Indeed, and do we have comparable figures on the reliability of the new caternary design (eg on the GWML) versus the older headspans on ECML, @Bald Rick ? I presume it's too early in the life of the new design for meaningful comparisons to be made?
As Voltaire said, "le mieux est l'ennemi du bien" - the ideal is an enemy of the good. But would it not be strange to face a situation where around £3bn is to be spent (perhaps) on Bed-Cam, while limiting system capacity by not tackling difficult but not insurmountable pinch-points at Bedford and Bletchley? I still think that the utility of the whole EWR scheme would be greatly increased by routing all trains into and out of MKC, rather than depending on a fortuitous remnant like the Bletchley flyover. This whole scheme is justified by vague talk of one million new homes. If this comes to pass, the demand along the coridor would quickly swamp 3-car units - and justify land-take to get trains in and out of MKC in both directions.
The key phrase is actually "more than adequate".
On Oxford-MK, maybe a decade at quickest. On other routes quite a bit longer. When I said "initially" I meant "to begin with", in that it will actually fill up in the 60-year design period of the railway (which is about 2 train lifetimes), but won't be at the beginning. We're not looking at Crossrail where we were looking at the short trains (9-car rather than 11-car) being a problem within a decade of opening (now less as the opening has been delayed) - though that was going to be fixed by increased frequency before making the trains full-length.
Wow, 4-car operation - dream big! Is this really what's about? 3-car is shockingly short-sighted, but add an extra car and it's somehow totally future-proof.
The legal issue here is you can only apply to compulsorily purchase land which you can demonstrate you have a valid and pressing need to purchase - i.e. a funded scheme that is being actively pursued, rather than a speculative proposal for the future.
The platform lengths of 106m is designed for a likely longest 4 car train - in the absence of there being a TOC to confirm what rolling stock they intend to deploy. Longer platforms at Winslow would be easily accommodated due to the straight alignment heading west. Longer platforms at Bletchley would require independently supported platform structures heading south/west, which would extend up to Buckingham Road. Also the track alignment coming off the flyover would require lifting considerably from what is currently planned. An earlier design proposal gives some idea of what that might look like.
and wouldn`t it be easier (and therefore cheaper) to electrify as the line was being built rather than wait until diesels were buzzing around at 100 mph ? Joined up thinking and all that !
Good to see some reality here. Not quite as many years as you, but enough to know that announcements and delivery of infrastructure are often completely different beasts. In my adult life we got so close to a south Hampshire tram system linking Fareham, Gosport and Portsmouth (so called Phase 1 optimistically) that my office forecourt was compulsory purchased, and it still got scrapped. Nearby is the so-called south coast motorway - 30 miles built, not to mention Stonehenge where a tunnel has been on and off for 40 years. Younger members may trust politicians to deliver, but until you see spades on the ground nothing is certain to happen. And even then HS2?
Actually, if the expectation is that interest rates are going up and will be permanently higher, then the strong case is to borrow the money now at lower rates and get the job done.
Yup....
likewise with things like fuel costs.
However there's actually quite a lot of flexibility, as EWR could take power from the WCML, MML and ECML where they meet, and extra feeders could be built alongside those main lines instead (or perhaps the existing ones could be upgraded). Slightly more awkward if EWR remains separate from NR, but it ought to be possible to include some kind of meter at the connections so NR can charge EWR for what they use.