• 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]

Status
Not open for further replies.

sharpener

Member
Joined
4 Oct 2018
Messages
32
I'd missed that the consultation ruled out the northerly approach, which I think is a missed opportunity. But if Cambourne station is up by the A428 (ie, at the top of the hill), then it would make sense for the line to join WAML west of the M11 to avoid the cost of a bridge, but as close to it as possible to limit the extra distance. There needs to be a crossing of the A10, presumably somewhere Harston and Hauxton...

Not sure about that Tobbes, to join the WAML just west of the M11 would mean crossing the A10 where you say, but this route would then encounter the disused gravel pits immediately to the east. IIRC the M11 is on a high embankment where it crosses the river and the route of the old Oxford line, but perhaps not high enough to get trains underneath so that will be another hurdle.

As jopsuk has said, "Cambourne into Cambridge will be very interesting when it comes to detailed route choice." The old railway definitely had the best approach from the west, following as it does the line of the Bourn Brook, and threading a new route through the villages to the north looks as though it will involve a lot of earthworks because of the terrain.

Also, there seems little scope for crossing the Shepreth branch to get to the GAML, and I think even talk of a new chord at Shelford is a non-starter, because much of the area is heavily built-up. Hopefully they will however be able to lay four tracks between there and Cambridge South, ideally incorporating some kind of flyover to provide direct access to P7&8, though I can see neither project will want to bear the cost of this.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
411
Is passive provision being made during the build for future electrification ?
Yes and no.

Yes - new overbridges will be constructed to accommodate electrification.

No - existing overbridges that required replacing for electrification clearance have been removed from scope. Substation sites were removed from the TWAO LoD.
 

Tobbes

Established Member
Joined
12 Aug 2012
Messages
1,242
Not sure about that Tobbes, to join the WAML just west of the M11 would mean crossing the A10 where you say, but this route would then encounter the disused gravel pits immediately to the east. IIRC the M11 is on a high embankment where it crosses the river and the route of the old Oxford line, but perhaps not high enough to get trains underneath so that will be another hurdle.

As jopsuk has said, "Cambourne into Cambridge will be very interesting when it comes to detailed route choice." The old railway definitely had the best approach from the west, following as it does the line of the Bourn Brook, and threading a new route through the villages to the north looks as though it will involve a lot of earthworks because of the terrain.

Also, there seems little scope for crossing the Shepreth branch to get to the GAML, and I think even talk of a new chord at Shelford is a non-starter, because much of the area is heavily built-up. Hopefully they will however be able to lay four tracks between there and Cambridge South, ideally incorporating some kind of flyover to provide direct access to P7&8, though I can see neither project will want to bear the cost of this.

I got myself mixed up. Though the released diagram isn't clear, I presumed that there would be a grade-sepearated junction on the Hitchin line between Foxton and Hartson to avoid another crossing of the M11.

Perhaps @ChiefPlanner @Bald Rick could let us know how much capacity there is on that line?
 

Neen Sollars

Member
Joined
21 Jul 2018
Messages
324
I really hope that we will have members of this forum or community who will take the trouble to set up a flickr account and/or new thread here to cover the EWR Phase 2 construction work now the green light has been given. The coverage during the Manchester/Bolton/Preston/Blackpool electrification and station upgrade work was fantastic. It really is true that a picture paints a thousand words.
 

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
15,836
Yes and no.

Yes - new overbridges will be constructed to accommodate electrification.

No - existing overbridges that required replacing for electrification clearance have been removed from scope. Substation sites were removed from the TWAO LoD.
So a lot more no than yes then, i know stuff is getting cut, but to take stuff out the LoD seems mad.
 

railfan100

On Moderation
Joined
31 Oct 2016
Messages
212
Location
London
I am lost for words that this service will have likely 3 car units in operation, has anyone ever heard of 'strategic planning' that signs the purchase orders? It is beyond short sighted, and really quite incredible to call it short term is an understatement and very flattering it is much worse than that....
 

si404

Established Member
Joined
28 Dec 2012
Messages
1,267
3-cars does mean that the typical train heading to MK from Aylesbury would be longer than most of those heading to London, and - aside from a few peak trains - as-long as the rest.

A 3-car Turbo (such as can sometimes be seen heading south from Aylesbury) seats just shy of 300. This seem more than adequate initially. It will take some time for service to bed in and passenger numbers to increase beyond that.

