16 Jul 2019

Maltazer said:
I don't understand the desire to extend simple services into ever longer meandering cross country routes.

Just look at the nonsense that is Thameslink's "new journey opportunities" - routes like Cambridge to Brighton sound great in theory but in practice who wants to take a stopper all that distance just to avoid changing trains in London?

Oxford-Cambridge would be just fine IMO, any extensions just increase the risk of delay to the service.

Mal

Since the change in London means using the tube, and the total journey time on the expresses is 2:23, the stopper taking 2:25 with no changes looks like the best choice to me. I plan to do it sometime, have a weekend away. It is also immediately faster the moment you want to use a station just before one of the termini. Honestly, I would love Thameslink to extend to King's Lynn (as I think was planned at one point).

A connection through to Reading would be good, one change outside of London to get to Wales and Cornwall. Even if it is slower than London, it should be cheaper and less uncomfortable.

I've used cross-country services long distance a few times, and found them much more relaxing. Even though I might be an edge case, using them end-to-end, people travelling from Aylesbury or Bletchley might want to get to Reading, and those journeys would be much easier. I've always viewed the long services as a way to serve many overlapping shorter trips in an efficient way. If it turns out that there is one station that very few passengers stay on through, and it causes operational difficulties (like maybe Nottingham on the Liverpool-Norwich service), it could be split, but if the through trip is popular, or easy to provide, I don't see any reason not to.

Esker-pades · 16 Jul 2019

Maltazer said:
I don't understand the desire to extend simple services into ever longer meandering cross country routes.

Just look at the nonsense that is Thameslink's "new journey opportunities" - routes like Cambridge to Brighton sound great in theory but in practice who wants to take a stopper all that distance just to avoid changing trains in London?

Oxford-Cambridge would be just fine IMO, any extensions just increase the risk of delay to the service.

Mal

Just on a point of order, no time is saved by changing in London compared to using the direct Brighton to Cambridge service. The same is true southbound. It's also inaccurate to describe said service as a stopper. Instead, it is more of a semi-fast.

Roast Veg · 16 Jul 2019

Richard Ingram said:
I've used cross-country services long distance a few times, and found them much more relaxing. Even though I might be an edge case, using them end-to-end, people travelling from Aylesbury or Bletchley might want to get to Reading, and those journeys would be much easier. I've always viewed the long services as a way to serve many overlapping shorter trips in an efficient way. If it turns out that there is one station that very few passengers stay on through, and it causes operational difficulties (like maybe Nottingham on the Liverpool-Norwich service), it could be split, but if the through trip is popular, or easy to provide, I don't see any reason not to.

Exactly this. To describe a route purely in terms of its end to end journey is obviously a very small part of the picture - to use hyperbole, imagine if I proposed building a railway form Aberdeen to Penzance!

Off topic, but running high capacity and high frequency services right through built up areas is much more sensible than bug termini since you can keep dwell times down to a minute or two instead of 10 minutes at the busiest locations and don't have to occupy great swathes of land.

DarloRich · 16 Jul 2019

Maltazer said:
I don't understand the desire to extend simple services into ever longer meandering cross country routes.

Just look at the nonsense that is Thameslink's "new journey opportunities" - routes like Cambridge to Brighton sound great in theory but in practice who wants to take a stopper all that distance just to avoid changing trains in London?

Oxford-Cambridge would be just fine IMO, any extensions just increase the risk of delay to the service.

Mal

my view entirely. Lets get the basic service running first!

si404 · 16 Jul 2019

Indeed, getting the basic pattern working is the most important thing.

Running through to Northampton, or Reading (but probably not from Bedford), can happen before the central section opens, but after Oxford/Aylesbury-MK beds down. The issue with siloing off the central section is termination space at Cambridge for the happening-earlier increased Anglia service (I mean E-W Rail eastern section) and E-W Rail. But do we want to turn Oxford-Bedford and Cambridge-Ipswich into Oxford-Ipswich in one go?

DarloRich · 16 Jul 2019

si404 said:
But do we want to turn Oxford-Bedford and Cambridge-Ipswich into Oxford-Ipswich in one go?

It will have to be incremental.

Andyjs247 · 17 Jul 2019

Out of interest when is the Public Inquiry into Phase 2 due to report? Presumably there is a report which goes to the SoS (Grayling).

cle · 17 Jul 2019

Reading has always been a part of the core scheme - and I don't think that running to Northampton is particularly left-field. Seems obvious to me, especially for a large town with an invisible profile, and poor non-London (and Cov/Brum) connections.

Talk of Bristol I think is for way into the future, but is definitely of interest. I'd suggest that until that point, calls at Didcot would be worthwhile for connections west - especially on a service which is regional in nature and stops at the likes of Winslow.

mwmbwls · 17 Jul 2019

Andyjs247 said:
Presumably there is a report which goes to the SoS (Grayling).

I think that that should read "Presumably...……………………………………...…….SOS (insert name here).

Dr_Intoxicated · 17 Jul 2019

richieb1971 said:
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.

11 months , that's nothing. The road bridge at Feltham station has been closed for 16 months and counting just for alterations. They are not replacing it, not even widening the actual bridge, just the approaches.

Bletchleyite · 17 Jul 2019

Returning to the Marston Vale section, I note that MK Council has a WCML-Marston Vale chord to move the terminus of the Marston Vale to MKC as a listed objective, albeit one that is maybe somewhat pie in the sky.

59CosG95 · 17 Jul 2019

Bletchleyite said:
Returning to the Marston Vale section, I note that MK Council has a WCML-Marston Vale chord to move the terminus of the Marston Vale to MKC as a listed objective, albeit one that is maybe somewhat pie in the sky.

Intriguing! Do you have a link?

cle · 17 Jul 2019

That plan has been around for donkeys, but with a reversal at Bletchley - and was part of the case for the new bay at MKC. I'd hope for a doubling of service with the Vivarail units, maybe, as there might actually be some demand there - and with more units, the final MKC stretch might be doable.

A new chord I wasn't aware of - might be tricky above the sidings there.

Bletchleyite · 17 Jul 2019

59CosG95 said:
Intriguing! Do you have a link?

It's in the main document linked from here:
https://www.milton-keynes.gov.uk/consultations/525

si404 · 17 Jul 2019

Said chord would be very useful as not only Bedford-MK, but Birmingham-Cambridge and everywhere in-between becomes possible once the central section opens. Of course, pie in the sky and all that, but we're probably going to end up with something from East Anglia terminating at Bletchley without such a chord.

East-West Rail (EWR): Consultation updates [not speculation]

Veteran Member

RailUK Forums

Member

On Moderation

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member