As long as new-build platforms were built for longer trains, it isn't overly short sighted (and more not visionary than myopic). It's not that difficult to fix - unlike the lack of electrification which would need a lot more effort than getting hold of more/different stock.
 

duffield

Established Member
Joined
31 Jul 2013
Messages
1,302
Location
East Midlands
I am lost for words that this service will have likely 3 car units in operation, has anyone ever heard of 'strategic planning' that signs the purchase orders? It is beyond short sighted, and really quite incredible to call it short term is an understatement and very flattering it is much worse than that....

Agreed...but playing Devil's Advocate, there is the argument that headlines like "New railway so successful that peak services are already full and standing" might be better for the prospects of future new/re-opened lines than "New railway 'carting around fresh air'" :E

Also - maybe - by the time this actually starts running there may be spare cascaded/warm storage DMUs available?
 

eastdyke

Established Member
Joined
25 Jan 2010
Messages
1,923
Location
East Midlands
3-cars does mean that the typical train heading to MK from Aylesbury would be longer than most of those heading to London, and - aside from a few peak trains - as-long as the rest.

A 3-car Turbo (such as can sometimes be seen heading south from Aylesbury) seats just shy of 300. This seem more than adequate initially. It will take some time for service to bed in and passenger numbers to increase beyond that.

As long as new-build platforms were built for longer trains, it isn't overly short sighted (and more not visionary than myopic). It's not that difficult to fix - unlike the lack of electrification which would need a lot more effort than getting hold of more/different stock.
3 car is the max for 1A Bedford so is (currently) the limiting factor. Bletchley (H/L) is getting 106m platforms with somewhat modest waiting facilities and access both at the extreme Oxford platform ends. There is a refuge pen for emergency evacuation perched on the embankment at the Bedford platform ends (fenced of course LOL)
I think that Bletchley will prove to be a significant limiting factor as we move towards 2050 :frown:
 

railfan100

On Moderation
Joined
31 Oct 2016
Messages
212
Location
London
As long as new-build platforms were built for longer trains, it isn't overly short sighted

Whatever 3 car units are built (with huge toilet area of course) the capacity will not be great, they will also have a working life of 30 years plus and not be compatible with existing stock in terms of multiple working. Also future stock ordered by the silo TOC ventures will not be multiple working compatible and really whatever is ordered should be planned to be fit for purpose for at least half of its expected life on the route it was ordered for. Knowing we cannot cascade stock as easy these days due to stock not being as compatible as under BR e.g. Sprinters\Pacers.

Also the amount of development planned on this route with new houses over the next 20 years plus is quite extensive. If you look at the Cambridge to St Neots stretch alone around 4,500 plus cars do that route every rush hour not to mention people in Cambourne that may join. Then there will be people taking longer distance trips. Really a 3 car unit is just not appropriate if we think it is then really is an example of how the current system has conditioned us to accept less and not plan for the future.
 

mwmbwls

Member
Joined
14 Dec 2009
Messages
645
So a lot more no than yes then, i know stuff is getting cut, but to take stuff out the LoD seems mad.
The nerveless fingers of Chris Grayling and his team grip even after his expulsion into the void - it seems. Is there a process by which these self limiting constraints can be challenged. The DfT's do minimum approach was after all such a success in the Castlefield Corridor.
 
Last edited:

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,182
Location
Fenny Stratford
I am lost for words that this service will have likely 3 car units in operation, has anyone ever heard of 'strategic planning' that signs the purchase orders? It is beyond short sighted, and really quite incredible to call it short term is an understatement and very flattering it is much worse than that....

And in the real world the motto is: take what you can get............
 

Snow1964

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2019
Messages
6,024
Location
West Wiltshire
3 car is the max for 1A Bedford so is (currently) the limiting factor. Bletchley (H/L) is getting 106m platforms with somewhat modest waiting facilities and access both at the extreme Oxford platform ends. There is a refuge pen for emergency evacuation perched on the embankment at the Bedford platform ends (fenced of course LOL)
I think that Bletchley will prove to be a significant limiting factor as we move towards 2050 :frown:

106m platforms ?
is that for 4 x 23m or 5 x 20m

Quite a bit of spare platform for former and apart from something like Heathrow connect 360 or a class 707 what is 5 x 20m (but isn’t it diesel initially and I can’t think of a 100m long diesel train), so struggling to work out how that length was chosen. Anyone know ?
 

Aictos

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2009
Messages
10,403
3 car is the max for 1A Bedford so is (currently) the limiting factor. Bletchley (H/L) is getting 106m platforms with somewhat modest waiting facilities and access both at the extreme Oxford platform ends. There is a refuge pen for emergency evacuation perched on the embankment at the Bedford platform ends (fenced of course LOL)
I think that Bletchley will prove to be a significant limiting factor as we move towards 2050 :frown:

You sure about Bedford 1A? Because it can most certainly take a 4 car Class 319 unless of course you’re referring to EWR using Turbos?

Indeed I’m in Bedford frequently and I’m positive there still is a 4 car stop sign for that platform.
 

si404

Established Member
Joined
28 Dec 2012
Messages
1,267
Whatever 3 car units are built (with huge toilet area of course) the capacity will not be great
Capacity will be sufficient enough for good long while, even with the housebuilding.

Amersham and Aylesbury will have roughly doubled in size, adding 50,000 people, in the 30 years since the Turbos were introduced. They still don't have a full 3-car main service into London (sure Amersham has the Met, but most people get the Chiltern nowadays due to faster service) with no plans to get longer or newer stock then E-W Rail should be OK with 3 car stock.
they will also have a working life of 30 years plus
Which doesn't matter if you can either get used stock cascaded to you (perhaps from Chiltern finally providing longer trains to Aylesbury), or be able to cascade when the time comes for longer trains. Both of which are possible. Getting stuck with them isn't an issue.
not be compatible with existing stock in terms of multiple working.
Surely if they go with Civity then it would be compatible with 195s and 196s (presuming new build, of course). Likewise other stock families that are current (eg Flirt).

And it's not like multiple working to make longer trains can't work by just doubling up your original units and getting new longer units.
Cambridge to St Neots
Isn't the bit being 3-car initially, which is Oxford/Aylesbury-MK/Bedford. The bottleneck presumably being Bedford, this will be sorted when that opens. We also have the ability to run frequent trains and so ~300 people per train can quickly reach thousands per hour able to be moved even without lengthening trains.
 

Mikey C

Established Member
Joined
11 Feb 2013
Messages
6,830
106m platforms ?
is that for 4 x 23m or 5 x 20m

Quite a bit of spare platform for former and apart from something like Heathrow connect 360 or a class 707 what is 5 x 20m (but isn’t it diesel initially and I can’t think of a 100m long diesel train), so struggling to work out how that length was chosen. Anyone know ?

"Flexed" bimode versions of the 376, EWR are welcome to them!

I assume Chiltern will be placing an order around the same time as EWR, it would make sense to order similar stock...
 

eastdyke

Established Member
Joined
25 Jan 2010
Messages
1,923
Location
East Midlands
You sure about Bedford 1A? Because it can most certainly take a 4 car Class 319 unless of course you’re referring to EWR using Turbos?
Indeed I’m in Bedford frequently and I’m positive there still is a 4 car stop sign for that platform.
The Sectional App. quotes 81m for 1A. I believe that the stops are forward of the actual end of the track, no doubt for a reason!

Capacity will be sufficient enough for good long while, even with the housebuilding.
Amersham and Aylesbury will have roughly doubled in size, adding 50,000 people, in the 30 years since the Turbos were introduced. They still don't have a full 3-car main service into London (sure Amersham has the Met, but most people get the Chiltern nowadays due to faster service) with no plans to get longer or newer stock then E-W Rail should be OK with 3 car stock.Which doesn't matter if you can either get used stock cascaded to you (perhaps from Chiltern finally providing longer trains to Aylesbury), or be able to cascade when the time comes for longer trains. Both of which are possible. Getting stuck with them isn't an issue.Surely if they go with Civity then it would be compatible with 195s and 196s (presuming new build, of course). Likewise other stock families that are current (eg Flirt).

And it's not like multiple working to make longer trains can't work by just doubling up your original units and getting new longer units.
Isn't the bit being 3-car initially, which is Oxford/Aylesbury-MK/Bedford. The bottleneck presumably being Bedford, this will be sorted when that opens. We also have the ability to run frequent trains and so ~300 people per train can quickly reach thousands per hour able to be moved even without lengthening trains.
I agree that 3 car will be ok on day 1. Except of course when the wires come down at Watford and a nice 3-car diesel trundles out of MK towards Aylesbury .... Or the wires come down at Luton and a 3-car sits in Bedford 1A ....
But we shouldn't be planning a 'new' railway where trains can be forseen to exceed new platform lengths. And running frequent trains along the Marston Vale can only be done with some difficulty (assuming Central Section gets built). On the other hand if it doesn't get built then, well we'll have to see!
A great shame that we couldn't wait to do the Western Section P2 and Central Section as a single integrated project. But perhaps @DarloRich is right, be grateful that something is at last stirring ...
 

Bald Rick

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Sep 2010
Messages
29,070
I got myself mixed up. Though the released diagram isn't clear, I presumed that there would be a grade-sepearated junction on the Hitchin line between Foxton and Hartson to avoid another crossing of the M11.

Perhaps @ChiefPlanner @Bald Rick could let us know how much capacity there is on that line?

Sorry, I’ve not been paying attention. Which line?
 

eastdyke

Established Member
Joined
25 Jan 2010
Messages
1,923
Location
East Midlands
Rather prescient. The wires came down at Bedford today. How busy was the Marston line this morning?
Yes, I saw that! Was the MV actually running today?
Oh, I think that a shiny new 3-car semi-fast will have some appeal in the morning peak :)
 

railfan100

On Moderation
Joined
31 Oct 2016
Messages
212
Location
London
And in the real world the motto is: take what you can get............

Why build a railway costing billions which is easily what it will cost by the time full delivery is complete and run short DMU's. Must be one of the few countries in the developed world in which a busy new build railway is not electrified. BR did the ECML in a short number of years today the UK seems to lack the ability for even the smallest scale of electrification projects. Really 3 car DMU shows the ambition of the current system.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,182
Location
Fenny Stratford
Why build a railway costing billions which is easily what it will cost by the time full delivery is complete and run short DMU's. Must be one of the few countries in the developed world in which a busy new build railway is not electrified. BR did the ECML in a short number of years today the UK seems to lack the ability for even the smallest scale of electrification projects. Really 3 car DMU shows the ambition of the current system.

This post, as with many here, shows the disconnection between the real world of railway operations and the perfect world of the enthusiast. The choice may well be stark: build it like this or not at all.

It also repeats the usual canards about how useless the uk is at everything and how everything is vastly overpriced and how everythingwas better in them olden days. I am not going to bother to try to explain why things cost money again. It is like shouting into a void with the experts here.
 

jfowkes

Member
Joined
20 Jul 2017
Messages
879
This post, as with many here, shows the disconnection between the real world of railway operations and the perfect world of the enthusiast. The choice may well be stark: build it like this or not at all.

It also repeats the usual canards about how useless the uk is at everything and how everything is vastly overpriced and how everythingwas better in them olden days. I am not going to bother to try to explain why things cost money again. It is like shouting into a void with the experts here.

I think this is a little unfair. It's not a weird enthusiast thing to expect electrification to be the standard in 2020, for environmental reasons alone. It's not a weird enthusiast thing to want more spend and resources for public transport. Lots of people would expect this as a matter of public policy, not just because "yay railways".
 

sharpener

Member
Joined
4 Oct 2018
Messages
32
In which case, “it depends”. Principally on stopping patterns. It’s more or less at capacity now between Hitchin and Cambridge, but at any one point there will be some spare.

At the public consultation display in Cambridge last February the (well informed) EWR representative I spoke to said that lack of capacity on the line from Hitchin was already a real problem for them and they wanted to find a way of bringing EWR in north of Shepreth Jn. Looking at the map they will find this quite difficult to do without demolishing property in Shelford Rd, though it seems that is exactly what they did to make a gap for the Addenbrookes' link road. Google Maps has the line of this road superimposed over a much older satellite view, so it appears to go right through several houses...[
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.1668506,0.1172337,235m/data=!3m1!1e3]
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
32,268
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
At the public consultation display in Cambridge last February the (well informed) EWR representative I spoke to said that lack of capacity on the line from Hitchin was already a real problem for them and they wanted to find a way of bringing EWR in north of Shepreth Jn.

On that particular matter mentioned above, what is the current official view on matters.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,182
Location
Fenny Stratford
I think this is a little unfair. It's not a weird enthusiast thing to expect electrification to be the standard in 2020, for environmental reasons alone. It's not a weird enthusiast thing to want more spend and resources for public transport. Lots of people would expect this as a matter of public policy, not just because "yay railways".

I don't disagree. However the government wont pay for that so it isnt going to happen. That is what is important. I have to work with what is funded not what should be funded. That's the difference
 

camflyer

Member
Joined
13 Feb 2018
Messages
876
I think this is a little unfair. It's not a weird enthusiast thing to expect electrification to be the standard in 2020, for environmental reasons alone. It's not a weird enthusiast thing to want more spend and resources for public transport. Lots of people would expect this as a matter of public policy, not just because "yay railways".

Not being an industry expert, how reliable are electrified services compared to diesel? I'm sure the move from diesel is a good thing form many reasons (especially environmental) but it seems to my (uneducated) eye that overhead electric cables are a very fragile way of supplying power and there are regular reports of services being suspended due to the "wires being down".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top